When will our people learn these moslems want our land and our lives - The link says it all. Join the BNP and help.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQLpG5b18pk
Thursday 28 June 2007
Thursday 14 June 2007
Sat-Nav Captured - Osama On Foot.....................
In a new development in the war in Afghanistan, American Forces today revealed how Osam Bin-Hidin has successfully eluded the forces hunting him. The americans stated "Osama has managed to keep three, i mean one, step ahead of us for years - with equipment like this its not hard to see why. Its dust-proof, weatherproof and can be operated in any cave in the world". The Taliban Taxi equipment that was seized is of a type said to be favoured by Osama himself, complete with "Hijab Hideaway" . (for getting thru allied checkpoints) and "As You Ride Prayer Mat" for the on-the-move-muslim as optional extras. The "Fatwa Tool Roll" with stones graded by size, as well as spanners, is currently under examination by american specialists.Note: Initially the U.S. Special Forces team who captured the Taliban Put Put failed to recognise the Sat-Nav due to most Afghan Moslems still believing the world is flat, and the SEALs had thought it belonged to an irish tourist until the "extras" were identified.
Monday 11 June 2007
Charter For Nonces
Almost 8,000 sex offenders have escaped with a caution rather than being charged in the past five years, according to a report.
Among those were 1,600 offences involving children, 230 were for rape and 350 involved a victim under the age of 13. Responding to the report, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) insisted offenders were not being "let off", since the caution would still be noted on a criminal record and they would be entered on the sex offenders register. Who on earth do these idiots think they are kidding - they have been LET OFF!
Offences which attracted a caution included rape, child porn offences, bigamy, exploitation of prostitution, indecent exposure, sexual offences against animals, sexual grooming and incest.
Much of the information was obtained by using the Freedom of Information Act. Only one force, West Yorkshire Police, failed to provide figures, saying it would be too expensive to search for the results (yeah, - what with all those followers of the Dead Paedophile there, i bet it is!).
The ACPO said that before deciding whether to charge or caution, police would take into account the victim's views, age and welfare (and ethnicity?). Cautions would be given in circumstances where the victim of a rape did not turn up to give evidence at court (this is a complete lie - to need the witness to turn up in court the pervert must have been charged and had a date set for their appearance) , or sometimes if the case involved a 16-year-old boy having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend.
Terrence Grange, ACPO lead for sexual offences and chief constable of Dyfed Powys Police, said: "Every incident will be treated on its own merit, taking into account the circumstances of the incident and the people involved."
A spokesman for the new Ministry of Justice (that name sends a shiver down my spine) said "very few" of the cautions were for rape offences against children -very few? VERY FEW? These people should hang their heads in shame that they knowingly even let one paedophile pervert who RAPED A CHILD get away with a caution! The scum should be hanged. Every decent human being should be outraged that these perverted, sick animals have been let free to roam the streets by our law enforcement agencys!
The spokeman then said: "The Government is committed to securing more convictions in rape cases and has commissioned the child sex offender review to ensure that children are better protected from paedophiles. There are very few circumstances indeed where a caution for rape or offences against children is the most appropriate sanction (so WHY do it then?).
"Use of cautions is a matter for the police but in exceptional circumstances - for instance where the victim does not want to proceed with a prosecution - a caution will still result in the offender having to comply with the notification provisions of the sex offenders register". And thats it - the twisted animals can carry on pretty much as usual while the victim has the rest of his or her life to live with the knowledge that the law did nothing to punish the perverts.
William Wordsworth (English Poet)
"We must be free or die, who speak the tongue that Shakespeare spoke, the faith and morals which Milton held..."
Among those were 1,600 offences involving children, 230 were for rape and 350 involved a victim under the age of 13. Responding to the report, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) insisted offenders were not being "let off", since the caution would still be noted on a criminal record and they would be entered on the sex offenders register. Who on earth do these idiots think they are kidding - they have been LET OFF!
Offences which attracted a caution included rape, child porn offences, bigamy, exploitation of prostitution, indecent exposure, sexual offences against animals, sexual grooming and incest.
Much of the information was obtained by using the Freedom of Information Act. Only one force, West Yorkshire Police, failed to provide figures, saying it would be too expensive to search for the results (yeah, - what with all those followers of the Dead Paedophile there, i bet it is!).
The ACPO said that before deciding whether to charge or caution, police would take into account the victim's views, age and welfare (and ethnicity?). Cautions would be given in circumstances where the victim of a rape did not turn up to give evidence at court (this is a complete lie - to need the witness to turn up in court the pervert must have been charged and had a date set for their appearance) , or sometimes if the case involved a 16-year-old boy having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend.
Terrence Grange, ACPO lead for sexual offences and chief constable of Dyfed Powys Police, said: "Every incident will be treated on its own merit, taking into account the circumstances of the incident and the people involved."
A spokesman for the new Ministry of Justice (that name sends a shiver down my spine) said "very few" of the cautions were for rape offences against children -very few? VERY FEW? These people should hang their heads in shame that they knowingly even let one paedophile pervert who RAPED A CHILD get away with a caution! The scum should be hanged. Every decent human being should be outraged that these perverted, sick animals have been let free to roam the streets by our law enforcement agencys!
The spokeman then said: "The Government is committed to securing more convictions in rape cases and has commissioned the child sex offender review to ensure that children are better protected from paedophiles. There are very few circumstances indeed where a caution for rape or offences against children is the most appropriate sanction (so WHY do it then?).
"Use of cautions is a matter for the police but in exceptional circumstances - for instance where the victim does not want to proceed with a prosecution - a caution will still result in the offender having to comply with the notification provisions of the sex offenders register". And thats it - the twisted animals can carry on pretty much as usual while the victim has the rest of his or her life to live with the knowledge that the law did nothing to punish the perverts.
William Wordsworth (English Poet)
"We must be free or die, who speak the tongue that Shakespeare spoke, the faith and morals which Milton held..."
Saturday 9 June 2007
How Can The Main Parties Get It So Wrong?
Borders which do not keep economic migrants and terrorists out.
A European Union which is contemptuous of the democracies of its Member-States.
Schools which do not teach and qualifications which do not qualify.
Railways which were torn-up when it was foreseeable that our roads would become over-crowded.
TV channels which spread moral sewage and filth, as well as political propaganda, into the minds of our impressionable children.
A punishment system that does not punish real criminals and delinquents, and which prevents us from doing so.
A Human Rights Act which takes away our human rights.
And yet, if you notice any of these things, the main politicians add insult to injury by telling you that it is YOU, and not they, who are extreme!
WE STAND OR FALL AS A NATION and now the effects of what is happening in our country are now beginning to affect us significantly. For example:AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGES, JOB SHORTAGES, THE COMING WATER SHORTAGES AND EXCESSIVE BUILDING ON GREEN BELT LAND, TOO MANY TAXES AND TOO MANY JOBS FOR PEOPLE ‘WORKING’ IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT DOING FAKE JOBS. THE CREEPING ISLAMIFICATION OF OUR LAND (and YES it is OUR land!), THE INCREASE IN RACIST ATTACKS ON WHITE BRITISH PEOPLE. PATRONISING GOVERNMENT OFFICERS OFFERING HANDOUTS TO US WITH OUR OWN MONEY - DOUBTLESS TO KEEP US IN LINE! DON’T FALL FOR THAT ONE!
We in the British National Party, like you, are concerned about all of these things. And we will not be bullied into keeping silent by the somewhat witless name-calling that intimidates many folk, quite wrongly, into keeping quiet. We will speak out, and we do speak out when it is in the defence of our homeland and folk!
Join the BNP help us reclaim OUR country!
A European Union which is contemptuous of the democracies of its Member-States.
Schools which do not teach and qualifications which do not qualify.
Railways which were torn-up when it was foreseeable that our roads would become over-crowded.
TV channels which spread moral sewage and filth, as well as political propaganda, into the minds of our impressionable children.
A punishment system that does not punish real criminals and delinquents, and which prevents us from doing so.
A Human Rights Act which takes away our human rights.
And yet, if you notice any of these things, the main politicians add insult to injury by telling you that it is YOU, and not they, who are extreme!
WE STAND OR FALL AS A NATION and now the effects of what is happening in our country are now beginning to affect us significantly. For example:AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGES, JOB SHORTAGES, THE COMING WATER SHORTAGES AND EXCESSIVE BUILDING ON GREEN BELT LAND, TOO MANY TAXES AND TOO MANY JOBS FOR PEOPLE ‘WORKING’ IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT DOING FAKE JOBS. THE CREEPING ISLAMIFICATION OF OUR LAND (and YES it is OUR land!), THE INCREASE IN RACIST ATTACKS ON WHITE BRITISH PEOPLE. PATRONISING GOVERNMENT OFFICERS OFFERING HANDOUTS TO US WITH OUR OWN MONEY - DOUBTLESS TO KEEP US IN LINE! DON’T FALL FOR THAT ONE!
We in the British National Party, like you, are concerned about all of these things. And we will not be bullied into keeping silent by the somewhat witless name-calling that intimidates many folk, quite wrongly, into keeping quiet. We will speak out, and we do speak out when it is in the defence of our homeland and folk!
Join the BNP help us reclaim OUR country!
Friday 8 June 2007
Store Wars - Join The Organic Rebellion
This has absolutely nothing to do with history or politics, but it is a great piece of animation and well worth watching!
http://www.storewars.org/flash/index.html
http://www.storewars.org/flash/index.html
This Day In The Falklands War
8th June
Plymouth in Falkland Sound is hit by 4 Argentine bombs but none explode;
Sir Galahad and Sir Tristram are bombed at Fitzroy while the Welsh Guards are waiting to disembark - 51 die including 38 Welsh Guards and 55 are seriously wounded;
War cabinet asked not to reveal Fitzroy casualties;
Landing craft Foxtrot-4 sunk with British vehicles aboard;
3 Argentine skyhawks are shot down by sea harriers;
General Moore finalises battle plan for Stanley
Plymouth in Falkland Sound is hit by 4 Argentine bombs but none explode;
Sir Galahad and Sir Tristram are bombed at Fitzroy while the Welsh Guards are waiting to disembark - 51 die including 38 Welsh Guards and 55 are seriously wounded;
War cabinet asked not to reveal Fitzroy casualties;
Landing craft Foxtrot-4 sunk with British vehicles aboard;
3 Argentine skyhawks are shot down by sea harriers;
General Moore finalises battle plan for Stanley
Falklands Anniversary - June 14th 1982 - War Over
A reminder of the sacrifices made by our forces to recapture the Falkland Islands from the Argies - a bit different to the last lot of our sailors who were recently "captured" by the Iranians without firing a shot! When the argies invaded the Falklands the small contingent of Royal Marines based there fought bravely against a massive invasion force and surrendered only when there was no further hope. I was a young man in the forces at the time and for me the war, short though it was, still resonates. I was not involved in the campaign but for me the following images and thoughts are still with me.
The bravery of the Royal Marines during the invasion
The Captain of the Atlantic Conveyor going down with his ship
The bombing of the Sir Galahad and Sheffield = the news reports were ghastly to watch
The cheers in our pubs whenever John Nott (then defence spokesman) announced any argy planes shot down
The silence in the same pubs when one of ours was shot down, and the same when we lost ships
The courage and fortitude of the marines and paras in extreme conditions
The VC awarded to Colonel H.Jones and the almost forgotten Sgt.McKay who was with him.
We are proud of you all.
Islam Exposed
Almost every ‘mainstream’ politician has said that Islam is a religion of peace and that Islam means peace. But are they telling the truth about Islam? To ask that question is to be almost sure of the answer. In fact the word Islam does not mean peace, it means submission; and the faith of Islam is very far from being peaceful in the means that is uses to spread and maintain both the religion itself and what it feels is its right to dominance over others - their lands, their thoughts, their cultures, their legal systems; and their whole state and political and economic system. Indeed, in denying the truth about Islam, the ‘mainstream’ politicians are engaged in a whole-scale scheme of falsehood. This is not unique by any means: they have done the same sort of thing with regard to the real nature and intent of what was at first put across merely as a Common Market; and they have, for several decades, been selling the idea of the multi-racial and multi-cultural society as though it was voluntary, had no dangers for us, and had been done with our consent. So it should not surprise us if there is something fishy about this new line that they have taken - after the September 11th attacks in New York and the London bombings - that Islam means peace; and that peace is all that there is to Islam. If only that were the case; but it is not.
There are certainly a number of different views on Islam. One viewpoint, which is quite prevalent, is that Islam is a religion of peace because it is a religion. Religion is all about peace, is it not? Christianity is about peace and all religions are about the same God; and so Islam, for that reason as well, will be peaceful. The suicide bombers were merely misguided young men who hijacked an essentially good religion and used it to an evil purpose, much like many have done with Christianity (the Crusades would be mentioned at this point); and they had been forced to such extremism by the provocation meted out to the Palestinians by the wicked West, the Israelis, and the Zionists. Poor suicide bombers, one might think. This is not so much a viewpoint as a blind spot - blind to every thing in front of it; and is not worthy of any further treatment however much it resonates with highly-paid human rights lawyer, Cherrie Blair.
A second view of Islam does not attribute the peace of Christianity to the religion of Mohammed quite so directly; it recognises that Islam is more than a Nazarene sect with a towel on its head, and that it does have a holy book and recorded traditions of its own; drawn from its own distinctive cultural and revelational milieu. Nonetheless, it too tends to equate religion with what we have come to expect of religion as heavily influenced in the West by our ethos of Christianity. The god of Islam may well be different, this view says, and his ways in many respects at variance to those of Jehovah; but - out of respect for multi-culturalism, and welcoming ‘the other’, as well as respect for the truth (and there can be no conflict between the two) - we cannot, and must not judge, Islam by our own far from perfect Western standards. Islam will likewise be tolerant of us if we only play fair: everyone is basically decent, and if we do the plain decent thing to them, they will surely reciprocate, since all cultures have much to give; and they do not really look upon us as ‘infidels’ anymore, if they ever really did.
A third view of Islam says that Islam is a violent religion implacably hostile to all that is good and non-Muslim in the world, known as ‘the abode of war‘; and that the design and intent of Islam is to wreak havoc, ruin, mayhem, and death upon all the heathen, Jews, and Christians - unless they either convert (Allah is merciful), or submit to pay the dhimmi tax, and agree to survive as second class citizens in a Muslim dominated state, where they have little influence and cannot proselytise. There can be no doubt that - in the light of many Koranic surahs (verses) and in the face both of Islamic sharia (law) and the written hadiths or traditions of what Mohammed said and did - there is much to commend itself in this view of Islam. And yet we all feel - if we know any Muslims, that is - that this view is very harsh on some or many of the Muslims that we do know, or did know, not so very long ago. They were the last people, we feel, who could turn on us, or harbour murderers, fanatical terrorists, or rapists in our midst. It smacks too much of the view, held in world war two, that every German was a Nazi; that all Nazis were bad; and that the only good German was a dead German. However, much truth there may be in the third view, it is being taken too far if it means something like that. And the fact of the matter, I think, is that the warlike character of Islam - though a very important part of the picture - is, yet, only part of the whole picture. It is not the whole truth. If it was the whole of the obvious truth about Islam, many - indeed, I believe, most Muslims - might recoil from Islam in horror.
Whenever we study any evil and totalitarian regime, whether religious or secular, we must understand that the truth or reality about it is much less obvious to those caught up in it than we usually suppose. So we must be careful in judging others. Evil comes in many guises, or should we say disguises; if it did not, it would have far fewer followers. And whatever you make of the suicide bombers, or mass murderers - and however hard this may be for us to take - some of them, at least, thought (in some way) that they were doing good: the will of a good Allah, and not that of a monster. I am by no means making an apology for radical or mainstream Islam (the two really only differ in tactics and pace, not in the ends and the means, if needed); but we still, as difficult as it may appear, have to see things from their point of view (as well as our own) before we finally evaluate their religion. This is known as empathy, and is quite different to sympathy.
So what is the whole truth about Islam. Well it will help if we evaluate it in its parts and then stand back from the canvass, so to speak, and see the whole: how each different part relates to every other part; what is each part’s character; and, vitally, what is the tendency and intent which emerges from the whole when put together -when the whole is much more than the sum of its parts when disconnected. An illustration may serve to help. Let us imagine a disassembled bicycle in all sits separate parts. We see that each part has a design and function - some parts are clearly moving parts, and some parts are fixed parts; and some parts do not seem to make any sense at all. The bell, to make noises, does not seem to be part of a bike but part of some strange musical band. Then if, in our minds at least, we put all these parts together correctly, we see that each part has a relation to the whole even when - considered in isolation - they did not quite seem to fit what we had heard about conveyances. It is like that with every political or belief system that we come across. Each part has a unique function (not always obvious) in relation to the other parts and in regard to the overall purpose; not merely of any one part, but of the whole together.
To change the picture somewhat let us not imagine a human artefact, such as a bicycle, but a living organism such as a cell. Every political or religious belief-system (and every scientific theory for that matter), if it is to survive and propagate - that is to convert and sustain confidence - it must be able to explain things and to fight off gainsaying arguments and conflicting evidence. Somewhere in the belief system there will be a set of values, and a collection of arguments, that act as a defence mechanism saying that the belief-system is good and worthy and that its competitors, opponents, or detractors are either wrong or bad, in some vital way, or both. And that is the subtlety of every belief system. Not everyone who was involved in the Holy Inquisition did so from the lowest of motives; quite the reverse. The same was true of every other form of evil. The French Revolution’s reign of terror was propagated by many who thought of doing only good and were loyal to the ideals of ‘liberty, equality, and fraternity’; as the ‘brotherhood republics’ of Red China, North Korea, Viet Nam, and the Soviet Union were dedicated also to the ideal of ‘equality’. So the fact that Islam attracts good people with only good intentions, high morals, and respectable civic virtues should not surprise us. These other causes have done so too.
So, what do we make of Islam? Well it is essentially organised around a principle of violence, to put it crudely, or - to put it in a more nuanced and self-justifying way (remember the analogy of the cell fighting of its detractors) - it is Allah’s mandated way of converting the world to his truth preferably by persuasion, if possible, but by military jihad and compulsion, if need be.
Yes, Islam is a religion; but that means, in its own terms so different to the West, that it is an army too. It is also a one-party state and political system. Like any army every member is a warrior but not all warriors are combatants in the front line. All are literally in uniform so to speak (as you would expect of an army) but many only contribute indirectly to the overall job of ‘spreading the faith’ - just as with the bicycle only some of the parts contribute directly to its movement by moving themselves. Yes, the faith must be spread in the end by the sword if necessary; but only if necessary. In that sense Islam could well be seen as a religion of peace. And if the approach of peaceful persuasion does not succeed there are many other ways, short of actual violence, but involving force which can ‘persuade’. For example the show of force to induce the non-Muslim world to convert willingly or to be cowed into submission, may suffice. War and violence, terrorism and intimidation are only some of the means of carrying on the mission. In ‘peaceful’ Islamic theory, war should be the servant of the mission, not its master. So, yes, militant mainstream Islam does have a peaceful side to it. But then so too does a battleship. The USS Missouri did not have to always fire its guns in anger to have the needed effect. It could attain its objective, at times, merely by the threat of force or by its very appearance and presence. The use of force may not always be needed, or desirable. Voluntary conversions to Islam do take place when it is portrayed in the rose coloured spectacles of the Western ‘liberals’. So, why war when you can succeed without it? But, alas, those who perhaps willingly and winsomely come into Islam rarely, if ever, are so free or willing to renounce it. It is not the way into a religion which is important - to see whether the religion is free or not - but the way out of it, which is often the more telling.
Certainly many Muslims are wholly peaceful and would never do the kind of things that their religious compatriots would do; but does that matter? Not every part on the assembled bicycle was a moving part but the bicycle is nonetheless designed to move; and not every sailor on the USS Missouri was a gunner or an aimer, or a target-locater and identifier; but yet - whether cook or laundryman - all too obviously peaceful roles - each contributed an essential part to the fighting nature of the whole. We must not infer the role of the whole from the limited use and peaceful function of a part. What matters in that sense is not the individual but the whole. For it is as a whole that it operates.
It is mainstream Islamic policy in Europe, under the orders of the Muslim Council of Europe, that no Muslim can lead a good Muslim life outside of his community; that all Muslims can only express a good and religious life in community with other Muslims around a Mosque; and that Muslims must congregate as Muslims in specified areas (encampments?) from which they can dominate a locality and from which they can then spread out. The army has a strategy; and it looks like an army - a religious army but an army nonetheless. One can hardly blame it, in one sense, for following through, and working out in practice, the teachings of its own holy book together with the written down traditions of their prophet. Islam is behaving in character and according to its nature and its purposes as, it believes it is, God’s true and noble religion. The truth must dominate and prevail; and it must do so in this life. What is surprising about the whole situation is not the ‘suicide’ bombings, the honour killings, the violence and intimidation of the few over the many, the paedophile-weddings, the rapes and enslavings of those taken in war - for all these are part of its nature, its teachings, its principles and its history; what is surprising is that the self-styled ‘liberal’ and ‘do-gooder’ elite have imagined that it could have been otherwise. Perhaps, just perhaps, it could have been; but the fact is that it is not, nor is it likely to be, with the policies being vigorously perused by the current ‘powers that be’ over Islam and over the West. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Thanks to my my good friend the Reverend Robert West (Christian Council of Britain) for his permission to reproduce this article. As with all posts feel free to link with acknowledgement.
The Lincolnshire Patriot
There are certainly a number of different views on Islam. One viewpoint, which is quite prevalent, is that Islam is a religion of peace because it is a religion. Religion is all about peace, is it not? Christianity is about peace and all religions are about the same God; and so Islam, for that reason as well, will be peaceful. The suicide bombers were merely misguided young men who hijacked an essentially good religion and used it to an evil purpose, much like many have done with Christianity (the Crusades would be mentioned at this point); and they had been forced to such extremism by the provocation meted out to the Palestinians by the wicked West, the Israelis, and the Zionists. Poor suicide bombers, one might think. This is not so much a viewpoint as a blind spot - blind to every thing in front of it; and is not worthy of any further treatment however much it resonates with highly-paid human rights lawyer, Cherrie Blair.
A second view of Islam does not attribute the peace of Christianity to the religion of Mohammed quite so directly; it recognises that Islam is more than a Nazarene sect with a towel on its head, and that it does have a holy book and recorded traditions of its own; drawn from its own distinctive cultural and revelational milieu. Nonetheless, it too tends to equate religion with what we have come to expect of religion as heavily influenced in the West by our ethos of Christianity. The god of Islam may well be different, this view says, and his ways in many respects at variance to those of Jehovah; but - out of respect for multi-culturalism, and welcoming ‘the other’, as well as respect for the truth (and there can be no conflict between the two) - we cannot, and must not judge, Islam by our own far from perfect Western standards. Islam will likewise be tolerant of us if we only play fair: everyone is basically decent, and if we do the plain decent thing to them, they will surely reciprocate, since all cultures have much to give; and they do not really look upon us as ‘infidels’ anymore, if they ever really did.
A third view of Islam says that Islam is a violent religion implacably hostile to all that is good and non-Muslim in the world, known as ‘the abode of war‘; and that the design and intent of Islam is to wreak havoc, ruin, mayhem, and death upon all the heathen, Jews, and Christians - unless they either convert (Allah is merciful), or submit to pay the dhimmi tax, and agree to survive as second class citizens in a Muslim dominated state, where they have little influence and cannot proselytise. There can be no doubt that - in the light of many Koranic surahs (verses) and in the face both of Islamic sharia (law) and the written hadiths or traditions of what Mohammed said and did - there is much to commend itself in this view of Islam. And yet we all feel - if we know any Muslims, that is - that this view is very harsh on some or many of the Muslims that we do know, or did know, not so very long ago. They were the last people, we feel, who could turn on us, or harbour murderers, fanatical terrorists, or rapists in our midst. It smacks too much of the view, held in world war two, that every German was a Nazi; that all Nazis were bad; and that the only good German was a dead German. However, much truth there may be in the third view, it is being taken too far if it means something like that. And the fact of the matter, I think, is that the warlike character of Islam - though a very important part of the picture - is, yet, only part of the whole picture. It is not the whole truth. If it was the whole of the obvious truth about Islam, many - indeed, I believe, most Muslims - might recoil from Islam in horror.
Whenever we study any evil and totalitarian regime, whether religious or secular, we must understand that the truth or reality about it is much less obvious to those caught up in it than we usually suppose. So we must be careful in judging others. Evil comes in many guises, or should we say disguises; if it did not, it would have far fewer followers. And whatever you make of the suicide bombers, or mass murderers - and however hard this may be for us to take - some of them, at least, thought (in some way) that they were doing good: the will of a good Allah, and not that of a monster. I am by no means making an apology for radical or mainstream Islam (the two really only differ in tactics and pace, not in the ends and the means, if needed); but we still, as difficult as it may appear, have to see things from their point of view (as well as our own) before we finally evaluate their religion. This is known as empathy, and is quite different to sympathy.
So what is the whole truth about Islam. Well it will help if we evaluate it in its parts and then stand back from the canvass, so to speak, and see the whole: how each different part relates to every other part; what is each part’s character; and, vitally, what is the tendency and intent which emerges from the whole when put together -when the whole is much more than the sum of its parts when disconnected. An illustration may serve to help. Let us imagine a disassembled bicycle in all sits separate parts. We see that each part has a design and function - some parts are clearly moving parts, and some parts are fixed parts; and some parts do not seem to make any sense at all. The bell, to make noises, does not seem to be part of a bike but part of some strange musical band. Then if, in our minds at least, we put all these parts together correctly, we see that each part has a relation to the whole even when - considered in isolation - they did not quite seem to fit what we had heard about conveyances. It is like that with every political or belief system that we come across. Each part has a unique function (not always obvious) in relation to the other parts and in regard to the overall purpose; not merely of any one part, but of the whole together.
To change the picture somewhat let us not imagine a human artefact, such as a bicycle, but a living organism such as a cell. Every political or religious belief-system (and every scientific theory for that matter), if it is to survive and propagate - that is to convert and sustain confidence - it must be able to explain things and to fight off gainsaying arguments and conflicting evidence. Somewhere in the belief system there will be a set of values, and a collection of arguments, that act as a defence mechanism saying that the belief-system is good and worthy and that its competitors, opponents, or detractors are either wrong or bad, in some vital way, or both. And that is the subtlety of every belief system. Not everyone who was involved in the Holy Inquisition did so from the lowest of motives; quite the reverse. The same was true of every other form of evil. The French Revolution’s reign of terror was propagated by many who thought of doing only good and were loyal to the ideals of ‘liberty, equality, and fraternity’; as the ‘brotherhood republics’ of Red China, North Korea, Viet Nam, and the Soviet Union were dedicated also to the ideal of ‘equality’. So the fact that Islam attracts good people with only good intentions, high morals, and respectable civic virtues should not surprise us. These other causes have done so too.
So, what do we make of Islam? Well it is essentially organised around a principle of violence, to put it crudely, or - to put it in a more nuanced and self-justifying way (remember the analogy of the cell fighting of its detractors) - it is Allah’s mandated way of converting the world to his truth preferably by persuasion, if possible, but by military jihad and compulsion, if need be.
Yes, Islam is a religion; but that means, in its own terms so different to the West, that it is an army too. It is also a one-party state and political system. Like any army every member is a warrior but not all warriors are combatants in the front line. All are literally in uniform so to speak (as you would expect of an army) but many only contribute indirectly to the overall job of ‘spreading the faith’ - just as with the bicycle only some of the parts contribute directly to its movement by moving themselves. Yes, the faith must be spread in the end by the sword if necessary; but only if necessary. In that sense Islam could well be seen as a religion of peace. And if the approach of peaceful persuasion does not succeed there are many other ways, short of actual violence, but involving force which can ‘persuade’. For example the show of force to induce the non-Muslim world to convert willingly or to be cowed into submission, may suffice. War and violence, terrorism and intimidation are only some of the means of carrying on the mission. In ‘peaceful’ Islamic theory, war should be the servant of the mission, not its master. So, yes, militant mainstream Islam does have a peaceful side to it. But then so too does a battleship. The USS Missouri did not have to always fire its guns in anger to have the needed effect. It could attain its objective, at times, merely by the threat of force or by its very appearance and presence. The use of force may not always be needed, or desirable. Voluntary conversions to Islam do take place when it is portrayed in the rose coloured spectacles of the Western ‘liberals’. So, why war when you can succeed without it? But, alas, those who perhaps willingly and winsomely come into Islam rarely, if ever, are so free or willing to renounce it. It is not the way into a religion which is important - to see whether the religion is free or not - but the way out of it, which is often the more telling.
Certainly many Muslims are wholly peaceful and would never do the kind of things that their religious compatriots would do; but does that matter? Not every part on the assembled bicycle was a moving part but the bicycle is nonetheless designed to move; and not every sailor on the USS Missouri was a gunner or an aimer, or a target-locater and identifier; but yet - whether cook or laundryman - all too obviously peaceful roles - each contributed an essential part to the fighting nature of the whole. We must not infer the role of the whole from the limited use and peaceful function of a part. What matters in that sense is not the individual but the whole. For it is as a whole that it operates.
It is mainstream Islamic policy in Europe, under the orders of the Muslim Council of Europe, that no Muslim can lead a good Muslim life outside of his community; that all Muslims can only express a good and religious life in community with other Muslims around a Mosque; and that Muslims must congregate as Muslims in specified areas (encampments?) from which they can dominate a locality and from which they can then spread out. The army has a strategy; and it looks like an army - a religious army but an army nonetheless. One can hardly blame it, in one sense, for following through, and working out in practice, the teachings of its own holy book together with the written down traditions of their prophet. Islam is behaving in character and according to its nature and its purposes as, it believes it is, God’s true and noble religion. The truth must dominate and prevail; and it must do so in this life. What is surprising about the whole situation is not the ‘suicide’ bombings, the honour killings, the violence and intimidation of the few over the many, the paedophile-weddings, the rapes and enslavings of those taken in war - for all these are part of its nature, its teachings, its principles and its history; what is surprising is that the self-styled ‘liberal’ and ‘do-gooder’ elite have imagined that it could have been otherwise. Perhaps, just perhaps, it could have been; but the fact is that it is not, nor is it likely to be, with the policies being vigorously perused by the current ‘powers that be’ over Islam and over the West. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Thanks to my my good friend the Reverend Robert West (Christian Council of Britain) for his permission to reproduce this article. As with all posts feel free to link with acknowledgement.
The Lincolnshire Patriot
Thursday 7 June 2007
Another Sickening Attack
Mary Sear was determined to lead an active, independent life.
The widowed great-grandmother lived alone and went out in all weathers to do her shopping.
On the morning of her 96th birthday, she walked the half mile to her daughter's house to receive her cards and gifts from the family.
And on the way home, she was knocked to the ground as a mugger took her handbag.
He rifled through her birthday cards, shaking out the birthday money they contained.
Mrs Sear, from Harrow, North-West London, died of a heart attack six days later in hospital, where she was being treated for a broken hip and shoulder.
IF the case is officially classified as homicide, she could make history as Britain's oldest murder victim. Some consolation to her family eh?
Until now, Harrow, whose MP is Tony McNulty, had been considered one of London's safest boroughs (but that in itself is nothing to be proud of as all through the country violent crime is escalating and nowhere is as safe as it was just a few years ago)
The incident is further evidence of the burgeoning street crime which leaves the elderly in fear.
Conservative councillor Susan Hall described the attack as horrific.
"It is absolutely shocking, something we would never expect to happen here," she said.
"My personal view is that if you shock someone into death, that is the same as putting a gun to their head.
"This was an innocent old lady going about her business."
The mugging happened on Tuesday last week.
The day after, a man of 27 faced court accused of two robberies, including that of Mrs Sear.
Further charges could be considered following her death. A Scotland Yard source said that to mount a successful prosecution for murder, officers will have to establish a direct link between the robbery and Mrs Sear's death.
"It's difficult, but not impossible," said one. "Murder squad officers are on standby to deal with the case."
In a statement, Mrs Sear's heartbroken family said: "She was a wonderful mother, grandmother and great grandmother who will be sorely missed."
The mugging left her in a terrible state. Until then she had been a perfectly independent lady.
"Although she was 96 she got about and visited her family. I saw her in hospital after the attack and she had a broken hip and was really bashed up."
It is way past the time when we should be dealing properly with lowlife scum like this 27 year old piece-of-shit. If a victim dies after a robbery then the criminal scum should be jailed for life. We have to much fannying around with this sort of thing, trying to make sure 110% that the poor criminal was directly responsible for the death. He robbed her, she died - end of story - jail him for life. Our liberal politicians will never bring back the death penalty, being more concerned with the rights and wants of the criminals, and to hell with the victims and their families! Its time this country got its guts back and started hanging drug-traffickers, terrorists, child killers and paedophiles as well as animals like the vermin who robbed and killed this 96 year old lady. Life should mean a minimum of 25 years not the paltry few years in a comfortable cell most end up serving. You should realise there is NO war on terror, NO war on crime - just soft soap as usual.
Sir Winston Churchill
"Arm yourselves, and be ye men of valour, and be in readiness for the conflict; for it is better for us to perish in battle than to look upon the outrage of our nation and our altar."
The widowed great-grandmother lived alone and went out in all weathers to do her shopping.
On the morning of her 96th birthday, she walked the half mile to her daughter's house to receive her cards and gifts from the family.
And on the way home, she was knocked to the ground as a mugger took her handbag.
He rifled through her birthday cards, shaking out the birthday money they contained.
Mrs Sear, from Harrow, North-West London, died of a heart attack six days later in hospital, where she was being treated for a broken hip and shoulder.
IF the case is officially classified as homicide, she could make history as Britain's oldest murder victim. Some consolation to her family eh?
Until now, Harrow, whose MP is Tony McNulty, had been considered one of London's safest boroughs (but that in itself is nothing to be proud of as all through the country violent crime is escalating and nowhere is as safe as it was just a few years ago)
The incident is further evidence of the burgeoning street crime which leaves the elderly in fear.
Conservative councillor Susan Hall described the attack as horrific.
"It is absolutely shocking, something we would never expect to happen here," she said.
"My personal view is that if you shock someone into death, that is the same as putting a gun to their head.
"This was an innocent old lady going about her business."
The mugging happened on Tuesday last week.
The day after, a man of 27 faced court accused of two robberies, including that of Mrs Sear.
Further charges could be considered following her death. A Scotland Yard source said that to mount a successful prosecution for murder, officers will have to establish a direct link between the robbery and Mrs Sear's death.
"It's difficult, but not impossible," said one. "Murder squad officers are on standby to deal with the case."
In a statement, Mrs Sear's heartbroken family said: "She was a wonderful mother, grandmother and great grandmother who will be sorely missed."
The mugging left her in a terrible state. Until then she had been a perfectly independent lady.
"Although she was 96 she got about and visited her family. I saw her in hospital after the attack and she had a broken hip and was really bashed up."
It is way past the time when we should be dealing properly with lowlife scum like this 27 year old piece-of-shit. If a victim dies after a robbery then the criminal scum should be jailed for life. We have to much fannying around with this sort of thing, trying to make sure 110% that the poor criminal was directly responsible for the death. He robbed her, she died - end of story - jail him for life. Our liberal politicians will never bring back the death penalty, being more concerned with the rights and wants of the criminals, and to hell with the victims and their families! Its time this country got its guts back and started hanging drug-traffickers, terrorists, child killers and paedophiles as well as animals like the vermin who robbed and killed this 96 year old lady. Life should mean a minimum of 25 years not the paltry few years in a comfortable cell most end up serving. You should realise there is NO war on terror, NO war on crime - just soft soap as usual.
Sir Winston Churchill
"Arm yourselves, and be ye men of valour, and be in readiness for the conflict; for it is better for us to perish in battle than to look upon the outrage of our nation and our altar."
Pegasus Bridge - June 6th 1944
The British 6th Airborne was given the task of securing the most easterly areas of the British landing beaches. This included the estuary of the River Orne and the Canal de Caen. This involved the capture and destruction of the German coastal battery at Merville, and the seizure, intact, of the two bridges at Benouville. One bridge spanned the river Orne and the other the Caen canal. It was vital these two bridges were captured intact to ensure the road inland was open for the advancing Allied Forces due to hit hit the beaches that morning.
The Divisional Commander, Major General Richard Gale decided to send in a special force of six gliders, carrying a force of 180 men. Three gliders would land and take the river bridge. The other three would land and take the canal bridge.For this mission the men of D Company, 2nd Battalion, Oxfordshire and Buckinghampshire Light Infantry (Ox and Bucks) were selected along with Royal Engineers from 'B' company and pilots of the Glider Pilots Regiment.
Major John Howard and his men evacuated the glider as quickly as possible, and attacked the bridge. The German defenders were taken by surprise. Lieutenant Brotheridge who led the attack across the bridge was shot in the neck and became the first Allied soldier killed on D Day. The men from the other two gliders joined the battle and within 5 minutes the bridge was secured. Five men were wounded in the battle for the canal bridge.
Of the gliders which were designated for the Orne river bridge, two landed within 300 and 700 meters from the target and one missed completely. When the bridge was attacked it was found to be undefended, the German troops had fled.
The two bridges had to be secured and held until the rest of the 6th Airborne, which had parachuted in, could relieve the Ox and Bucks, which was no easy task as the Germans launched two ferocious counterattacks including armour (tanks) - this was soon put out of action by Sgt. Thornton using a PIAT (projectile-infantry-anti-tank) gun, from very close range. The paratroops finally arrived at 3.00a.m. to the relief of Major Howard and his men. A brilliant feat had been accomplished, the two bridges had been secured, the road-link was open, ready for the invading allied troops due to arrive from the beacheads.
When you think that the gliders were released from their tug aircraft at 5,000 ft. in darkness, using only maps and stop watches, it is understandable that it was described as the "Finest piece of airmanship of the war"
The Divisional Commander, Major General Richard Gale decided to send in a special force of six gliders, carrying a force of 180 men. Three gliders would land and take the river bridge. The other three would land and take the canal bridge.For this mission the men of D Company, 2nd Battalion, Oxfordshire and Buckinghampshire Light Infantry (Ox and Bucks) were selected along with Royal Engineers from 'B' company and pilots of the Glider Pilots Regiment.
Major John Howard and his men evacuated the glider as quickly as possible, and attacked the bridge. The German defenders were taken by surprise. Lieutenant Brotheridge who led the attack across the bridge was shot in the neck and became the first Allied soldier killed on D Day. The men from the other two gliders joined the battle and within 5 minutes the bridge was secured. Five men were wounded in the battle for the canal bridge.
Of the gliders which were designated for the Orne river bridge, two landed within 300 and 700 meters from the target and one missed completely. When the bridge was attacked it was found to be undefended, the German troops had fled.
The two bridges had to be secured and held until the rest of the 6th Airborne, which had parachuted in, could relieve the Ox and Bucks, which was no easy task as the Germans launched two ferocious counterattacks including armour (tanks) - this was soon put out of action by Sgt. Thornton using a PIAT (projectile-infantry-anti-tank) gun, from very close range. The paratroops finally arrived at 3.00a.m. to the relief of Major Howard and his men. A brilliant feat had been accomplished, the two bridges had been secured, the road-link was open, ready for the invading allied troops due to arrive from the beacheads.
When you think that the gliders were released from their tug aircraft at 5,000 ft. in darkness, using only maps and stop watches, it is understandable that it was described as the "Finest piece of airmanship of the war"
D-Day 6th June 1944 - Lest We Forget
Why do you still march old man,
With medals on your chest?
Why do you still grieve old man,
For those friends you laid to rest?
Why do your eyes gleam old man,
When you hear the bugles blow?
Tell me why you cry old man,
About those days so long ago?
I'll tell you why i march young man,
With medals on my chest,
I'll tell you why i grieve young man,
For those i laid to rest,
Through misty fields of gossamer silk,
Come visions of distant times,
When boys of tender age lost lives,
And all their mothers pined.
We buried them in a blanket shroud,
Their young flesh scorched and blackened,
In a communal grave, newly gouged,
In bloodstained gorse and bracken.
And you ask me why i march young man,
I march to remind you all,
That but for those apple blossom youths,
You'd never have known freedom at all.
Rupert Brooke (1887-1915) - English poet
"If I should die, think only this of me: That there's some corner of a foreign field that is for ever England. There shall be in that rich earth a richer dust concealed; A dust whom England bore, shaped, made aware, Gave, once, her flowers to love, her ways to roam, A body of England's, breathing English air, Washed by the rivers, blest by suns of home.
And think, this heart, all evil shed away, A pulse in the eternal mind, no less Gives somewhere back the thoughts by England given; Her sights and sounds; dreams happy as her day; And laughter, learnt of friends; and gentleness, In hearts at peace, under an English heaven".
("The Soldier" - 1914)
With medals on your chest?
Why do you still grieve old man,
For those friends you laid to rest?
Why do your eyes gleam old man,
When you hear the bugles blow?
Tell me why you cry old man,
About those days so long ago?
I'll tell you why i march young man,
With medals on my chest,
I'll tell you why i grieve young man,
For those i laid to rest,
Through misty fields of gossamer silk,
Come visions of distant times,
When boys of tender age lost lives,
And all their mothers pined.
We buried them in a blanket shroud,
Their young flesh scorched and blackened,
In a communal grave, newly gouged,
In bloodstained gorse and bracken.
And you ask me why i march young man,
I march to remind you all,
That but for those apple blossom youths,
You'd never have known freedom at all.
Rupert Brooke (1887-1915) - English poet
"If I should die, think only this of me: That there's some corner of a foreign field that is for ever England. There shall be in that rich earth a richer dust concealed; A dust whom England bore, shaped, made aware, Gave, once, her flowers to love, her ways to roam, A body of England's, breathing English air, Washed by the rivers, blest by suns of home.
And think, this heart, all evil shed away, A pulse in the eternal mind, no less Gives somewhere back the thoughts by England given; Her sights and sounds; dreams happy as her day; And laughter, learnt of friends; and gentleness, In hearts at peace, under an English heaven".
("The Soldier" - 1914)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
