Friday, 26 October 2007

Disingenuous Posturing? "Islam is Peace"

...or as they used to be called "Muslims for Britain".

I originally planned to post on this when "Phase 1" was launched, but I thought I'd hold off until "Phase 2", to see how it went.

They are now pushing the meme "Islam is Peace", but peace is an odd term and actually we know that Islam is actually "submission" and not personal, but collective, and you are only permitted to submit to a predetermined entity and it must the be the same one. It is the same kind of peace that Hitler pushed, i.e. the "once everyone has submitted, then we will have peace" kind of peace.

The videos at the new site are also disappointing in that they contain, almost without exception, only tightly hijab'd women. Not a single uncovered head. Now, it is anyone's personal choice to wear hijab, but to have exclusively rigorously hijab'd women then say this is "moderate" does tend to promote the meme that hijab is both moderate and near universal amongst moderate Muslims. Some may say that is a fraudulent and misleading meme. I have significant difficulty in believing that the group is truly moderate, but lets see how it progresses before drawing final conclusions.

So, on to the underlying aims which are not openly shown on the new site, but previously existed on the Muslims for Britain site...

Regrettably, a group who may be well-meaning, have got off to a bad start with a campaign that the BBC says is an anti-terror campaign. Yes, it could well be anti-terror, but frankly it seems the terror they are anti is not the same kind that most people in Britain would think and ironically appears to have been hijacked along the way.

Lets take a look:
..Whoever kills an innocent soul.. it is as if he killed the whole of mankind, And whoever saves one, it is as if he saved the whole of mankind”
[The Holy Quran, 5:32]
This opening has two main issues. First, it is a quotation from the Koran. If you want to foster good relations with everyone in the UK, using a quotation from the Koran is not the ideal way. Most people do not believe it at best and at worst some consider it a man-made terrorist handbook. Secondly, we have the word 'innocent' - alas, to an Islamist (though not necessarily to a Muslim) it only refers to pious Muslims - the infidel is never an innocent to an Islamist. Of course this is a quotation, so hopefully elsewhere the statements can clarify and remove this obvious mumble-swerve.
The Muslim communities across Britain are united in condemning the attempted bombings in London and Glasgow.

We are united with the rest of the country at this critical time and are determined to work together to avert any such attacks targeting our fellow citizens, property and country.
This is a good start, but who asked them to speak for everyone? "I didn't vote for you".
Islam forbids the killing of innocent people.
Alas, we have 'innocent' again. They are reinforcing the fact that Islam forbids the killing of pious Muslims. It says nothing of infidels, and, by omission, it speaks volumes. I do wonder if many in such groups are sincere, but one or two "moles" push this term so as to get themselves off the hook, as it were, with the radicals and their ideology. Off their hook, but onto mine.
We reject any heinous attempts to link such abhorrent acts to the teachings of Islam.
Reject, but is it a valid link? I think there is a valid link. The use of the word reject is interesting, as it does not require proof. A refutation would be better, but that is hard to do.
• British Muslims should not be held responsible for the acts of criminals.
Oh...ok, now we have rapidly switched away from anti-terror and are now talking about the Muslim community. No mention that the British community and nation should not be held responsible for the acts of criminals or governments. This is disappointing. The British people are routinely held "responsible" for acts like the Iraq war or the plight of Palestinians.
• We commend the government for its efforts to respond to this crisis calmly and proportionately, and welcome both the Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s and the Home Secretary’s emphasis on the need to distinguish between the overwhelming majority of British Muslims who are law-abiding citizens and a few criminals who seek to inflict harm and terror on our country.
Again, focus on just the Muslim community.
• We express support for the emergency services who are working tirelessly and courageously to avert these attacks and ensure the safety of our country.
Seconded.
• We urge the media and all politicians to continue to maintain the values of our open society, free from prejudice and discrimination, sustained by tolerance and mutual respect for all.
It is not the media that is the biggest risk, but elements inside the Muslim community. You guys are looking in the wrong place. Alas, the statement is about ensuring the Muslim community benefits, not about condemning the ranting and preaching that creates such "home grown" terrorist muppets or might provoke reaction. There has hardly been any reaction, yet what has been done to kick out the troublemakers from within the Muslim community?
• We call on our government to work towards a just and lasting peace in areas of conflict around the world and to take the lead in helping eliminate the injustices and grievances that foment division and nurture violence.
If you look closely and squint, you can almost see the words "Iraq" and "Palestinian" in there. Here it is, a coded message, a mumble swerve to weasel out of, to absolve responsibility by saying that, in effect, such acts of terrorism are triggered and excused by other situations abroad. The implicit message of simultaneous blame and excuse is there with the use of "injustices" and "grievances". Hop-skip-jump the aims move rapidly on from acts of terror on British soil, to only Muslim benefits and then dragging in external conflicts and demanding these are fixed "or else".
The unity of our society must be maintained and we must not allow divisions to emerge between us. We must remain friends, neighbours and colleagues, and take Britain forward as one nation – towards a Greater Britain.
Seconded. The best way to keep up divisions is to ghettoize, to import non-English speaking religious and "community" leaders and to not face up to the facts. As an example, 8% of imams preaching in the UK were actually born here. Only 6% speak English as a first language and 45% have been here for less than 5 years. This means religious leaders are unlikely to be a force for integration, let alone toleration. It might be a good place to start. Since this came out in June IIRC, not much has been done to sort out the Muslim camp from within.

Alas, this release, though it has a couple of good statements, on the whole is about allowing the Muslim community to not do anything and to put the burden upon the rest of the UK to not react but accommodate. It is a form of passive-aggression. It is inward-looking, self-serving and self-centred. The terrorist acts are being used as a ratchet to further lock in special treatment and the use of kid gloves. It must be rejected.

The grouping have a 3-phase plan.

First is the above, which they say is "Full page advertisements, in the leading tabloid and broadsheet papers have been placed following the attempted bombings in London and Glasgow to clearly state the Muslim community's unequivocal condemnation of these terrorist attacks.".

If you want this to be equivocal, I suggest you guys drop the use of the word 'innocent' and begin to say 'British population'.

The second moves away from the pretense of anti-terrorism "Phase two aims to continue to resonate this message through advertising on bill boards, London buses, and the tube network. Part of this phase focuses on the positive contribution of Muslims in the UK.".

So they will advertise propaganda. I hear a Trojan Horse rumbling up the hill. This has now started with the "Islam is Peace" campaign.

The third is even more direct: "Phase III involves leveraging on the first two phases to engage our diverse communities to further interact constructively working together to fight the diseases of Islamophobia and racism that are a cancer in our society. In order to leverage, maintain, and sustain the impact from phase one and two there will be development of sites called "Café Islam" in partnership with high profile Mosques in the UK. The essence behind these sites would be to have permanent Islamic exhibitions, IT interactive displays and a resource directory set out in a relaxed and easily accessible environment. This is designed to be a mechanism to promote discussion and community cohesion, to improve race relations, and to foster tolerance and understanding of the diversities in our communities.".

Here we have it revealed. The true purpose of this is not to stop terrorism by misled, fanatical crazy Muslims, but to push for a focus on the fake, fraudulent concept of "Islamophobia". The best rejection of this term I have seen can be found here. There is no disease of Islamophobia in the UK. You cannot be phobic of something that is clearly proactively against your best interests - i.e. radical Islamism. This project has revealed itself to be about propaganda hand-in-hand with a determined attempt, in advance of that, to de-fang and neuter any debate or exposure of the flaws and inadequacies of Islam using Islamophobia as the cover. Most people in Britain would rather NOT know if someone is a Muslim or not and would rather not know that ANY religious grouping existed. It is in the British nature to keep religion private and personal. Muslims again want to ram their world down peoples' throats. Bad idea.

If Muslims truly want to foster diversity and tolerance, I suggest they really do condemn the terrorists who act in the name of Islam and ridicule them, too. They need to ensure that the communities will not harbour such people but, rather, denounce and expose them.

The Chinese have a saying "A man must silence his own dogs".

In addition I think it would be worthy to have all Mosques managed by mixed-sex committees. I think the presence of women will severely reduce the scope for radical bearded crazies to sneak in and spread their psychotic, and dare I say it, almost masturbatory poison.

3 comments:

Mark Wadsworth said...

I did have the vague intention to lay into this when I saw all the prominent adverts on London buses, but a commenter at Neil Harding's came up with something that rivals even Pat Condell:
---------------------
I think we all must start calling the Islamofascists 'racists'. We should scream that they are hateful towards the Christian race, and the Jewish race, and the Hindu race, and the Atheist Race, that they are Christianityphobiasts. They will scream that Christianity is not a race, and we'll say:

"See, Islam is NOT a race either.
And by the way, the Bible doesn't say to convert, conquer or kill non-Christians; like the Koran says to do to non-Muslims. So there YOU RACIST hater of non-Muslims! You're a Kuffarphobic!"

Phil A said...

Re: “Whoever kills an innocent soul…”

Terrorism is always ‘condemned’ in those terms by Muslems.

Innocent, there ‘s the rub who is innocent?.

According to the Qur'an, Jews and Christians are under Allah's curse (9:30), also unbelievers are the "vilest of creatures" (98:6).

If you listen to people like Anjem Choudhury, of the Omar Bakri group, as stated on the BBC's Hard Talk - because non-Muslims have rejected Islam, none of them are innocent.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014454.php

Always On Watch said...

The first step in any debate is to establish the definitions. Sadly, when Westerners hear the words "peace" and "innocent," those words have a different meaning for devout Muslims, as pointed out here in the post and the comments.