Sunday, 26 September 2010
Territoriality is intrinsic to Islam. Muslims divide the world into two categories: Dar al-Islam (the House of Islam, defined as those places where Islam has achieved ascendancy and now dominates life) and the Dar al-Harb (the House of War, defined as the places where infidels are in the ascendant, infidels who must be warred upon until they are killed or subjugated and forced to acknowledge the supremacy of Islam).

Many expressions commonly used by Muslims reflect this sense of territorial proprietorship. For example: "Muslim soil", "Muslim lands", "the Muslim world", "Muslim countries".

Many Westerners, including those who are strongly antipathetic to Islam, often unthinkingly lend credence to this Muslim concept of territorial proprietorship by casually adopting some of these expressions into their own discourse.

It is worth pointing out therefore:

There is no such thing as Muslim soil. Soil cannot be affiliated with a particular superstition.

There are no such things as Muslim lands. Land cannot be affiliated with a particular superstition.

There is no such thing as the Muslim world. The world, or part of it, is not the exclusive preserve of a particular superstition.

There are no such things as Muslim countries. Countries cannot affiliate themselves with particular superstitions. No matter how dominant a particular superstition appears to be in one country, there will be people whose allegiance is with other superstitions or with none at all among its population. They may not declare their allegiance, or lack of allegiance, openly because of fear of the consequences; but their silent dissent should be acknowledged.

If you are tempted to use any of these phrases in your own speech or writing, consider using alternatives instead.

Rather than talk about "the Muslim world", use the term "Umma" - the community of Muslim believers.

Rather than talk about "Muslim countries", use the term "Muslim-majority countries" instead.
Saturday, 25 September 2010

I've been watching a lot of French films on DVD recently and can't help but be struck by the extent to which the Muslim penetration of France is reflected in the films released within the last few years.

I provide a list of the films I've watched below, with brief descriptions of their salient features.

The Prophet

The main character is a Muslim Arab who is not particularly religious. When sent to prison, he is coerced into committing a murder by the powerful group of Sicilian gangsters who control prison life. After completing the task, the Sicilians accept him into their group where he does menial work for them. In the meantime, he falls in with other more devout Muslims and, with them, he builds up his own independent criminal operation on the side. Gradually, the balance of power shifts. By the end of the film the grip of the Sicilians has been broken; their leader is humiliated; the main character leaves the Sicilians and joins his fellow Muslims, who are now in the ascendant.

Paris Lockdown

This is a very violent gangster film. A group of French gangsters dominates organised crime in the neighbourhood. A less powerful group of Muslim gangsters is also active. One of the Muslims fails to pay a debt to one of the French gangsters. As a result, he is beaten and humiliated. The nearest the film has to a hero is an independent French operator who is hired to do rough stuff by the various groups of gangsters. He is white but is always seen with black women.

As the film proceeds, the power of the French gangsters ebbs away and that of the Muslims grows. A confrontation is in the offing. The independent contractor realises that the French gangsters are going to be wiped out by the Muslims; he decides to side with them, accepting a contract to kill the French gangster leader. He does so, fulfilling the contract, but later feels threatened by the Muslims himself. The Muslims come looking to kill him, but the final scene shows him having fled to somewhere that looks like North Africa, surrounded by brown people in a primitive-looking town.

Go Fast

The main character is a Muslim policeman. He is good friends with a white French policeman who is killed shortly after the film begins. The Muslim maintains friendly relations with his dead friend's family. The plot involves the Muslim infiltrating a drug-smuggling group. He encounters the criminals who killed his friend and ultimately kills or arrests them. The close relationship with the now husbandless white family is maintained and there is a hint of the Muslim possibly taking the place of the dead white man, acting as a surrogate father, although in the final scene the Muslim goes off with a supposedly American woman.

Army of Crime

A bunch of immigrants to France start up their own resistance cell to fight against the Nazi Second World War occupation of France. In this case the immigrants are mostly brown-skinned Armenian Christians or Jews. They carry out attacks for a while but in the end all are killed or captured then executed. Racist Vichy propaganda against them is broadcast. In the end their names are read out, "Mort pour la France."

Days of Glory

A group of North African Muslims are recruited to fight for France in the Second World War. They are led by a seemingly white officer, but it later emerges that he has a shameful secret: he had an Arab mother and keeps a photograph of her in his shirt. The Muslims do some fighting and help liberate a French town. The French inhabitants are friendly, grateful and welcoming. A white Frenchwoman has sex with one of the Muslims and, after parting, they write letters to one another, which, however, are never received because wartime chaos and censorship intervenes.

Lots of Muslim music plays throughout the film, along with invocations of Muslim prayers and references to Allah. Much of the dialogue is in Arabic.

Later the Muslims proceed into Alsace to hold a bridge against the Germans there. All of the white officers are either killed or seriously injured by mines and the Muslims have to take command. They fight against the Germans and most are killed. The ones who survive, however, are ultimately not given the respect their achievements deserve, implicitly because of French racism.

The Nest

An Albanian mafia leader (Muslim) who is responsible for trafficking white female slaves for prostitution purposes is being transported from one location to another. The members of his gang attempt to free him while a small team of international police tries to fend them off. The main character, the leader of the police troop, is played by Nadia Fares, an Arab woman born in Morocco. She is not portrayed as a Muslim in the film and I'm not sure whether she is a Muslim in real life.


I couldn't actually bring myself to watch this one but apparently it tells the story of a kindly French lifeguard who helps a Kurdish immigrant swim across the Channel to enter Britain illegally.

Note this was just a random selection of recent French films that had high enough ratings to seem watchable. I wasn't consciously seeking out films that had islamification or immigration as their themes.

But what is the takeaway from all of this? The theme of brown, Arab Muslims taking over and displacing white, French people is pervasive in recent French cinema. What's particularly striking is that this is never portrayed in a negative light. Often the Muslims are portrayed positively, as in Go West, where the Muslim usurps the father figure role of the dead white cop; or the formerly dominant whites are portrayed as brutal and callous, as in Paris Lockdown and the Prophet, in a way that appears to justify their later displacement by the Muslims.

Cinema creates role models, portraying characters in a heroic light to which the watchers are meant to aspire. In many of these films, the lead characters are either explicitly Muslim or the actors and actresses portraying them are wholly or partly Arab. The Arab immigrant is held up as the role model. This is what young French people are supposed to aspire to. Immigration is portrayed in a positive light and anyone opposed to it is shown as evil and vicious.

The ultimate effect is of almost Soviet-style propaganda designed to depict third world immigration, and the process of islamification, in a positive light. White women are shown maintaining joyful relations with the Muslims/Arabs. Anyone expressing disdain for them is portrayed in a negative light.

Even the story of French resistance to the Nazis, probably the cornerstone mythology of post-war French politics, has been co-opted by the Muslims/immigrants. Telling a simple tale about heroic French men and women opposing foreign invasion is not good enough any more. It seems there must now always be an angle that lets the Muslims/immigrants/brown people get in on the picture.

Yes, it is propaganda but it is not entirely spontaneous, self-generated propaganda by indigenous French people rejoicing at their new state of dhimmitude. French cinema is heavily subsidised by the state. Watch the credits for these films and you will see many mentions of government agencies and bodies who are thanked for providing their support. In fact, the film Welcome won the Lux award from the European parliament, a prize awarded annually "for the film which best illustrates 'the European integration process, topical European issues or cultural diversity in the Union'." The prize money is to be used to translate the film into all languages of the European Union.

What we are seeing in these films is nothing less than state propaganda designed to get Europeans to consent to their own genocide. I, for one, do not consent.
Friday, 24 September 2010

For decades the American government has cultivated relationships with potentially subversive elements in foreign countries. Often, after an election, or a coup, their proteges come to power and re-orient the government's policy to favour American interests. One of many examples is Saakashvili in Georgia, a petty Putinesque despot and borderline lunatic.

Outrageously, as this article in the New York Times reports, the US government is now cultivating relationships with Europe's disaffected Muslims.

The United States Embassy in Paris has formed a network of partnerships with local governments, advocacy groups, entrepreneurs, students and cultural leaders in the troubled immigrant enclaves outside France’s major cities.

We have already seen Obama using American taxpayers' money to promote sharia law in Kenya (the money was used to promote a new constitution that contained elements of sharia law). Now he is throwing more money at Muslims in Europe. It would be nice if the blame for this insane initiative could be pinned entirely on Obama. Unfortunately, it can't. The "outreach" programme got underway in the Bush years, although it "has grown in scale and visibility since the election of Barack Obama."

With an annual public affairs budget of about $3 million, the Paris embassy has sponsored urban renewal projects, music festivals and conferences. Since Mr. Obama’s election, the Americans have helped organize seminars for minority politicians, coaching them in electoral strategy, fund-raising and communications.

The International Visitor Leadership Program, which sends 20 to 30 promising French entrepreneurs and politicians to America for several weeks each year, now includes more minority participants, and Muslims in particular.

So yet again Muslims are being rewarded for their aggression by having money and attention thrown at them. This time it's even worse, however, as the reward comes from abroad.

These Muslims are a subversive element within European society and European governments should crack down hard on any ties between them and foreign governments, whether those governments are American or Saudi.
Tuesday, 21 September 2010

The Pope has recently visited Britain. During the visit, the British media gave prominent coverage to the protests against the Pope led by people like Peter Tatchell (a gay rights activist), Richard Dawkins, Stephen Fry, et al.

Strangely ignored by the mainstream media, however, was the protest led by the group Muslims Against Crusades, helmed by Anjem Choudary. Holding up placards like "Shariah for Rome", "Jesus Hates the Pope" and "Jesus Loves Islam", they chanted "Benedict watch your back, Islam is coming back!".

Monday, 20 September 2010

The Sweden Democrats, the supposed "far right" party which warns about the dangers of immigration, particularly of the Muslim variety, has thrown a spanner in the works of the Swedish political establishment.

Initial indications were that the Sweden Democrats have achieved at least 5% of the vote, although there are reports, suspicious reports, that this total is rising to above 8% after recounts. This showing should ensure it has at least 20 seats in the new parliament. Previously, the Sweden Democrats had no representation whatsoever as the Swedish electoral rules stipulate that a party must achieve at least 4% of the vote before it gains any seats. Clearly this rule was designed to stifle "fringe" points of view, such as the one that mass Muslim immigration may not be a good thing. But that view's not quite so "fringe" any more, is it?

The party's success comes despite the most extraordinary campaign of discrimination against it. Most newspapers refused to run the party's ads. A rather innocuous television commercial (shown above) was banned. The party's website was hacked, many of its campaigning events had to be called off because of threats, or the reality, of violence from the left and its Muslim allies.

The Swedish left, which dominated politics in the country throughout the post-war era, has lost a second election in a row for the first time ever and has seen its share of the vote fall further. This is a trend I expect to see repeated throughout Europe. The European left has contracted a fateful and traitorous alliance with Islam and will pay an increasing price for it at the ballot box, at least among the indigenous Europeans.

It seems that the small countries in Europe are reacting more strongly to the Muslim invasion than the larger countries. This is most likely because in small countries, all politics is much more highly localised. In large countries like the UK, there are large tracts of the country that have barely been affected by the immigration jihad. Life continues there as normal, while perhaps only a small proportion of the country finds itself on the frontlines of the Muslim invasion.

Denmark, so far, has been the most successful model for how Europe should react to the Muslim invasion. The Danish People's Party has eschewed racism but mounted a vigorous defence of European values by opposing further third-world immigration. It has achieved a sizeable share of the vote such that it is able to make demands of the other parties in return for offering its support. Denmark now has some of the most stringent immigration laws in Europe and is already implementing the "voluntary repatriation" policy that outfits like the BNP have campaigned for in vain.

The Netherlands, of course, has Geert Wilders. And Belgium is disintegrating largely as a result of differences of opinion between north and south about how to respond to the Muslim invasion. Eventually these tendencies will manifest themselves within the larger polities too. Let's hope they do so soon.
Sunday, 19 September 2010
All over Europe there is talk of paring back public spending to stave off concern in the financial markets about the high levels of sovereign debt. Some of the cuts proposed are extraordinary in scope. For example, in the UK, there is talk of trimming the military budget in a way not seen in the post-WWII era. Radical reforms of the welfare state are being bruited about. The story is similar elsewhere.

What's missing, of course, is any big picture analysis of why this has come about. Of course, to some degree, it is a reaction to the recent recession. But there have been plenty of recessions in the post-WWII era and the recent one has not been significantly worse than some of the others. So why has it produced such calamitous effects?

The answer is simple: the Muslim colonisation of Europe is producing enormous pressure on budgets throughout Europe. No one talks about this explicitly. They refer to the pressure on budgets as if it was a bad thing that just mysteriously happened; something over which we have no control, like the rain falling. But that simply isn't true. European budgets are being drained by a parasitic Muslim presence that only exists as a result of government policy.

For example, in Denmark Muslims constitute only 5% of the population, yet consume 40% of the welfare budget.

One study, reported in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (in German), found that migrants to Germany (who are overwhelmingly Turkish) had taken 1 trillion euros more out of the social security system in benefits than they had put in through tax payments!! 1 trillion Euros! That is about £850 billion or $1.3 trillion US dollars.

In Britain we know that the top 5 immigrant groups, ranked by benefits dependency are Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Turks, Somalis and Persians: all Muslims. We know that more than 50% of the Muslim population resident in Britain is economically inactive. Of course, it is not only through benefits dependency that the Muslims drain European treasuries. Thanks to their high birth-rates and their habit of inbreeding (which produces congenital defects) they are disproportionate users of the government-provided health services. They also commit crime at disproportionately high levels.

Put it all together and what do you have? The Muslims are acting like a veritable swarm of locusts devouring the European economy. And some of them are doing this consciously. As part of a Sunday Times investigation, an undercover reporter infiltrated a Muslim extremist group in Britain called the "Saviour Sect":

The Saviour Sect was established 10 months ago when its predecessor group Al-Muhajiroun was disbanded after coming under close scrutiny by the authorities. Its members meet in secret in halls, followers’ homes and parks. They are so opposed to the British state that they see it as their duty to make no economic contribution to the nation. One member warned our undercover reporter against getting a job because it would be contributing to the kuffar (non-Muslim) system.

Instead, the young follower, Nasser, who receives £44 job seekers’ allowance a week, said it was permissible to “live off benefits”, just as the prophet Mohammed had lived off the state while attacking it at the same time. Even paying car insurance was seen as supporting the system. “All the (Saviour Sect) brothers drive without insurance,” he said.

Given the demographic jihad that the Muslims are waging in Europe, as expressed in high birth rates and high rates of immigration, Europeans will increasingly find themselves unable to provide the range of government services to which they have become accustomed. Ludicrously,
Europe's political elites hail immigration as the solution to the continent's economic problems, rather than tell the truth, which is that it is the source of them. The disease is being hailed as the cure!
Saturday, 11 September 2010
In some of the discussions kicked up by the Sarrazin affair in Germany, I occasionally heard mention of the research of criminologist Christian Pfeiffer. So I decided to follow up this reference and find out exactly what it was he had discovered.

It turns out that Pfeiffer conducted an elaborate study of youth crime, interviewing 45,000 young people. His conclusion was striking: the more devoutly religious young Muslims in Germany were, the more crimes (like robbery and violence) they committed. This was in sharp contrast to young people of other faiths like Christianity. The more devout young Christians were, the fewer crimes they committed. These correlations remained valid even after taking every other variable, like socio-economic status, parents' education level, etc. into account.

So Islam actually inspires people to commit crimes and acts of violence? Who'd have thunk it?

Also interesting is the fact that, worried about political correctness, Pfeiffer kept his study secret for six months after finishing it and consulted with a German federal government ministry about how he could release the results in a low-key way.
Monday, 6 September 2010
Read the mainstream press and you'll come across their standard interpretation of what's happening to Belgium: the Dutch-speaking north and the French-speaking south are falling out with one another. It's just old nationalist instincts reasserting themselves.

You need to peer beneath the headlines to find the real story, as this article (in German) on Politically Incorrect does. It's not about Flemish vs. Wallonians. It's about Muslims vs. All. Brussels is a predominantly French-speaking enclave within the Dutch-speaking North. But, increasingly, it's not French that can be heard in the Brussels streets, but Arabic.

Brussels could well be considered the Muslim capital of Europe. It is a cesspit of corruption and criminality and not all of it stems from the EU.

The Dutch north could tolerate the French south, even if it was less economically successful and therefore a net recipient of government subsidies. It could tolerate a French city in its midst. But it cannot accept it when that French city morphs into a Muslim city and sucks in ever greater amounts of money from the rest of Belgium to pay for Muslim corruption.

The main left-wing party in Belgium dominates politics in the French south of the country. Of course, as elsewhere in Europe, the left has made its bed with the Muslims and supports more Muslim immigration and more Islam-friendly policies. The Dutch north, however, wants the circus to stop. This is the real root of the crisis in Belgian politics, one that may well tear the country apart.

As the Muslim populations grow in virtually every country in western Europe, I expect to see similar problems cropping up elsewhere. Old separatist tendencies will re-assert themselves, and existing ones will be invigorated, as the still-European parts of some countries look on with horror as whole cities and regions are transformed into Muslim ghettos.

Secessionist demands will be coming both from the Muslims who want to set up mini-Sharia republics and the non-Muslims who want to get away from them. Of course, at times, violence will erupt. Civil war is in our future. That is what the utopian idealism of the 60s has sown. There has been no greater folly in the history of the world.
Sunday, 5 September 2010

According to a poll commissioned by Germany's BILD newspaper, 18% of Germans would vote for a party led by Thilo Sarrazin.

Meanwhile, Germany's pitiful chancellor Merkel is doing her best to cope with a popular clamour in support of Sarrazin. In an interview, Merkel, a trained scientist, has even been reduced to refusing to say whether she believes intelligence is a genetically inheritable characteristic! This must be the ultimate low point in the history of political correctness when, in their mad quest for equality, the utopians are reduced to denying the basic facts of biology.
Saturday, 4 September 2010
The publication of Thilo Sarrazin's book "Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab" may turn out to be one of the most important events in the history of the modern Muslim invasion of Europe. Geert Wilders, of course, is a heroic figure who has set a template that the rest of Europe should and must follow. But, ultimately, the Netherlands is a small country that is most likely incapable of decisively affecting the rest of the continent. Germany is Europe's largest country and what happens there will have repercussions throughout the European Union. It is also, of course, the author of the Nazi episode in history, which for decades has been used to beat recalcitrant Europeans into silent submission to the ongoing destruction of their culture and way of life. The weight of history is heavier there than anywhere else; so, if the Germans can get over it, the rest of us can too.

Sarrazin has provoked an almost unbelievable media storm. Visit the German news websites and you'll see special sections devoted entirely to the controversy. Sarrazin's book is now on sale but very hard to get. It sold 70,000 copies on the first day and Amazon Germany is currently quoting 1-2 week availability for anyone who orders it now. Opinion polls and comments on websites show virtually the entire German people behind Sarrazin; and virtually the entire political and media establishment against him. This is the kind of moment that generates a political revolution.

In German and French political discourse about Muslim immigrants, you sometimes hear the phrase "parallel society" used to express fears that the Muslims are failing to integrate. What the Sarrazin episode makes clear, however, and also the ongoing saga of the Roma in France which pits most of the political and media establishment, even senior figures within his own party, as well as the church and the EU, against Sarkozy's policy of expulsion, is that it is not just Muslims who are living in a parallel society, but politicians. There is an extraordinary gulf between ordinary people, who overwhelmingly back Sarrazin and the French policy of expulsion, and the utopian elite who dominate politics and political debate with their outmoded and naive sixties idealism.

Of course thoughtful observers will have known this for some time. But the Sarrazin episode makes it clear to everyone. It dramatises the chasm between the people and the elite.

The Bundesbank has now set in motion the process that will almost certainly lead to Sarrazin losing his job there. This is actually a good thing, however, for several reasons. First, it will be a long drawn-out process. Because there are stringent measures in place to safeguard the independence of the Bundesbank, the German President has to sanction his removal. He has sought the opinion of the German Chancellor (Merkel) to give himself political cover. In fact, both will certainly give their consent and have already (shamefully) explicitly or implicitly called for the Bundesbank to get rid of Sarrazin. Sarrazin may have many avenues of appeal, however, which can draw the whole process out even further, maximising the drama and the public sympathy that will gather around him as a martyr figure.

Second, after working as a top banker, and with what are expected to be almost unprecedented sales of his book, it is doubtful that he is going to be hurting for cash any time soon.

Third, his departure from the Bundesbank leaves him unemployed. He will have time on his hands, time to think about what he wants to do with his life. There is talk of a new right-wing political party being formed in Germany, possibly with Sarrazin at the helm. This hopeful possibility might have been forestalled had the Bundesbank kept Sarrazin on. He might have been tempted to keep his mouth shut and his head down for a bit. But now he's outside the tent with nothing to lose.

Even though they are joining in the hysteria against Sarrazin, most German news publications are also actually taking the time to examine the truth of his claims. When they do that, they invariably find that the claims are valid, because, as Sarrazin himself says, all he has done is carefully analyse publicly available sources of information. Therefore the process of public scrutiny can only increase support for Sarrazin further.

All in all, what has happened has been truly wonderful. It is like a dam of public discontent and decades of suppressed misgivings have suddenly burst forth, inundating the old political world. It remains to be seen what will emerge once the waters subside, but at this stage we can only hope that the other countries of Europe will soon benefit from Sarrazins of their own.
Thursday, 2 September 2010
Those concerned about the islamification of Europe should know that there have been extraordinary developments in Germany within the last week or so. Thilo Sarrazin, a German banker who sits on the board of the German central bank, has provoked uproar in the country by drawing attention to the negative effect immigration, particularly Muslim immigration, is having on the country.

Sarrazin has claimed that Muslim migrants have failed to integrate; that they are lowering German educational standards by their poor performance at school; that they have made a net negative economic contribution to the country because of their high welfare dependency; and that their high birth-rate, combined with the low birth-rate of indigenous Germans, means they are gradually taking over the country.

Sarrazin's book has not been published yet, but extracts from it have appeared in the Bild newspaper. (Available here if you can read German). There is overwhelming public support for Sarazin's point of view. Bild ran a poll that showed 89% agreed with Sarrazin. Despite this, of course, the bien-pensant elite of the politics and media worlds have denounced Sarrazin in the most strident terms.

The prosecutor's office is carrying out an investigation to see whether anything he has said or written constitutes a crime. Politicians from all across the political spectrum, including Germany's allegedly conservative CDU, have vilified him and called for the Bundesbank to dismiss him from his position. This may well indeed happen; the Bundesbank is currently reviewing the situation.

The episode is an extraordinary illustration of the McCarthyite persecution of anyone who dares to dissent from the mad utopian ideology that our elites have developed into a kind of secular religion in recent decades. Sarrazin has made factual claims. Those factual claims are either true or false and their truth or falsehood can be examined. When they are examined carefully, they are found to be true. But this doesn't matter to the elite. They have conjured up an atmosphere of witch-hunting hysteria.

Regardless of what happens to Sarrazin's career, though, he has broken the taboo and opened up a debate. Since the facts are on his side, that can only be a good thing. There is speculation that he may start a political party and pundits believe it could instantly get around 20% in the polls.

It's not clear whether he wants to do this, though. Sarrazin, although perceived by some as a kind of German Geert Wilders, in fact distanced himself from Wilders, whom he called a "right-wing populist". Somewhat bizarrely, Sarrazin is a member of the German SPD (Germany's main left-wing party) although there are now steps underway that may result in him being expelled from the party.
Wednesday, 1 September 2010

This shocking video shows Muslim men taking over whole streets and districts of Paris for public prayer sessions, completely without any authorisation. These actions are illegal but the police do absolutely nothing to stop them. The people who live in those districts are unlawfully prevented from going about their business while these prayer sessions take place.

They appear to be intended as a public demonstration of Muslim power, a deliberate taunting of the kaffars and dhimmis who are allowing these savages to take over our continent.

Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi has called for Europe to convert to Islam, saying it is "the last religion", and predicting that the conversion process will begin once Turkey joins the European Union.

Speaking before an invited audience of 500 female models, Gaddafi said that "Islam should become the religion of all of Europe...Islam is the last religion and if we are to have a single faith then it has to be in Mohammed".

In other remarks made during his visit to Italy, he demanded €5 billion in "protection money" each year for keeping the African hordes out of Europe. If he didn't get it, he said, Europe might "turn black" and "become another Africa".

"Tomorrow Europe might no longer be European and even black as there are millions who want to come in," he said.

"We don't know if Europe will remain an advanced and united continent or if it will be destroyed, as happened with the barbarian invasions".
Channel 4 has played a key role in promoting the careers of Muslim activists, including Muslim extremists. Channel 4 practises positive discrimination in favour of "minority" candidates. This practice was recently explored at a parliamentary committee hearing; some of the exchanges are reported here.

Mehdi Hasan

Mehdi Hasan is one of the extremist Muslims who have successfully infiltrated the media establishment. After carving out a career as a politics and culture editor at Channel 4, he infiltrated the New Statesman and acquired a senior editorial position there; he writes regularly for the Guardian.

In his public discourse, Hasan is careful to appear "moderate". One time, though, the mask slipped. Unfortunately for him, he was being filmed when it did. This article at Harry's Place exposes Hasan for the Muslim extremist that he is. In the film, Mehdi Hasan describes atheists as "cattle" and people "of no intelligence".

“The kaffar, the disbelievers, the atheists who remain deaf and stubborn to the teachings of Islam, the rational message of the Quran; they are described in the Quran as, quote, “a people of no intelligence”, Allah describes them as; not of no morality, not as people of no belief – people of “no intelligence” – because they’re incapable of the intellectual effort it requires to shake off those blind prejudices, to shake off those easy assumptions about this world, about the existence of God. In this respect, the Quran describes the atheists as “cattle”, as cattle of those who grow the crops and do not stop and wonder about this world.”

Aaqil Ahmed

Aaqil Ahmed was a religious commissioning editor at Channel 4 whose tenure was controversial.

One series he commissioned, Christianity: A History, "was criticised by Church figures for trivialising the religion." Another, "The Secrets of the 12 Disciples, cast doubt on the validity of the Pope."

He did, however, commission "a week of special programmes on Islam including a feature-length documentary on the Qu'ran, and a series of interviews with Muslims around the world talking about their beliefs."

Even the risible dhimmi George Pitcher assessed Christianity: A History as "a showcase of dumbed-down religion, a History of Platitudes. We had Howard Jacobson with the scoop that Jesus was a Jew. Michael Portillo reading off an autocue that it was a shame Constantine adopted Christianity. Ann Widdecombe saying it was a pity the Reformation was bloody. And, God help us, Cherie Blair assessing contemporary Christianity. Some see a pattern here, a mild ridicule of Christianity, but the overall theme seems banal."

Ahmed then advanced his career by becoming head of religious programming at the BBC. His appointment provoked a flood of complaints; of course critics of the appointment were dismissed as racists and islamophobes but their reservations were later shown to be justified.

Ahmed soon accused the Church of England of "living in the past" and proclaimed that "all religions should be treated equally". So Christianity, a faith practised by about 70% of the British people should be treated equally with Islam, a faith practised by 2-3% of the population of Britain?

The BBC later ran a gushingly favourable documentary about the East London Mosque, which had already been exposed as a front for the supremacist IFE. The documentary contained not a word about the critiques of the mosque that had been aired and substantiated.
Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews