Friday, 31 August 2012

'Denigrate Your Values'? What Values?

Irfan Akhtar, of the Waltham Forest Council of Mosques (WFCOM), which has joined forces with WAWF, said: “We wrote to the Borough Commander explaining that by banning the EDL march it would send the right message to the EDL and to our communities, particularly our youth.”
“Without the ban, unfortunately our congregations will feel the police are allowing these thugs to insult our religion and denigrate our values.
Your religion deserves insult and your 'values' are the values of misogynist child abusers.

And you're pretty damn selective about which 'hate marches' you want banned, aren't you? Or did I miss your pronouncement on that one?


Farenheit211 said...

I think the people who started the thuggery and insult wasn't the EDL it was the poppy burners, bombers and similar loons. Those organisations that are holding the march are behaving impeccably as far as I can see in their liasion with the police.

I noticed the islamofash was using the language of racial victim grouping when the situation is plainly not a matter of race. We must have the right all of us black and white to protest against the expansion of political and religious currents that are unwanted and which can be verified as dangerous. The growing protest against Islam isn't a race thing - it's a British thing, a freedom thing.

I did love the way that the Islamofash despite whining about man made law quotes English law to back his point up. Irony fail there I think.

Elsewhere, the religion of peace silences critics in a more subtle manner.

Antisthenes said...

"Anger of a Quiet Man" is a blog I read every day. He is a member of the EDL and if he is representative of the members of that organisation then I cannot see that organisation other than be a fair and reasonable minded one that has much to bring to the debate on Islam and immigration. It does not strike me as being racist (if he is to be believed the EDL encourages other peoples than those of English descent to join it). No doubt what irks the left and Islamists is the very fair and reasonable stance it takes.

Farenheit211 said...

Antisthenes I also get the same impression that the EDL (and I'm not a member by the way) has white black jewish hindu whatever members and isn't a fascist organisation despite what he left say. Politically incorrect yes but Hitler worshippers nah most likely not.

To borrow and adapt from an old Trot slogan from the 70's/80's how about 'Islam - It's Time For White and Black To Unite And Fightback'

I'd prefer the fighting to be done peacefully but that will require the politicians to come onside re Islam and excessive immigration.

Robert the Biker said...

The EDL are against the imposition of the sort of creeping shariah that these islamonazis evoke.
Before anyone pulls a 'Godwin' on me, the nazis got the idea of yellow stars for Jews from the muslims, the use of special clothing or symbols for those who accept the Dhimmi status is part of their whole superiority schtick.

David Gillies said...

There's always the implicit threat of violence with these people. The subtext is that whereas "the majority of Moslems are peace-loving, blah, blah, blah" there's "a minority of hotheads whose behaviour we cannot control". It's essentially the dynamic of the protection racket: nice city centre you've got here, would be a shame if anything were to happen to it. The correct response is first to call their bluff and then to go absolutely balls-to-the-wall nuclear on them if they step out of line. Tear gas, water cannon, rubber (or real) bullets. Make them so terrified that their chauvinistic supremacism is broken. Militant, but non-terroristic, Islam is a bigger threat than the bomb-planting kind, because it's more insidious and uses Western democracy and sense of fair play as weapons.

Dr Cromarty said...

The cheek of this bearded jackanape. Who the hell does he think he is writing up the Borough Commander to 'explain' why march of Englishmen and women should be banned in their own town.

If messages are to be sent they should be sent to savages who presume to tell other people what they may and may not do in their own land. It is a very simple message: **** off.

Farenheit211 said...

The only values much of UK islam is giving us is values that we don't want or values which we've had before and turned away from such as the oppression of women. Fuck off it's not culture to treat women like that, it's abuse.

However, it's mot the individual's at fault it's the culture and the ideology. It's the ideology that needs oppression not the individual bod who just happens to be muslim.

Anonymous said...

My social group includes Muslims, a Jew, Catholics, Protestants, and a few 'minor' branches of Chritanity. Invariably, the subject of religion rears it's head and fortunately, we are all mature enough to accept that we all have different views on the subject. Recent, during a fairly heated debtate, one of the Muslims accepted that Islam is, in a round figure, about 1600 years old. He then asked what Christianity was like when that religion was 1600 years old? He went on to ask if it was true that Catholics were killing Protestants and vice versa; that old women who liked cats and had warts were being burned, drowned or impaled by witchfinders; that daughters were traded off for financial or social profit, that wives were subject to their husbands wishes, desires and cruelty and that European Christians were killing thousands in foreign lands because they didn't worship 'the one true God'. "In short," he added, "Christianity is, in parts, rather like Islam today. So what gives you the right to criticise what your ancestors were doing not so long ago in the name of their religion? If you delve deeper into pre-history, you may find earlier religions acted exactly the same." As an athiest, I agreed with him and, when asked what I thought,replied that my view is that religion is an artifial concept to cater to the arrogance of man that they are something special in this universe instead of an insignificant accident of evolving nature. It also caters to the greed of man for power and wealth by using the name of religion to achieve it - the founder of any religion is guaranteed to be talked about and looked up to for quite a while while probably making a few bob on the side.
It only goes to show that, like politics, followers of religion don't take a blind bit of notice of the disasters of the past.

Farenheit211 said...

Penseivat - I concur with you when you say that Islam is where Christianity was prior to the Reformation. It is a shame that it cannot reform in the way other religions have done. I can't stress it enough that I do NOT hate individual Muslims only the ideology of Islam and Islamism.

Don't the Christians say 'hate the sin but love the sinner'?

Anonymous said...

Farenheit211, Perhaps, if we are still here in 400 years time, Islam will be yet another token religion of peace and forgiveness, instead of being one of hatred, duplicitousness and misogyny, but no doubt something else will have taken its place. I will have to take your word about the Christian saying, but in his time, didn't Torquemada say something like, "Flagellate the b*stard until he believes in my God."? I have no problem with any religion being acceptable, though I may do if it became compulsory!

blueknight said...

Christianity, with a Pope or General Synod is able to develop and move with the times, - see the debates about female priests gay clergy,- but Islam, which does not have such a heirachy is stuck..

blueknight said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Farenheit211 said...

Penseivat - Good points. It makes me think that we cannot afford to wait for Islam to evolve into a peaceful faith, it is, sadly, going to have to be countered and stood up to when it's iffy side appears. The alternative doesn't bear thinking about.

Blueknight I don't think it's just to do with the existence of a heirarchy after all Judaism has no pope or super chief rabbi and most of Judaism has compromised with later knowledge and reformed.

Anonymous said...

Well if Islam is 400 years behind other world religions can they please just f*ck off and come back in 400 years time when they have grown up. Or better still just f*ck off and don't ever come back!

Antisthenes said...

Islam was conceived in the 6th century by an illiterate paedophile who had a mishmash of understanding of Judaism, Christianity and the local pagan religion and put them altogether and dictated his thoughts to his followers who then wrote them down it what came to be known as the Koran so it is believed. So Islam is now at the point where Christianity was 15 centuries after that religion was founded. Martin Luther came on the scene at that point and the questioning of Christianity had its birth. Hopefully a Muslim equivalent will appear so that Islam can start to examine itself openly and a reformation can set in. Unfortunately it took many more centuries for Christians to become less fundamental about their religion even now there are still many who still are fundamentalists.

JuliaM said...

"I noticed the islamofash was using the language of racial victim grouping when the situation is plainly not a matter of race."

A common tactic, I've noted.

""Anger of a Quiet Man" is a blog I read every day. He is a member of the EDL and if he is representative of the members of that organisation then I cannot see that organisation other than be a fair and reasonable minded one.."

We should perhaps bear in mind that people who attend demos and people who support organisations in other ways might not be the same types...

"It's essentially the dynamic of the protection racket: nice city centre you've got here, would be a shame if anything were to happen to it."

Spot on! If the police would only call their bluff...

Perhaps a swap with the French riot police could be arranged? ;)

"...but Islam, which does not have such a heirachy is stuck.."

Something's going to have to give. I fear it'll be us.

"Unfortunately it took many more centuries for Christians to become less fundamental about their religion even now there are still many who still are fundamentalists."

They don't have the ear of government, though, do they? No, not even in the States!

Anonymous said...

"It's essentially the dynamic of the protection racket: nice city centre you've got here, would be a shame if anything were to happen to it."

It will be interesting to see if the East London Mega-Temple gets permission once all the Olympic frivolity passes off without {cough} unnecessary incidents.

Noggin the Nog said...


Islam is around 1400 years old, not 1600.

It is not true that Islam is at the same stage that Christianity was 400 years ago. BTW, Luther kicked off almost 500 years ago, but never mind.

Whilst there are numerous, sad examples of the Church abusing its power (predominantly the Church of Rome, you'll note), and atrocities have been committed using Christianity as an excuse ever since its inception, it only takes a casual perusal of the Bible to prove that the perpetrators of these crimes were acting in direct contradiction to the teachings contained therein. Christ taught that we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us, that we should should turn the right cheek to an aggressor when the left had already been struck, that there is no greater love than to give up your life for a friend, that he who lives by the sword shall die by it, to forgive and not to avenge. I could go on.

This is not so with Islam. Both the Koran and the Hadith (a commentary on the life and works of Mo by so called scholars, which Muslims consider to be of equal importance to the Koran in the governance of everyday life) are replete with injunctions to the believer that they are superior to the unbeliever, that some Jews have been turned into pigs and apes, that unbelievers should be 'terrorised' and have their heads, finger and toes cut of. It teaches that Islam will dominate the world in its entirety, and that Muslims are to achieve that domination through any means necessary. Islam has not produced great art, literature, music or culture, it is basically a desert moon cult, founded in murder, rape, hostage taking, slavery and savagery, by a paedophile, which bears absolutely NO resemblance to Christianity.

Those hoping for an Islamic reformation are going to be sadly disappointed. Islam regards Mo as the perfect man, the height of civilization, the crowning glory of creation. They do wish to progress from the 7th century into the modern day; they wish to regress from the modern day back to medieval savagery, dragging the rest of the world kicking and screaming with them.

It always amazes me how people are willing to say that Muslims are nice people. How can they be, when they follow such a foul, revolting ideology?

Ps please don't spam me with OT verses advocating violence. The NT is the Christian's binding rule book, if you wish to look at it in that way.

Noggin the Nog said...

Correction: they do NOT wish to progress from the 7th century...

Farenheit211 said...

Noggin. Firstly individual muslims are sometimes good in spite of their culture / religion not because of it.

Secondly, I agree with you that the doctrine of Mo being the perfect man is really going to hamper reform of Islam and may even make such reform impossible.

Anonymous said...

Noggy old fruit, where have you been? I've missed you. To be honest, I couldn't give a personal stuff whether any religion is 1400, 1600, 2000 or, in the case of the Jewish religion, over 3000 years old. My own views on religion were mentioned above yet I am happy to allow others to believe what they want as long as they accept my view. Farhenheit211 put it more succinctly than I could with '....individual Muslims are sometimes good.....' My Muslim friends follow their faith (I was going to say 'religiously' but that would be silly) yet interact socially with non-Muslims. Likewise my Christian and Jewish mates. The problems arise between religions, as in politics, when people stop talking to each other and merely rant that their religion, or political way of life, is better than anyone elses. Mohammed happily followed one religion till, apparently, one day some bloke appeared before him and said that he was the one true God and Mohammed should follow him and spread his word. Mohammed said, "OK." and the rest you know. How did Mohammed know that the bloke wasn't a con artist who was actually taking him away from the one true God's religion? Similar stories are shown in the Bible, assumed to have been written a couple of hundred years after Christ, and which hs been changed, altered and edited over the years by various religious leaders and monarchs. Mohammed was illiterate so how do we know that what is written in the Koran, as in the Bible, is no more than Chinese whispers, with stories changing slightly as they are passed down the generations until what is left is acceptable to the leaders of the day? Again, I don't really care, but the topic for debate continues and probably will do so, right up until the time when some religious or political cretin blows us all up to prove a point - because they have stopped talking!

Farenheit211 said...

Penseivat - I cannot stress this enough that it isn't the Muslim individuals I struggle against - all our blood is the same colour - it is the power and principality of Islam that worries me. Islam as a religio-political system is incompatible with a democracy of free and equal peoples.

Islam is NOT the Church of England with added curries and different prayers, it really is not despite what the Islamic propagandists say. Hey it's likely that Allah is not even from the same divine pantheon as that of the Jews and the Christians but we get told that it is often by people who's wages we are paying through our taxes.

If Islam could live peacefully with others in an non expansionary, non evangelical, non violent way and if they (Islam) accepted the validity of the existence of other faiths, and accepted the concept that the law of the land is the law also of the visitor or guest as most Christians, Jews, Hindus etc do then I would not have an issue wit Islam. But it doesn't so I do have an issue with Islam.

My only hope is that this coming battle can be won peacefully and democratically through the ballot box and doesn't plunge into bloodshed.

Noggin the Nog said...


It is demonstrable fact that Christianity, and the cultures it helped produce, are superior to those of other religions, with Islam appearing somewhere near the bottom of the pile along with cow worshipping.

If you are going to critique religion in general and Christianity in particular, you should learn its history more thoroughly than you apparently have hitherto.

Most of the Bible was written at least 400 years before Christ was born and the largest gap between Christ's death and resurrection and the the writing of part of the NT is around 60 years - The Revelation of St John.

I'd be interested to know if your belief that the Bible has been edited and altered to suit is based in factual research or whether you merely repeat what you read as though it were fact.

You say that people are free to believe whatever they like, so long as they respect your view. There's the rub. You can believe what you like in my opinion. Do what you want, behave how you like, without hurting others - fine. I believe you'll stand before God and answer to Him for it one day. You can even insult me and blaspheme Christianity, if you like, all with impunity (in this life). But you will not have those freedoms if the Muslim has his way. Indeed, some of your freedom to blaspheme (as a Muslim sees it) has been curtailed already.

Tell you what, try a little experiment. Stand outside a church on a Sunday morning and explain to the worshippers going in that their belief in God is a childish make-believe in fairy tales. They'll either ignore you or pray for you.

Repeat the above outside a mosque on a Friday.

I dare you, if you think all religions are basically the same.

Noggin the Nog said...


Bloodshed is inevitable.

I agree that not all Muslims are morons. As a general rule of thumb, the stricter the follower of mo, the more moronic, objectionable and violent he becomes.

BUT, the day is fast approaching when a decision will need to be made, a side chosen.

Do you really think that those 'nice' Muslims will choose anything other than what their told to, for fear of being called an apostate? You know what happens to apostates in Islam, don't you?

The phrase 'good Muslim' appears to me to make about as much sense as 'good Nazi'.

Farenheit211 said...

Noggin you said: "You can even insult me and blaspheme Christianity, if you like, all with impunity (in this life). But you will not have those freedoms if the Muslim has his way. Indeed, some of your freedom to blaspheme (as a Muslim sees it) has been curtailed already. "

That's a very good point and the fact that my local rag has basically killed all public comment about Islam proves that such freedom to blashpheme (a freedom dearly bought by our ancestors) is being chipped away.

I agree with Noggin about what would happen if you stood outside a mosque on Fridays and said Allah was derived from a pagan idol culture for example.

A similar insult delivered to a Christian would either result in peaceful engagement or ignoring the insult

A similar insult delivered to a Jew would either result in the above plus a discussion.

I don't think the above would happen if it was Islam, would you? Hospital food would await you.

Farenheit211 said...

Noggin if there is bloodshed then I don't think that it will be the non muslim who sheds the blood first.

I agree with you that the stronger a Muslim identifies with the concept of Mo being the perfect man then the more of a worry that is for a democratic society. I agree that we are coming up to a time for choosing sides but there are ex muslims who may be quite happy to choose the side of freedom and I'd hate to see them in schtuck because of their ex co-religionists.

I agree that in the event of conflict there will be lots of muslim peripherals who will choose the side of Islam because of fear.

Noggin the Nog said...


RE the cultural aspect of religion. There are a great many people who identify themselves as culturally Christian, whilst no really going in for all the 'obeying God' stuff that actual Christians attempt. Over 70 % of the UK considered itself Christian according to the last census. It is quite clear that 70% of the nation is not Christian, but the effect on society of a large body of people identifying with the general ideas and basic tenets of Christianity is undoubtedly positive. Thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not steal, commit adultery, etc.

The general effect of a large body of people identifying with the deranged ramblings of a paedophile, warlord, rapist slave-trader is easy to observe. Go to Pakistan.

Or Sparkhill, Brum.

Anonymous said...

Noggy, I may not have explained myself all that well and for that I apologise. To stand outside a church or mosque and do as you suggested would be a confrontational act, designed to achieve a confrontational response and so it is not something I woul be likely to do. Rather, if the situation arose, I would use debate and reasonable conversation to obtain views and either question or agree with those views. Most religious believers find fault with other religions and little fault with their own. Thgs is due to their faith and belief, whether obtained through personal experience or by regular visits to churches and mosques under the guidance of parents or schools. Christians are taught to accept other religions while Muslims are taught not to. This could be due to racial or even tribal customs (Liverpudlians hate Mancunians; Glasgow Celtic supporters hate Glasgow Rangers supporters; Northerners tend to prefer Labour to Tory and West Country folk tend to hate Tory and Labour in favour of LibDems. Location, culture, biased education in the home - you'll like what your Dad likes or you'll get a belt around the ear!; Indians hate Pakistanis; Sharia Muslims hate Sunni Muslims, yet are followers of the same religion. They all have a part to play in the continuance of sectarian, religious, political or tribal resentment, hatred and violence because people won't talk to each other. This is one of the reasons I believe religion is bunkum, though my (church going wife) believes that God is female with a sense of humour as only a w woman would give Man a brain and a penis but only enough blood to operate one at a time!

Farenheit211 said...

I have lived in Islamified areas and I've seen diversity of thought and identity disappear. And I agree with you on the cultural aspect of religion, it's really powerful.

However, it cannot be denied that Islam is having a deliterious effect on democracy and free speech and action For example: You may or may not agree with equality for gays, but violently forcing out Gay pubs that have been peacefully in place for thirty odd years or so and harrassing their punters is to me not acceptable. This is what is happening in Tower Hamlets in East London which is controlled by Islam and more specifically by those with links to Jamaat e Islaami a Bangladeshi Islamist group. These nutters now control over a billion pounds of taxpayers money. I think that for this to be allowed to occur is shameful for us as a nation.

Also you might want to try voicing a criticism of Islam in places like Newham or Bradford or Rochdale etc and see how far you get. I've got friends who are leaving such areas because they cannot criticise Islam like they can criticise aspects of Christianity or Judaism or whatever.

Also I've heard of some cases where you don't even have to complain about Islam to get in the shit as the local Islamic mafia and their fellow travellers will see to it that any complaint about any council service
will be tagged as 'islamophobic' if the employee you are complaining about is Muslim. Lets have one law for all back please not this multiculti abortion of a legal system we've been handed.

I know Islamised areas are bad. Islam, as a philosophy and especially a governing philosophy, is bad news for Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and all those who want to see a secular state with religion being a personal confessional thing.

I know Islam is a shit way to run a life, or a council, or a nation but you must separate individuals from the ideology. Lets peacefully go after the organisers of Islam and the fellow travellers in councils etc but NOT encourage pogroms against the innocent. Don't forget there are Muslims who want to get out of Islam and we as a society must support such people more than we have in the past.

It makes me wonder sometimes if the money spent on pandering to Islam wouldn't have been better spent on countering Islam as a philosophy and encouraging assimilation rather than separatism, including help for those wishing to leave Islam. What's wrong with helping people to leave a philosophy which in many parts of the world is behaving as a death cult.

Noggin the Nog said...


Not sure Julia is going to like my ramblings on this matter, so I'll call it a day with this last comment.

You would not use debate and reasonable explanation with Muslims outside a mosque because you would be too busy defending yourself. One cannot reason with an entirely unreasonable person.

The mistake you are making is to view others through the prism of your own values, and assume that, because you would not launch into frenzy of beheading, simply because of a perceived offense, nor would they. Wrong.

You are correct in your idea that I do not find much fault with Christianity. With Christians yes, but with Christianity, no. If everybody who professed to be a Christian behaved like Christ, the world would be a better place.

If everybody who professes to be a Muslim behaved like Mo, the result is rather like a downtown Baghdad market after a visit from one of the faithful. Murderous mayhem, with a bit of rape to add a little spice, and therein lies the intractable difference between reasonable people and Muslims.

Anonymous said...

Noggy, I have nothing but respect for your views because you believe them, even though I may not agree with them (all). You see, we are engaged in non-confrontational debate. Lovely.

Noggin the Nog said...


No really, this is the last one.

The Bible does not teach Christians to be 'tolerant' of other religions. It does not recognise other religions as having any validity, it calls all worship which is not directed to the one, true living God 'idolatry'.

It makes no odds for the sake of this argument whether or not you think that God's name is Jehovah or Allah, nowhere in the Bible are there any instructions commanding a tolerance of idolatry.

The difference comes in the manner of intolerance. IMHO, that intolerance should come in the form of telling others they are making a mistake, not changing national and local laws to suit foreigners (in the true sense of the word), not allowing mosques and temples to be built, not allowing overtly religious clothing like hijabs and burkas, in fact not allowing a totally alien religion, nor its followers into the country in the first place, and removing those that are already here who will not conform to the standards of civilized society. We have enough criminals and trouble makers of our own, without importing more by the boat load.

Woman on a Raft said...

The missing word here is from the 1980s: "competitor ideology".

Islam is not a religion in this context; it is a competitor ideology which seeks to displace the dominant ideology.

Why the dominant ideology seems set on helping to make itself history I can't understand, but it is.

Farenheit211 said...

WOAR,spot on As to why people are colluding with it well that wouldn't have anything to do with Islamic violence would it?

There is a lot in common with Islam and fascism and communism if you see Islam as an ideology rather than a religion.