‘Phobia’ just means ‘fear of’. ‘Islamophobia’ therefore, is the fear of Islam. But Islam is not a group of people, a race or an ethnicity. It is just a religion. A religion is a set of ideas, so Islam is an ideology.
It is reasonable to fear an ideology that calls on its followers to kill you and destroy your culture; so why does ‘Islamophobia’ have special status? Why are people deliberately shamed into not stating that they are afraid of Islam and what it instructs its benighted followers to do to them?
Why should Islamophobia be reviled, when it is actually the only intelligent position to take? Is self-preservation a bad thing? Is it wicked to want to protect a culture that you are justly proud of? Is it wrong to want to protect yourself and your children from a 9th-century travesty of lies and delusions fabricated by an evil warlord whose closest modern equivalent is Adolf Hitler?
Islamophobia is not only a reasonable fear, it is also the only intelligent and rational position to take.
Identity Politics (IP) is a development of the thinking that gave us Political Correctness, which operates by denying an opponent the language needed to present a case, and thus preventing that person from doing so. It is intellectually lazy and morally bankrupt, because it is directly contradictory to free speech. You cannot speak freely if the language you must use has been censored so that you cannot express yourself. However, the Regressive Left has never been very keen on free speech. It prefers that people toe the party line.
IP ‘identifies’ a hierarchy of privilege in the patriarchy. It proposes to counter this by saying that those who are awarded most patriarchal privilege should not be allowed to speak about matters that affect the less privileged. This applies even if the person speaking is a recognised expert quoting the best science.
IP then follows up by constructing an inverted system of status such that those who ‘identify’ as being in an ‘oppressed group’ are regarded as being higher in status than those who are not. The more oppressed the group you ‘identify’ as being in is deemed to be, the more authority you have. This we might call a ‘status of oppression’.
Well, there is a system of status in the patriarchy. In the West and indeed most of the world, this posits that men are above women, high status men are above low status ones and so on. White men have higher status, under this, than black men, while Asian men are somewhere in between. It is a nasty, controlling, anti-human social order. However, it has one thing in its favour: it actually exists. It can be recorded and observed like any other natural phenomenon. It may not be desirable, but then, neither is bubonic plague and nobody argues that because the latter is not very nice, it doesn’t exist. Continue reading Identity Politics — the secret oppression→
I was asked today if I was a ‘liberal’. Now in all honesty, until quite recently, I would just have said ‘yes’ and moved on. Simple, easy, checks the right boxes. But the world is not as it was; liberalism has become infected with some appallingly bad ideas that we have to stand up to and defeat. So when I analysed ‘what I am’ I came up with this: a socially aware, libertarian, scientific, secularist.
‘Islamic extremism is a danger to society and a threat to public safety. It must be defeated wherever it is found’.
Well it’s no secret that I think this is wholly true. Anyone who reads my posts on Islam knows that I consider it to be a sick, depraved cult based on male privilege, misogyny, homophobia, male paedophilia, ‘honour killings’, genital mutilation and violence.
Hallelujah! Is it premature to imagine that some common sense has at last been allowed to spring its green shoots in UK politics? Not so long ago, I would have been vilified for saying things like that, and I know people who have been banned from social media for it. That there is no more grim darkness than the regressive liberalism that infests such spaces has no greater confirmation. And today a minister of State says exactly what should have been said over a decade ago. Continue reading Islam: a danger to society→
The Hadith constitute the third pillar of Islam. They are ‘commentaries on the life of the Prophet.’ They are second in authority only to the Qur’an itself. The other pillars are the Qur’an and Sharia. Together these form the ideological basis for the ‘religion of peace’.
Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the literal word of Allah. The Angel Gabriel transmitted it, exactly as spoken, to Mohammed. He memorised it because he couldn’t write. You make your own judgements as to how accurate his recall was likely to have been. (The Qur’an was not actually written down until some 80 years after Mohammed’s death, which is also worth considering.)
The internationally known UK law firm of Mishcon de Reya has moved to block any unconstitutional attempt to trigger the UK’s early departure from the EU.
In a piece by Owen Bowbott, The Guardian newspaper today reports that Mishcon de Reya ‘has retained the services of senior constitutional barristers, including Lord Pannick QC and Rhodri Thompson QC’ to act in this matter.
We do not yet know the opinion of these honourable gentlemen, but we can assume that it will be broadly in line with that of Geoffrey Robertson QC, another leading Constitutional lawyer. Robertson made it clear, in a recent interview with the Business Insider, that ‘Brexit’ would require an Act of Parliament. Continue reading Mishcon de Reya moves against early Brexit→
In the UK, Parliament is the ultimate authority. All power is held by it. While technically, sovereignty resides with the monarch, in the UK this is ceded to and implemented by a group of elected representatives called Members of Parliament.
The UK is NOT a plebiscitary democracy; it is a representational one. Elected Members of Parliament make decisions on behalf of the electors they represent.
This makes no provision whatsoever for the implementation or otherwise of the result of the ballot. This in turn means that the referendum vote has absolutely no authority over Parliament. It is not even ‘advisory’, in any legal sense. It is nothing more than a high-falutin opinion poll.
The British Project was — and is — simply this: to make the world England. To profit from it and get rich on the military colonisation of other, weaker people, yes, that was its stimulus. But its philosophical motivation was to make the world England.
When I was at school, we had maps on the walls that showed a world covered in ‘pink bits’. Those, it was said, were ours. They had been ‘our’ Empire; now they were our ‘Commonwealth’. This was another way of saying that all of these countries were still ‘ours’ but we were nice chaps and we let the darkies play unsupervised these days. The whole concept was about as offensive as it gets.
Islam is locked in a war with secular democracy and moderate Muslims themselves.
Ten days ago a Canadian, Robert Hall, had his head hacked from his body in a brutal public murder. Two days later, over 100 people were gunned down in a nightclub in Orlando, Florida; forty-nine died. Two days after that a married couple, both police officers, were stabbed to death in their home outside Paris and their infant child held hostage until the killer was shot by police.
There is nothing whatsoever to connect these victims, on the face of it. Nothing. A middle-aged professional, young people in a nightclub, serving police officers. They died in equally unrelated locations — the Philippines, the USA, France.
But they are connected all the same: they were all murdered in the name of Islam.
These are but the tip of the iceberg; all over the Middle East, Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, in the same time, hundreds of innocent people were murdered — in the name of Islam. And most of them were Muslims.
These victims join the tens of thousands of others who have been murdered, raped, or enslaved in the name of Islam, just since 2000. If we go back to the 20th century, we find that millions were murdered, raped and enslaved in the name of Islam. When we call the roll of violent, murdering ideologies of that century, we always forget one; Nazism, Communism — and Islam.
Yet we may not speak a word against this. We may not name what we see, what is manifest, what is plain as day — that Islam perverts men into monsters who kill, rape and enslave in its name and expect a heavenly reward of unlimited, unending sex with 72 perpetual virgins for doing so. (The Orlando shooter was homosexual and we wonder what he imagined his reward might be; 72 Christians, perhaps — the porn star, not the religion.)
A War Against an Ideology, not a ‘Race’
Despite the blindingly obvious truth about Islam, we are not allowed to say a word against it. Why? Because Islam is mainly practised by people who do not have white skin. And the intellectual fascism of ‘identity politics’ insists that no-one of non-white skin colour may ever be criticised for anything.
This of course reveals the excruciating irony that ‘identity politics’ is itself a form of racism; but then, you have to have some intelligence to divine that. Bill Maher calls it the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations’, and Bill is right on point.
The Qur’an is the base text of Islam, which is today followed by approximately 1.2 billion people.
Most people know about the activities of so-called Islamic extremists, operating in Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and, most prominently and gaining the most attention, in the Levant conflict zone, principally Syria and Iraq. But how extreme are they? Do they have justification for their behaviour from the Qur’an, as they repeatedly claim to?
Naturally, any thinking person must be repulsed by such evil; but not a week goes by now without some example of completely intolerable behaviour, carried out by Muslims, frequently on women, somewhere in the world. In fact, hardly a day passes.
Saudi Arabia, which has gained for itself the reputation of being the most sadistic and barbarous legally constituted state on the planet, routinely carries out ‘punishments’ — better described as tortures, many ending in death — all the time. We now know that at least 14 million Africans are held as slaves by Muslims. 14 million. In 2016.
But many of us in the West know Muslims; we eat in their restaurants, shop in their convenience stores. Clearly, these Muslims are good, decent people. So the bombers, the beheaders, the immolators, the lapidators, the slavers and kidnappers must be misunderstanding Islam, right? They must be misreading the Qur’an? Continue reading Qur’an: Read It Yourself→
Non-Politically Correct Writing and Photography by Rod Fleming and Guests