Pat Condell on how Islam “has nothing to do with Islam”:
And this is from an article in the The Participator by Chauncey Tinker, titled Terror Attack in the Heart of London:
Following this week’s attack in Westminster, the subject of extremism is back once again on the front pages.
The purpose of the UK’s “Prevent” strategy is not to deal directly with these kinds of terrorist attacks. “Prevent” is only one “work stream” of four in the UK’s larger counter-terrorism strategy called “CONTEST“. “Prevent” is supposed to stop people from becoming “radicalized” in the first place, by challenging those promoting “extremist” ideologies, and intervening early to influence those at risk of becoming “radicalized” away from “extremist” ideas.
IS THE PREVENT STRATEGY HAVING ANY EFFECT AT ALL?
The Independent reported in November last year on “an extremist group with links to 140 Isis fighters active in UK”. Here the Independent show pictures of the group openly selling Korans in Oxford St., London. Quote from the article:
Members of an extremist group banned in Germany for inspiring more than 140 Isis fighters with its “violent” ideology are active in the UK and seeking to recruit followers in Britain’s largest cities, The Independent can reveal.
It seems quite extraordinary does it not that over a decade after the “Prevent” strategy was first introduced, things like this are still going on openly in a busy street in the heart of the capital. However, this is just the tip of a very large iceberg of course.
In an effort to reassure the Muslim population that the “Prevent” strategy was not exclusively targetting members of their faith, the authorities recently publicized their work to “de-radicalize” a 14-year old boy in Yorkshire:
He was saying that Muslim women shouldn’t be allowed to wear the niqab and he had his head filled with nonsense that Muslims were trying to take over the country.
Nonsense perhaps that has also been expressed by Muslims as well, for example a Muslim caller on a BBC Asian Network program recently said:
Sooner or later Islam is going to be taking over anyway.
I would also like to cast readers’ minds back to a speech given by the UK’s first Muslim government minister, Shahid Malik, where he expresses the view to a large Muslim audience that:
At this rate the whole parliament will be Muslim.
He then adds (with a big smirk):
… but just to say, in case there are journalists here today, that is not my objective.
Has Mr. Malik been de-radicalized by the “Prevent” strategy yet, I wonder? During his time in government he held a number of posts including Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice. Surely the extremist view of a prominent politician (indistinguishable from that schoolboy’s view) is far more in danger of radicalizing impressionable youngsters than the rants of a lone schoolboy in a school playground?
During Mr. Malik’s time as “Cohesion Minister”, he was accused of “going soft on Muslim youths in the war against extremism”. According to an article in the Daily Express, Mr. Malik may in fact have been personally responsible for the original change in direction of the policy that led it to target this young schoolboy in Yorkshire. Strange then, that his own views are so very similar. They both seem to believe that Muslims are taking over the country.
Cohesion Minister Shahid Malik said the £45 million-a-year “Prevent” strategy would also work in deprived white areas rather than concentrating on Muslim youths.
Its also odd that this young boy was targeted by the Prevent strategy when many others including prominent politicians have expressed similar views about the more extreme forms of Islamic dress, for example from the Daily Telegraph:
MP calls for burkas to be banned in Britain
I wonder if Mr. Hollobone (Conservative MP for Kettering) is currently being “de-radicalized” by the “Prevent” strategy as well?
I would describe what is going on here as state bullying of a minor, nothing more dignified than that. The authorities imagine that by bullying the odd hapless schoolchild here and there they can hoodwink the UK public into thinking that they are getting tough on real extremism. By real extremism I mean direct and credible incitement to violence, not merely suggesting that the niqab should be banned, or simply projecting current population trends into the not so distant future. …
The hypocrisy of the UK’s current “leadership” is truly breathtaking to behold.
As is the same hypocrisy of the leaders of almost every country in the West – President Trump being the most important of the rare exceptions.
He insists that the acts of terrorism carried out by Muslims are “Islamic” – and saboteurs among his White House staff try to remove the word.
From the Washington Free Beacon:
In one instance, Trump administration officials found evidence that the administration’s executive order banning travel from certain Muslim-majority nations had been selectively altered to bring it more in line with Obama-era talking points.
Several hours before the orders were set to be signed by Trump, officials noticed that language concerning “radical Islamic terrorism” had been stripped from the order and replaced with Obama-era language about countering “violent extremism”.
Because although the terrorist acts are carried out by Muslims in the name of their religion, to fulfill the Islamic religious duty of jihad, they still have
“NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM“
In the West, since the Enlightenment, the university is an institution for the exploration of the infinite realm of ideas. It is a convention of many members all dedicated to the perpetual quest for truth. They will learn, imagine, search, examine, invent, experiment, discover, reflect, reason, conjecture, theorize, test, propound, doubt, criticize, argue, challenge, revise, triumph and fail. There can be no dissent that is unwelcome, no novelty barred out, no mystery preserved from exploration. It is an open field for thinkers.
If a university adopts any set of ideas as an orthodoxy, if it refuses to allow an idea to be expressed, it ceases to be a university. It has become a church.
A church is an institution for the protection of unproven belief, the propounding of dogma, the performance of mystical rites and rituals, the enforcement of strict ideological conformity, the exclusion of doubt, the punishment of dissent, the scorn of reason. It insists that it owns the truth. Its doctrine is apodictic. To challenge it is heresy, and heretics are shamed and silenced. It is a stuffy home for the gullible.
The university and the church are as opposed to each other as are fire and water.
Here is a video about a university becoming a church.
Published as a YouTube video yesterday, March 16, 2017 –
From The Mark Steyn Show, here’s a SteynPost from a few weeks back musing on the supposedly non-existent Deep State as it sinks its tentacles deeper and deeper:
For fun on a Sunday –
nice satire by JP:
Ben Shapiro argues that it is not.
We agree with him.
But we would simply argue that one cannot have a right to something if the provision of it forces obligations on others.
Again we take pleasure in spreading the truth eloquently told by Pat Condell in another of his series of important videos.
This is a rallying cry to the women of Europe, to vote their pro-Islam governments out, and so save themselves from the Muslim barbarians who have invaded their countries at those governments’ invitation.
“Political correctness” is a doctrine of the religion of Leftism.
In Europe, anyone who does not conform to it is a blaspheming heretic and must be hunted down, brought to trial, and condemned. It is no defense that the accused spoke the truth. The law protects “political correctness” from the truth.
In this video, Pat Condell fires the truth at the politically correct Dutch cowards who served the hostile interests of Islam by bringing Geert Wilders, heroic leader of the Party of Freedom, to trial late last year, on absurd charges of “insulting a group” – namely, Moroccan Muslims – and “inciting discrimination”. They found him “guilty”.
(See our post about the trial, Speaking Freely for Freedom, December 10, 2016, here.)
In this video, issued shortly before the inauguration of President Trump, the admirable Pat Condell talks about those who fear the truth – in particular the truth about Islamic aggression – and how Donald Trump “came along with a great big bucket of honesty”:
We agree with almost all he says. Only, we don’t think that Donald Trump’s “willingness to tell the truth” is “all he’s got going for him”, as Pat Condell suggests may be the case, at least in the minds of some who support him. We think Donald Trump has an understanding of how a free, capitalist society works or should work, and how nation-states are good and need well-guarded borders; and that he will keep America the strongest nation-state in the world for its own good and the good of the world.
Stephen Miller defends the Trump administration forcefully and triumphantly in a hostile TV interview:
Without enthusiasm, we recall a very deficient and unqualified candidate for the US presidency, someone best forgotten named Hillary Clinton, because she said something that deserves to be laughed at in a video for the 2017 Makers Conference held this week at Rancho Palos Verdes, California:
Despite all the challenges we face, I remain convinced that, yes, the future is female. Just look at the amazing energy last month as women organized a march that galvanized millions of people all over our country and across the world. And remember, you are the heroes and history-makers, the glass-ceiling-breakers of the future. As I’ve said before, I’ll say again — never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world.
Putting all this together – here is a picture of the “female future”: