Now the male councillors should start wearing the fez. The women the hijab.

Posted by: leavingtheleft at October 1, 2005 7:41 AM

Really, I am speechless. This maybe one of the stupidist things I have heard of.
I mean, there have been Jews is England for a while, right? They didn't seem to get all upset about toy pigs, did they? Somehow Jews managed to keep a stiff upper lip in the face of Pig Kitsch Humiliation.

Now Winnie the Pooh and piglet are banned?

Tonstant Weader Fwowed Up.

Posted by: Miss Moneypenney at October 1, 2005 8:01 AM

Yes stupid. But notice how they invade your lives and slowly it will be in everything.

Posted by: leavingtheleft at October 1, 2005 8:07 AM

pig-shaped stress relievers???

I'm not sure why pig-shaped items should relieve stress, unless it's a reference to the rumour that a pig's orgasm lasts 30 minutes. Whatever happened to that classic executive toy, Newton's cradle, or Newton's balls as they were often called?

Perhaps the earliest executive stress reliever was Tipoo's tiger, an organ in the form of a tiger mauling an Englishman. Perhaps Dudley Council should introduce miniture versions of this by way of apology for Western imperialism.

Posted by: Interested at October 1, 2005 8:44 AM

The online article in 'The Sun' is above an advert for the DVD of 'The Kingdom of Heaven'.
I wonder if they are aware of the irony or if they feel they ought to make a pro-Islamic gesture to compensate.

Posted by: Elephant at October 1, 2005 8:59 AM

I have a question. The British flag carries the symbol of a cross. How long will it be before the Islamists decide that the flag is offensive and must be changed? My own guess is that it is not too far off, if it hasn't happened already. But I'd be interested in the views of the British citizens who visit Jihadwatch.

Posted by: Anacletus II at October 1, 2005 9:01 AM

Buy a pig necklace and wear it with pride.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 1, 2005 9:14 AM

They'll be complaining about dogs next. Just watch. Everybody should replace their pig calendars with dog calendars. Ones featuring black Labs.

Posted by: feralee at October 1, 2005 9:39 AM

You might want to send a message to the Council at this address.

Perhaps you can attach at pig image, just for the heck of it.

SEYMOUR(The Pig Lover) PAINE

Posted by: Seymour Paine at October 1, 2005 10:10 AM

Gosh.. we're even puttin Indians to shame with regards to dhimmitude.

Heres what muttawa has to say:
Anyway, congratulations once more to the British. Although we Muslims only comprise 3% of the population, this kindly and tolerant people still allow us to dictate what they can and cannot have on desks in their offices. Carry on like this and we'll eventually get them to ban their own churches and religious celebrations.

http://muttawa.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Vikrant_Camberleykar at October 1, 2005 10:16 AM

Its heartening to see Sun publish artciles like these. Now i'll get some real news with my daily dose of testostereone.

Posted by: Vikrant_Camberleykar at October 1, 2005 10:23 AM

What a crock this is. When are the Brits going to start fighting back ?

Posted by: TooBad at October 1, 2005 10:45 AM

We have been here before.
I am still searching for the story about the Moslems who objected to an pub names something like The Pig and Whistle or the Three Jolly Pigs. There was the problem Mothercare had (this is online and can be found on a google search) with declining to sell Pooh and Tigger withour Piglet. There was the woman asked to remove her crucifix from the window facing the mosque. That was reported here but I can't find the story quickly.

I recommend that the removed pigs should immediately be replaced with - http://www.snoozeshop.com/acatalog/Products_Cuddly_Monkey_Plush_Toys_157.html

And a round of bacon sandwiches, white bread, tomato sauce, should be purchased from the nearest cafe.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at October 1, 2005 11:13 AM

Latest Islamic studies conducted in Saudi Arabia have shown that pigs are more intelligent than Believers. This is the reason that pigs do not hate Believers while for later pig is Haram. pl do not consider this "Islamic study" as joke.

Posted by: iqbal at October 1, 2005 11:19 AM

Do diabetic muslims know that the insulin they themselves with is made from pigs plasma? I never heard them complain.

Posted by: Anti-PC at October 1, 2005 11:25 AM

Let them huff and puff and try to blow the House Where the Infidels Live down. As long as no one inside lets in lots of wolf-cubs (however harmless they may outwardly seem), and as long as the house itself is sturdily built (at this point, it may need some concrete reinforcement), the structure will hold.

Posted by: Hugh at October 1, 2005 11:31 AM

That's good, iqbal. You helped to get my blood pressure back down.

I get so damned mad, I want to go flush a Koran.

Posted by: texan at October 1, 2005 11:42 AM

Time to rid our supermarkets of pork products, too, I imagine. I think it's just outrageous that innocent, unsuspecting Muslims be made to endure shopping in a premises where pork is sold. The psychological harm this pork must surely be causing is simply criminal.

Oh, and Hugh, speaking of huffing and puffing, we can kiss goodbye to the Three Little Pigs, too. Poisons young Muslims minds, that filthy, intolerant tale.

Posted by: spect8or at October 1, 2005 11:52 AM

Aaarrrrgggghhhh!!!
http://www.hollywoodlostandfound.net/wilhelm/

Posted by: Carolyn2 at October 1, 2005 11:57 AM

Here is the one that really expresses my total frustration!
http://www.sound-effect.com/sounds/human/Scream2.aiff

Posted by: Carolyn2 at October 1, 2005 12:03 PM

I demand that my local Council ban:

- all women with permed hair –-it’s offensive to my belief in naturalness.
– all women with coloured hair –- as above, except for those who do a good job and keep it natural looking.
– excess jewellery on anyone. This symbolizes the crass materialism of the West, unless I think otherwise, which I tend to do when the jewellery is on my own person.
– all leather shoes –- I’m a vegetarian and this disturbs my sensibilities, but leather shoes bought on sale might be OK - depends on their colour.
– all party platter meat trays brought in for late night Council meetings. As a vegetarian I demand that no offensive flesh be put within range of my sight. Feed me Chinese vegetable chow mein instead, as long as it’s on the Council’s tab.
– all logos and designer label clothes -- they are offensive to my belief in a just and equitable marketplace, except when I find the Jones New York label on sale, then it might be OK.
– all male cologne –- it reminds me of my ex-boyfriend thus destroying my mental equilibrium.
– all landscape pictures on the wall -– they make my mind drift away from the business at hand (ex-boyfriend and I once had a picnic in a spot like that ...)
– all coffee, unless it’s fair trade. I find the other offensive because it’s a symbol of oppression and corporate greed (unless it’s Tim Hortons –-then it’s OK)
–all tea - ditto (unless it’s any brand of Earl Grey – then it’s OK)
–all chocolate - ditto (unless it’s Toblerone – then it’s OK, or a gift from some grateful constituent, then Enjoy!)
– all Piggy articles and references -- that includes, Miss Piggy, Piglet, Piggy-wig, Three Little Pigs, piggy banks, pigtails, pigging out, and any and all piggish behaviour. Why? Because in the spirit of equal treatment for all, I demand that cows and horses and sheep receive their share of the spotlight. In all fairness to Council, I’ve noticed some progress in this area. Council is now acting cowed and following like sheep, but to be fair to all barnyard animals, Council now must get some horse sense.

Posted by: Jen at October 1, 2005 12:48 PM

If I worked at that council, I'd come to work drenched in pig blood.

Posted by: A.G.Frederick III at October 1, 2005 1:22 PM

"all male cologne –- it reminds me of my ex-boyfriend..."
-- from the list of bans posted above

As to this demand, why not limit it to the particular brand of that ungrateful and possibly untrustworthy ex-boyfriend? Was it Drakkar Noir, a blend whose name promises adventure (the Paris-to-Dakar road race), and the virility of the African bush? Or something else? One must keep one's wits about one; this is not a time for scentslessness.

Posted by: Hugh at October 1, 2005 1:29 PM

Hugh,

I'm getting a whiff of hyperbole here!

Yrs
Robert

Posted by: jihadwatch at October 1, 2005 1:32 PM

What's hyperbole to a satyr?

Posted by: Hugh at October 1, 2005 1:41 PM

Who cares??? Muslims say and do a lot of things that I find offensive, yet I doubt that they will change one iota of their behavior, speech or dress so as not to offend me. Let the council have their pigs.

Posted by: epg at October 1, 2005 2:15 PM

VOTES, thats what it is all about.
To all who have not seen it before I have pasted a story below from the Muslim news. it is stomach churning stuff.
This is the article that my merry band I busy posting to all indian sikh/hindu temples, community leaders etc.
Also I read in the Telegraph today that all three UK parties support turkey's bid to join the EC, such obscene shortsightedness.

Labour and British Muslims:
Can we dream the same dream?
by Mike O`Brien MP
Are some Muslims about to vote against the best friend they have ever had in government? Can people really claim that the Labour Government is a friend of Muslims after Iraq? The answer may surprise you.

Understandably, many Muslims are very angry about the war. Traditionally they have supported Labour but some are now switching to the Liberal Democrats, Respect or even the Tories. But the real question is whether there is a danger that anger may be causing Muslims to vote against their own long-term interests?

Putting a cross on a ballot paper is much more than just about expressing anger; a General Election is not some kind of referendum on the Governments` record on one issue. It is about making a balanced political judgment between political parties and deciding which of them should have a majority in a Parliament. It is about the kind of country you want to live in. It is about considering what a Labour Government rather than a Conservative Government has done and will do in the future for Muslims. I suggest that a vote, which weighs in the balance the long-term implications for Muslims, is the right approach.

We all know the importance of Iraq. Indeed, some people will try to convince you that it is the only issue that matters. Most however, will look beyond Iraq to also consider other issues such as the fate of the Palestinians. Despite the many setbacks over the last few years, the creation of a Palestinian state is a cause that the Prime Minister has repeatedly raised with great conviction and never abandoned. He has even declared it to be his personal priority. It is the key to peace in the Middle East. He has long advocated a two state solution, Palestine and Israel, side by side, both at peace. The reality is that the only way a Palestinian state will be created is if Israel is prepared to concede land it currently occupies on the West Bank and Gaza. Whether we in Britain like it or not, the reality of the modern world is that only the Americans can influence Israel. And it seems only Tony Blair has any influence with the Americans. Can anyone seriously imagine that Michael Howard or Charles Kennedy would be able to significantly influence George W. Bush? If they do, then they need to join the real world. The Prime Minister who has the most political clout to help the Palestinians is Tony Blair.

No one claims that the creation of a Palestinian state is going to be an easy ride for Tony Blair or for the Labour government but we are willing to stay the distance, no matter how difficult it gets. The Labour government and the Prime Minister have a record of arguing strongly that the creation of a Palestinian state is essential to peace and justice, and that any settlement must be based upon land being given for peace in line with UN Resolution 242. When the Americans and Israelis refused to negotiate with Yasser Arafat, Tony Blair promptly sent myself as the Foreign Office Minister, to visit Yasser Arafat in the Muquata in Ramallah to convey the message that we had not abandoned him. Tony Blair’s message was clear: we will work with the elected leader of the Palestinians, even if the Americans will not. On the issue of the assassination of the leaders of Hamas, Jack Straw as the Foreign Secretary was the first Western politician to condemn Israel’s actions.

Soon after the recent US elections, Tony Blair travelled to Washington to make it very clear that he wanted to see the road map to a Palestinian state opened up. If we are to have a Palestinian state in the next five years, then a key player in creating it will be the British Prime Minister, who will need to have world influence. In practice, only Tony Blair has the required credentials and track record. The reality remains that with George W. Bush in the White House, neither Charles Kennedy nor Michael Howard has the clout to deliver.

Are you still unconvinced that the Muslims need or should want a Labour Prime Minister in Downing Street? Well, let‚s compare Tony Blair with previous Prime Ministers. He is the first Prime Minister to have ever read the Qur‚an, to quote from it and to talk about it. Can anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher or John Major doing the same? Whilst in opposition, Tony Blair had developed a genuine dialogue and relationship with a number of Muslims and Islamic organisations, based not just on getting votes but also on his interest in assisting Muslims achieve their rightful place in British life.

After 1997 Muslim groups were welcomed into the Home Office, the Foreign Office and 10 Downing Street. For the first time ever, four Muslim peers were appointed to the Lords and the first Muslim Labour MPs were elected. Even today, no other Party has a Muslim in the Commons. Labour is also the Party that has the largest number of Muslim councillors. We are proud of this achievement, but we have not yet finished. If you ask who are the only Party running Muslims in seriously winnable seats for the next election, the only answer is Labour.

The Muslim Council of Britain has been at the forefront of lobbying the Government on issues to help Muslims. Recently Iqbal Sacranie, the General Secretary of the Council, asked Tony Blair to declare that the Government would introduce a new law banning religious discrimination. Two weeks later, in the middle of his speech to the Labour Party Conference, Tony Blair promised that the next Labour Government would ban religious discrimination. It was a major victory for the Muslim community in Britain.

But this is not the first and only time that Labour Party has delivered for Muslims. When I was a Home Office Minister in 1997, the MCB lobbied me to introduce not only a new law which would increase sentences for racial violence and harassment but also to recognise the particular problems faced by Muslims. As a result we were able to amend the law to make religion a factor in any violence and harassment. Today, new Crime Bill, announced in the Queens Speech is coming before Parliament to toughen the laws on incitement to religious hatred. This has upset some M.P.`s such as Evan Harris MP, the Liberal Democrat spokesman, who has said he will oppose it because it is unnecessary!

Within weeks of coming to power, people will remember that Labour also repealed the appalling Primary Purpose Rule that discriminated against people coming to join their families in Britain, from Pakistan, Bangladesh and from other Muslim countries. This law introduced by the Conservatives caused a great deal of anguish and had broken up families. Labour promised to repeal it and promptly delivered after the election.

The new Labour Government was the first British government to give state recognition and funding to Muslim schools. Previously only Christian and Jewish schools had been allowed this opportunity. The Liberal Democrats opposed Muslim schools and Labour had to push legislation through the Commons against their strong opposition. At the same time the Foreign Office adopted a new policy to provide support for the Hajj delegation, sending doctors and administrators to Saudi Arabia to help British Hajjis. We are the only Western government to do so. Thousands of Muslims who travelled to Mecca have benefited from the change. And each year in the Commons there is now an Eid celebration, often attended by the PM, as he did this year.

I also remember when the issue arose about Muslims being included in the Remembrance Day ceremonies. Tony Blair was appalled that Muslims were being excluded and changed the protocol. He insisted that at all future civic ceremonies, including for example the commemoration of September 11 at St Paul’s Cathedral, Muslims would have a prominent role.

And across a whole range of social issues, on creating jobs, reducing poverty, on welfare reform and housing policy, Muslims have benefited from Labour government policies. Take for example the Sure Start initiative, which financed the new crèche opened at the London Muslim Centre in East London. It provides childcare facilities for the predominantly Muslim women in the whole area, in a place in which they have confidence in leaving their children.

In 2000 I took through the Commons the first Race Relations laws in a quarter of a century. Labour wanted to ensure that all public services had an obligation to promote good community relations. The impact of the law will be wide ranging.

Some might say these changes are all the result of pressure from within the Labour Party rather than the personal influence of Tony Blair himself. It is certainly true that it is the Labour Party as a whole which has had the support of Muslims; it is the Party that has supported migrant communities and the Welfare State. But Tony Blair’s keen interest in Muslim issues has been a key driver of progress through the last seven years. He was keen to ensure the interests of Muslims were considered and protected when Labour introduced the Minimum Wage, the Working Families Tax Credit and community development strategies.

It was also the PM who was personally committed to the intervention in Kosovo to help the Muslims who were being murdered by the Serbs. This was an intervention entirely for humanitarian reasons, opposed by many on the liberal Left of British politics like George Galloway. Many Muslims in Kosovo owe their lives to British intervention. Likewise, British funding of the reconstruction of Bosnia has helped Bosnian Muslims slowly re-build a future. It is Tony Blair who has personally championed the entry of Turkey- a Muslim country into the EU and he has taken a personal interest in dealing with the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. One of the key policies promoted by the Chancellor, Gordon Brown has been development aid, with 33 of the countries receiving British foreign aid being Muslim. Since 1997, the British aid assistance to Bangladesh alone has doubled.

You will have noticed I have left out the anti-terrorism legislation out of this balance sheet. There is no denying that this is a difficult issue; so let me tackle it head on. After the Madrid bombing, no one seriously doubts that we face concerns about terrorism but many have concerns about the ways in which anti-terrorism laws are being implemented.

I come from an Irish Catholic family brought up in the West Midlands. I remember the aftermath of the Birmingham pub bombings, with the introduction of anti-terrorism laws and internment. The 1970s were a time when understandably fear and anger went through the Irish Catholic community in Britain. Remember the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four who were Convicted and later acquitted? Yet, despite the fact that problems arose in implementation of these laws we realise now that the anti terrorist laws were always targeted at terrorists and not at all Irish Catholics. So too today, the legislation is targeted at terrorists, not at all Muslims. Today, Ministers are doing the best they can to ensure that the laws are not wrongly used and have publicly reject the notion that these are anti-Muslim laws. Tony Blair has personally and repeatedly made this clear.

So, I ask Muslims to look at the balance sheet on the Labour government and Blair as a whole. The balance sheet shows show both positives and negatives. No one is suggesting we can possibly measure the suffering of Iraqi’s since the war, any more than we can forget the countless Iraqis that Saddam himself killed during his long tyranny.

It is true that the Prime Minister has disagreed openly with Muslims on removing Saddam and some Muslim may feel betrayed, but, across a range of other vital issues from Kosovo to policies in Britain, the Labour government are trying to deliver an agenda that has shown consideration and respect for Muslims.

And it is also important to reflect on the fact that in some seats a vote for the Liberal Democrats or Respect may be an outlet for anger over Iraq, but, in a House of over 600 MPs, it is unlikely to elect more than a handful of the minority party. The real question is who is in Government? What a protest vote could do across the country is to switch votes away from the Labour column and allow the Party that is in second place in most seats to gain a considerable numbers of M.P.`s. That Party is the Conservative Party, not the Liberal Democrats, nor Respect. The truth is that, if you vote Lib Dem or Respect, then you could end up with a Conservative MP and Conservative Government. That is the mathematics of our system of voting, whether people want it or not. Ask yourself what will Michael Howard do for British Muslims? Will his foreign policy aim to help Palestine? Will he promote legislation to protect you from religious hatred and discrimination? Will he create more jobs or support greater equality? Will he give you the choice of sending your children to a faith school? Will he stand up for the right of Muslim women to wear the hijab? Will he really fight for Turkey, a Muslim country, to join the EU? These are not academic questions. Remember, the last thing we want is to vote in anger and repent at leisure as Michael Howard, with a big smile on his face, walks through the door of Number Ten.

Tony Blair’s record on Iraq may anger many Muslims but his record is about more than one issue. But the issue is about who rules Britain and across a range of issues the Labour Government has delivered again and again for British Muslims. Labour values equality, compassion and a multi-religious Britain and so in that sense we share the dream of most British Muslims. To create that kind of society, we still have a lot to do if we are given the chance.

Mike O‘Brien is the Minister for Energy in the DTI, he is the Labour MP for North Warwickshire.

Home | http://www.themuslimweekly.com/advertiseus.aspx| Advertisement | Contact us
Copyright © All Rights Reserved 2004

Posted by: apostate_islam at October 1, 2005 2:22 PM

Anacletus,

The EU is considering splitting the UK up into nine new countries, each to have their own flag.
If this happens, I can't see any of these having a cross.

Posted by: Elephant at October 1, 2005 2:22 PM

I don't know how many of you saw this...what we need control of the internet.
/That is sarcasm BTW

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050930/ap_on_hi_te/internet_control

Posted by: Carolyn2 at October 1, 2005 2:31 PM

Hugh,

I tried to remember the brand of that ex's cologne that I want to have banned - but I must have psychologically blocked it from my memory. All I can remember is that it had a large "X" in the name. But actually, for Dudley Council, I suppose that's reason enough.

Posted by: Jen at October 1, 2005 2:41 PM

Are we going to have to ban highschool football (American football) just because the ball is made out of pigskin? Yikes! High school football is almost a religion in most Texas towns. I hate to think what would happen if we let all those teenagers loose on Friday nights with no place to go. We'll all be back guarding our melon patches with shotguns, I guess.

Posted by: texan at October 1, 2005 2:56 PM

,,did a quick trademark search for Zam-Zam
..the sacred water from a well at mecca..

..no claim to it ,apparently..any entrepeneurs out there?

ZamZam(TM) Sport drink..it's got Zing!

Posted by: otterfisher at October 1, 2005 3:14 PM

apostate_islam

Melanie Phillips had a post on O'Brien's comments in the Muslim Weekly some months back.
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/000974.html
"O'Brien plays the anti-Jewish card"
The Daily Mail has spotted government minister Mike O'Brien's grovelling plea in Muslim Weekly to the Muslim community to vote Labour (see post below, 4 January). Indeed, it makes it its splash story today. Under the headline 'Shameless: Labour's cynical bid to win back the Muslim vote it lost over Iraq', ....
.... But interestingly, it focuses on another unpleasant aspect of this article — the unstated implication that Muslims should not vote for Michael Howard because he is a Jew:

http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/000977.html
"Scrambling for cover"
'A senior minister was forced to deny last night that he had been anti-semitic in accusing Michael Howard and another Jewish MP of failing to stand up for British Muslims. Mike O'Brien, the Energy Minister, issued a hasty statement after Mr Howard demanded an apology for remarks made by the minister in an emotionally charged appeal to Muslims to support Labour.

As for the piggy bit, just send them letters with the latest US Postal Issue of Muppet stamps - Miss Piggy.

Posted by: Cynic at October 1, 2005 3:39 PM

Cynic,

And in the UK you can buy farm animal stamps, one of which is a pig, though I'm not sure which breed, some sort of saddleback, I think. I'm afraid I'm pig ignorant.

Posted by: Elephant at October 1, 2005 4:03 PM

Seymour, thanks for the link to the council. I sent a nice long email. Did my civic duty for the week, even if it is overseas.

Posted by: texan at October 1, 2005 7:24 PM

Robert is exactly right. It is intolerance. The stress relievers may have been a mistake. But marching around the office confiscating Piglet cartoons is crazy. Tolerance is about putting up with things you don't like -- be it pigs, beefburgers, or hijabs. To define tolerance as the right to demand that anything offensive be banished from sight is the worst kind of newspeak.

Posted by: Viking5 at October 1, 2005 7:45 PM

Anacletus,
It has already happened...
Muslims in Britain have complained about the british flag on the tail of the British Airways aircrafts,and to prevent them from being offended any further,the whole fleet has removed the union jack from the fuselage.

Posted by: adela at October 2, 2005 1:35 AM

Mike O'Brien's letter makes one wander. Britan gets bombed after years of leacking muslims backsides.
It is interesting if Mrs. Blair understands what drives terrorists to bomb Britan the way she understood them when they bombed Israel.
Do British people understand that the mess in the Middle East is a direct result of FCO policy going back to the time of British mandate over Palestine?
And I have a news for you, Mr. O'Brien: with another arab state in The Middle East things will get worse, not better, as Britan will continue to give support to the terrorists just because they call themselves leaders or government as it has done in the past.

Posted by: pong at October 2, 2005 3:05 AM

Mike O'Brien's letter makes one wander. Britan gets bombed after years of leacking muslims backsides.
It is interesting if Mrs. Blair understands what drives terrorists to bomb Britan the way she understood them when they bombed Israel.
Do British people understand that the mess in the Middle East is a direct result of FCO policy going back to the time of British mandate over Palestine?
And I have a news for you, Mr. O'Brien: with another arab state in The Middle East things will get worse, not better, as Britan will continue to give support to the terrorists just because they call themselves leaders or government as it has done in the past. And London will see more bombs in the future.

Posted by: pong at October 2, 2005 3:05 AM

Mr O'Brien doesn't understand that we have people living in our midst who don't understand the rules of cricket and fair play. No matter how many politicos try to play ball with them, they have no intention of playing ball with us. Since Muslims arrived on our shores, there has been a concerted effort to change all the rules and our social infrastructure to suit them. The rights or feelings of other citizens simply don't count. The last time there was an attempt by another religion (Catholicism) at usurping power in England, it was crushed ruthlessly by Elizabeth 1 and her successors. If only politicians would try to learn a bit from history.

Posted by: londongirl at October 2, 2005 6:26 AM

I hope that all the non-muslims bring ham and bacon sandwiches to work and eat them conspicuosly.

Posted by: CGW at October 2, 2005 7:29 AM

Re: "Councillor Mahbubur Rahman, a practising Muslim, backed the ban. He said: “It’s a tolerance of people’s beliefs.”

The irony in this statement! No other cult can begin to compare.

Posted by: johnb at October 2, 2005 8:59 AM

As a Brit, I am in despair at the way my country is heading! I was brought up to believe that Britain had a proud history of strength and resolve in adversity. There's not a whiff of strength and resolve in the British now. Those must have been characteristics of previous generations. Or can one conclude that there isn't enough adversity yet? If this is the case, then bring on the adversity! Now!

Posted by: Mark at October 2, 2005 12:08 PM

As for tolerance, a quality the British are so famous for, along with fair play, then, as far as I can see, we show too much tolerance and practise too little fair play to ourselves!

I was in a shop recently and I got talking to the shopkeeper about how the British were too tolerant for their own good. His immediate retort was: Too tolerant! How can one be too tolerant! I, of course, was astounded that anyone could ask such a question.

If people think in this way, then I am afraid to say that there is no hope for the future of the British Isles.

People have become so complacent, I believe, because they have attained a level of comfort; so they don't want anything to jeopardize that comfort. As a result, they just give in. It is precisely this that Muslims play on to get their own way.

Brits beware!

Posted by: Mark at October 2, 2005 12:18 PM

Wait a second...
But was not muhammed himself a pig? I really don\t understand moslems...

Posted by: thomas. h at October 2, 2005 1:17 PM

Mark:

I too despair the way Britain is kow-towing to islam this and islam that. What many in Britain think is tolerance, is really apathy or not to rock the boat. Criticising a "religion", particularly one they know little off, is just not done.

Things will have to get a lot worse, like several separate incidents of bombs in Britain, might just wake us up and kick the muslims out of here - the one action that truly frightens the hell out of them - quite literally, as I will show below.

It is not going back to Pakistan or wherever, or the inability to suck on the welfare teat, but the realisation that they will be unable to wage Jihad on the infidel state from within, that truly frightens the mujahireen (muslim emmigrants). For it is in waging the Jihad that they book themselves a place in their paradise. Jihad by sabotaging the economy, jihad by impoverishing the state by scrounging on it, jihad by crime and the resultant expenditure. All good jihad.

In a way I'm satisfied that Britain is caving in so fast. For things to get better, they have to become a lot worse. So the faster they get worse the sooner will be the reaction. I hope.

For a Brit blogger who has similar concerns on the islamisation of Britain

http://uppompeii.blogspot.com/

Worth a look. Brit bloggers on this vital issue are few and far between and need support.

Posted by: DP111 at October 2, 2005 6:37 PM

Incidentally, i got a reply from my email to dudley council, it read "thank you for your email which has been forwarded to our finance dept. regards, tracey johnson, customer service advisor, dudley council plus"

poor tracey, hope she hasnt been totally inundated with emails like mine, but her stupid bosses are to blame and we have to get our point across

Posted by: freddiefreeloader at October 3, 2005 12:22 PM

Incidentally, i got a reply from my email to dudley council, it read "thank you for your email which has been forwarded to our finance dept. regards, tracey johnson, customer service advisor, dudley council plus"

poor tracey, hope she hasnt been totally inundated with emails like mine, but her stupid bosses are to blame and we have to get our point across

Posted by: freddiefreeloader at October 3, 2005 12:22 PM

Incidentally, i got a reply from my email to dudley council, it read "thank you for your email which has been forwarded to our finance dept. regards, tracey johnson, customer service advisor, dudley council plus"

poor tracey, hope she hasnt been totally inundated with emails like mine, but her stupid bosses are to blame and we have to get our point across

Posted by: freddiefreeloader at October 3, 2005 12:23 PM

sorry about the triple posting, i was apparently being vetted as a possible "abusive poster" or something (as if)

Posted by: freddiefreeloader at October 3, 2005 12:25 PM

Post all your disallowed Piggy items to Messrs Sacranie and co with a polite note that they require aslyum forthwith and have petitioned the Porcine relations Board to raise an action defending there right to convert to Islam.

Posted by: KnightTemplar at October 3, 2005 2:33 PM

I also remember when the issue arose about Muslims being included in the Remembrance Day ceremonies. Tony Blair was appalled that Muslims were being excluded and changed the protocol. He insisted that at all future civic ceremonies, including for example the commemoration of September 11 at St Paul’s Cathedral, Muslims would have a prominent role.

I believe Moslems already have a role in 9/11.

$10 bet: Within 5 years, the British will celebrate how the Moslems saved the firefighters from the 9/11 attack by Freemasons and Jews.

Posted by: Seymour Paine at October 4, 2005 9:36 AM