Sunday, October 21, 2007

The emergence of the Conservative Muslim Caliphate


The Conservative Muslim Forum, a body established by Michael Howard and supported by David Cameron to advise the Conservatives on Muslim issues, has articulated some of its policy demands. In summary: Iran has a right to nuclear weapons, the Party should cease its support for Israel, a compulsory history curriculum in schools should give ‘full recognition to the massive contribution that Islam has made to the development of Western civilisation’, and preachers who advocate a rejection of democracy and its institutions should not be denied entry into Britain. They even support al-Qaradawi’s message of ‘gay-hate’.

Are these Muslims really Conservatives, or are they plants intent on subversively undermining the Party’s liberal foundations and Judaeo-Christian heritage?

By giving Iran nuclear weapons, they facilitate President Ahmadinejad’s desire to ‘wipe Israel off the map’. By juxtaposing Iran and Israel, they suggest moral equivalence, yet one is a democratic nation which recognises the rights of minorities; the other is a barbarous totalitarian theocracy which executes women and children. By allowing them input into the history curriculum, they will be able to brainwash children with the ‘massive contribution’ Islam has made to Western civilisation, when in reality it could be summed up in a few lines (if not two words). By defending Iran, they give succour to Holocaust-deniers. And by advocating the admission of Muslim preachers who wish to destroy British democracy, they fuel the flames of the Islamist agenda and offer them the Conservative brand in support of a totalitarian Shari’a system. The rights and liberties of the British people are inalienable, and the Conservative Party above all parties should stand in their defence.

Here was an opportunity for Conservative ‘moderate’ Muslims to distance themselves from their ‘extremist’ co-religionists, yet they have done no such thing. Instead, they challenge the Party Leader, repudiate Conservative policy, undermine the FCO, and assert that their way is the only ‘sensible’ way. And further, they demand censorship:

We accept that some terrorists do abuse Islam for their purposes. However, an incoming Conservative administration must deny their attempt to link criminal acts to any religion. The term ‘terrorism’ must be separated from any religious references. We reiterate that the Conservative Party should not explicitly or implicitly link terrorism with Islam as, similar to other major religions, Islam forbids terrorism.

What of the Muslim voice which perceives the link between terrorism and Islam? What of the Muslim voice which opposes Iran? What of the Muslim voice which supports the existence of Israel? What of the Muslim voice which does not want to see homosexuals summarily executed? The Conservative Muslim Forum is acting like a Muslim Conservative Caliphate. It will be a source of great rejoicing that Sayeeda Warsi, the unelected Shadow Cabinet Spokesperson for Community Cohesion, sits at the right hand of the Leader to further their cause. But in reality there are many Conservative Muslims who find a natural home in the Party and would view the proposals of this Forum with extreme distaste.

The Forum works out of the Conservative headquarters in London, and is thereby financially subsidised by the Party. It is chaired by Lord Sheikh, a party donor who was given a peerage last year. His wife works in Tory HQ, and appears tolerant of her husband’s adultery. That is no reason, however, for the Conservative Party to be tolerant of his hypocrisy.

The Conservative Muslim Forum holds itself apart from those same Conservatives with whom they wish to convey ‘shared values’, and they also hold themselves apart and separate from British democracy and Western civilisation.

Yet it should not be for Cranmer to respond to this, but the Conservative Christian Fellowship, which is also similarly accommodated and equally subsidised. The problem is, unlike its Muslim counterpart, it is congenial and diplomatic. It is therefore perceived to lack teeth. If it cannot bite, and will not bark, the Conservative Muslim Forum is free to advance its reactionary, anti-Semitic and homophobic cause - all at the Conservative Party’s expense, electorally and financially.

UPDATE (9 Nov 2007)

The former director of the Conservative Christian Fellowship has written an open letter to the Chairman of the Conservative Party, posted on ConservativeHome:

Has CCHQ taken all necessary measures to ensure the Conservative Muslim Forum cannot be infiltrated?

"Dear Caroline,

You will be aware of the recent controversy caused by the Conservative Muslim Forum's response to Pauline Neville-Jones' national security report, 'An Unquiet World'. The CMF, which is headquartered at CCHQ and uses the party's logo, took issue with a number of The Unquiet World's conclusions. You will remember that it opposed the proposal that preachers who campaign against our nation's democratic institutions be refused entry to Britain. It also called for full engagement with the MCB, an organisation that Baroness Neville-Jones said "uses identity politics to pursue a domestic and international policy agenda sympathetic to Islamists.”

It is, of course, vital that free speech flourishes within the Conservative Party but I would value your reassurance as to what steps have been taken to ensure that the CMF has not been - and cannot be - infiltrated by groups or individuals with hostile agendas. Given its privileged place inside Conservative HQ I hope you agree that these are reasonable concerns.

For example:

I understand that Lord Sheikh is Chairman of the CMF but does the Forum have a governing board? If so, who sits on the CMF's board?
How often does the CMF meet?
Are any of its meetings minuted? Who has access to those minutes, if they exist?
Is it a democratic body?
Who exactly wrote the CMF's recent paper and its criticisms of the policy group report?
Is the CMF part-sponsored by Conservative Party funds? Who, for example, pays for its website?
Do you know if its leading players are attached to some of the groups that Baroness Neville-Jones has criticised?
Thank you for your time.

I will be publishing this letter on ConservativeHome.

Yours sincerely,

Tim Montgomerie"

30 Comments:

Anonymous najistani said...

The ‘massive contribution’ Islam has made to Western civilisation:

- Vibrant rape gangs and pedophile rings reaching out to give multiple new new cultural diversity experiences to the women and children of the hideously unvibrant monocultural community.

- Architectural enrichment from vibrant MegaMosques dominating the skylines of ancient European cities

- Imaginatively enriched travel experiences which keep you wondering what exotic contents are in your diversified fellow passengers' luggage.

- Vibrant new ways of using surplus tax income by spending on 'inclusion' projects for jihad-crazed psychopaths.

- Improved efficiency in the vibrant heroin supply chain

- Increased employment diversity in the police force for investigators of mind-crimes.

- Doctors who save on health care costs by neglecting their unvibrant Kuffar patients.

- Low-cost demolition and disposal of outdated buildings and obsolete monocultural icons.

- Vibrant kuffar-free neighbourhoods

- Encouragement of unvibrant women and dancing slags to stay home at night.

- Demands for an inclusively diversified school curriculum, such as banning music, dance, drama, biology, swimming and lessons about any other religion but Islam. Also compulsory history lessons about the massive contribution that Islam has made to the development of Western civilisation.

.... If all this is cultural 'enrichment' then I wonder what cultural impoverishment would look like?

21 October 2007 at 14:27  
Anonymous najistani said...

BTW if you check out the original document at http://www.conservativemuslimforum.com/An%20Unquiet%20World%20RESPONSE.pdf it actually says that:

(26) "Any revised compulsory history syllabus needs to give full recognition to the massive contribution that Islam has made to the development of Western civilisation. Historically the recognition of this contribution has been suppressed because in the past control of the educational system rested with the Christian churches which saw Islam as a competitor."

So their paranoia at Islamic 'cultural humiliation' is now being visited on Catholic and Church of England schoolteachers instead of the evil Jooooooooooz who control everything including the school syllabus.

21 October 2007 at 14:53  
Anonymous nedsherry said...

Are these Muslims really Conservatives, or are they plants intent on subversively undermining the Party’s liberal foundations and Judaeo-Christian heritage?

To paraphrase Xenophon: the latter, the latter. But I have some questions for His Grace: Is he a follower of Judaeo-Christ or of Christ? Is he a Judaeo-Christian or a Christian? Why is "Christian heritage" not good enough? The term Judaeo-Christian is of very recent coinage and of propagandistic intent. Like Muslims and Islam, Jews and Judaism are no friends of Christians and Christianity. In fact, I'm surprised the term Abrahamo-Christian hasn't been taken up as a smarmy way of pretending we're all three chums together.

By allowing them input into the history curriculum, they will be able to brainwash children with the ‘massive contribution’ Islam has made to Western civilisation, when in reality it could be summed up in a few lines (if not two words).

I wouldn't call it massive, but Islam, unlike Judaism, has overseen its own civilization and words like alcohol, algebra and zenith prove that we owe a great deal to them as transmitters, if not originators. Islamic architecture and calligraphy are also worthy of great respect.

21 October 2007 at 16:35  
Anonymous nedsherry said...

najistani writes:

So their paranoia at Islamic 'cultural humiliation' is now being visited on Catholic and Church of England schoolteachers instead of the evil Jooooooooooz who control everything including the school syllabus.

Here's someone blaming the Jooooooooooz, naj:

Sacks said Britain's politics had been poisoned by the rise of identity politics, as minorities and aggrieved groups jockeyed first for rights, then for special treatment. The process, he said, began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. He said the effect had been "inexorably divisive."

"A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others," he said.


Couldn't have put it better myself. That's Sacks as in the chief rabbi, by the way.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1192380605648&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

21 October 2007 at 17:04  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Nedsherry,

Insofar as the New Testament teaches that Christians are 'grafted in', and salvation is 'of the Jews', the spiritual heritage is manfestly Jewish, and Christians are a branch thereof.

21 October 2007 at 17:50  
Anonymous Irene Lancaster said...

Thanks for this blog. I've blogged on it here:

http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/10/lord-sheikhs-je.html

German academic, Dr. Matthias Kuentzel, who was banned on arrival from Leeds University last March (having been invited by them in the first place) recently gave a talk there on the links between Hitler's philosophy and the rise of philosophies like the one espoused by Lord Sheikh.

Kuentzel's book, 'Jihad and Jew-Hatred', is coming out on November 1st and I've been asked to review it. It is a real eye-opener and demonstrates that most traditional Islamicists had/have a problem with women.

Just like Hitler, of course.

21 October 2007 at 18:06  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

'What of the Muslim voice which perceives the link between terrorism and Islam? What of the Muslim voice which opposes Iran? What of the Muslim voice which supports the existence of Israel? What of the Muslim voice which does not want to see homosexuals summarily executed?'

So where are they Your Grace? Are they even in the Muslim Conservative Forum? Are you simply assuming they are because one would assume if they were anywhere that they would be there? Reading your post makes me wonder whether being blind to the worrying parts of Islamic ideology is not something that is restricted to the Left. That perhaps Muslims, of any political persuasion might fit your description above, and they are scattered about the place. For this reason, their voices are rarely heard. Perhaps?

21 October 2007 at 18:34  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Ms Snuffleupagus,

They exist, and not only in His Grace's circle. He knows of quite a few Muslims who advocate the Israeli cause, who think Iran is an abhorrent regime, and who know sufficient theology and history to make a very credible intellectual challenge to the superficialities of what has become known as orthodox Islam.

The pity is that they get no media coverage (or very little), and groups like the MCB and the CMF talked of here espouse the utterly cliche predictable two-dimensional policies with which all Muslims are now tarnished.

His Grace is not blind, Ms Snuffy; just fair.

21 October 2007 at 18:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace might be interested in the following results from a Populus poll in 2006:

'..Populus then asked some questions about attitudes towards Jews and Israel. A bare majority of British Muslims (52%) did support the right of the state of Israel to exist, 30% did not. 31% thought that the Muslim Community should participate in Holocaust Memorial day, while 56% said they should not (21% said they shouldn’t because of Israeli treatment of Palestine, 12% because it ignored Muslim suffering, 20% for unspecified other reasons, 4% said they didn’t believe the Holocause happened).

Finally Populus gave respondents a list of statements about the Jewish community in the UK and asked if they agreed or disagreed with them. 58% of British Muslims thought that the Jewish Community supported Israel right or wrong, 20% disagreed (a net agreement rating of +38). 57% though they had no interest in the plight of the Palestinians, 21% disagreed (net agreement rating of +36). 53% thought that the Jewish community had too much influence on foriegn policy (net agreement +34), 46% thought that the Jewish community were in league with the freemasons to control the media and politics (net agreement +24!) and, most worryingly, 37% thought they were “legitimate targets as part of the ongoing struggle for justice in the Middle East (net agreement +2).'

21 October 2007 at 19:09  
Anonymous Cinnamon said...

The 'Conservative' muslims basically forbid their party leader Cameron his mouth in the paper, quoting him directly to make their point with pompous emphasis about how one must speak (or not) of 'Zionists'.

Cameron can't be seen to tolerate that, he sacked far better men for much lesser offenses. If he is going to wimp out of this one, then you guys better look to start a new party.

Maybe we all ought to ask the Swiss SVP if they consider opening a franchise here -- they seem to be the last true Conservatives of Europe...

21 October 2007 at 20:42  
Anonymous ned said...

His Grace writes:

Insofar as the New Testament teaches that Christians are 'grafted in', and salvation is 'of the Jews',

Romans 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

That the Jews were -- not are -- God's salvific vehicle is entirely orthodox; His Grace's present remarks smack of the Judaizing heresy. Where in the New Testament does the term "Judaeo-Christian" appears? Where in the Church Fathers? Where in His Grace's pre-incineratory writings?

...the spiritual heritage is manifestly Jewish, and Christians are a branch thereof.

The spiritual heritage at the time of the NT was certainly Jewish. What else could it be? It is not now: Judaism is a false religion according to orthodox Christian teaching. The two religions can no more be reconciled than Christianity and Islam, except by the surrender of one or the another or the dilution to vacuity of both.

Dr Lancaster writes:

Kuentzel's book, 'Jihad and Jew-Hatred', is coming out on November 1st and I've been asked to review it. It is a real eye-opener and demonstrates that most traditional Islamicists had/have a problem with women.

Just like Hitler, of course.


Rabbis cancel conference on 'chained women'
By Amiram Barkat

Chief Sephardi Rabbi Shlomo Amar last week canceled the conference on women whose husbands refuse to grant them a divorce (agunot), which was due to take place in Jerusalem on Tuesday, at the order of ultra-Orthodox Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/783697.html

21 October 2007 at 22:58  
Blogger Dr.D said...

How can the English listen to this nonsense? Is it not plainly evident to you that you have within your borders a group of invaders who wish to take over your country and take away your freedoms? Will you cease to have the freedoms that Englishmen have won and spread throughout the world over the last thousand years? You are on the way to slavery if you do not wake up! These people are completely intent on enslaving you; wake up!!

22 October 2007 at 04:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your grace,

http://www.b3ta.com/board/7717722

22 October 2007 at 10:06  
Anonymous Noga said...

"‘full recognition to the massive contribution that Islam has made to the development of Western civilisation’"

may look like this:

http://www.alhamraacademy.org/multimedia/MuslimHistory_files/frame.htm

22 October 2007 at 15:43  
Anonymous geraldo said...

Dr.d. Are you talking about muslims or europeans? Sadly, from where I am, I'm not sure since Lisbon.

22 October 2007 at 17:49  
Anonymous najistani said...

Thanks for the link, Noga.

Now let's apply the same process to England.

(1) Stonehenge is the remains of a mosque.

(2) Muslims defeated the Armada.

(3) Prominent British Muslims have included al-Fred the Great who founded the navy, the dramatist Sheikh Speare, the folk hero Roh bin Hud, and the inventor of the internet Timbur Naz Ali.

Why let historical accuracy stand in the way of a Shariah-compliant curriculum?

22 October 2007 at 18:44  
Anonymous Hansard said...

Your Grace,

I sought out this website because of reports of your trenchant erudition. Having read this comment and others, however, I am sorry to report that what I had expected to be learned comment, the better with which to burnish your eloquence, seems to me to amount to simplistic, generalised and frankly ugly anti-Islamic rants. Surely, to conflate extreme adherents of Wahhabi Islam with all Muslims is akin to assuming that, because they called themselves Christian, the Branch Davidians of Wacco were representative of the true face of Christianity...

I have deep regard for your obvious theological learning but, with respect, your grasp of Medieval history is, in my humble opinion and with one caveat, somewhat lacking. The contribution to Western civilisation of Islamic civilisation (as opposed to Islam per se, hence my caveat) is, without question, immense.

Without the countless summa of Greek and Latin learning previously lost to the West and translated in the cosmopolitan and, uniquely for the times, tolerant atmospheres of Cordoba and Baghdad and the incalculable advances in mathematics and astronomy which were exclusively Muslim in nature, the Renaissance would have been quite impossible.

Perhaps we should all bare in mind that, in the late 10th and early 11th centuries, this was taking place at a time when, to echo Disraeli’s put down of O'Connor, the ancestors of the Arabs were cultivated intellectuals at the heart of a sophisticated and advanced civilisation and ours’ were psychopathic savages in a dark and mostly unknown land...

22 October 2007 at 23:07  
Anonymous hansard said...

My apologies your Grace - having read my contribution again, I realise that my criticisms could be interpreted as relating to your observations. With the exception of your belief that the contribution of Islam to Western civilisation can be summed up in a few words, they do not. They relate to the comments left in your eminent wake by various dyspeptic individuals.

22 October 2007 at 23:44  
Blogger Didactophobe said...

The Conservative Party has to dissociate itself utterly from these people. They are not Conservatives; they are seeking to deny and pervert young people's knowledge of the country and culture in which they live.

To suggest that "Historically the recognition of this contribution has been suppressed because in the past control of the educational system rested with the Christian churches which saw Islam as a competitor" is risible. It is so ludicrously wrong as to be unworthy of attention, and the party leadership must make clear that the views of these people will never reflect party policy.

Homophobia and anti-semitism (or suspicion thereof), meanwhile, are not just hugely damaging to any party perceived to be promoting them, but are quite simply immoral and wrong.

22 October 2007 at 23:47  
Anonymous hansard said...

Mr Didactophobe,

I wholeheartedly agree that homophobia and anti-Semitism are quite simply morally wrong and to be resisted in every possible way.

So too Islamaphobia...

In response to your comment to the observation that,” Historically the recognition of this contribution has been suppressed because in the past control of the educational system rested with the Christian churches which saw Islam as a competitor" that, "(it) is risible. It is so ludicrously wrong as to be unworthy of attention, and the party leadership must make clear that the views of these people will never reflect party policy."; I would respectfully suggest that your opinion is in itself almost risible.

I am quite prepared to accept that in the recent past the history of the confluence of Western European civilisation with Islamic civilisation has been ignored, rather than suppressed as some potential rival, but, today, I can't see how such neglect can be so dismissed, save on the grounds cited that it could be perceived as competition.

As far as I am concerned, as a Christian, I can see no problem with history being told truthfully for once rather than as an extension of political correctness or incorrectness. I get just as irritated with those who want to trumpet a "Rule Britannia, weren't we wonderful", Whig view of history as I do with those for whom anything done during the era of Empire is a clear manifestation of British mendacity, greed or turpitude.

Yes, we made mistakes. Yes, some of our people were greedy, on the make and racist. And some of them were selfless, honest and genuine. So, on balance, we were a human nation during the Victorian era and beyond. Surely, not the greatest of shocks?

By the same token, whilst there was and is a lot about Islamic doctrine (depending, of course, on the tradition and the school of thought) that would seem antithetical to Western beliefs, there is also an immense amount in Islamic doctrine which is not and, certainly so far as Islamic civilisation and culture is concerned, particularly during the Medieval period and the crusades, much which was not just helpful and precious but utterly indispensable to the West - one only has to read Ibn Al Athir's comments on medicine at the time, contrasting an Arab with a "Frankish” (Western) Doctors’ prescription to see that perfectly.

I appreciate that this approach doesn't set off fireworks or light bonfires for the partisans of either cause but, alas, it is true (however inconveniently) and therefore, no doubt, doomed to be ignored by most, if not all, protagonists ad infinitum. Such, alas, are the lessons of history…

23 October 2007 at 00:48  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Hansard,

His Grace is puzzled by your observations, which, in the first instance, were clearly directed to His Grace, and then, in the style of 2Corinthians, appear to back-track. If your criticisms were aimed at communicants (with some of whom His Grace is himself a little despairing), it is quite easy to name them. Some threads are more erudite than others, but His Grace has little appetite for censorship.

You then proceed to inform His Grace that your only contention is that the contribution of Islam to Westen civilisation cannot be summed up in two words. Since His Grace did not specify what these two words were, this would appear to be an unfair criticism. Notwithstanding this, to apportion Western advances in mathematics and astronomy to Islam is to ignore the contribution of the Greeks completely, and Plato in particular, who founded his whole academy principle upon these very two disciplines.

History is a wonderful thing, but it is art as well as science.

23 October 2007 at 09:05  
Anonymous Miss Snuffleupagus said...

Your Grace
Yes yes - I see that. I was not questioning whether or not these Muslims exist. I was wondering where they are. I was also questioning why you assume (or know?) them to be in the CMF. I was then suggesting that it is perhaps because these 'enlightened Muslims' do not belong to any one political group, that they do not get any media coverage.

So I wonder whether you simply assume that 'enlightened Muslims' are of the Right and therefore necessarily in the CMF? Or is that the Muslims who you say you know, are so, and rarely get their voices heard?

23 October 2007 at 13:58  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Miss Snuffleupagus,

Enlightenment and the CMF are not mutually inclusive. That the dissenting voice of Islam is not heard is down to a pathologically combative media.

23 October 2007 at 16:30  
Anonymous Irene Lancaster said...

It is not true that there is no Jewish civilization. There certainly is.

The so-called Muslim civilization of the Middle Ages was largely dependant on Jewish, Christian and pagan antecedants, not least because in Muslim thought it was regarded as wrong to study foreign languages.

Lambeth Palace has just asked me for the full document on which this blog was based. Please could you oblige.

Thanks

23 October 2007 at 17:28  
Anonymous convinced Anglican said...

Your Grace

As I have previously mentioned, one is blessed in great benefit from your Grace's guidance and erudition.

Having just read the complete document from this extraordinary group (CMF) may I request your attention to 'tone'. It is surely one of self-assured scolding and patronage? I am horrified by the question

"Furthermore, why should foreigners who advocate a peaceful change in that
direction be banned from entry to the UK?"

That 'direction' is, of course, Islamic rule.

Surely these are the complacencies of a Fifth Column, eroding with stealth the rights - by colonisation and assumed 'privilege' - of the indigenous population. These are people indoctrinated in an alien culture and religion. They speak here as though conquest of this once proud nation is not just a foregone conclusion but already achieved.

May God in His Mercy be good to us.

23 October 2007 at 21:24  
Blogger Mark Wadsworth said...

That first response by Najistani is a touch of class, links all seem to work and everything!

Is 'vibrant' some sort of new buzzword that I have overlooked, I mean do the Islamists use it in a different way to the typical Nulab 'vibrant diverse communities' sort of meaning?

29 October 2007 at 23:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If there is a war on islamic terror, our borders are wide open, every body knows that of course please bear with me, Why would our security services and Govt do that, it would be like leaving the borders open during WWII....It does not make sense, the Govt has to know about growing tension in society, Anti Muslim Feelings, Anti Semitism....Attacks on Christianity.
If it knows this then this has to be Policy.
The Only possible reason for this is that our society is being Deliberately set up for civil war or purge of some sort.
Why would any Govt not address these growing tensions and unease. It can only be a deliberate Policy.

And with Jack Straw saying things like 'The British are not worth saving as a race' and Others saying things like 'Immigrants make better citizens' I can only be more concerned, And what does this have to do with 6 Million On demand Abortions carried out in the UK. And the Psychological represssion carried out in the Biased Media repeatedly Shaming the British Public about crime. Only reporting Brit crimes like,

Ian Huntley, Fred West, Beverly Allet, the Dunblane Massacre, the Black Panther Murders, the Stephen Lawrence Murder, Dr Shipman Peter Sutcliffe, Damiola Taylor, Chris Langham, MichaelBarrymore, the Guy in the Portugal Maddelaine case, Notice the Link...that's right, ALL AngloSaxon British Murderers, that's all our Govt and Press report.

Here's the Mets 12 Most wanted list..Remember I didn't compile this list, the Police did
http://www.met.police.uk/wanted/

Here's their 15 Most wanted
http://www.met.police.uk/wanted/othercases.htm

Yet More. And remember the Govt will not deport them.
http://iamanenglishman.com/rogues_gallery.php

Here's west Midlands most wanted.
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/wanted/index.asp

We never see these in our National News Either.
http://newnation.org/NNN-UK-Europe.html

More Victims of Our Govt's Hidden Genocidal agenda Against Britain and the
British, And remember if Brits do happen to defend themselves THEY GO TO JAIL..
http://thefallenlist.blogspot.com/

More Slaughter of the British
http://warband.wordpress.com/

http://warband.wordpress.com/category/paedophilia/

So all races commit crime obviously, but why so one sided with the reporting, Why would a Government and National Media demonise IT's OWN PEOPLE...
This is Repression, It is obvious and deliberate Psychological repression, Presumably so the Brits ( and Europeans ) will not rise up and defend their Heritage and homeland, this along with the aforementioned can only mean one thing, Deliberate Colonization.

http://bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/2007/10/frankfurt-subversion.html

Since the law was passed legalising Abortions, 6Million have been carried out, now why If we needed More people in this country so Badly (as we are constantly told) could we not have given our welfare to support
those children.

http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2007/10/3/3269034.html

When I look around at what is hapening and take into consideration evidence like the above the words that spring to mind are Social Engineering and Genocide.

I am not the first to come to similar conclusions.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/15991/How-the-Government-has-declared-war-on-white-English-people

29 October 2007 at 23:57  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Had the Caliphate not laid waste to the Eastern Roman ('Byzantine') Empire, the Greek and Latin heritage would not have been 'lost' in the first place.

The Islamic contribution was primarily in providing a common threat to Europe of such magnitude as to create a new (albeit shaky) European solidarity and unity unseen since the whole continent was under Rome, and to create - via their invasions - the Greek diaspora in the West which was the primary means for the rediscovery of the classics in the West, from Greek and Latin originals rather than scarce and selective Arabic translations.

What Western civ actually needs is to inculcate a proper historical understanding of the experience of the Orthodox East in order to heal the ancient wound that cuts through our own civilisation, rather than give undue credit to barbarian invaders for the scraps of learning they graciously saved from the ruin they made of the Eastern Roman Empire.

30 October 2007 at 10:48  
Anonymous woman on a raft said...

Your Grace

Scholar Najistani (22 October 2007 18:44) is in error regarding Timbur Naz Ali.

Although the internet most certainly is Islamic it should rightly be attributed to the noted scholar Al-Goreh.

30 October 2007 at 22:42  
Anonymous British Patriot said...

Your Grace, Britons of all Persuasions must begin to Unite and shout with a commion voice on this issue,

United we MUSTB stand, because Divided we will most certainly fall.

23 June 2008 at 12:56  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older