I hear the apologists for Islamic terrorism state that violence and murder have “nothing to do with Islam”. That violent adherents to the extremely violent religion of peace have “hijacked” the religion for their own non-Islamic ends.
Whilst this may help Muslims appear to be moderate by way of Taqiyya, it is an argument without logic or reason.
By way of a couple of analogies, let us examine who makes a more pure or representitive or accurate example of a Muslim…
Analogy one:
You own a nearly new BMW motor car which needs a service. You can choose between taking the car to a back-street garage which services any make or model of car, using generic parts bought cheap from a motor factors company, without any official BMW afilliation whatsoever. Or you could take your car to a genuine BMW dealership, with fully licenced BMW technicians who will strictly and only use officially licenced, genuine BMW parts, and stick to the letter of the BMW recommended proceedures to service the vehicle.
Which of those two garages is the most “BMW”?
Analogy two:
A man who is born into a Christian family and is Christened. His father was a cleric and although he attended church regularly as a child, now only attends at Christmas and Easter. He is living with a woman, unmarried with children out of wedlock. Another man is a Bishop and lives as much as he possibly can by the Canon law upholding Christian scriptures. He opposes same gender marriage, as he considers Holy matrimony to be a holy union between a man and a woman.
Which of those two is the more Christian?
Which is the more accurate example of a good Muslim:
One identifies as a “moderate” Muslim. He is peaceful. He rarely attends Mosque, does not pray five times a day and he drinks alcohol. He opposes Jihad and wants to integrate into Western society, supports democratic human lawmaking and is a valued member of his local eclectic and secular community.
The other is an Immam who preaches that Sharia is the only law. That the punishments under Sharia law are the post perfect punishments because they are what Allah’s prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was told by Allah, and that only Allah can change Sharia law. That no man can question such law and all such punishments are not extreme or radical, but pure and beautiful. That death is the appropriate punishment for adultery, apostacy and performing homosexual acts. That Jihad is central to Islam. That the haddiths and Qu’ran specifically spell out the Islamic way as the only legitimate way to live, including these punishments and Jihad as being central to the Islamic faith.
Which of those two Muslims is the most representitive of the religion of Islam?
Now how the hell can anyone explain the logic that Islamic terrorists involved in holy Jihad against infidels are “nothing to do with Islam?” IF such terrorists are nothing to do with Islam, then neither is the Qu’ran, any Mosques, or Sharia law.
This is the first post and will be a long one as it will set the scene for a lot of what I will publish here in this blog.
I have been researching an issue which is increasingly troubling. First some background.
I was born and raised in a very monocultural, white Northern English working class town. As a child I never knew, or experienced the rich tapestry of different races or colours or cultures in my everyday life. As a consequence, myself and most of my peers were overtly racist.
I maintained my racist opinions until I turned 18 in 1987. What changed? I had cause to visit Brixton in London and it was the first time I met and spent time with a group of Black musicians. This experience completely changed my life. I had the best time and we all had amazing fun and all my ignorant pre-conceived notions of race were completely destroyed. Upon returning from that trip, I met the girl, who has since become my wife. she was raised in the Military, had moved all over the world during her childhood and so never ever understood racism or prejudice.
I fundementally changed my beliefs from that trip to London. I became dedicated to opposing racism and bigotry and intolerance wherever I discovered or encountered it. I embraced diversity. I still do. I am proud to oppose racism and to embrace diversity. I am even more proud to do so today, than ever. Especially considering the topics making the news lately.
I am very pleased at the massive changes in society which have occured over the last 30 years. The massive reduction in overt racism and prejudice in the British white community is something for which we can all be proud. I thank and praise “liberal progressives” from the left of politics in largely being the driving force behind that change and I applaud them for that great achievement.
However. What I have increasing become very unhappy about. What really, severely, pisses me off and what I find deeply offensive, is how the liberal left appease overt racism and prejudice within non-British communities.
The massive increase in immigration has seen a big increase in people from other countries and other cultures which contain their own racists, bigots and unfair prejudices. Eastern European whites who still hold vile white supremacy beliefs. Black power advocates from Africa and central America, Islamic supremacists. These must be tackled. Of course we should not label the whole with the bad actions of a few bad apples, but we should tackle their prejudices just as effectively as we tackled our own. There is one exception I would make to that, and I shall come to that later in this polemic.
These racist views, from wherever they originate must be tackled and tackled with the same zeal with which white racism has been so successfully challenged in this country, as this country is a better place for it.
What literally sickens me, is the craven appeasement of overt racism from non-British communities by the liberal progressive left. They are in a state of psychological denial of such racism. They literally refuse to believe it even exists, and claim that those of us who are rightly opposed to it, are being racist and bigoted for even accusing people in different communities of being racist, prejudiced and bigoted.
I am proud of my heritige and my country. I am proud that English Common Law was exported to the rest of the world. I am proud that the heart of that common law is human rights and equality.
I am in favour of multiculturalism and diversity that we all benefit from. I have always believed that there MUST be room, within that multiculturalism, for OUR British and English heritige and traditional customs, values and culture. Equality for all INCLUDING us natives, thanks.
The Legal Maxim: “Quod ad jus naturale attinet, omnes homines aequales sunt” means “All men created equal before natural law” What does that mean? It means equality is built-in to our law. ALL people, regardless of skin colour, religion, gender, sexual preference or whatever else, are EQUAL under the law. I am rightly proud of that and that is exactly how it should be interpreted. All are equal before one law. It is impossible to be prejudiced under such a system. All are individuals equally entitled to the same legal protection and all under the same legal obligations.
It is very distressing therefore, that the liberal progressive left are not satisfied by that and insist on creating exceptions and special privilidges in the law for specific groups in society, further differentiating and dividing society along racial, religious and sexuality based considerations. Even worse that they implement policy in the mistaken belief that traditional British/English culture does not even exist and should not enjoy any protections whatsoever. That whenever any foreign culture conflicts with our own, that we should apologetically and supinely concede to avoid causing offence!
This “Politically Correct” division is destroying our society. It goes against tolerance and equality under the law to appease the bigotry and intolerance in other cultures and plays into the hands of prejudiced supremacists. It is eliminating in tiny baby-steps, our own culture.
There are several groups of people which should be tackled. The biggest threat to our multicultural, multi-ethnic and diverse society currently comes from a religion which is capable of extreme violence, extreme bigotry, extreme prejudice and is completely supremacist in nature.
It teaches its followers that their God has willed that the entire world will fall to them. That they are the only people worthy of consideration of being human. That all those who are not part of them are lower than cattle and are the worst of beasts and such animals should be converted, enslaved or killed. It’s holy books, when taken literally, describe severe punishments for homosexuals, adulterers, even women who are raped, people who choose to leave the religion and anyone who does not follow that religion strictly enough. Worse still, they believe that their deity has created them as being the supreme religion. That no human on earth has the authority to judge or question the rules of that religion and those extreme punishments are not extreme or radical at all, but are the most perfect punishments, because their God wills that to be so. They are utterly opposed to diversity, tolerance of those who are different, equality and anyone who is not one of their own.
I refer, of course, to Islam.
In light of the illegal invasion of Iraq, I began to investigate Islam. I believed that we should never have invaded Iraq based upon such obvious and blatant lies as those which were told and debunked online at that time. I believed that it would be like “grabbing a tiger by the tail” And so it has proved to be. the Islamic state believe that they are engaged in a defensive Jihad, and so the Islamic laws relating to Jihad come into play, and they are reserving what they believe to be their right to do whatever they like, wherever they like, within those rules of Jihad to impose their Caliphate globally under a strict and literal interpretation of the Haddith as implemented by Sharia law.
I shall outline my opposition to Islam and why, I believe that the liberal left’s defence of Islam is one of the most profound and dangerous threats to traditional British culture, to diversity and to tolerance.
Let us begin with whether there is any differentiation between extreme, radical Islam and Moderate Islam.
for this I present the following video:
In this video, ordinary Muslims are segragated. Men at the front, women at the back of the room. They unanimously agree that the Haddith of the Sunnah and the Quoran teach that beheading and stoning people to death for homosexuality, adultery and apostacy are the perfect punishments in Islam and cannot be considered radical or extreme, because they simply are Islam. And Islamic law, being the will of Allah, cannot be anything other than just and natural and good. These are not radical positions. These are the positions of Islam. There is only one Allah, one Sharia and one Islam.
So there is no such thing as Moderate Islam, as ALL Islam is what the Haddith defines it to be, and that is the imposition of Sharia law for all.
But does that mean, as in English law, that we are all equal before Sharia Law? No. I present the following:
Sura 8:55: Lo! the worst of beasts in Allah’s sight are the ungrateful who will not believe.
Sura 98:6 Lo! those who disbelieve, among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters, will abide in fire of hell. They are the worst of created beings.
The worst of anything God ever created, whether it be the unclean pigs, or bacteria, cancer cells or the AIDS virus. Unbelievers, even those among the People of the Book, are worse than that.
The Qur’an breeds contempt for anyone who is not a Muslim. If statements like this would be printed anywhere outside of the Qur’an, the authors would be dragged before the courts for hate-speech.
The consequence of such statements quickly is: If such people are not really human beings, but are on a level of wild and vile beasts, then you do not need to treat them as human beings. Psychologically it is the same dynamic as used by Nazi Germany in regard to the Jews. First calling them sub-human (to remove the barrier that is naturally in every person’s conscience against killing another human being), and then seeking to eradicate them.
This is indeed an identical form of self-supremacy as the KKK, NAZIs, or any other form of religious or racial supremacy.
I refer you, dear reader, to what a strict and literal interpretation of the Haddith means according to life under the Sharia law as imposed in the Islamic State.
We see from this, that contrary to ISIS having nothing to do with Islam, that in fact, every single part of every day life is dictated by living according to Sharia law and living in constant fear of the brutal punishments which Sharia law dictate. There is NO tolerance or Diversity whatsoever. Just the most extreme prejudice imaginable.
Do we really want that here? They promise everyday to bring it to us.
If we contintue to appease Islamic supremacy, then we head down the road to an extinction of diversity and tolerance of all those who are not Muslim.
So why do we hear from Muslims preaching that Islam is the religion of peace? According to the Quoran it should be, IF all were Muslim. However, considering the fact that more Muslims are slaughtered in the Middle East by Muslims than by any other religion, it shows that their bloodlust is too strong even for them to obey their own religious doctrine, or they lethally apply it to those who are “not Muslim enough!”
… “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks…” (Qur’an 47:4). …
“The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding.
note – Muslims who do not join the fight are called ‘hypocrites’ and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter”
What chance for non-Muslims under an Islamic Caliphate under Sharia law?
Why then, do some Muslims insist that these literal interpretations of the Haddith are a perversion of a peaceful and freedom loving compassionate religion, in spite of so much terrifying evidence to the contrary?
Are they telling the truth when they say this? Do we believe them because they are saying comforting words that we want to hear and so are willing to give them any benefit of doubt?
There is one exception in Islam to obeying the doctrine of Islam. There exists an opt out for those who are living outside of the Caliphate, to deny their religion and what their religion means. They actually have a duty to Islam to deceive the non-believers.
This can be lying by ommission: Kitya, or outright deception which is called Taqiyya.
They are allowed to lull the non-believer (Kiffir or infidel) into a false sense of security before taking over and converting non-Islamic lands to become Islamic under Sharia and in a time of Jihad.
They consider non-Muslims as lower than cattle, so any Islamic duty to tell the truth, does not apply in their dealings with non-Muslims. After all, There are non greater than Allah, and his word is the supreme Law of all people and lands. All Muslims must serve Allah before themselves and do Allah’s will and strive at all times to be better Muslims. Therefore lying to Infidels and Kuffir (non-believers) is of no consequence and can be done with impunity, as it is part of trying to be a better Muslim. There is no law other than Sharia law. Although they will happily use and abuse any law which they can gain personal advantage over non-Muslims from, they do not accept that they themselves are obligated to obey any law which is not Sharia law.
When they are dealing with non-believers, then there is no limit to what is acceptable in the form of dishonesty, abuse, even rape and murder, if such things are required.
This brings me to what we should do IF I have misinterpreted Taqiyya and Kitya. What IF Moderate “Westernised” Muslims are correct and they are following the true peaceful, secular version of Islam? Can we as non-Muslims take that risk? I shall defer to Brigitte Gabriel who answers this question in a very powerful and relevant way:
So what are the “peaceful majority” of Muslims actually going to DO to convince our tolerant and diverse society that they are NOT a threat? They MUST do something, because the violent rules of the Haddith, the grotesquely barbaric actions of the Islamic State and of Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham and elsewhere who brutally gang-raped non-islamic children, erases their assurances that Islam is peaceful, tolerant or open to British values of tolerance and acceptance. When we see more Muslims marching in favour of the sheer brutality of Hamas and ISIS than we do marching in opposition to them, when British Mosques are collecting money for ISIS, then the assurances from “moderate” Muslims are almost worthless.
The actions of the Islamic Pakistanis in Rotherham and elsewhere brings me to the next attack in this polemic. That attack is reserved for my former comrades in the fight against racism and bigoted prejudice.
I am appalled, ashamed and disgusted at your appeasement and active protection of the vile brutal rapes of thousands of non-Muslim children. Of course every single rapist in Rotherham and elsewhere must be found and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Every single rapist who brutally gang-raped children who their religion preaches are “lower than cattle and the worst of beasts” MUST be found and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
But so rightly should the labour run authorities who not only appeased these rapist’s crimes for 16 years, but who actively ensured that the rapes could continue. I shall explain:
The labour authorities, under a labour government and a labour police chief, liaised with police in inter-agency meetings to “deal with” this sensitive issue. They directed how the police should interact with a sensitive issue in a sensitive community so as to not inflame or damage community relations… All in the name of Politically Correct pursuit of diversity.
What they actually did was not, “turn a blind eye”, nor “not take the issue seriously enough”…. No. They went further.
The council supressed multiple critical reports into “Child Grooming”
They refused to call it racial and religiously motivated brutal gang rape of white and non-Muslim children by Islamic Pakistani men. and called it “Child grooming by Asians” instead, thus actively choosing to misrepresent what was happening, in order to offer protection to the Islamic rapists.
They downplayed how many victims there were by claiming that more white men abuse children than other races and whenever the issue came to light, before being suppressed again, the impression given was that a very small number of girls were effected and that they had mostly brought it on themselves and that anyone raising this issue, did so because they were racist.
They insisted that Islam had nothing to do with it. When every rapist was Muslim and every single victim was non-Muslim.
The council deleted emails and thousands of documents relating to these brutal rapes, presumably to cover up the extent of the crimes which they repeatedly appeased.
The police “Lost” lots of physical evidence against Islamic rapists in order to prevent prosecutions from proceeding.
The police arrested whistle-blowers who tried to expose these crimes in order to shut them up and not allow the truth of these rapes to become public.
The Police arrested parents who tried to rescue their own daughter from houses where their daughters were actually being gang-raped which allowed the rapists to continue raping.
The police even arrested victims themselves for being drunk and disorderly after the rapists had disposed of them on the streets.
The police almost never even interviewed suspects, let alone arrested or charged them during the vast majority of that long 16 years.
Labour officials, and police acting under labour guidlelines actively protected those rapists over a span of 16 years and attacked the victims. They deliberately took action which ensured that the racial and religiously motivated brutal gang rape of white and non-Muslim children by Islamic Pakistani men could continue unabated under the de facto protection of the state!
That means that labour effectively decriminalised the racial and religiously motivated brutal gang rape of white and non-Muslim children by Islamic Pakistani men
I shall repeat that, for the shocking and disgusting stench of what it represents is difficult to stomach and admit.
Labour effectively decriminalised the racial and religiously motivated brutal gang rape of white and non-Muslim children by Islamic Pakistani men.
For 16 years Islamic men were allowed, by the labour authorities, to continuously and repeatedly brutally gang rape children who they had selected for that abuse on the grounds of the colour of their skin and the fact that none of their victims were Muslim.
Over 1400 victims in Rotherham alone. Add to those, the victims from:
Wolverhampton
Bradford
West Midlands
Derby
Bradford/Keighle
Luton
Burnley
Leeds
Sheffield
Rochdale
Newcastle
Oxford
Ipswich
Cardiff
Swansea
Redhill
Horley
Crawley
I am sure that there are others. How many thousands of victims? How many thousands of our daughters have we had to sacrifice on the alter to Political Correctness?
WHY did labour allow this? Because they are all hypnotised by a cult-like addiction to a political philosophy which is blinded to any form of racism, sexism, homophobia or bigoted prejudicial hate UNLESS it comes from white British people. In which case, even the tiniest, slightest bit of, even non intentional, racism is enough to render the guilty party thrown out into the unemployment line so fast their heads will spin!
This cult of Political Correctness as implemented by Labour in all levels of British governance and public life, solely seeks to destroy racism and bigotry within the white community and openly appease it within all other communities.
The labour party and their liberal progressive lefty supporters who have appeased these vile crimes for 16 years, clearly are NOT directly responsible for the Islamic perverts raping these girls in the first place, and our justified outrage, should not be diverted from the Islamic perverts or their reasons for committing these rapes. Each and every one of them MUST be found, arrested, charged and punished to the full extent of the law.
However, the actions of the labour authorities, due to their own strict adherence to their delusional politically correct beliefs (that only white anglophiles are racist), are wholly responsible for those crimes continuing for 16 long years and thousands more victims being created by the Islamic paedophile rapists, than would have been the case if reality based policing had been allowed, and the left were not obsessed with hampering and hounding the police as being institutionally racist.
ALL should be equal before the law. Labour’s appeasement meant that Islamic Pakistani men were not to be considered equal, but to be considered excempt.
That is the same as Labour legalising the racial and religiously motivated brutal gang rape of white and non-Muslim children by Islamic Pakistani men.
For that, the labour party must never be forgiven. Labour promised to “rub the right’s nose in diversity” It is beholden upon all decent people of character who believe in the rule of law, to now and continuously rub Labours nose in their evil appeasement of Islamic men who rape non-Islamic children.
Labour: Responsible for the brutal ongoing rape of children by islamic perverts since 1997.
thegobbyshite 