The U.K. Is Islam's Poodle
Over and over again, Muslims intimidate Western people into silence, and citizens in the U.K. and elsewhere just blink like sheep in response. The same is true of elected officials in the U.K. and elsewhere who should be defending Western Enlightenment values -- like free speech -- against their attack by Muslims.
"They caved in like a bunch of spineless pussies." --Pat Condell on what the British government did when one Muslim MP (Lord Nazir Ahmed) allegedly threatened to mobilize thousands of Muslims if the courageous, truth-telling Dutch legislator, Geert Wilders, was allowed into the U.K. (Ahmed later denied it.) Here's the video.
See Geert Wilders' film about the reality of "the religion of peace" here.
And here's the word from somebody who disagrees with him, Daniel Hannan, in the Telegraph:
Now for what it's worth, I think Wilders is a nasty piece of work. Having begun with an eminently reasonable point of view - that Islamism should not be allowed to prejudice civic liberties - he has ended up being every bit as authoritarian as the people he criticises. Read his demand for the Koran to be banned: this is not a measured critique from a politician concerned about tolerance and freedom; it's a foul-mouthed rant from someone deliberately courting controversy.But being obnoxious is not a criminal offence. Crassness is not the same thing as incitement. To find someone guilty of incitement, you need to show that they, you know, incited someone. If I were to say: "There are too many Archenlanders in Narnia, they're taking our jobs and they're dissing our talking beasts", I would be guilty of discourtesy, but not of incitement. For incitement, you'd need me to say: "Right, let's go and throw some of these Archies into Winding Arrow River: who's with me?"
Wilders has never done this. Some of the Islamist preachers he is criticising, mutatis mutandis, have. And yet, as Douglas Murray points out, despite Labour's repeated promises, hardly any hate-peddlers have been deported or denied access to Britain. Our judges, happy enough to bar Wilders, can usually be relied on to overturn the deportation orders of jihadi enthusiasts.
Is there any hope for Europe? It's mind boggling what's happening there. You think that it can't happen in the U.S. but don't be so sure. The nanny state is in total control now with Saint Obama in charge.
There's an excellent youtube video on the British gun ban. Regular Brits taking to the streets in protest. Search for "England Gun Ban Update". It's the type of anti-freedom law the Dems dream of.
Sean at February 14, 2009 7:31 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/02/14/the_uk_is_islam.html#comment-1626711">comment from SeanHere it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGVAQOUi6ec
Amy Alkon
at February 14, 2009 7:41 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/02/14/the_uk_is_islam.html#comment-1626712">comment from Amy AlkonAnd then here, watch British police literally running from Muslims (scroll down to the bottom):
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1134042/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-British-police-running-Muslim-demonstrators-Christian-nurse-facing-sack-offering-pray-patient--way-society-dies.html
Amy Alkon
at February 14, 2009 7:45 AM
Holy crap, that video of the retreating police is disturbing. My initial reaction was that any officer who didn't need rotator cuff surgery from swinging his billyclub should be fired but I'm sure they just reacted the way they were expected to react. If their superiors weren't going to respond with reinforcements bent on kicking ass what are those 30-40 cops supposed to do?
Could "protesters" in the U.S. get away with pelting police and chasing them down the street? I don't think so. We've had our riots but the police stand their ground given half a chance.
sean at February 14, 2009 8:32 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/02/14/the_uk_is_islam.html#comment-1626716">comment from seanBritain is Islam's bitch.
Amy Alkon
at February 14, 2009 9:05 AM
al-Bion.
Jim Treacher at February 14, 2009 9:43 AM
Are there really enough CSLewis fans reading the Telegraph to get the archlander reference? Or to understand what a horrible analogy it is?
lujlp at February 14, 2009 10:08 AM
I know its completly off topic but I have this annyoing OCD thing when it come to butchering literary references
lujlp at February 14, 2009 10:09 AM
"It's the type of anti-freedom law the Dems dream of."
Democrats aren't Americans. Democrats are dope-smoking hippie communist beatnik college professors who have sex and visit other countries that don't even speak our language!
Makes me so mad I have to go out and wax the station wagon every time I think about it.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at February 14, 2009 11:00 AM
Having begun with an eminently reasonable point of view - that Islamism should not be allowed to prejudice civic liberties - he has ended up being every bit as authoritarian as the people he criticises. Read his demand for the Koran to be banned: this is not a measured critique from a politician concerned about tolerance and freedom; it's a foul-mouthed rant from someone deliberately courting controversy.
He has lost sight of Wilder's point: For the reasons Mein Kampf is banned, the Quran must also be.
So, Wilder's demand really is: ban both, or ban neither, because in terms of savagery of their respective contents, there really is nothing to distinguish between the two.
One would think that sort of thing would be worth keeping in mind.
Hey Skipper at February 14, 2009 12:41 PM
Wake up people!
It IS happening here!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57141
Study: 3 in 4 U.S. mosques preach anti-West extremism
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1132475689987&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
Expert: Saudis have radicalized 80% of US mosques
Ken at February 14, 2009 4:45 PM
Ahmed doesn't explicitly deny it; his response is kind of vague.
kishke at February 15, 2009 7:55 AM
Leave a comment