|
Of course, in fact it means "submission." How confident can Reid really be of defeating this "intolerant and violent totalitarianism" when he refuses even to look squarely at its deep roots in Islamic tradition and teaching -- despite the fact that the very depth of those roots will give him a good indication of what he really may reasonably expect from many Muslims in Britain?
"Europe faces 'very real threat,'" from the BBC, with thanks to M.:
UK Home Secretary John Reid has said Europe faces a "persistent and very real" threat from terrorism, after a meeting with EU counterparts in London.But he said the presence of five other interior ministers and top EU officials symbolised Europe's determination to stand together and defend their values.
Finland, holder of the EU presidency, congratulated the UK on pre-empting an apparent plot to bomb US-bound planes.
Twenty-four people are now in custody in the UK over the alleged plot.
Mr Reid said the European Union needed to develop its counter-terror policies in response to the evolving threat.
He said the talks had discussed practical measures in four areas:
* Tackling liquid explosives
* Co-ordination of transport security
* Exchange of intelligence
* The nature of European IslamThe world was faced by a form of "intolerant and violent totalitarianism", he added, which was subverting a religion, Islam, whose very name stood for peace.
And even if it did stand for peace, what kind of peace, Reid? On what terms? What makes you think Islam means by peace the same thing you mean by it? Why has it never occurred to you even to consider seeking answers to such questions?
Posted by Robert at August 16, 2006 1:23 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there are 20 steadfast men among you, they shall vanquish 200; and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding. - 8:65
I'll bring the cake and ice cream.
Posted by: limes at August 16, 2006 1:38 PMperhaps he meant to say RoP?.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
It's all about Iraq, isn't it?
Yep, it's all about Iraq and...
India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and England and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Turkey and Kabardino-Balkaria and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Germany and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and...
...and pretty much wherever Muslims believe their religion tells them to:
"Fight and slay the Unbelievers wherever ye find them. Seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war."
Qur'an, Sura 9:5
Even Reid would really like to say what he can't!
Posted by: M at August 16, 2006 2:27 PMEven Reid would really like to say what he can't!
Posted by: M at August 16, 2006 2:27 PM
Islam means submission, not peace.
Stupidity runs thick in Western governments, and this idiot is living proof. These dhimmis should at least study something before they go publicly speaking about it.
Posted by: DCWatson at August 16, 2006 2:52 PMWhat an ABSOLUTELY STUPID, BRAINDEAD IDIOT!!!
If there's any way of reading "peace" into the word "Islam" its totally subordinate to the real meaning.
By now anyone with an 8th grade education surely knows that the word means "submission". And anyone not deliberately turning a blind eye to the facts exploding (literally!) around them everywhere, can see that in practice, that means grovelling in the mud at the feet of the worst, most repressive and menacing kind of tyranny!
I used to consider myself a social democrat. Now I'm saying, if this is the kind of stupidity the U.K. government is going to spout, GET LABOUR THE HELL OUT OF THERE AS SOON AS YOU GET THE CHANCE!
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 2:54 PMWrong. Islam means submission. Democracy and submission are antithetical to each other. Democracy breaks the chains of slavery, be they human slavery or the slavery of one government to another. The most a muslim can hope to be is a "slave to allah", as bin laden put it. Ultimately one system or the other must perish.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 16, 2006 3:05 PMA long time ago, Karl Marx said “The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism”. Once you understand this, you understand the various Leftist "peace" movements. They were not demonstrating against conflict in general, they were agitating for the United States to surrender to Socialism.
To somebody who was indoctrinated in that way, of COURSE submission is the same as peace
Posted by: PapaBear at August 16, 2006 3:06 PMStupidity runs thick in Western governments, and this idiot is living proof. These dhimmis should at least study something before they go publicly speaking about it.
Posted by: DCWatson at August 16, 2006 02:52 PM
Ignorance about Islam is nothing short of irresponsible indifference, even when Islam is out to destroy civilization as we know it. Dubya has no hesitation in parroting "Izlum is a Religion of peace", followed closely by Condi "We know the benevolence in the heart of Islam" who, after 9/11, asked "Alkeda? What is Alkeda?". Well, what can one say about someone who knows nothing other than parroting "Diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy." And we know how diplomacy saved Nick Berg or Paul Johnson or Daniel Pearl...... This bunch of blooming idiots will get us killed.
Posted by: Alert at August 16, 2006 3:23 PMIf what I hear from a lot of people with connections to Britain, the infidels there are getting VERY fed up. I don't think too many of them take Reid's assertion seriously. Britain has a history of waking up, albeit late, to mortal threats, and reacting with aplomb. Hopefully the new debate there about immigration, and the rights of the accused (when those accused plan mass-casualty Jihad attacks, will reach fruition soon and a new national consensus of self-preservation.
Posted by: Quijybo at August 16, 2006 3:37 PMKarl Marx said “The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism”
True. But I had thought one of the positive implications of Blair's alliance with George Bush was that it was surely a sign that Labour was finally getting it and purging iself of that kind of discredited old school, stifling, dogmatic lunacy.
I can't imagine the type of nightmarish scitsophrenic mental torture chamber these people's minds must be in to, on the one hand advocate an issue such as women's rights on the one hand, and sympathize, on the other, with a system of thought that makes their women wear tents and walk four paces behind their men on the sidewalk. How they sleep at night is beyond me.
I hope you people in the good old mother country (I'm writing this from Canada) are POUNDING this point home to them loud and clear. I can't think or a more obscene political marriage. Ideological pornography!
If I were a Brit, I'd not only be threatening Blair with voting for the Conservatives, I'd be campaigning for them - AGGRESSIVELY - for this.
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 3:37 PMGET LABOUR THE HELL OUT OF THERE AS SOON AS YOU GET THE CHANCE!
Lol. Have you seen the state of British politics lately? The only real alternative to labour is the conservatives, who nowadays are trying to be more left oriented than labour (as shown by the "hug a hoodie" campaign... the average hoodie makes your average redneck look civilized). Asides from that is the Lib Dems, who are even further to the left.
The only real option when it comes to Islam is the BNP, but they'll never get popular support from the brainwashe- er, educated masses.
Posted by: Uriel Septim at August 16, 2006 3:42 PM"I can't imagine the type of nightmarish scitsophrenic mental torture chamber these people's minds must be in"
That should be "schizophrenic" of course. I'm so incensed by this I can't even think straight.
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 3:43 PM"The only real option when it comes to Islam is the BNP, but they'll never get popular support from the brainwashe- er, educated masses."
I couldn't have said it any better myself, although there are still many things with which I cannot condone with the BNP's policy. This is not because I am brainwashed just that I do not think pulling the troops out of Iraq to be the right thing.
Posted by: M at August 16, 2006 3:48 PMUnless of course we are going to do something to eradicate the threat of Jihad!
Posted by: M at August 16, 2006 3:52 PMI used to consider myself a social democrat. Now I'm saying, if this is the kind of stupidity the U.K. government is going to spout, GET LABOUR THE HELL OUT OF THERE AS SOON AS YOU GET THE CHANCE!
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 02:54 PM
The only real option when it comes to Islam is the BNP, but they'll never get popular support from the brainwashe- er, educated masses.
Posted by: Uriel Septim at August 16, 2006 03:42 PM
I agree with Uriel on this the BNP are the only party who have gone on record to warn of the dangers of Islam, dawa and Jihad. They have also had the fortitude to not hide behind PC double speak that Islam is a religion of peace and it is just a handful of extremists.
If Europe is to survive the Nationalist parties need to get a stronger hold on the political process.
\Waiting for hysterical outburst from Interested and Granny. ;->
Posted by: km at August 16, 2006 3:54 PM"there are still many things with which I cannot condone with the BNP's policy"
I might feel the same way, but I saw a recent news piece on the CBC (our equivalent of the Beeb) that left me the impression that the BNP is perhaps not nearly so scary as some of its kneejerk critics might be assuming it is.
In any event the BNP or a party like it is sounding pretty good to me right about now. My philosophy is "Choose your fights!" and the fight against this emerging Islamic tyrrany comes prior to everything else!
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 3:55 PMI can tell you that indeed the Infidels here are mighty p'd off. I live in West Yorkshire, just a short drive from where the 'Beeston' bombers came from. Don't believe what you hear in the news media. People I talk to don't buy the Islam is peace line and everyday folk are speaking out more and more about the problem with Islam, saying things I would never have heard five years ago. It is true we Brits are tolerant - to a fault perhaps. But, we do have a breaking point and it could be approaching sooner than we care to think.
Posted by: CarolUK at August 16, 2006 4:35 PMRoP®=peace, like this:
http://thinksmart.typepad.com/headsup_on_organizational/RIP.jpg
M
Pulling all Infidel troops out of Iraq, and let the Sunnites and Shiites go at it is the right thing to do. Problem with the BNP's foreign policy statements is that it's no different from the far Left - they are opposed to the Iraq intervention not because of this rational desire to see different Islamic groups go at it throughout the Mid-East, but rather, their claim that Zionists and Neo-Cons are driving this policy.
Why one opposes the current presense of troops in Iraq is important. For instance, I agree with everything Ned Lamont says, but his alternatives - work with the UN and the EU in determining our policy there - is braindead. Similarly, with the BNP, they don't oppose Islamic forces outside Britain. Which would be fine if they chose to be neutral. Somehow, their rants about Zionists and Neo-Cons don't convey that impression.
Having said all that, I somehow tend to agree these days with km. Let's say all European countries did vote in anti-Islamic 'fascistic' parties into power. It would have a few very good effects:
Besides all that, I agree with Templar - prioritize your battles. Inshallah, if we prevail and Islam becomes extinct in our lifetimes, we'd be happy to resume the earlier racist fights from where we left off. Or maybe not.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 16, 2006 5:17 PMBTW, DCWatson, old friend, good to see you back. ;-)
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 16, 2006 5:28 PMYou can contact the Home Secretary at:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/contact-us
Politely worded, informative emails stand the best chance of making it to his desk.
Posted by: PRCS at August 16, 2006 5:58 PMGranted, Infidel Pride, that from where I am on the other side of the Atlantic, I can't possibly know the specifics of the current British political scene as intimately as you must but I'd still make one or two observations if I may.
I'd think twice before being easily deterred by the rumour or possibility that there are "fascist" tendencies in the BNP, but instead I'd consider that maybe the best strategy is to wade in there, on the basis of what you know you have in common with them, to uphold the better parts of their policy and dampen the rest. The great regret that people who sympathized with or supported the peace movement in the 1980's is not that they knew that, in some cases, as PapaBear rightly points out, they were walking alongside people who were willing tools of Soviet propaganda, but that they didn't expose these twits and their bias to bring more balance to the movement and delete the one-sided, reflexive anti-Americanism from the fold.
From what I've seen of the BNP it didn't seem to me that this is a party that foreigners and people of non-Anglo stock per se would need be uncomfortable with or threatened by, but only those who arrive with an agenda of inorganically and arbitarily overthrowing British customs and values, and those who naively swallow hook, line and sinker the idiotic racist-in-reverse line of thought that every injustice in the world is the fault of our advanced and prosperous Western societies and that our way of life is, by definition, rotten to the core (and as a matter of fact, from what I recall seeing on the CBC, it seemed to me that some of Britain's sensible immigrants or their descendents even support it). Having considered the histories of various parts of the world, I can tell you that I've long since concluded that this western guilt complex is one of the worst travesties ever invented and that no other society anywhere else in the world would've done any better by the rest of the world given the circumstances of history that we (the developed west)have found ourselves in since the European enlightenment and many probably would've done far worse! I say this not to excuse the Wests faults or past wrongs, but to put things into their proper perspective. So lets rediscover our confidence, our pride, and most of all our will to live!
You would know better than I would, of course, whether the BNP really is as benign as I'm speculating that it is. Still, I can tell you that were a party like that available here in Canada, I'd be taking a long hard look at it as an alternative, and would be willing to join it, at least for a while, to check it out. I said above "I used to consider myself a Social Democrat". Actually, I still do, but the difference is that I used to be proud of it, and now I'm totally embarrassed and demoralized because I see the same kind of dhimmi stupidity and collaborationist policy at work in the NDP (our equivalent of Labour). You don't have to surrender all of your convictions about other issues, but this matter of recognizing and responding to the threat posed by this militant and aggressive minority is of vital concern to the survival of your nation, and I think you need to have a party that is willing to face up to this and begin the fight by securing your society within its own borders (which is what I'm hearing that the BNP wants to do). If Labour or its equivalents elsewhere can't be that party, so be it, I say. So even though I hadn't considered the BNP when I made my initial posting above, I'm glad Uriel Septim brought it into the conversation and reminded me of it.
I can tell you that if the "Ummah-al-Islamiyah" succeeds in its goal of bringing the whole world under its sway, the prosperity that all immigrants, Muslims included, stand to gain by integrating peacefully and constructively into societies like Britain, Europe and North America will cease to exist entirely everywhere and, after a hundred years or so, the whole world will be reduced to the condition of Afghanistan.
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 6:23 PMFor those that are interested, here is a commentary from the BNP on the latest Israeli/Jihad conflict.
I am sure their pro-Israeli response will come as a shock to the BNP knee-jerk critics.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/columnists/brimstone2.php?leeId=80
Templar, great last post, I couldnt agree more with what you have to say.
Posted by: km at August 16, 2006 6:34 PMTemplar
I'm on the same side of the pond that you are. All I cited was from their website, which some Brits here claim is sophistry. Other than that, I wouldn't claim to know more than you do.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 16, 2006 6:34 PMThanks for the link, km. I'll definietly check it out.
Posted by: templar at August 16, 2006 7:15 PMIf I see a million-man march against Islam in London (with the protestors risking arrest), then I will cease to flirt with the BNP as a good alternative.
I'm waiting.
Posted by: remote_control at August 16, 2006 7:36 PMI wonder where Interested and GrannyW are? I havent seen them post in a long time.
It would be nice for their input on how the Jihad is waging in the UK!
Waves over internet.
Posted by: km at August 16, 2006 8:52 PMI guess Mr. Reid's not very familiar with the intention of the Nobel Peace Prize .. or of it's decidedly crummy recipients.
Posted by: Daisytoo at August 16, 2006 8:54 PMWell, Islam DOES mean peace...The peace of the GRAVE!
Death to Islam, and
their mediot stooges!
Duty, Honor, Country
(in THAT order)
Rowane
Folks at JihadWatch are familiar with these hadith, but Home Secretary Reid should have read. Sahih Bukhari, authoritative hadith, on jihad and martyrdom in battle, the very best of deaths and a sure ticket to paradise:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html
Posted by: JTF at August 17, 2006 12:55 AMMohammad was such a great and eloquent advocate for nonviolence, a true pacifist, statesman, was he not?
For example,
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 72:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet said, "Nobody who enters Paradise likes to go back to the world even if he got everything on the earth, except a Mujahid who wishes to return to the world so that he may be martyred ten times because of the dignity he receives (from Allah)."
Narrated Al-Mughira bin Shu'ba: Our Prophet told us about the message of our Lord that "Whoever amongst us is killed will go to Paradise." Umar asked the Prophet, "Is it not true that our men who are killed will go to Paradise and their's (i.e. those of the Pagan's) will go to the (Hell) fire?" The Prophet said, "Yes."
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 73:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa:
Allah's Apostle said, "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords."
km
Interested decided to stop posting around mid July after an item about Royal Navy ships headed to Lebanon to evacuate Brits there. Something tells me that this thread won't even be a 100 post thread, let alone 200 or 300. In this case, it would have stayed on topic, unlike some of the previous threads that became BNP marathons, like the last one about the G-Had rapper (where were you then?) Granny still posts, but is a lot rarer these days. In fact, I seem to be noticing the number of British posters on this site come down considerably, or am I mistaken?
Also, Uriel mentioned the Liberal Democrats being more to the Left. I recall the days when Roy Jenkins and David Steele combined the Liberals and SDP to form the Liberal Democrats, and they became the Centrist party in Britain. Did they really become the most Leftist party in Britain, or is that just the perception of this poster?
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 17, 2006 1:28 AMkm
I appreciate the BNP finally taking sides with Israel, but some of the things mentioned by Lee Barnes in this article were bizarre.
If the IRA had launched rockets from Southern Ireland into Northern Ireland then the BNP would have retaliated with air strikes on those sites and wiped them out. We would not have sat their watching them fly over us and then debate whether we should ring the UN for permission to knock on the door of the Southern Irish embassy and ask them politely to tell the IRA ' would you mind awfully stopping firing those missiles at us old chap '.Aside from the Republic of Ireland never being called Southern Ireland, when did the BNP ever run a government in Britain? Am I missing something?
About some posters being less vocal currently: in my case I'm as interested as ever, but other posters say everything that needs to be said, so I don't feel the need to contribute so often.
You're all doing great work :)
Posted by: Lili at August 17, 2006 2:36 AMInfidel,
I didnt see the one about the G-Had rapper do you have a link.
Its a pity Interested isnt posting anymore I enjoyed debating with her.
I agree some of the things from the BNP are a little bizzare, but I really think what Templar said has a lot of validity.
"I'd consider that maybe the best strategy is to wade in there, on the basis of what you know you have in common with them, to uphold the better parts of their policy and dampen the rest."
My argument has always been that this war is far further along than most people actually think and that the current political parties both in the UK & US are just incapable of tackling the problem because of endemic PC rot.
Therefore the obvious solution is to support those institutions that recognize the threat. Even if they are a bit whacky.
I cant say I had really noticed any less British posters, except Interested and Granny of course, but only because they were so prolific. Infact I have been noticing a steady stream of new names.
Also, Uriel mentioned the Liberal Democrats being more to the Left. I recall the days when Roy Jenkins and David Steele combined the Liberals and SDP to form the Liberal Democrats, and they became the Centrist party in Britain. Did they really become the most Leftist party in Britain, or is that just the perception of this poster?
I wouldn’t say they are the most leftist party but definitely socialist, their politics is totally incompatible with dealing with the Jihad, they are rampant multiculturalists.
The BNP have never been in power, I get the feeling though that unless Europe adopts their policies towards Islam there are going to be a lot of Euroweenies who wish they were in power.
km
On the G-Had rapper, here you go.
I don't disagree with you or Templar - just that the wierdness and wackiness stood out.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 17, 2006 2:58 AMInfidel
The G-Had rapper is a good thread. Some well articulated points. There are some great posts by yourself, somethingaboutIslam and Zathras.
No wonder they dont turn up anymore,they got pulled apart, their position was untenable and the realities of this war have finally caught up with them. Sometimes their line of reasoning was just so shrill.
It is a good co-ordinated routine that they do which often makes me think that there were other factors and agendas at play with their vocal opposition.
Posted by: km at August 17, 2006 4:11 AM
"I think there are some on this board, who may come here because they are feminsist, or they are gay, or they are Hindu, and as such, islam offends them, but ultimately, they are instrinsically liberals at heart, and as such, the right-wing also offends them and therefore can never support the right-wing draconian measures required to defeat the menace of islam. That's too bad, because everyday islam creeps a littler closer and one day soon those people will have wished they had chosen the lesser of the two evils. "
Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 28, 2006 11:09 PM
Somethingaboutislam, we miss you.
Infidel Pride
Re your 01.47 post. "Southern Ireland" is the term invariably used to describe The Irish Republic in the UK. It is not a "political" term just easier to say.
Also it is common knowledge that the IRA could not have operated without the connivance of powerful politicians in the South. A British TV documentary about this was suppressed by the Thatcher Government of all people.
makes me think that there were other factors and agendas at play
and
In fact, I seem to be noticing the number of British posters on this site come down considerably, or am I mistaken?
No agenda km, merely a desire that JW not appear to be a site that gave it's support to a racist organisation. However we discussed this with Mr Spencer, and he made the point that anybody coming to the site knows that all comments are unmoderated, and thus do not necessarily reflect the views of the JW team. Therefore your and others support for a party that you do not consider to be racist can go unchallenged.
Which brings me to the next point, there are indeed less British comments on here, although there are also new posters.
All choice involves loss.
Typical bureaucrat. Too lazy to get the facts for himself, so he relies on a staff of like-minded individuals who feed him what he wants to hear.
Never mind that the Qur'an, that wonderful book that preaches peace, mentions over eight hundred times to wage war and kill the infidel.
One muslim cleric said that not all muslims wanted to wage war and kill infidels, that only about ten percent are really violent. The reply was something like," Great. Only one hundred million people want to see me dead."
Why is it that liberals value the truth so little?
"Inshallah, if we prevail ..." ?! Rather, as Urban II proclaimed: "God wills it! God WILLS IT!"
Posted by: templar at August 17, 2006 12:17 PMThe words I quoted above are from Infidel Pride.
Posted by: templar at August 17, 2006 12:23 PMTrouble with Labour is they are to busy toadying for Muslim votes to really come out and say the problem is intrisically to do with Islam.
Subverted ...the religion of peace?..really Dr Reid do you think we are all stupid....time you treated the Majority with less contempt ...we elected you to
be Honest , Upright and Forthright in the defence of our nation and her laws. Is that too much to ask ...
obviously it is...
We badly need a real Statesman with the courage to draw the line under what is a small minority group in this country...Enoch Powell ridiculed and hounded over his famous Rivers of Blood speech ....wish you were here today !!.
Posted by: Kelticman at August 17, 2006 12:41 PMArjun
Heres another classic from somethingaboutislam,
Posted by: somethingaboutislam at July 1, 2006 12:05 PM
The final analysis is that people like Interested are essentially on the Left. Which is their right (pun intended). But it makes for an uncomfortable position when the fight of the 21st century is against islamic imperialism and the multicultural ethos that created this monster.
Being on the right, makes the solution so much clearer and easier. Kick them all out, return England to the more racially homogenous society it was for 1000 years and the problem corrects itself. This solution however, is not acceptable to liberals and especially not to anyone on the Left, or anyone who is Hindu, anyone who is black, anyone who once had a boyfriend who supposedly was punched. For those people, they have a personal beef against such a solution. And their personal beefs come first. If one was punched by a BNP supporter while still yet having to be punched by a muslim, then the muslim doesn't look quite as bad. Until the beheadings start. Then we must compare apples to apples.
Ultimately, for these people, simple solutions don't work because they don't take into account the nuances required to fight islam without stepping on the toes of other people, because to those people, respecting the toes of other people is more important than all other considerations.
In this clash of civilizations, however, I say the two considerations are not even close. We are going to have to step on the toes of lots of people to settle this in our favor. Fascism, however you want to define it, is just a tool, not an ideology. Like any tool, it can be used for good or bad. It's just a hammer. And the time has come to use such a hammer to smash islam domestically and the multicultural and legal ethos that empowers it.
Posted by: somethingaboutislam at July 1, 2006 12:05 PM
There are just so many good posts in that thread by so many people, but I really think that the point saislam is trying to make about the left having to come to a point where they really are going to have to surrender some of their holy cows to the objective truth that Islam is a bigger existential threat to their well being than say Nationalism (even BNP nationalism).
But it makes for an uncomfortable position when the fight of the 21st century is against islamic imperialism and the multicultural ethos that created this monster.
Is indicative of the state of Europe at the moment. It was a spirited argument from two very distinct viewpoints but through the whole of that thread the logical consistency of saislam, zathras, television, infidel pride and others proved IMO that the position taken by this group was logically/evolutionarily stronger and therefore the winner in that debate.
The pain of cognitive dissonance from loosing this argument is so bad that it has stopped interesting from postimg here. I believe Granny's more right wing outlook allows her to measure the logic behind the two positions and so she still feels able to contribute.
I have a question for Granny, here in the US even mainstream news agencies are filing reports asking if the current conflict against Islam (Israel/Hizballah) is a sign of the end times. As a practicing Anglican how do you view the prophetic components of the Bble and do you see any relation to the current standoffs?
Is there a realization within the clergy specifically your local clergy that this is a holy war?
Actually Interested is the more Conservative out of the two of us. She left, and I (and quite a lot of others as Infidel Pride astutely noticed) ceased to be bothered about posting much because of anti British comments culminating on a particular thread that week.
I don't accept that you have won the argument. The BNP are a racist organisation, the sky is blue, the Earth is round. If someone will not accept the evidence of the round earth and insists that it is flat further argument is futile.
I do know people who voted BNP in the hope that they might be a viable alternative, they all prefaced their choice with the words "I'm not a racist, but...." In other words even the people who voted them in as the opposition party in Dagenham in the spring consider them to be racist, and voted with extreme reluctance and a sense of guilt.
So when new posters come to this site, and see support for the BNP they might think :-
1 Good, I hate them N******s myself.
2 Comments are unmoderated and no one actually affiliated with JW has ever expressed support for the BNP.
3 I can't trust the other information I am learning here, if the BNP are considered acceptable.
You pays your money and you takes your choice.
Good day.
GrannyW I think you still fail to fully understand the argument. The BNP/Nationalism comes up on JW as a legitimate topic as they have a publicly stated policy against Muslims and Islam in addition the BNP are a recognized legitimate political party. Therefore it makes sense to discuss whether they as a group are worth looking into and if they have a useful role in countering Jihad.
A lot of the counterpoints made by the British posters were that they would abandon Israel in a time of Muslim invoked crisis. There is sufficient evidence to counter this claim (see above). So it is fair to assume that their assesment and reportage of what or who the BNP policies really are falls short of reality. A point I have been making all along and one that was laid out by Zathras et al in the other thread.
And GrannyW I thought the following statement was absurd.
3 I can't trust the other information I am learning here, if the BNP are considered acceptable.
What does the validity of any of the information posted here have to do with the BNP. This kind of statment highlights the irriationality you & Interested et al seem to display when ever the BNP appear as a topic of discussion.
What I Learned From This Thread
I certainly missed a lot of discussions.
I know absolutely nothing about BNP.
I sure hate to lose our British posters.
I don't like it when posters leave, then run us down. The majority of posts are intelligent, well researched, and informative for those who need to learn about islam. That is something not found in the MSM.
can I?
Posted by: km at August 20, 2006 12:22 AMThe answer to this dilemma is to work at the grassroots level. Join the local branches of your favoured political party and attempt to influence how politicians go about their business. The dhimmi politicians need a wake up call. They need to realise that ordinary British people are fed up with the politically correct way of doing things.
Also, the British politicians need to stop behaving like eunuchs.
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)