Sunday, October 08, 2006

Dumb Britain - It's Paediatrician Time

Some educated chap in Middlesborough sprays unpleasant anti-Muslim graffiti over the home of Indian Catholics.

Not since this case, etc etc.

33 comments:

verity said...

It's a terrible shock and a cause for fear for the Indian family, of course, and who wouldn't sympathise with these people?

Yet is anyone surprised?

The thought fascist - aka 'political correctness' - Blair régime is forcing, through its preachy inaction, native British to try to defend their country as best they can. People who love their country have no recourse, in an intentionally inactive régime, other than making protests outside the law. When British people object to their public services being blown up and their streets and schools being taken over (as in the foul halal meat in school meals for all British children)the government hectors, lectures and punishes the indigenes, not the violent newcomers.

When the government does not defend, but preaches at, the 58m indigenes that they, not the 2.5m islamics, are refusing to adjust and integrate, there are sufficient millions of people who can spot the falsity of the argument. And will act upon it.

It is not "paediatrician time". That was illiterates who didn't know that paedo is a Greek prefix for anything to do with young humans.

The people who attacked the house of that poor Indian family - and I say again how much I sympathise with this family - felt driven to take matters into their own hands because their government will do nothing to protect their country.

Obviously, they attacked the wrong people to horrible, horrible result, but this is because the government failed them and they wanted to defend their country and our way of life. It's awful that this Indian family were innocent victims, but unless the government is seen to defend Britain and British values and the British way of life, we will see more of this.

Anonymous said...

verity you seem to be saying that if it had been a muslim family living there it would have been ok...

verity said...

If it had been a muslim family, the attack, in today's terms of engagement with a supine government, would have been understandable.

After all, this mythical "moderate majority" does absolutely nothing to curb the primitive aggression of this mythical "tiny minority", do they? Surely, if this "vast moderate majority" had the will, it could control these violent young men and the imams who preach racial hatred and call for the death of the Pope on the steps of Westminster Cathedral?

Rick said...

This is the same kind of mindless vandalism which destroyed the home those Life Guards were hoping to rent near Windsor

verity said...

I don't agree. It is vandalism, but it is vandalism born of frustration, and that frustration can be laid on the steps of No 10 Downing Street.

Neither is trashing the house the Guards were renting mindless violence. It was an aggressive attack designed to intimidate, and to dictate British foreign policy. Rather than consult the national interests of Britain and the West, we should construct our foreign policy for the further glory of the umma. I. think. not.

Anonymous said...

Verity - I really deplore your moral relativism. Writing murderous slogans on people's houses is wrong. Plain wrong. I have no sympathy with your attempt to excuse things that are so palpably morally reprehensible.

AgainsTTheWall said...

I appreciate where you are coming from verity but there is a non-violent recourse to the problem of a corrupt and treacherous ruling elite and that is for those concerned citizens to join and support the BNP. A nationalist govt is the only hope for a (relatively) peaceable future.

verity said...

anonymous 2:13 - I'll resign myself to living without the benefit of absolution from you. I don't want to see what is happening in France and which, oddly, is not being covered in the British media, happening in my country.

But if the government and the law will not protect the citizens - the citizens will act for themselves. The majority 58m indigenous people simply will not accept being pushed into second place in their own country to please 2.5m aggressive aliens who worship a bloodthirsty diety. Human nature militates against this happening. The French took the law into their own hands and had a Revolution - and that was in the days before the internet and cellular phones, but they managed it. The Filippinos took the law into their own hands and ousted Marcos and Imelda without ceremony. The Romanians despatched Ceacescu and Elena when they came out on the balcony to receive the adulation of the crowds.

This is what happens in oppressive regimes. I am not advocating murder of rulers or anyone else. But history and knowledge of human nature informs us that when people are frustrated that their rulers aren't listening to them, and are exploiting them for their own purposes (Blair is looking forward to ME money) people will simply take over themselves. I don't want to see this in the streets of Britain.

I want to see the streets orderly and civilised, and that will require the government to take a realistic approach to 2.5m people who are very alien and many, many of whom wish to destroy our way of life. The myth of the "vast moderate majority" was generated by Blair's spinners. Consider the source.

JuliaM said...

"..there is a non-violent recourse to the problem of a corrupt and treacherous ruling elite and that is for those concerned citizens to join and support the BNP."

Hmm. Sounds a lot like the arguments in 1930s Australia:

'We need to get rid of these cane beetles, they are ruining the sugar cane crop'

'Ok, let's import cane toads to eat them!'


What could go wrong......?

Yes, the rise of radical Islam is a threat, yes, young men full of piss & vinegar will launch retaliatory action on those they identify (wrongly, in this case, and it would be wrong even if they had the 'right' target) as 'the enemy' but please, nobody should think that the BNP is the way out of this mess.

verity said...

juliam - If the government won't do it, the people will. But there seems to be no way of forcing the government to do the will of the people, because they have people conditioned to think that warning of the violence and aggression - of which we have volumes of evidence all over the world - is "racist". So the debate is shut down. So, knowing there is to be no debate, and the government will brook no complaints about islam or muslims, they will do it themselves.

Even the Archbishop of Canterbury referred to this yesterday, saying the government was "prejudiced" in favour of islam over Christianity. And that is the case, although I was surprised to read such a candid statement by a senior member of the establishment.

Michaelcd said...

It seems to me to be another example of these minor incidents, of very little consequence, which are then used as a battering ram against free speech. For instance, unverifiable reports of 'veils being torn off', juxtaposed with a report on Jack Straw are a clear threat - don't talk about this Jack or you will be the cause of violence.

This technique is widely used by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defimation, in America. They have a generic statement which reads 'since XXX's speech/comment there has been an alarming rise in attacks on homosexuals'. Again, the link between these events could be tenuous at best, but what better way is there to make people feel guilty for having an anti-pc opinion

JuliaM said...

"there seems to be no way of forcing the government to do the will of the people.."

Well, there's democracy, and voting for a party that promises to tackle it. But this is not going to be the BNP, who would undoubtedly e worse......

"...I was surprised to read such a candid statement by a senior member of the establishment."

Indeed. Perhaps we are now at one of those turning points where the true liberal, secular democrats say 'No! This is wrong, and we are not going to stand for it anymore....'

I really hope so.

dearieme said...

Until we know who did it, there's not much point speculating about motives, is there?

DumbJon said...

What dearieme said.

A bunch of folks Muslims hate are attacked in a way that nevertheless casts Muslims as the victims. My taqqiya meter just jumped off the scale.

verity said...

juliam - I hadn't realised that the Archbishop of Canterbury was "a secular democrat".

You also opine: "Well, there's democracy, and voting for a party that promises to tackle it." Oh, really? And the name of this party, please?

verity said...

Dumbjon has a point. They have been known to break the windows in their own mosques and then report it. At times, oddly enough, the broken glass lies on the pavement instead of inside the mosque. Must be the will of allah.

Anonymous said...

Juliam 4.15

"Nobody should think that the BNP is the way out of this mess"

We are continually begging for somebody from the three mainstream parties to address the muslim problem and yet all we hear is from them is the odd appeasing whimper.

Until somebody stands up for the British people then, at present, the BNP is the only option and certainly in the local elections if only as a wake up vote.

Anonymous said...

Although I think of myself as a "liberal" I find myself agreeing with Verity. The British people are sick of being made to feel guilty in their own nation. Our government seems more concerned with the "rights" of immigrants who have no affinity with this country then they do with the rights of the native population. If you had told me five years ago that I would be thinking of voting BNP in the next election I would have laughed in your face but they will get my vote unless something gives. I'm also not the only one - almost every other person I speak to recently feels the same way.

JuliaM said...

"Oh, really? And the name of this party, please?"

I don't know the party. I know what it isn't.

It isn't the BNP.... Never the BNP.

Anonymous said...

Unless you Brits fight back you're fucked.

vereity said...

juliam- You noted early that the way to defeat islamic looniness was the democratic way and to vote for the party which promised this.

You apparently made this statement with no party in mind. Well, I'm going to vote for the party that will make me a gift of a million pounds.

What do you mean, there is no such party?

The three main parties having failed to uphold democracy - being complicit in the right to freedom of speech being leached out of British civil life - the British will vote for a party that gives them their freedom of speech and thought back. And their country back from an invasion of fast-breeding aggressors who hold an alien agenda that is hazardous to the life of our country.

I would vote for a party that would strip rights to citizenship of Great Britain from aggressive individuals like Abdul Bakri, "Sir" Iqbal Sacranie, the willowy and graceful Inyat Bangalawangla and all the other hundreds - perhaps thousands - of taxpayer supported special pleaders whose job is to harangue the British government and people and demand ever more concessions.

A gallery in London has pulled a painting from its show. Why? Because a dependendable islamic bigot complained? No. But because islamics "might" find it offensive.

First, so?

Second, I didn't know islamics were big art fans and that they frequented London galleries. In fact, representations of any kind are forbidden by the big A. So best close all the galleries down.
There are, after all, islamic children in Britain refusing to learn arithmetic because the symbol for plus is a cross.

JuliaM said...

"...the British will vote for a party that gives them their freedom of speech and thought back. And their country back.."

And you think the BNP will do that? I certainly don't.

Anonymous said...

And you think the BNP will do that? I certainly don't.

I think the BNP was set up by MI5 to prevent an effective, articulate and popular right-wing party emerging in Britain

Chris said...

The BNP? Let me tell you about the BNP - they print their membership magazine in Slovakia: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/4236640.stm

So much for standing up for British jobs!

I'd rather scribble "None of the Above" on the ballot than vote for those bunch of wankers.

In fact, "None of the Above" is probably the best decision for the next election.

verity said...

juliam - "and you think the BNP will do that"?

I would appreciate it if you would stop referring to me whenever you make a comment about the BNP. I am not a member of the BNP. I have never visited their website. I know that their leader is called Nick Griffiths and that they are against immigration. That's it. Please refrain from directing comments about the BNP to me.

If you want to vote for one of the three socialist parties who are killing the debate on islam because they are whimpering cowards, your vote is completely your vote and you can vote for more oppression of indigenous people and integrated immigrant groups if you want to.

I will be using my vote to protest against them. Previously, I have voted Tory for my whole life. Not any more. UKIP, the BNP or some other small party, if there are any running in my constituency. Many people will take the opportunity of voting for these groups for the sole purpose of frighening the horses.

verity said...

chris - You are part of the problem. You would rather opt self-righteously out of the fight than try to correct the tilt to appeasement of islamics in this country. A vote for a minor party can be quite destructive if sufficient numbers do it. It is a way of explaining to David Cameron what we, the citizenry, want him to do.

JuliaM said...

"Please refrain from directing comments about the BNP to me."

Hmm, contrasts a little with:

"A vote for a minor party can be quite destructive if sufficient numbers do it. It is a way of explaining to David Cameron what we, the citizenry, want him to do."

If you continually call for a party which endorses all the talking points used by the BNP in their appeal to nationalists, whether it is to vote that party in, or shock a main party into adopting some of their policies, don't be surprised by the connections people make.

You could always found one yourself, if you feel none of the current parties adequately represents your needs, I suppose.....

verity said...

juliam says: "If you continually [not 'continually'; that is an infantile exaggeration]call for a party which endorses all [not "all"; few people are able to endorse all of any party's policies; the word "some" would be more truthful if not as dramatic] the talking points used by the BNP in their appeal to nationalists, whether it is to vote that party in, or shock a main party into adopting some of their policies, don't be surprised by the connections people make."

Again, you must refrain from trying to associate me with the BNP, any more than you have tried to associate me with UKIP or the Raving Monster Loony Party, to whom I would also give my vote if they ran in my constituency. I find your bullying attitude naive, agenda-laden and irritating. Try to develop a more mature understanding of how politics works. The votes of minor parties are going to go through the roof at the next election.

As I have stated above, I know next to nothing about the BNP's policies on anything and I'm not interested in devoting any time to finding out. My interest in them begins and ends with the indisputable fact that they are not Tories, Labour or Lib Dems. I suggest you take your grudge against the BNP to a site where you will find people willing to defend them.

If you want to continue Britain's descent into dhimmitude and acceptance of islamic rules in our country, that is your choice, and if it is, you should vote for one of the three socialist parties.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't think they allow foreigners to start political parties here. Also, the man I would have voted for if I were a citizen won the presidential election, so I am very happy with the political offerings here.

JuliaM said...

"I find your bullying attitude naive, agenda-laden and irritating."

I thought it was the bullying attitude of Muslim Islamists you found 'naive, agenda-laden & irritating'....?

Is it that you simply can't brook any disagreement with your own thoughts & opinions? If so, blogging ain't your cup of tea....

"If you want to continue Britain's descent into dhimmitude and acceptance of islamic rules in our country, that is your choice, and if it is, you should vote for one of the three socialist parties."

Disagreement with Verity's point of view = acceptance of dhimmitude. Thanks for clearing that one up, love.....

verity said...

Juliam writes: "I thought it was the bullying attitude of Muslim Islamists you found 'naive, agenda-laden & irritating'....?"

I do. Errm, are you seriously suggesting that one is only entitled to despise one naive and agenda-laden entity at a time?

"Is it that you simply can't brook any disagreement with your own thoughts & opinions? If so, blogging ain't your cup of tea...."

Standard issue leftist "reasoning". Present a risible hypothesis as fact, and then make a derisory judgement of it. This is also a method of debate is much favoured by the muslims. It’s called taqqya.

And I note your descent into faux endearment, as in "love". Condescension - the last resort of those who cannot argue their case.

JuliaM said...

"Standard issue leftist "reasoning"."

My personal politics are about as left-wing as Norman Tebitt's.....

See what happens when you jump to conclusions based on the sole fact that someone disagrees with you on a small point? You make a complete arse of yourself......

Hilary Wade said...

Going back to what Vereity said, I for one find it hard to believe that "There are, after all, islamic children in Britain refusing to learn arithmetic because the symbol for plus is a cross." This sounds like an urban myth to me. Do you have references? Any normal teacher would just say "okay, write 'plus,' or 'and,' or use an ampersand, if you've got a problem with the notation. It's only a mark on paper after all," and go on with the lesson.

Squander Two said...

> you must refrain from trying to associate me with the BNP, any more than you have tried to associate me with UKIP or the Raving Monster Loony Party, to whom I would also give my vote if they ran in my constituency.

I'm sorry; what? I would certainly vote for this party. How dare you associate me with them? What?