British PM says multiculturalism has failed, Muslims must integrate into British society

In pronouncing multiculturalism a failure, Cameron joins Angela Merkel, who said the same for multiculturalism in Germany. Hopefully, his words also signal a substantive U-turn from the Labour Party’s quiet but deliberate campaign to make Britain “truly multicultural,” as if that must necessarily be a good thing, and something Britain needed in order to be better than it was. After all, if it ain’t broke, keep on fixing it ’til it is.

“Muslims must embrace our British values, David Cameron says,” by James Kirkup for the Telegraph, February 5:

Entering the debate on national identity and religious tolerance, the Prime Minister declared an end to “passive tolerance” of divided communities, and say that members of all faiths must integrate into wider society and accept core values.

To be British is to believe in freedom of speech and religion, democracy and equal rights regardless of race, sex or sexuality, he will say. Proclaiming a doctrine of “muscular liberalism”, he said that everyone, from ministers to ordinary voters, should actively confront those who hold extremist views.

He warned that groups that fail to promote British values will no longer receive public money or be able to engage with the state.

His speech, to an international security conference in Munich, comes after The Daily Telegraph disclosed the extent to which the British intelligence community fears the “unique threat” of terrorist attacks by radicalised British Muslims.

Mr Cameron promised a new willingness to argue against and “defeat” extremist ideologies that lead some to engage in terrorism.

That means abandoning the notion that different communities should be able to live according to their own values and traditions as long as they stay within the law. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream,” Mr Cameron said. “We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong.”

No, society has bent over backwards to accommodate them. There can be no more waiting around for people to “want to belong.” If they don’t, why are they there?

All Britons should believe in basic values of freedom and equality, and actively promote them, he said. That means ensuring that immigrants learn to speak English and that all schools teach “elements of a common culture and curriculum”.

See below, regarding the enforcement of a core curriculum.

The Prime Minister accepted that multiculturalism has left some members of the white community feeling unfairly treated. Racism and intolerance are “rightly” condemned, he said. “But when equally unacceptable views or practices have come from someone who isn’t white, we’ve been too cautious, frankly too fearful, to stand up to them.”

Allegations of racism and hatred have been a highly successful emotional ploy to silence criticism of Islam and of unacceptable behavior by Muslims.

The speech comes after Baroness Warsi, the Conservative Party chairman, caused controversy by claiming that prejudice against Muslims was widespread and socially acceptable.

Still not touching that third rail:

Mr Cameron will drew a clear distinction between “Islamist extremism” as a political ideology, and the Islamic faith itself. “We need to be clear: Islamic extremism and Islam are not the same thing,” he said.

The Government is reviewing its entire strategy for counter-terrorism and community cohesion amid concern that the state is working too closely with Muslim groups that do not fully endorse liberal values. Mr Cameron said that community groups will be scrutinised in future to see if they promote democracy, equality and integration. Those that fail the “tests” will be cut off. “No public money, no sharing of platforms with ministers,” he said..

One must make sure the scrutiny is meaningful: one problem such attempts at quality control have encountered recently occurred when sympathetic Muslims whitewashed alarming findings on Islamic schools.

EDL rallies in Luton: "Every single one of you are on the forefront of the fight against militant Islam"
UK: Islamic supremacist protesters call for Sharia in Egypt
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    “We need to be clear: Islamic extremism and Islam are not the same thing,”
    You still don’t get it David. You did well up to this point, but you balked at the last hurdle.
    I’m sorry to have to tell you , but there is only one Islam.
    And that Islam will take your head off and flush UK down the toilet if you don’t see it for what it truly is.

  2. says

    Cameron cannot be trusted on this issue. This is mere verbiage, designed to generate positive headlines in the traditionally Tory press which has been critical of him because of his politically correct posturing and reneging over holding a referendum on EU membership and putting effective controls on mass immigration. Only the other year he was telling us that it was mainstream British society that ought to integrate with Muslims rather than the other way around. He has also promoted Muslim mega-mouth Sayeeda Warsi to a ministerial position although she has not been elected. Do not be fooled. See second section of the following article: http://durotrigan.blogspot.com/2011/02/edl-luton-demo-first-reports-and-tommy.html

  3. says

    Cameron is such a twat that I don’t think he will do more than talk but it is nice to get those ever so few and far between glimmers of hope.

    And who does Bung awaala think Cameron should be “firing” at? Possibly the brave lads of the EDL who shamefully demand the right to be British in Britain.

  4. says

    This is pure, cheap trickery, buying time to let the demographic jihad progress beyond reversal. Shameron is a liar. The UK needs a new broom and it needs to sweep clean, the same is true for the USA.

  5. says

    PM Cameron is merely mouthing words on ‘multiculturalism’ and on Islam.

    He will not apply stronger legal or financial sanctions against what he calls ‘extremism’ in Britain.

    No, Cameron’s Munich pronouncement is a pronouncement of appeasement.

  6. says

    “He [Cameron] warned that groups that fail to promote British values will no longer receive public money or be able to engage with the state.”

    Well, the sentiment is certainly OK. But some office will have to be responsible for initiating and carrying through on deportations, and some money will be needed to pay for the one-way flights back to whereverstan.

  7. says

    It’s about time a mainstream, British politician, spoke candidly about the threat that Radical Islam poses to our country, (and the rest of the Free World). Let’s hope his strong words are matched by strong actions.

  8. says

    I respectfully disagree with many of the commenters above that what Cameron said amounts to nothing. It is certainly not enough, but it is a first step.

    Mankind is having a very difficult time of it coming to the conclusion (a correct one) that a major religion can be evil. Cameron is representative of this. Besides, he is a major public figure who has to take into account that his statements have enormous consequences, something that none of us here at JW have to worry about. I’m not the biggest Cameron fan to be sure. In fact, I’ve not been impressed with him hardly at all, but cut the PM a break in this case, I would argue.

    And if anyone thinks I’m wrong here, then just imagine you are Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and not just an anonymous commenter on the Internet. What would you say, taking into account such things as the markets, peoples’ pensions, diplomatic relations with sundry Muslim countries, etc.? Indeed, what would you say?

  9. says

    Milton! thou should’st be living at this hour:
    England hath need of thee: she is a fen
    Of stagnant waters: altar, sword and pen,
    Fireside, the heroic wealth of hall and bower,
    Have forfeited their ancient English dower
    Of inward happiness.

  10. says

    It’s a start. He is, after all, a politician. I must admit I was overjoyed to see this article coming on the same day as the EDL demonstration. From my own experience, once I caught a glimpse of the truth regarding Islam there was no stopping my thirst for more information. I believe this will happen to Mr. Cameron. At least I hope so.

  11. says

    Cameron also said

    “Let’s properly judge these organizations: Do they believe in universal human rights ” including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law?”

    Doesn’t he know that the answer to all these questions from Muslims must be big “Hell no!”? The British Muslims know it and this why they are annoyed – with Cameron asking these obvious questions (which should have been asked decades ago) people might find out the answers.

    “Do they believe in democracy and the right of people to elect their own government? Do they encourage integration or separatism? These are the sorts of questions we need to ask. Fail these tests and the presumption should be not to engage with organizations,”

    Well again, true Muslims fail this test big time and we have both the Koran, the disgusting biography of their “perfect example”, and history to prove it. Cameron really ought to study Islam, but maybe if he had he might not have asked these embarrassing questions.

    The clear point is that Muslims just don’t belong in the West, and Cameron’s questions are making the obvious belatedly obvious.

  12. says

    These days I’m grateful the least bit of positive news from the ruling elite when it comes to islam. This will do just fine for now, it’s a step in the right direction.

  13. says

    The Double Standards of the Great Majority of Muslims regarding the Killing of Innocent People
    The expression double standard means there is one reaction for X person/situation and a different reaction for another person/situation.There is favoritism.One sees that among Muslims.

    An Imaginary Example

    Suppose an intellectual or politician in the West were to say:

    “Muslims have hate and enmity in them till the end of the world”

    Immediately he would be accused of:

    1.Being an islamophobe.

    2.Inciting hatred toward an innocent group.

    3.Being guilty of a hate crime.

    4.Being a racist.

    It turns out that is what the Koran says of Christians and Jews

    Example 1(regarding Christians)

    Chapter 5:14:

    “And with those who say “We are Christians” We took compact; and they have forgotten a portion of that they were reminded of. So We(Note:Allah) have stirred up among them enmity and hatred, till the Day of Resurrection; and God will assuredly tell them of the things they wrought.”

    http://www.antisharia.com/2011/02/06/the-double-standards-of-the-great-majority-of-muslims-regarding-the-killing-of-innocent-people-2/

  14. says

    A few days ago I asked “Where is Tariq Ramadan?” Well, I found him, not surprisingly, on Al Jazeera. He is interviewed about events in Egypt along with a Slovenian social commentator, who was rather the more interesting of the two, I thought, although their opinions were predictable.

  15. says

    Who here has read Roland Shirk’s recent article, “Should We Envy Evil”? He offers us a reminder that our Western values are also one of our greatest assets against Islam and its enablers. WE (anti-Islamists) are the ones who value sexual equality, religious tolerance, and human well-being both here and abroad. Islamic apologists support sexism. They support stonings. They support terrorism. They support sex slavery. They support beating women. They support murdering homosexuals and apostates. They aren’t bothered by the oppression and murder of non-white, non-Western Muslims at the hands of Muslims. They regard Muslims as though they are subhuman animals not capable of being civil.

    We rely on logic and evidence to support our cause. Apologists rely almost entirely on slander and deceit. (New to JW and don’t believe me? Try to have a critical, civil discussion of Islam or Muslims on a liberal forum and see how long it takes before you’re called a racist, a bigot, or an Islamophobe, assuming you aren’t simply outright censored.) Just as apologists smear us with lies, making illogical accusations of racism, we need to start routinely smearing them with facts. Instead of merely presenting our arguments and going on the defensive when they slander us, we need to start aggressively calling apologists what they actually are: sexists, homophobes, bigots, and racists. It will bring well-warranted sympathy to our cause and make people think twice about the nonsensical, dishonest, and immoral arguments of the self-righteous Left.

    I’ll be posting this around here a bit so people can read it. I’d love to get some feedback on this approach.

  16. says

    Separate but equal has been a bad idea for a long long time now. Its updated version hasn’t worked much better. Worst when you get right down to it.

    Now, after all these years, and all the chattering BS. All the denials, the accusations, recriminations,Studies, courses, articles, championing, and on and on add nausea.

    We get treated to an OOOOPs moment?

    OOOOPs? That’s it? OOOOPs? Really! Really really?!

  17. says

    Wellington said “I have a gut feeling that more and more Western politicians are finally figuring out Islam, but still doing inaccurate things like distinguishing between Islamism and Islam, but this is, in and of itself, indicative of tentative first steps in the right direction.”
    —————
    Not only do I believe this to be the case but they also must tread lightly at first. If they came out Arnold Schwarznegger style with guns full bore, they won’t last their first term. Education of the public must be done about what exactly Islam says in their religion and the public must be shown how intolerant Islam really is. Until that time, we will continue to hear things like

    “Mr Cameron will drew a clear distinction between “Islamist extremism” as a political ideology, and the Islamic faith itself. “We need to be clear: Islamic extremism and Islam are not the same thing,” he said.”

    The second reason we’ll hear this is there are Muslims who are peaceful. They truly do want to see Islam reformed into a peaceful religion that can co-exist with other religions. Many people still believe that reform in Islam can happen. One of those people is Ibn Warraq, a person often cited at Jihadwatch.

  18. says

    “Mr Cameron will drew a clear distinction between “Islamist extremism” as a political ideology, and the Islamic faith itself.”

    The problem is that, there is NO such distinction. Islam is a political ideology, with some religious looking aspects.

    While many muslims may content themselves with following islam partially i.e. only following the religious aspects like praying, fasting, Haj etc, that alone is not islam or ‘islamic faith’, like Cameron likes to think.

    Muslims who are following the political ideology as well as the religious aspects are the most serious adherents of islam.

  19. says

    The problem is that Multi-culti in Europe, has been, in effect Solo-Culti. It has only been about appeasing and pampering the cult of Islam.

  20. says

    “Cameron: State Multiculturalism has Failed”

    Comments by Mary Jackson:

    “He is talking ‘tough’ – as he perceives it – on Islam, because he’s in Germany, just as he talked soft on Islam when he was in Turkey. But what kind of a threat is the withdrawal of public funds? Not funding one’s enemies is a necessary but far from a sufficient condition of survival, let alone victory. Identifying the enemy would be a start. What do ‘these organisations’, who don’t believe in human rights, the rights of women and those of other faiths, have in common?”

    http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/32457

  21. says

    We are seeing the disappearance of Western civilization. And why? By fudging one of our most important tools of survival—the risk/reward analysis. Clearly, multiculturalism was implemented based on fuzzy emotions, belief in alchemy, self-hatred, etc. while pushing aside reason and the wisdom of former statesman like Churchill and Gladstone. And now we reap the terminal whirlwind. A beginning to winning back the homelands is to form self-protective community-located swarm trooper units to reply to Mushlim (cultural and criminal Muslims)gangs with tit for tat tenfold reprisals. This should drive the swarms back to their hives and make the streets safer for individuals. Then the liberal engineered screw-ups with our civilization will have to be corrected by the extreme measure of hive removal. There is a clear and present danger. Jack Straw should be hanged for treason without reason.

  22. says

    M/C has failed, hes a little late, after wilders , sarcozy, merkel etc, hope its not just another of his sound bites,
    (maybe he should have a dinner chat with his chairwoman Warsi, to put him right)
    well the EDL hasn t,
    DESPITE…anything from 250/300 up to 2000 being reported for a march in Luton yday..with actual figures at least 3000 attendees…
    DESPITE, nearly that number being turned away, buses, cars, from trains,(where the police had allowed, the laughably named Unite against fascism, to try & block EDL attendees at said station..yes
    thats right allowed one demo to try and block another, with police assistance, from a lawful protest…check out the video).
    shameron….his thinly veiled speech, aknowledging the MAIN
    issue at hand.
    he better get back to his dinner with warsi for erm islamaphobia/sensitivity training…sorry to be cynical
    but he s been more than a “wet lettuce” up to now.
    proof as they say will be in the pudding.

  23. says

    Well, a long time in coming, but we can still only hope that the new UK Government carries through with these new and sane policies…we shall see if it’s too late?!

  24. says

    ‘Right action sooner or later leads to right results’…often the right action begins with an idea, a revelation, an epiphany, a realization…Cameron at least has an idea in his head…What he will do, if anything is yet to be determined…
    I also notice that there are numerous other power people getting the idea in their heads about Islam, thanks in no small part to Spencer…Beck has even received the Islamo-meme, and it is replicating…When Hannity calls Choudary an evil sob, we know we are almost home…
    I don’t know what the ‘right results’ are, but I’m sure they are on the way…

  25. says

    Wri7913 notes: “Many people still believe that reform in Islam can happen. One of those people is Ibn Warraq, a person often cited at Jihadwatch.

    Of course, there are many who feel that reform (particularily a postive peaceful reform) in Islam will never happen….I respect Ibn Warraq’a opinion, but I have mine too…..

  26. says

    “We need to be clear: Islamic extremism and Islam are not the same thing,” – Mr. Cameron

    Uh oh, there’s that danger pressure point again… Stay tuned, this message will repeat… Don’t touch that dial!

    There is ONLY ONE Islam, and the ‘extremists’ so called are camouflaged within ALL of it, as they must be, all worshipping the same god. Mr. Cameron et al are all wrong on this issue, as they must be. The alternative is the truth, and it is very ugly… Get over it. In the Islamic universe there is only ‘One Islam'(TM), and the distance between Bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood, Iranian Mullas, Taliban, and ‘moderate’ Islam, on a galaxy scale, is measured in millimeters.

  27. says

    At last, at least one politician is beginning to see the light. But as gerard said, he just can’t bring himself to bite the bullet and admit that the big problem with multiculturalism is Islam and only Islam.

    By the way, I have noticed that the BBC in its reports now not only quotes comments, “in the press,” but now also quotes comments,”on the internet.” So perhaps websites like this are begging to have an effect. I bloody well hope so.

  28. says

    OT
    I believe that it is very important that we (those who oppose islam), begin to get more mobilized. This is where islamists have a HUGE advantage over ‘us’. They are essentially united, regardless of country or language, by being part of the greater Ummah. They have a plan and are organized in applying it. As great as Jihad watch is, with our ability to make comments about various threads, I believe we need to create even more of an ability to connect with one another to brainstorm ideas and begin to create community. As an example, a forum that would allow different threads to be discussed and brainstormed about is essential. We need to have a landing place for all of the people who populate many of these great websites, such as Jihad watch, Political islam, citizen warrior, prophet of doom, etc, so that these people are somehow connected into more of a community that can brainstorm and then put things into actual action. Robert Spencer is acting but we all need to start acting. I have joined Act! for America with this in mind. I’m writing this because I just wish to find a way to to connect us all so that we can have a punchers chance of defeating this doubtlessly evil entity called islam. Thanks!

  29. says

    The jury’s still out for me about this. I agree with those who’ve said Cameron’s not gone far enough, and also he’s making the sublime error of differentiating between Islam the religion and Islam the political ideology.

    It remains to be seen whether the UK government will follow this up.

    I’m not hopeful, because the penny’s still not dropped for Cameron’s lot – that suddenly combatting Islamic terrorism in the UK by acknowledging that multiculturalism is dead in the water will be enough. NO! It’s the open borders/globalisation/mass immigration policy that has to be stopped, stupid! Then we can deal with the Islamic problem we already have, without having to worry about the flood of future immigrants. British people aren’t so much worried by Islamism (though they ARE very worried) – but by the devastating effect mass immigration is having on British culture and economy.

  30. says

    The jury’s still out for me about this. I agree with those who’ve said Cameron’s not gone far enough, and also he’s making the sublime error of differentiating between Islam the religion and Islam the political ideology.

    It remains to be seen whether the UK government will follow this up.

    I’m not hopeful, because the penny’s still not dropped for Cameron’s lot – that suddenly combatting Islamic terrorism in the UK by acknowledging that multiculturalism is dead in the water will be enough. NO! It’s the open borders/globalisation/mass immigration policy that has to be stopped, stupid! Then we can deal with the Islamic problem we already have, without having to worry about the flood of future immigrants. British people aren’t so much worried by Islamism (though they ARE very worried) – but by the devastating effect mass immigration is having on British culture and economy.

  31. says

    The jury’s still out for me about this. I agree with those who’ve said Cameron’s not gone far enough, and also he’s making the sublime error of differentiating between Islam the religion and Islam the political ideology.

    It remains to be seen whether the UK government will follow this up.

    I’m not hopeful, because the penny’s still not dropped for Cameron’s lot – that suddenly combatting Islamic terrorism in the UK by acknowledging that multiculturalism is dead in the water will be enough. NO! It’s the open borders/globalisation/mass immigration policy that has to be stopped, stupid! Then we can deal with the Islamic problem we already have, without having to worry about the flood of future immigrants. British people aren’t so much worried by Islamism (though they ARE very worried) – but by the devastating effect mass immigration is having on British culture and economy.

  32. says

    As an American, I find your Prime Ministers words unexpected and the comments, and I read every one, to reflect that perhaps there is possibly an awakening to the death spiral of the West that is approaching critical mass.

    I highly recommend the following article (The Roadmap to Saving Western Civilization) as I suggest it adds another layer to the discussion. Suprising enough it is from a speech just days ago at one of our most liberal college towns in the US (Berkley CA). It will at least double your score from a three to a six in my opinion!

    http://www.squidoo.com/the-roadmap-to-saving-western-civilization

  33. says

    You’re probably right that Cameron cannot be trusted on this issue, especially after he shamefully reneged on holding a referendum on EU membership and putting effective controls on mass immigration, as you say (he & Obama seem to have attended the same school on effective lying). However, it was a strong speech in public and it was good that such strong words were heard which, given by such a prominent person, give them some respectability, even if he can’t be trusted to follow through. So I’m glad he said the words he said, and he just might do something to back them up, even if too little.

  34. says

    Respectfully, Canto28, have you considered the possibility that Cameron’s questions are meant primarily rhetorically? I have a gut feeling that more and more Western politicians are finally figuring out Islam, but still doing inaccurate things like distinguishing between Islamism and Islam, but this is, in and of itself, indicative of tentative first steps in the right direction.

    As Abraham Lincoln, one of the few supreme statesmen anywhere in the world over the past three centuries, understood so well, error, particularly massive error (like slavery or thinking that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance), cannot be eradicated all at once. It must be done one step at a time. Those possessed of the truth of things are understandably often impatient with this approach but it’s the only approach, I would argue, which is rooted in realism. After all, it’s not enough to be right. One must know how to be right.

  35. says

    Agreed with your take.

    Cameron’s speech is a tough one considering from where he has to start from – a “multiculti appeasement of Islam at all costs”.

    Muslims will not concede an inch. So Cameron or others that come after, will have no choice but to up the ante. That is the positive side.

    Muslims are here to claim their rightful inheritance from allah, and install the law of allah as required. In the final analysis, only war resolves such an issue of whose land this is- its the only option left.

  36. says

    Respectfully, Wellington, as I indicated above, I agree that Cameron is not to be relied upon but the point is that he said some good things, laid out some good criteria that can be repeated again & again and used against his inaction.

    For instance, it can be demanded of him now in Parliament to try to require all candidate citizens to swear before their God (if they have one) that they believe & uphold all the human rights and freedoms he pretended to champion as part of being British – in particular, full equality of women, freedom of speech including the right to criticize any ideology, religion, cultural practice as well as any historical figure however revered.

    Muslims who object ( and I expect most would strongly) would be shown to be hypocritical when they claim they are assimilated British.

  37. says

    I agree with your nuanced POV, Wellington. Given his previous position, Cameron has obviously moved to a more credible vantage point than before, and credit should given where it’s due. It remains to be seen whether he maintains this trajectory until he reaches full enlightenment.

    FWIW, his full speech, without the interpretive remarks of the Telegraph, is here. One can see he still harbors some fantasies about whether Islam is compatible with the West, and hasn’t reached the point where he is willing to completely abandon the multicultural project. But he’s tending toward that direction. On a scale of 0-10, where 0 is complete ignorance about Islam (where, it might be mentioned, is where many of us were not too many years ago), and 10 is possessing a full understanding of its history, tenets, and the social implications of giving it room to metastasize, I’d put him at about 3. Considering he was at 0 before, that’s progress, but he still has a ways to go.

    It seems as if his thinking is limited to the sociological aspects of the problems of integration, and is informed by traditional Leftist concepts that don’t take into account strong religious and cultural factors. He’s a public official, meaning his days are filled with the busy-ness of officialdom, so he will find it hard to set aside the time to do the reading and studying and thinking necessary to fold these additional factors into his thinking. But unless he does this, he’ll stay stuck on 3.

  38. says

    Mainstream political culture is having a hard time concluding that a major religion is evil simply because it is no longer able to assess and understand theological language of any kind. It cannot tell that Jesus’ words about Hell and damnation include no command to hurry people on there way thither; while Islam screams for jihad at every turn.

    As for Cameron’s “muscular liberalism”, I cannot help that when his country had such a thing (between Pitt the Younger and Gladstone, maybe?), there was also a very robust cultural consensus ultimately based on the Christian faith. It seems to me that all this business about fair play, freedom of speech and expression, etc., works well when people accept “Love the Lord your God with all your…and love your neighbor as thyself”, but if the primary ethos of the culture is “look out for Number One”, “Empower yourself (and forget about serving others?)”, and “It’s all about ME”, then liberalism will become a very weak and flabby thing, a tattered plastic bag flapping in the wind.

  39. says

    Wellington, it is very sensible what you say, though I think Cameron could get away with the following right now:

    Immigration – make a policy change to accept only skilled and in demand migrants (not watertight anti-Muslim but close). This can be justified on economic grounds and crippled services/national infrastructure. To the extent a humanitarian class remains, say it’s open to Copts and other non-Muslims in Muslim lands for the time being. The plight of these people is now making news and, whilst the Muslims will scream racism anyway, it is a solid and defendable stand.

    Child support – cut it for over 3 kids (hasn’t this been done in Denmark already (to 2)?) They don’t want to scare off Brits replenishing themselves but it may make some Muslims think twice about more than 3. This can be justified on current economic grounds and simple fairness “if you want more kids, pay for them yourself”.

    Abolish any restrictions on free speech. This is justified on asserting basic British rights and ‘muscular liberalism’.

    Things like this alone are neceesary immediatley and are not extreme. It might stem the problem a little, while time is bought to change more attitudes and gradually tighten the noose (as suggested). Otherwise, extreme measures will be needed soon, I think that’s the realisation we all have now. Cameron needs to accept his responsibility and make the hard decisions. If he thought about it, he could go down in history as one of Britain’s finest and isn’t that what all Politicicans want, their ego and legacy inflated.

  40. says

    gerard said “You still don’t get it David. You did well up to this point, but you balked at the last hurdle.
    I’m sorry to have to tell you , but there is only one Islam.
    And that Islam will take your head off and flush UK down the toilet if you don’t see it for what it truly is.”

    Maybe he does see it. But he is a politician, who can only go so far. Its a beginning. Steps in the right direction.

  41. says

    “3” is about right, Eastview. Let’s indeed hope that Cameron can move onto “4” and then higher numbers. He is for now in good follow-up mode to Merkel and so I will allow myself a cautious optimism.

    Still waiting for that day, however, which I certainly hope will come, and which I believe will come, when we get another “Evil Empire” speech from a major Western politician, optimally from a future President of the United States, the only difference being that one malevolent totalitarian ideology, i.e., Marxism, will be exchanged for another, i.e., Islam (and what a joy it will be when this occurs so that we no longer will have to put up with the faux distinction between “Islamism” and “Islam”).

    I’m encouraged that we already have one significant public personality, the present Pope, who has paved the way to such a speech, just as the previous Pope did so for, or in conjunction with, Reagan and Thatcher respecting the totalitarian menace of Communism. We need Reagans and Thatchers right now and, ideally, a Churchill or two, those who have way above moral vision and the leadership capacity to express such vision very effectively. One thing’s for certain, Obama doesn’t cut it. Not even a little. Another thing for certain is that if such leaders emerge in the West, The New York Times (and their ilk) will be as clueless as ever.

  42. says

    “Try to have a critical, civil discussion of Islam or Muslims on a liberal forum and see how long it takes before you’re called a racist, a bigot, or an Islamophobe, assuming you aren’t simply outright censored.”

    Indeed, you are correct, John. There is a lexicon of terms the Liberal/Leftist axis draws from to shut down those who would offer dissenting views.

    Here’s a partial list of terms pulled from Leftist comments on a number of different subjects. All are negative terms of a dismissive nature intended to marginalize or shut down further substantive discussion.

    racist, hater, ignorant, prejudiced, bigot, xenophobic, profiler, whiner, demonizer, spewer, Nazi, Fascist, Zionist, occupier (of Palestinian territories), Hasbara propaganda, apartheid, genocide, colonialist, capitalist, imperialist, homophobe, Islamophobe, anythingphobe, redneck, cracker, yokel, gap-toothed, skinhead, teabagger or bagger, clinger (as to guns and Bibles), cherry-picker (of ayat from the Qu’ran), demonizer, hypocrite, sheeple

    I have tried to reply to Leftist posts in places like the Huffington Post by copying the list above with a note about it being Leftist-speak, and then highlighting how many words in the original post are in the list. Not one such reply, of the many I have attempted, has ever made it past the censors.

    I’ve also sent emails to Glenn Beck several times suggesting he do a show or segment on Leftist-speak, and show the parallels with the negative and violent rhetoric of V.I. Lenin.

  43. says

    John, I like your approach. As I like Wellington’s wise approach and so many outstanding remarks by posters on this thread.

    Cameron did speak of the failure of Western society to present to Muslims a vision of what Western society stood for, something they could adhere to.

    His distinction between Islamism and Islamic Faith should evolve towards distinction between “Islam-heavy” and “Islam-light” or so.

    Just like knowledge of Quran-Hadith, positions of Islamic leaders and organisations should be promoted, it should be made public that official Islam has the abrogation-rule that makes agressive Medina-verses trump peaceful Mecca-verses. Which ignorant or deceitful Muslims keep using towards ignorant media and masses, in order to make Islam look benign.

    Camerons position now still is that the burden of proof is on Critical Islam Experts and their readers for Muslims being Islamists, while they by default must be seen as separated from these Islamists and innocent of totalitarian designs until proven guilty.

    But Islam is for all mankind to know and to use. And relentlessly it should be shown what this ideology really stands for, including the abrogation-rule.

    And Critical Islam Experts should evolve towards the position that merely declaring oneself to be a Muslim, a person should be held accountable for the known mainstream tenets, laws and loyalties of Muslims. Regardless if they are “Islam-heavy” or “Islam-light”.

  44. says

    Yes it is a step in the right direction. I was at first delighted when he named the beast: “Islam”. But I was very disappointed when he went on: .. “Mr Cameron will draw a clear distinction between “Islamist extremism” as a political ideology, and the Islamic faith itself. “We need to be clear: Islamic extremism and Islam are not the same thing,” he said.
    “Islamic extremism and Islam are not the same thing,” he said. Well, yes they are! That’s the whole point! And that’s the point that DC isn’t getting. Or at least not saying.
    Still as you and others have said..”small steps”..
    At least the “I” word, Islam, is being used. Many, especially BBC, haven’t even got that far. They manage to report an Islamic Jihad attack without mentioning Islam! Quite a feat really.

  45. says

    “when we get another “Evil Empire” speech from a major Western politician”
    That’s the one I’m waiting for. There are indeed many who could give that speech but they are not in office…yet. Now that I have recovered a bit from my initial disappointment I can acknowledge DC’s 3/10.
    We need a Geert Wilders.

  46. says

    Inayat Bunglawala from Muslims4Uk says Mr Cameron is “firing at the wrong target”
    Clearly he feels that there is a target and that it needs to be fired upon.
    If those words, “firing at the wrong target” were used by a Conservative, the left would probably say the same thing I did about that Conservative.
    The difference is the left would be wrong. I am not.
    In islam there are many targets.

    islam is a lie and
    Truth is killing it.

  47. says

    Islam is not a religion.
    Islam is a political ideology that should be tossed in the trash heap of history.

    Whether Islam is a religion or not is a question for the interested to amuse themselves with.

    What should never be a question is that Islam is a deadly disease that spreads from the sloppily fenced trash heap of history.

  48. says

    Muslims who object ( and I expect most would strongly) would be shown to be hypocritical when they claim they are assimilated British.

    As long as there is no laws against hypocrisy what exactly would be accomplished by that?

  49. says

    Yes, Canto28, let’s hope Cameron follows up on this speech of his. As Eastview commented, on a scale of 0 to 10 respecting proper awareness of what Islam is all about, Cameron’s around a 3 right now. Gotta’ go higher.

  50. says

    Hypocrisy exposed is generally a good thing in itself and might even lead to improvement out of shame, even without laws against it. The point gets emphasized that recognition of these human rights spoken of are essential to being considered assimilated. Muslims and especially imams and asylum seekers in Britain (and anywhere in the West) can frequently be questioned on this when their words or behavior indicate otherwise and held accountable wrt granting citizenship or visas.

  51. says

    You make a great point, Kepha, about the need for a society to have a sound religious ethic to back up freedom and democracy. Otherwise, I fear freedom will often be confused with license and narcissism on a large scale will set in. Particular individuals within a society may lead a good life and behave responsibly without being religious, but the society as a whole is best off with a religious foundation. A lot of secularists don’t get this. In fact, the blind hostility to all religion by many who are not religious often rivals the closed mindedness by the worst of religious folks.

  52. says

    Hypocrisy exposed is generally a good thing in itself and might even lead to improvement out of shame, even without laws against it. The point gets emphasized that recognition of these human rights spoken of are essential to being considered assimilated. Muslims and especially imams and asylum seekers in Britain (and anywhere in the West) can frequently be questioned on this when their words or behavior indicate otherwise and held accountable wrt granting citizenship or visas.

    Hypocrisy exposed is generally a good thing in itself and might even lead to improvement out of shame.

    Well, I’d say not only generally, but universally. It is strong point in a debate and often may even cause the party whose hypocrisy was exposed an embarrassment. Unfortunately, that requires that both the exposing party and the exposed one share the same ethics, morals, values and goals. But the ethics, morals, values of moslems differ critically from ours on the relevant to this discussion points. It is taqiyah that, for moslems, is a proper way of dealing with kufar, so even assuming that you have succeeded in exposing hypocrisy of a moslem, his reaction will not be the kind of embarrassment that flows from revealing his dishonesty, but from getting caught. He will work harder on improving his taqyiah. That’s all.
    Really, there have been many moslem commenters on JW whose hypocrisy was repeatedly and mercilessly exposed. Do you believe that even one of them was led to “improvement out of shame” as you fantasize. My friend, the whole point is that moslems are SHAMELESS.

    Muslims and especially imams and asylum seekers in Britain (and anywhere in the West) can frequently be questioned on this when their words or behavior indicate otherwise and held accountable wrt granting citizenship or visas.

    “Can frequently be questioned”? Sure. And THEN what?

  53. says

    Agreed, Rob. Glad to hear you’ve joined Act!For America. One way we can all pitch in to help is in making financial donations to Act!, as well as to JihadWatch (this is done through David Horowitz’s Freedom Foundation) and Atlas Shrugs. Single contributions are good, but a better way is to establish a program of automatic monthly contributions (I have set this up for all three of these groups). These people all need a regular and sustained cash flow to be able to operate efficiently, so the more people who can donate regularly, the more effective they will be.