Saturday, May 05, 2007

Look East

Reading the Daily Mail this morning, I see the paper predicts that we will be an Islamic state within two generations. Nothing new here, as I remember reading the same wild prediction in the pages of The Observer newspaper on a flight back from Athens in 2001.

Mind you, the same warning is true of much of Europe now, the inevitable consequences of a birth rate one can't argue with. It's the French that will most likely go that way first but as the Daily Mail points out, in England, we are so deeply in denial that by the time we wake-up to the social implications it will be too late.

Perhaps then finally, the trains will run on time and criminals will be subject to the full force of Islamic law. There are a great many people who might think that this would not be such a bad thing but as time passes, tensions that presently exist between communities look set to increase and no single country in Europe appears to have a sensible answer to managing the progress of this inevitable change.


Anonymous said...

It is a popular misconception that Christianity and Islam cannot co-exist in harmony. This will never be an Islamic Country, the realistic Muslims that live here peacefully and in harmony know this, and they respect the fact that this is, and always will be a Christian country. It is the fundamentalists that are driven by their misinterpretation of the Koran that want to 'bomb' the Western world into submission. These people need to be rooted out by their own communities. The problem is, no-one listens when concerns are raised and it isn't until something terrible happens that, as in the July 7 tragedy, the authorities become active. There are so many limits in place that work against the authorities, ie. accusations of racism, the Human Rights Act etc, that prevent mosques being searched, suspects being arrested and questioned, that allows the radical few to spread their poison. This leads to further damage in the Muslim communities because non-believers regard Muslims with suspicion and see them as a threat. The majority of the followers of Islam want to integrate and be part of British Society but are regarded with suspicion by non-Muslims. Besides, the morality of the British culture clashes with Islam ! The British no longer enjoy the comfort of 'extended families' when grannies old, bung her in a home. (When did you last see an Elderly Asian person in an old folk's home ?) The British public enjoy boozing too much and if you can find an 18 year old virgin then it's a rarity these days !
Morally, this country is too corrupt to support an Islamic way of life, so it will never happen. I know very few people who have the discipline to pray 5 times a day, and the 'yoof of today' would never be prepared to bathe in preparation for it ! Islam is a faith of family and strict morals, a complete opposite of what this country has become.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10.05 - If, as you post, Islam is a faith of strict morals then these morals are totally incomprehensible to me if they allow bombing and murder of innocent people - As far as praying five times a day that is not a current requirement of Christianity, nor is ritual purification so is irrelevant to us.
As far as the majority of the Muslim community wanting to integrate with British society I don't think that British society really wants them as members now, since all the trouble. It has to be a two way thing and its not happening.
If Muslims want to live a strictly Islamic way of life then I would suggest they are perfectly welcome to go and find a country where that is popular.
To come here and reap all the benefits of a welfare state and a relatively safe community - and then try to change it for the worse is taking the p out of the country.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11.12. Why is it necessary for a Muslim to go to a Muslim country to practice their faith ? Are Catholics, Jews, Hindus etc not welcome here ? You see, your misunderstanding of Islam is indicative of the problems we have with integration. You suggest I leave my own country, you assume I am on benefits, or at least that all Muslims claim benefits, neither is true. You do not make any comment about the extended family system. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the killing of innocent people is unacceptable and you assume again that all Muslims are terrorists ! Read my post again, I am not your enemy, I am trying to put the point across that this country cannot become an Islamic state and you immediately attack me. The fundermentalists are the ones we should all be targeting, not the decent, hardworking people who happen to be Muslims - whatever their colour, or do you assume I am Asian as well ? Incidentally, I have never claimed a penny from the welfare state, I am a British Citizen by birth and I'm proud of my beliefs, at least I have a moral code to live by and yes, I too feel outrage about the bombings and the benefit cheats but I don't make the assumptions you appear to make that all members of a generic group are terrorists. Did the Irish receive this kind of insult when the IRA was killing innocent people ? Wasn't that funded by our Amrican 'allies' who are now killing Muslims ? There are many sides to an arguement and all I can do is tell you again that this country cannot become an Islamic state. Mind you, Shariah law would solve the overcrowding in the prisons, don't you think ! At least a peadophile would never re-offend.

DrMoores said...

I recall a similar conversation thread from at least three years ago, so I went looking for some of the content.. see below

"Muslim immigration is transforming all of Europe. Nearly twenty million people in the European Union identify themselves as Muslim. This population is disproportionately young, male, and unemployed. The societies these men have left are typically poor, religious, conservative, and dictatorial; the ones they enter are rich, secular, liberal, and free. For many, the exchange is invigorating, but for others Europe becomes a prison of alienation. A Muslim’s experience of immigration can be explained in part by how he views his adopted homeland. Islamic thought broadly divides civilization into dar al-Islam, the land of the believers, and dar al-Kufr, the land of impiety. France, for instance, is a secular country, largely Catholic, but it is now home to five million Muslims. Should it therefore be considered part of the Islamic world? This question is central to the debate about whether Muslims in Europe can integrate into their new communities or must stand apart from them. If France can be considered part of dar al-Islam, then Muslims can form alliances and participate in politics, they should have the right to institute Islamic law, and they can send their children to French schools. If it is a part of dar al-Kufr, then strict Muslims must not only keep their distance; they must fight against their adopted country. "

Anonymous said...

This is exactly how I see it. I do not want to see seperate Islamic schools, how can children learn religious tolerance and integrate if they are kept apart ? Of course France is not considered an Islamic state and quite rightly, they do not tolerate the veil in schools. As a Muslim I find it difficult to accept the veil in the street. We should, in an ideal world, co-exist together, just as other religious minorities do.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:05 Your view that Islam can co-exist with other faiths is I suggest optimistic at best. Islam tolerates Judaism and Christianity so long as the dhimmis are prepared to pay the jizya. For idolaters like Buddhists and Sikhs the Koran is rather less generous. What for example does the Koran have to say about apostates? Your belief that Islam is a religion of peace is a myth. Islam has always been a religion of conquest. Muslims in Europe are comparatively quiescent because at present they are in a minority. If the demographic changes continue as they are this will not remain the case.
You ask
Why is it necessary for a Muslim to go to a Muslim country to practice their faith ? Are Catholics, Jews, Hindus etc not welcome here ?

I think perhaps you might also ask are Christians, Sihks and Hindus welcome in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan to name but two Islamic countries?
Sadly our tolerance of the intolerant will be our undoing. I doubt we will see peace in Europe in the long term as the population continues to change. As for living under Sharia law. Thanks, but no thanks. Ask any homosexual how they feel about that idea?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5.12, what a well informed individual you are ! (That is meant as a compliment by the way). Whilst I do not agree with everything you say, I think you have made a few good points. I do not believe everything about Islam is perfect, as with all faiths, there are good and bad things, but I have found it works very well for me. I am not homophobic, I believe we should not persecute anyone for their chosen way of life. It is not up to me to judge my fellow man and I respect everyone's right to live how they choose. I just happen to choose to be a Muslim, that does not mean I am a terrorist or a benefit claimant. I live by a code that suits me very well and in the matter of Shariah law, particularly regarding serial peadophiles, it is the one crime that should be dealt with once and for all. I am not a perfect Muslim, just as no Christian is a perfect Christian, but I hurt no-one. Surely the basis of your arguement is, if Muslims come here and settle, they should live by our laws. Quite right, I agree with you. If you then go to an Islamic country, would you not expect to live by their laws, as in your comment regarding Saudi or Pakistan ? If you know Islam is the faith, would you not abstain from alcohol or not go there ?

Anonymous said...

Religion is nothing more than a superstition, as each gerneration pases by by religion has less relevance. With any luck there will be no religion at all in two generations and that would solve a lot of problems.

Anonymous said...

Successive British Governments, demonstrating incredible naivety and with short term agenda being the priority, have set this country on a path of future internal strife by allowing mass immigration of populations of different religious persuasion. Whilst RACIAL equality has been the focus, it is only since the Iraq invasion that the RELIGIOUS problem is now being belatedly realised.

The real problem facing British society was never really that of race, but of religious differences.
Our own history in Ireland; the experience of the Muslim community in the former Jugoslavia and examples from around the world all point to the simple fact that an integrated tolerant society is not possible when separate faiths prevent inter-marriage. We kid ourselves if we really think that civil strife in this country based on religious differences is not the legacy we have handed to future generations. The success of multi-racial Brazil resulting in a melting pot of races was the simple fact that one faith, Catholicism, was shared (or forced) on all races and marriage and integration then ocurred.

So where are we headed? Two scenarios possibly: the first that we pagan Brits(nominally CofE, RC etc) manage to corrupt the Sikh, Hindu and Muslim young away from their faiths so that religion ceases to be an issue other than as a small minority interest held by eccentrics. The second is that a strident rigorous Islamic ascendancy continues on the path that it is already on and that we become Muslims.

I fear a third scenario is more likely; a militant and vibrant Muslim faith will continue to create a 'society within society' with ever increasing demands that are already resulting in bloody outcomes and will inevitably provoke a non-muslim backlash and a society in bloody strife akin to civil-war. The history of the next two hundred years is going to be interesting.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8.33 - I think you have hit the nail on the head there,thank goodness I won't be alive to see the final breakdown of British society and values which, though they are far from perfect, are what we have been accustomed to and what we feel comfortable with.

sue said...

Anon 5.12 :
"idolaters like Buddhists and Sikhs"

Your ignorance is staggering. And dangerous.

"Islam has always been a religion of conquest."

And Christianity?

sue said...

Anon 11.12

"Islam is a faith of strict morals then these morals are totally incomprehensible to me if they allow bombing and murder of innocent people"
More staggering ignorance on display.
Islam doesn't condone murder of innocents any more than Christianity condones the bombing of women and children.

No wonder you stay anonymous!

Anonymous said...

Sue, don't be too tough on 11.12 and 5.12; I have heard Catholics described as 'idolaters and papists' with suitable expletives by fellow Christians (Ulster Protestants). It can be very confusing for some us when radical muslim mullahs issue fatwas and preach jihad as a war on the kafur as opposed to jihad as an internal spiritual battle for improvement. All radicals of any religious denomination are a little bit scary, even to fellow travellers of the same denomination!

Anonymous said...

Sue - 5.46 - you are right the mullahs of Islam do not condone murder of innocents - they are ACTIVELY PROMOTING IT!

Hence the bombings in US, UK and most of all Iraq against followers of their own faith in marketplaces.

And as far as that poster being castigated for being being anonymous, signing your post "Sue" is hardly enough to identify you either.

Put your full name and address and then you won't be effectively anonymous either.

Its not going to happen is it?

sue said...

Not with individuals like you about.

Doctor Doom said...

Well said Sue, Anonymous 6:11., and the other few voices of reason above.

We all know Simon loves nothing better than to post something controversial, and of course this was guaranteed to trigger a predictable tirade of Little Englander knee-jerk branding anything and anyone not fitting the White-Christian-English image as a terrorist-scrounger-“forinner” intent on destroying civilisation as we know it.

But even so this was an unusually pessimistic posting from Simon, and an unusually selective summary of the report he refers to.

Of course, no-one in their right mind reads the Daily Mail other than for its comic value, and this double page spread Simon has picked to stir debate would be incredibly funny were it not so serious.

Britain will become an Islamic state within two generations.

This was the stunning warning from essayist Ruth Dudley Edwards, there in black and white in the Daily Mail, so it must be true.

But let’s not be too hasty in our conclusions.

It just so happens that Ruth Dudley Edwards is currently publishing her latest book, so needs to make some controversial comments to hit the headlines and get publicity to push up sales. It’s worth noting too that she specialises in satirical fiction, so has a demonstrable history of making things up.

But this was a serious debate, and of course Ruth Dudley Edwards had sound statistical evidence for this terrifying claim that our grandchildren will live in a Britain under Sharia law, right?

Well no, actually. Curiously all she could summon was a few feeble figures about relative birth-rates of Muslims and “non-Muslims”.

By non-Muslims, of course, she just means White European Protestant-Christians. And, to be fair, the birth rate among this group is in decline, though anyone with even a basic understanding of geographical demographics and population trends would realise this is a entirely natural cycle within a stable advanced industrial society that has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.

But it suits her argument to suggest we are about to be submerged by the sheer number of Muslim births outweighing all others. Of course if one included figures for non-Muslims who happen to be Hindu, Sikh or indeed most Catholics, then her statistics would tell a somewhat different and far less sinister story.

But Ruth Dudley Edwards has no intention of letting facts getting in the way of a good old-fashioned Daily mail scare-mongering session. In fact she excels herself by digging up a obscure and out of date comment by a well-respected Arab Muslim leader to back up her assertion of imminent doom. “The 50 million Muslims in Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades,” she quotes him as saying.

Well that’s it then. Concrete proof. After all, Libya’s very own Colonel Gaddaffi can’t be wrong, surely?

And just in case we’re still inclined to doubt it, Ruth thoughtfully cites American neo-con author Mark Steyn to further back up her argument. Need one say more?

Let’s make no mistake here. Of course the extremist minority element within Islam are a danger to our and every other society and should be stamped on hard.

But let’s be clear that these are a tiny, tiny, tiny minority of people who hide behind the robe of Islam to pursue political agendas and, contrary to popular Little Englander fiction, they in no way reflect the views and values of the vast majority of Muslims in the UK or around the world. Not even in the demonised Muslim states like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.

The simple fact is, the ruling elite of any society need a fear-factor to exercise social control - ideally an enemy without and an enemy within.

Post World War Two the enemy without was, until recently, the dread threat of Communism and imminent Soviet invasion. Of course those evil Russians never did invade us, nuke us or infiltrate our beloved institutions, and that particular bogeyman died a quiet death after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The enemy within, of course was the threat of Irish terrorism. As an Irish-born author, Ruth Dudley Edwards would do well to reflect that our previous terrorist bogeymen, the IRA and the UVF, are now warmly-applauded democratic statesman. Before that we had demonised Israeli terrorists like Menachim Begin, who of course later became our good friend the Prime Minister of Israel.

Curiously, although the Irish terrorist groups killed far more British citizens than any so-called Islamic militants ever have, we never had headlines ranting about Catholic Terrorists or Protestant Terrorists, or indeed Jewish Terrorists, so why do we scream about Islamic terrorists now?

Of course, one reason is that the threat of so-called Islamic terrorism ticks so many boxes for anyone with an agenda that can be furthered by latching on to our base social insecurities. Race, religion, skin colour, clothing, language, life-style... You name it, it can be exploited to prey on people’s most basic fears and worries.

And of course it simultaneously fulfils the criteria of enemy-without and enemy-within. An absolute gift to Little Englanders, pseudo-patriots, racists, bigots, neo-cons, Zionists and every other extremist element that feeds upon such drivel.

To be fair to the Daily Mail, it’s in the business of selling papers, and ill-informed, bigoted, scare-mongering essays like Ruth Dudley Edwards’ pap certainly do that.

Butit’s disappointing Simon did not also mention Peter Hitchens’ reports and blog in the same newspapers a few days prior. Peter Hitchens is a staunch White-English-Protestant Daily Mail reporter and columnist not noted for liberal, easy-going views about immigration, foreigners and the like.

But he actually made the effort and visited Iran in the week AFTER the British “hostage crisis” was resolved, expecting to find a demonic West-hating, repressive Islamic state. Have a look at his bluntly honest and refreshingly objective findings at - the official Mail site.

Travelling in the old Communist states years ago, and especially in East Germany and Soviet Russia, it was always sobering to realise how genuinely terrified the people were of being bombed by the Americans and the West, especially Britain.

Travelling in many Middle East Islamic states now one finds exactly the same sentiments.

With one subtle difference.

Post Vietnam the West wasn’t actually bombing and invading the Communist states, so their fears were largely historical and without real foundation.

Tragically while we remain in Iraq and Afghanistan and constantly demonise the Iranians to prepare the ground for an attack on Teheran, the fears of the people and governments of the Islamic states are very real and entirely warranted.

It certainly does NOT justify a few deluded individuals seeking to attack their enemy, us, on our home ground. But it certainly goes some way to explaining it.

DrMoores said...

A great post.. thank you!

In fact I did read the Peter Hitchens Blog and should, on reflection, have really added it into the mix, so "mea culpa".

But then your reply made its inclusion quite unnecessary!

sue said...

Thank you Doctor Doom. An excellent, informative and intelligent post.

Anonymous said...

Dr Doom fails to answer fully the question that he posed himself,"so why do we scream about Islamic terrorists now?" other than to lambast 'little englanders etc etc'. The greatest hyperbole we have witnessed in regard to the militant Islamic threat has come from our own Government as it seeks to divert criticism from its misguided policy in Iraq and Afghanistan. This country had no history prior to May 1997 and of course John Major's work on peace in Northern Ireland never happened as it is Blair's legacy!

So Dr Doom's description of this Government does him credit " Little Englanders, pseudo-patriots, racists, bigots, neo-cons, Zionists and every other extremist element"

Anonymous said...

I'm Muslim, I'm proud and I'm here to stay. Don't like it ? Tough !

Anonymous said...

So you should be 9.02, as I am sure the Romans,Vikings,Danes and Normans were and probably expressed the same sentiments as you have. Don't expect the indigenous tribe to view you fondly though until a couple of hundred years have passed.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10.20 - and a thousand years later most Britons still regard the French (who were the Normans) as their traditional enemy.
You'd think it would be the Germans but it ain't. OK maybe we don't like them much after 2 world wars (in which they came second each time) but for real deeprooted hatred and mistrust its the French every time for most Britons.
The only relaxation is for booze shopping, and then we try not to speak French if we can avoid it.

Anyway it looks like the French may now be toppled from pole position by the threat from the East.

Anon 9.02 - you stay but don't expect to be liked, and even if you (speaking collectively) want to integrate which from experience seems unlikely it will not happen.
We will have distinct cultures and little intermarriage.

In the US where there were 2 very different populations after slavery was abolished there are, nearly two hundred years later, still 2 very different cultures with little inter race social mixing.
And the descendants of the freed slaves are still generally much poorer, worse educated and form a much larger element of the prison population than their percentage should suggest.

So that may well be the future for immigrants here, I hope not.