"Shut up" she explained
You mean this guy had gone to all the trouble of memorising his holy book, because he valued its contents so much, yet he still managed not to understand a word of all its vast treasures of love, acceptance and forgiveness? Instead - inconceivable - for some inexplicable reason he chose to misinterpret the whole thing to such an extent that he indiscriminately dismembered & eviscerated young girls going home with Mum & Dad after their big night out.
If this guy can't understand Islam then truly it is a completely inscrutable code of life.
And please don't give me the line about "poverty and social disenfranchisement causing this violence". Where are the equally poor & disadvantaged Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists performing these acts based on their central religious texts? A lot of Poles get a hard time in Britain for taking jobs off locals - where are the embittered young Poles blowing up the children of the hated oppressors after memorising the New Testament? Of course none of these groups produce such people. It is so simple and so inescapably obvious that that religion alone produces such people. Yet we are too embarrassed to push for its wider study and evaluation.
Instead we fret over some sort of "backlash" against Muslims living in such communities as Manchester after the attack. I want a backlash alright - but not against Muslims. I want a backlash against the source of these outrages - that is the Qur'an, the collections of Hadith and the Sira. I want a backlash against Sharia law which is the real problem. Sharia creates people who want to remain separate and who view non Muslims as lesser beings. Sharia - orthodox, historic, Islam - leads to these mass murders. I want us to publicly interrogate these books and these teachings. Or we will never have an end to this.
As things are it is increasingly probable that there will at some stage be a mass backlash against ordinary Muslims. There will come one time too many when people see their women & kids dismembered while the Police, government & the media rush to place, not only millions of people, but an entire religion, above scrutiny, above the law of the land. Our leaders are setting in motion the very disaster they seek to avoid.
Consider a few reasons why the authorities & establishment are bringing this upon themselves:~
- August publications like the New York Times attack those who merely wish to scrutinise Islam in the same way as every other religion or ideology is scrutinised. Why? What is special about this particular religion which is presented by so many as the basis for their hate? Why aren't we even allowed to ask that question?
- Instead of engaging with the issues British Muslims & a leading Muslim group immediately choose to take offence when asked how Islamic is the Islamic State. When they have a chance to make a difference they default immediately to victim status. Why do they do this? These groups at least are run by intelligent, articulate people. Surely they can discuss the details of how IS abuses their own faith?
- In Paris women who have spent their whole lives in some suburbs are no longer safe to even show their faces at the windows of their apartments let alone walk the streets for fear of Muslim men. Does no-one think this significant? Is this what chivalry looks like in the West today? Where are the men?
- A BBC Radio talkback host asks listeners to call in about tensions within the Asian community - Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians and Muslims - and cuts off a Hindu caller who explains from his experience it is always the Muslims who create the tensions between Asians. How is that helping grasp the dark reality of the situation on the ground? If we can't honestly do that how can we hope to fix things?
The religion's central person and central teachings - the prophet Muhammad and the Qur'an & Sunna - have created people who follow it, literally, to the letter of the Law. It is not a "cultural" problem. It is a religious problem.
Anyone who doesn't want to acknowledge this simple reality - be they Talkback hosts or the Prime Minister of Britain - has, to me, lost the right to speak words of sympathy when these attacks happened. Because they are part of the problem.
Yet another Jihad massacre in Britain
Prime Minister May should apologise, and resign.
Robert Spencer, 23 May 2017.
Here we go again. 19 people are dead and 50 wounded in a suspected jihad-martyrdom suicide bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, a target that the jihad murderers apparently chose because of its concentration of pre-teens and tweens, so as to maximize the potential to “strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah” (Qur’an 8:60) [Graeme: remember Beslan in 2004? Nothing new here]. But don’t be unduly concerned: Britain’s criminally feckless Prime Minister Theresa May is on the job, saying in a statement: “We are working to establish the full details of what is being treated by the police as an appalling terrorist attack. All our thoughts are with the victims and the families of those who have been affected.”
As canned responses go, that one is particularly packaged, processed, and colorless. How grand that she is thinking about the victims and their families. And the police are on the job! Marvelous! Britons can go back to sleep, knowing that selfless public servants such as May are working tirelessly to protect them.
But there was one key element that May left out of her statement: an apology.
One of the things she should apologize for is the routine aspect of her response to this latest jihad massacre. There was nothing she said about this jihad attack that could not have been said about ten jihad massacres before it, and will not be said about the next ten. The Muslim Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said after the jihad bombings in New York City in September 2016 that such attacks were “part and parcel of living in a big city” and that people would just have “to be prepared for these sorts of things” to happen, and May is behaving as if she has thoroughly internalized these instructions.
In reality, no one in a big city or a small one, or out on the farm, should ever accept jihad terror massacres as “part and parcel” of living there. Sadiq Khan’s statement was a declaration of his inability or unwillingness to do anything effective to counter the jihad threat.
And that brings us to the second and more important reason why May should apologize: because she and the political establishment she represents have allowed this to happen.
If it weren’t for the immigration policies that May and her Conservative Party, in collaboration with the other British establishment parties, have pursued for well over a decade, the jihadis who perpetrated this massacre may not have been in Britain at all. Of course, it may yet be discovered that they were “homegrown terrorists,” born and raised in the UK. But here again, the British political establishment has accommodated and appeased the Muslim community at every turn, allowing for the establishment of Sharia courts and partnering with numerous “moderates” who turned out, surprise surprise, really to be “extremists.”
Meanwhile, the full wrath of the British government has been unleashed upon those British citizens who have dared to dissent from this madness and to declare publicly their support for the preservation of British national security, as well as the national character and culture. All too many of these people have been hounded and persecuted, arrested and prosecuted on the flimsiest of pretexts. Others who were in a position to prosecute Muslim rape gangs hesitated for fear of being branded “racist.” May has, meanwhile barred foreign foes of jihad terror from entering the country at all (including me), while allowing the most hair-raising preachers of jihad violence to enter the country and preach all over it with impunity.
As she implemented these policies, what did May think would happen? What did Britons? Did they really think that by coddling their Muslim population, winking at the crimes Muslims committed in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings, and muzzling all dissent from these policies, that it would make Muslims feel welcome in Britain, and that Muslims and non-Muslims would march arm-in-arm together into the glorious multicultural future?
In other words, did they really think that being nice to Muslims would make Muslims forget the jihad imperatives of the Qur’an and Sunnah? Did they really think that if they appeased their Muslim community, that they would be spared further jihad deaths?
They won’t. Manchester was “only the beginning,” said an Islamic State jihadi in a video released just after the massacre Monday night. And that is true: Manchester is only the beginning, thanks to Theresa May. If a modicum of sanity prevailed in Britain, she would be forced to apologize and resign in disgrace.
Instead, she is looking to be overwhelmingly elected to the Prime Minister’s office in her own right in the coming elections. Britons should enjoy that election, because they won’t be enjoying very many more of them.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.