• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Paul Weston: The Multicultural Madness of Theresa May

Feb 3, 2015 12:24 pm By Robert Spencer

Theresa-MayThe Multicultural Madness of Theresa May
by Paul Weston

Western politicians have got themselves into a bit of a pickle over the violent rise of Islam both globally and within the once Christian West. Just as it would be difficult for a scientist to conduct experiments related to oil and water without first accepting the fact that They Just Don’t Mix, so it becomes similarly difficult for politicians to talk rationally about the predictable outcome of trying to mix together monocultural Islam and multicultural nothingness – without succumbing to some form of inevitable mental breakdown.

When we wilfully refuse to believe basic facts, such as the incompatibility of Islam and non-Islam, we retreat into fantasy or outright lies in order to deny the bleeding obvious. Highly educated men and women with PHD’s and Master’s degrees thus find themselves talking utter nonsense when it comes to Islam, simply because of their Politically Correct refusal to accept the awful, ghastly reality of Islam’s rigid belief system.

The pathologically irrational behaviour of British Home Secretary Theresa May is just such an example of the insanity that ensues when liberals pontificate upon Islam. She made a speech recently at the Conservative Party Conference which was so riddled with platitudes, contradictions, lies and fantasies that had it been submitted it as an end of term paper, she would have been laughed out of a school for slow learners let alone Oxford University from where she inexplicably graduated.

Some choice quotes from her speech are as follows:

Theresa May (TM): “All British people – including British Muslims – are free to practise their faith, and wear whatever clothes they choose….We know the overwhelming majority of British people want to be free. Free from danger. Free from fear. Free from prejudice. Free from discrimination. Free to practise their religion. Free to observe their cultures and traditions. Free to dress as they like. Free to be educated as they choose. Free to work where they wish. Free to live with whom they love. Free to raise their families as they see fit. Free to get on with their lives. We must not become a society where these things are no longer possible.”

Memo to TM: Here is the oil and water bit darling, which appears to have sent you clean over the edge of sanity. If I understand it correctly, you want Muslims to freely practice their faith, culture and traditions….such as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), forced marriage, honour violence, the death sentence for apostasy etc – none of which you personally or politically/professionally agree with and have passed laws against – even as you state we must not become a country where Muslims are unable to observe their culture and traditions…..It comes as no surprise these varied contradictions of yours have caused an apparent short circuit in your cranial cortex.

TM quote: “We need to defeat the ideology that lies behind the threat. The extremists believe in a clash of civilisations – a fundamental incompatibility between Islamic and Western values, an inevitable divide between “them and us”. They demand a caliphate, or a new Islamic state, governed by a harsh interpretation of Shari’ah law. They utterly reject British and Western values, including democracy, the rule of law, and equality between citizens, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, religion or sexuality. This hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam itself. And it is rejected by the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Britain and around the world. Let the message go out that we know Islam is a religion of peace and it has nothing to do with the ideology of our enemies. Let us stand side by side with the British Muslims who are coming together and saying “not in my name”.

Memo to TM: What is this mysterious ideology that we need to defeat? Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism? Scientology? Zoroastrianism? Here’s the thing Theresa, could it just possibly be Islam? If it is not Islam, then what exactly is this invisible, threatening ideology which knows no name? Also, what is a “harsh interpretation” of Sharia law? Sharia law is Sharia law. It Just Is. Period. And why do you say this is rejected by an overwhelming majority of British Muslims when 40% of British Muslims do actually want to live under sharia law? Finally, who are these British Muslims you claim are stating Not In Our Name…. because I haven’t seen them out on the streets. Seriously, where are they, you foolish, dangerous, vapid, disingenuous woman?

TM quote: “ISIL are just one of the terrorist threats we face. There is Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, like-minded groups in Libya, Al Shabaab in East Africa, terrorist planning in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and home-grown extremists, who, like the 7/7 bombers, were radicalised here in Britain. Last year, Drummer Lee Rigby was murdered by Islamist extremists in London. Dealing with those threats requires a deep understanding of what is going on in the world.”

Memo to TM: What is going in the world, babes, is the rise of pure, unadulterated Islam. Unfortunately for Britain, your “deep understanding” of Islam amounts to your oft repeated platitude of Islam is a religion of peace (© all Western politicians) which is simply not true – see one weeks’ worth of news stories today if you cannot be bothered to read a history book. Honey bunch.

TM quote: “…there are no simple answers. We can’t go around the world trying to re-make it in our own image. We can’t just remove dictators and assume that liberal democracy will follow.”

Memo to TM: But isn’t this exactly what you have done? You backed the “Arab Spring” and the overthrow of Gaddafi. You wanted to depose Assad in Syria. Grown-ups (right-wing fascists, racists and Islamophobes….) told you it would end in tribal chaos and war. Which of course it has because This Is The Reality Of Islam. Really Theresa, how is it possible you are a high ranking politician?

TM quote: “When you look at what is going on across the Middle East, there is a battle raging for the heart and soul of Islam itself. And it is not for Britain, or any other Western power, to try to resolve it. Only the many peoples of the world’s Muslim countries can determine their future….we have to disentangle our own national interest from the struggle that is going on in the Middle East and across the Muslim world……..that judgement will sometimes be difficult to make. But in the case of ISIL the danger is clear. That is why it’s right that we are part of the international coalition dedicated to ISIL’s destruction.”

Memo to TM: Britain and other Western powers should not interfere in this ongoing Islamic catastrophe but on the other hand we should interfere in this ongoing Islamic catastrophe? You are a Home Secretary Ms May, you are not an altogether stupid woman, so please tell me how any logical, sane, rational person could make any sense at all of your surreally contradictory witterings?

TM quote: “I am going to talk to you about the deadly terrorist threat we face. David Haines was a tireless humanitarian worker who helped Muslims….not just in Syria….but in Bosnia, South Sudan and Libya…. he was murdered by terrorists, simply for being British. The terrorists who murdered David Haines like to call themselves the Islamic State. But I will tell you the truth: They are not Islamic. And they are not a state. Their actions have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran.”

Memo to Theresa May (TM): They are Islamic and they are following Mohammed’s teachings to the letter: “I have been ordered to fight all men until they testify there is no God but Allah…Strike terror into the hearts of the disbelievers, smite at their necks….etc.” This Is Simply An Unarguable Fact Ms May And You Are Engaging In Dishonest Fantasy.

TM quote: “Here in the city of Birmingham, local people know the problem only too well. Because it was here that extremists infiltrated state schools and sought to impose a hardline curriculum on children. Across the country, there are concerns about the way Shari’ah law is being applied, the way women are told to live and the intolerant attitudes shown to people of different beliefs and ways of life. ….we must be clear to people that the United Kingdom is a great place to live….we celebrate different ways of life, we value diversity, and we cherish our freedom to lead our lives as we choose.”

Memo to TM: Are you utterly insane? You cannot state we celebrate different ways of life and value diversity whilst at the same time complaining about people because they lead different lives in line with the “diverse” values of 7th century Arabia. The whole point of diversity is “difference” sweetie-pie! This is as foolish as stating you value the diversity entailed in living with peckish lions and then complaining about their illiberally carnivorous behaviour when they unsurprisingly eat you. You can celebrate British values or you can celebrate Islamic values. You cannot, you simply cannot celebrate both! A five year-old would understand this basic fact. Why cannot you?

I have to ask you, in all seriousness Ms May, are you A) Suffering from a form of mental illness? B) Both remarkably stupid and illogical? C) A coward? D) A traitor? E) A typical careerist politician engaging in lies and deception in order to ensure the inevitably violent racial/religious break-down occurs only after you have retired somewhere safe with your gold plated pension?

And a final question, Home Secretary May: When our politicians refuse to recognise reality, is it likely that reality will just disappear, or will it remain to devour our children?

Paul Weston is Chairman of the British political party Liberty GB.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, United Kingdom, Useful idiots, willful ignorance Tagged With: Theresa May


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Don McKellar says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 12:40 pm

    Great piece. The irony of her delusions are completely lost on her. The reality of the situation is as far over her head as the vapour trail from a 767, Madness is an appropriate description for the state she is in based on this speech; she dwells in a idealized leftist dream world, virtually completely disconnected from reality. The dreamer will not wake up no matter how much they are shaken and how much violence and noise and mayhem goes on around them — the dream is too beautiful to break away from it and wake up to horrible reality.

    • Spot On says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 7:04 am

      How nice it must be for her to be so very stupid. How else could she continue to sleep at night.

    • James Foard says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 12:11 pm

      “But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked.
      “Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.”
      “How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice.
      “You must be,” said the Cat, “or you wouldn’t have come here.”
      ― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

    • M S case says

      Feb 5, 2015 at 12:28 am

      How do these people get into office is beyond my thinking.

      • TH says

        Feb 5, 2015 at 8:56 am

        The same way Obama got into office by repeating platitudes like “Yes, we can”. Democracy needs an educated and critically thinking electorate to prosper. Nowhere does it exist these days. We now have a one party system (in the U.S. the Deomocrats) and a tame compliant press which also repeats the same platitudes. Academia is bought out by Saudi Arabia, so they feed this dribble to a public incapable and unwilling to think and alalyze what is being dished out to them. In Europe the right has simply given up its principles and joined the game with the left, the left halving lined the field and changes the goal posts when it likes. Tthe Repulican party is for good reasons called the “stupid party”.

  2. tesa says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 12:44 pm

    if it was just the silly rantings of a drug affected nutter, i could overlook the total denial of this person but it’s not. this is the metality that allows terrorists to remain in britain and keeps informed critics of islam out, thus will be the demise of a once free people.

    • nacazo says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 1:35 pm

      How can you be sure it’s not the silly rantings of a drug affected nutter???

      Just saying.

    • Bamaguje says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 8:08 am

      Indeed she doesn’t seem to know what she wants or believes. One moment she states – “They demand a caliphate, or a new Islamic state, governed by a harsh interpretation of Shari’ah law.”

      The next moment she asserts “This hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam itself.”

      Really? Sharia has nothing to do with Islam?
      She gaffes further:

      “ISIL are just one of the terrorist threats we face. There is Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, like-minded groups in Libya, Al Shabaab in East Africa, terrorist planning in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and home-grown extremists, who, like the 7/7 bombers, were radicalized here in Britain.”

      And all these Jihadist groups have nothing to do with the Islam.

      “Last year, Drummer Lee Rigby was murdered by Islamist extremists in London.”

      “Islamic extremists”? I thought she (like Obama) said the violence had nothing to do with Islam.

      • Mr Pendle says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 12:05 pm

        Well people, it’s getting on top now. The more Islamic madness, the more the spot lights hit the politicians. Mr Obama is running the show, make no mistake. Mr Cameron will Shut Up and Do as he is Told. Most people are beginning to understand there is something wrong here. Mrs May is not mad but is simply doing what Mr Obama wants done. The British, along with the rest Europe, have no choice but to do has they are told because of the Muzzi populations in their countries. Until Obama decides it’s time to sort this out, it will be a nightmare biweekly. The strategy for Obama is to wait this out for two years, leave the problem to the next administration to save face on a poor decision to leave Iraq. The problem is, Cameron does not have two years to wait. At want point, does Europe act alone. The more politicians that lie, the closer to civil war. The stage is being set and Johnny Jihad is coming home soon, and for sure, he or she, is not bringing back a stick of rock.

      • M S case says

        Feb 5, 2015 at 12:34 am

        If isis and other hateful radical terrorist is not part of islam then why does islam not stand up and be counted. All the supposedly moderate muslim people in the muslim states must be cowards. They are being killed by their own people Of course nobody else is doing much either. Dropping a few firecrackers on them occasionally just won’t get it. .Fire bombs and carpet bombing might help but probably a bunch of those so-called moderate muslims would be killed also.

    • Bamaguje says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 8:24 am

      Theresa May sounds confused. One moment she states – “They demand a caliphate, or a new Islamic state, governed by a harsh interpretation of Shari’ah law.”

      The next moment she asserts “This hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam itself.”

      Really? Sharia has nothing to do with Islam?

      She gaffes further:

      “ISIL are just one of the terrorist threats we face. There is Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, like-minded groups in Libya, Al Shabaab in East Africa, terrorist planning in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and home-grown extremists, who, like the 7/7 bombers, were radicalized here in Britain.”

      And all these Jihadist groups have nothing to do with the Islam.

      “Last year, Drummer Lee Rigby was murdered by Islamist extremists in London.”

      “Islamic extremists”? I thought she (like Obama) said the violence had nothing to do with Islam.

  3. Salah says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 1:01 pm

    The British people have only three options:

    1- A massive peaceful popular uprising to bring down their PC leaders.
    2- A bloody civil war which they may or may not win.
    3- A total surrender.

    My people chose the first, AND THEY WON.

    http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-end-of-muslim-brotherhood.html

    • zulu says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 7:44 pm

      My money is on this option.
      2- A bloody civil war which they may or may not win.

    • michael hughes says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 6:04 am

      I have a horrible feeling it will come down to civil war as the present Government of the day and the other two main parties are all hindering freedom of speech and expression where the common man and woman are unable to express them selves in a supposed demoracy either through rule of law thats biased to political thinking and the BBC a law unto its self on what they perceive to be good to show to the people of England. And to think the problem people of England are only 2.4% of the populalation so wait till there 25 to 35% and see what troubles you all have this could be only 25 years away.

      • DrJohn says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 12:01 pm

        I believe that I am a highly educated, middle class Catholic. Until recently I always thought of myself as “liberal”. However, I and my family and friends, will NEVER be subjugated by a 7th Century, peasant, evil, supremacist, nazi ideology, and nor will many others in our green and pleasant land. Accordingly, therefore, unless hope in the UK Independence Party, who acknowledge “the enemy within”, is fulfilled, there WILL be civil war and we are being forced into it by both David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the lunatic Lib Dems. We must form a much stronger alliance with our British Jewish friends and with Israel as we will need their support and backing. We British must also openly support people like Pastor Jay Smith, Tommy Robinson and Paul Weston. Whilst Teresa May does not allow Robert Spencer into the UK we will be getting, hopefully, Usama Dakdok sometime this year and we must support him in great numbers. The war is now on. God bless Great Britain.

        • James Foard says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 12:17 pm

          God bless you.

  4. boer says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 1:21 pm

    “Cranial cortex” is a mixed metaphor.

    The cranium is the skull, the cortex is the grey matter.

    There is no “cranial cortex”.

    Like there is no “moderate Islam”!

  5. Mahmoud says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 1:36 pm

    “Sharia law is Sharia law. It Just Is”

    What utter nonsense. It is him who would get laughed out of a school for slow learners for that statement. Sharia law has a vast number of differences, both between and within the different madhabs, ranging from the big to the small. How can he say “it just is” when it has been subject to so much change and interpretation throughout the centuries?

    • Bradamante says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 4:49 pm

      Can you give us an example of a mainstream, respected school of sharia jurisprudence which affirms that it is *not* the duty of Muslims to attempt to establish sharia as the law of the land everywhere?

      • Western Canadian says

        Feb 3, 2015 at 5:10 pm

        No, this lying idiot cannot give you an example. And he knows it, as he is knowingly lying.

        • terry says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 12:43 pm

          Mahmoud,

          Wow, you got us really scared and convinced with your pseudo intellectual and articulate response!

          Let’s see, we’ll take three Muslim countries, far from each other, who have the Sharia as the law of land, and compare their laws to see if there are any differences.

          Saudi Arabia, Islamic state in Iraq and Syria, and Afghanistan. Public executions, usually beheadings; cutting hands of thieves; public executions for adulterers, usually by stoning; lashes for different minor perceived crimes; Islamic banking; code of dress for women (complete black or dark hijab, in many cases with burqa or niqab); killing of apostates (those who leave Islam); female role in society, female social norms and rules of conduct; how to deal with Christians and Jews, how to deal with other faiths; how to split wealth of a deceased person to his children, boys and girls, in what ratio; how many women a man is allowed to marry in any given moment, grounds for divorce; what kind of punishment for infidelity; honour killing; jihad; Islamic commerce, profit;…….etc.

          In almost all, if not all, previously mentioned cases, the law is precise to the letter, if there is a difference, only superficial while the core is the same. For example sale and consumption of alcohol are forbidden, while it is an outright, no exception kind of law in ISIL and once Taliban controlled Afghanistan, In Saudi Arabia, where a lot of qualified western professionals are needed and employed, there will be special designated complexes, compounds or areas where sometimes they live, work and socialize there, and most probably, only there alcohol will be available for them. Sharia in such situation is applied in the public realm and with the general population.

          Another possible difference, is the kind and degree of punishment for certain crimes. Here again, the difference is superficial or almost negligible to be counted. In ISIL, Taliban controlled Afghanistan, someone who leaves Islam would most probably be beheaded while In Sudan, where Sharia is the law the same person would be executed by hanging or a shooting squad (that’s one of the reasons, I didn’t include Sudan in the comparison).

          Meanwhile, in all Muslim countries, excluding those fully enforcing Sharia laws, one will find varying degrees of sharia apllication directly or indirectly and more similarities than differences, even in those marketing themselves as open or more secular.

          Honour killings, social norms and behaviour, blasphemy laws, criticism of anything Islamic, Islamic supremacism, consistent uniform hate of Jews and Israel, fear, paranoia and suspicion of the non Islamic world, all of these things one can find them easily and without fail in Egypt, Sudan, Lybia, Tunisia, Algeria, Morroco, Palestinian territories, Syria, Iraq, Gulf states, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malysia and any other place in the world where the majority are Muslims.

          Mahmoud, if you come to this site open to examine things honestly and learn, you will find a lot of sincere people eager to share and exchange knowledge with you. Meanwhile if you come here simply to continue spreading lies and delusion about your cult religion, you are wasting your time and above all, ours.

    • Mirren10 says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 5:06 pm

      Mahmoud, you’re talking crap, and you know it. You’ve come to the wrong place to serve up your nonsense.

      In every country where sharia is the law of the land, it exacts the same penalties, even when those countries are thousands of miles apart. You know it, and we know it.

      Go and peddle your meretricious taqqyah somewhere else. You won’t gain any traction here.

    • Angemon says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 5:44 pm

      Mahmoud posted:

      “Sharia law has a vast number of differences, both between and within the different madhabs, ranging from the big to the small.”

      So vast are those differences that you’re unable to name even one.

      But tell us, Mahmoud, which versions of sharia teach that muslims and non-muslims are equal in the eyes of the law? Or that it’s ok to make cartoons of muhammad? Or that there’s no penalty for converting from islam to any other religion?

      • zebo says

        Feb 3, 2015 at 6:27 pm

        Well,there are some differences-
        in some countries sharia law is so tolerant,you can even choose the color and shape of the sword that should kill you for aposthasy.

        of course mahmoud forgott to mention that sharia law is the ultimate law from Allah that must not be changed-therefore ,if you are not killed for apostasy or don’t loose your hand for stealing,this happens because people willingfully missinterpreted in a human way and used every possible loophole to humanize islam and adjusted it in a reasonable way-
        but this does not change the fact that those laws still exist and that muslim who practise this soft kind of islam are not considered muslims by the muslim how follow precisely,
        BTW i’m pretty sure Mahmout is 100% aware of this,just like he is aware of mohammeds horrible crimes which prooves that he is the exact opposite of what mohammed said about himself: one of the most imperfect human beings ever,the messenger of death.

    • Crixus says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 1:35 am

      It’s irrelevant.

      I don’t give a crap about the jurisprudence and analysis of Sharia.

      The bottom line is we have our law in the UK, Common Law, Scots Law and European Law(at present).

      Sharia has no place in our legal system full stop. In any form.

    • duh_swami says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 5:06 am

      Mahmoud…How many versions of Allah’s laws are there? How can there be more than one?

      • Mischief Maker in the Land says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 6:22 am

        72 versions?

        • Joe Shmo says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 6:10 pm

          Really like what you did there!

  6. thomas pellow says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 2:56 pm

    And in the run up to the U.K General Election in just over three months we will have the unpleasant spectacle of Britain’s main political parties competing in their appeasement of Islamic interests to get Muslim votes.

  7. Michael Copeland says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 3:44 pm

    Theresa May declared in 2011:
    “we must be clear: the ideology of extremism and terrorism is the problem;
    legitimate religious belief emphatically is not.”
    Foreword to “Prevent” strategy (a free download).

  8. Michael Copeland says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 4:22 pm

    “Islam is a religion of power, fighting, jihad, beheading and bloodshed.”
    Imam Hussein Bin Mahmoud, prominent writer
    http://pamelageller.com/2014/08/prominent-cleric-cleric-justifies-beheadings-islam-religion-beheading.html/

  9. Hurricanegrade says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 4:47 pm

    I am not a fan of Theresa May but I don’t like the author’s trollish writing style. I don’t begrudge politicians like Theresa May (or George W Bush) for their platitudinous spin. If politicians spoke the truth they wouldn’t be elected. It’s much more important what they do.

    • Paul Weston says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 7:14 pm

      Hurricanegrade suggests a high degree of stratospheric activity, which does not really apply to your IQ level does it? By pointing out the lies and generally disingenuous bullshit of people in the front line of providing security for Britain I am guilty of “trollish” writing style? You feel it is important that politicians are elected on their ability to lie rather than bravely confront the truth? Are you for real?

      • TheBuffster says

        Feb 3, 2015 at 10:02 pm

        Paul, I think comments like this: “Hurricanegrade suggests a high degree of stratospheric activity, which does not really apply to your IQ level does it?” aren’t appropriate when you’re talking to posters – people whose background and knowledge and experience and age you don’t know, and who aren’t prominent leaders who deserve to be swatted down. A person may be open to explanation, willing to consider a different point of view, and needs to be helped along with some patience.

        I don’t see what good is accomplished by that personal attack on Hurricanegrade.

        Recently Robert Spencer posted a couple of articles about a school who allowed a Muslim student to have a “Hijab Day” for her senior project. Her “Hijab Day” focussed on the mean treatment meted out to girls who wear the hijab. CAIR was allegedly involved when the girl made her presentation to the school staff, although I don’t know whether Robert’s information was correct on that or not. Anyhow, Robert urged people to write to the principal of the school. As a result, some of the students and a couple of teachers posted comments on the two articles. I was disappointed with the way some of our regulars personally insulted the students, surely playing into the teenagers’ prejudices and expectations that this is a website for angry bigots, instead of treating these students as kids who might be open to our point of view if it’s presented with patience and by people who take the kids’ concerns seriously.

        When we’re dealing with people we don’t know, and if we want to get people thinking, questioning their premises, and perhaps eventually coming around to a more comprehensive grasp of the truth, there’s nothing like treating them as if they have minds that can be reached. Personal insults are rarely an effective means to that end.

        • terry says

          Feb 3, 2015 at 11:29 pm

          Paul Weston,

          I saw you talking on YouTube, recently, and I agree with every thing you said there.

          I appreciate your courage and sincerity, I admire and respect a lot, people like you!

        • terry says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 11:01 am

          TheBuffster,

          “I was disappointed with the way some of our regulars personally insulted the students, surely playing into the teenagers’ prejudices and expectations that this is a website for angry bigots, instead of treating these students as kids who might be open to our point of view if it’s presented with patience and by people who take the kids’ concerns seriously.”

          I felt the same thing about some of the comments that were posted in response to that student who wrote in response to the hijab day article. I was embarrassed to see that even when specifically, he/she, whose name, I think, was Parker, asked to have the conversation civilised and clean from calling names, some of the comments responding to his were exactly what he/she asked to be avoided. I think it was simply, shameful!

          All of us, who comment on this site, who hold dear to their hearts spreading the truth about Islam, should always remember that it’s not one-size-fits-all kind of responses that will help us achieve just that. A response to someone like Shabeer Hassan, who comment regularly on this site to continue misleading and lying to infidels, should be different from a response to, let’s say, another Muslim who comes for the first time and who may be sincere in his comment, to a response to a student like the one I mentioned above or to one given to one of us, a fellow “kaffir” or infidel because of a difference of opinion on a specific subject or point of view.

          Meanwhile, TheBuffster, I think it’s completely a different case, here. Paul Weston was responding in the article above not to a young student, who may be sincere, genuine in and open to seeking the truth but to a senior government minister, who may very well become prime minister, in the near future, Theresa May is in a position of authority and a supposed leadership, her opinions, comments and policies could literally affect the point of view, lives and even destinies of millions of people both in UK and outside of it, for the worse of course, given her record on this issue, so far!

          Hurricanegrade’s comment about Paul Weston response writing style is basically very common and to be expected these days, coming from this relatively new generation of politically correct, traditionally educated and articulate, mostly in the use language and grammar, however well-intentioned but who, without being conscious about it, became gradually more axed on aesthetics than real substance, which obviously should be far more important as sometimes it is literally a matter of life and death, in this case, potentially of millions of people, actually I would say, the survival or demise of humanity itself!

          Islamic invasion and Jihad against all of non believers, is here, whether we like it or not. I would even safely assume that it’s in its final phase of a complete conquest of the west; all it needs now to have the job done, is more tip toeing around the subject and threat of Islam by our politicians and mainstream media, more sugar coated comments by our ever increasing, politically correct PhD’s and university academics, ignorance and unawareness by the masses!

          Et voilà le tour est joué!

        • Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 5:37 pm

          Buffster, I think you are on to something when you say
          “When we’re dealing with people we don’t know, and if we want to get people thinking, questioning their premises, and perhaps eventually coming around to a more comprehensive grasp of the truth, there’s nothing like treating them as if they have minds that can be reached. Personal insults are rarely an effective means to that end.”

          It is a triumph of Islamic tactics that a skillful taqiyya artist is indistinguishable from a naive Hijab Day sympathizer.

          Hypothesis: The quickest way to get a Muslim to change his/her mind about Islam is to get him/her to accept the challenge of reading the Quran, while asking himself/herself, verse by verse, “Do I agree with that?”
          Will most teenage Muslimtos y Muslimitas in America believe the verses about talking ants, or agree that the best way to deal with a non-Muslim is as instructed in 47:4?
          But the Quran has its own built-in protection against this: It is so boring, repetitive, and stilted in language that readers will give up in a few days. Someone (I forgot who) has written a clear English version of the Quran that cuts out the repetitions, so a version like that would be more palatable.

          P.S. I enjoy Weston’s writing style in this contra-May phillipic, but without getting too Freudian, dare we infer, from the terms of endearment it contains (“sweeti-pie”), that we are dealing with a teenage crush?

        • TheBuffster says

          Feb 7, 2015 at 11:03 pm

          This is for Philip Jihadski, whose post has no reply button.

          Philip Jihadski said: “You can be as ‘disappointed’ as you like. As I recall, you’ve been on this site only very short while under “Buffster”. Your standing is reduced vis a vis your claim of “personal insults” to supposed “students” who commented on this site by ‘regulars’.”

          Buffster: “Ah, I see you’ve worked out that I used to post under another name. Very good. I was wondering if anyone would pick up on that. “Tallulahdahling” just didn’t seem to fit here on a website dedicated to fighting the demon jihadis.

          This makes me think that you may have picked up on something that I did not…

          Jihadski: “Anybody who’s been around here for a few years can recognize a concerted effort to flood the comments section with reams and reams of supposedly earnest high school students… who – strangely – all seemed to have the same vocabulary, tactics and complaints resident in their comments. You’re naïve to assume otherwise. “Personal insults” are subjective, I’ll remind you. Ditch the nanny attitude.

          Buffster: While it did occur to me that the students, or “students” might not be who they claimed to be, I did not notice if they were using the same “voice” in all their posts, if that’s what you mean. But I did notice that their arguments and tactics were mostly along the same lines.

          I didn’t think that this guaranteed that they were anything other than high school students who have gotten the usual PC education and been exposed to only one side of the argument. The kids who have absorbed the messages and mental methods that are all around them today *do* sound all alike. Those who participated in hijab day would be those most likely to be caught up in the PC way of looking at things.

          So when they heard about their principal getting bombarded by emails from angry JihadWatchers, they could have decided together to come over here without needing any outside encouragement. They undoubtedly all know each other and may even have texted or emailed each other about coming over here to play the role of heroic bigot-baiters, with their capes of virtue billowing in the wind. Why wouldn’t they all sound similar? They’ve all gone to the same school, had participated in HIjab Day and heard the “Islamophobia” presentation, and are growing up in the same PC world.

          As to the “nanny” attitude, the earlier you can get through to a person, the better. If more people took the time to get kids to listen to better ideas than the ones they get from the leftist culture and had started a long time ago, we’d all be in much better shape today.

          I don’t consider this to be a “nanny” attitude. I consider it to be damage control. A part of fighting the enemy, taking territory.

          Jihadski, quoting Buffster, aka “Talluladahling” (Wait, was I using just “Tallulah”? I don’t remember anymore) : “’…surely playing into the teenagers’ prejudices and expectations that this is a website for angry bigots…’”

          “Nonsense. How is it possible for you to know that those “students had pre-existing prejudices and expectations”? And to wrongly criticize the sometimes strongly-worded ripostes of “regulars at JWatch” as insults to an unreliable cyber-entity is just mamby-pamby illogic.”

          TheBuffster: How is it possible to know? In some cases, it was obvious, simply from what they said.

          And in the politically correct ethos that most kids live in these days, a lot of young people in high school and college really do think that people who aren’t PC must have bad motives. Since I didn’t know who I was talking to, I thought it would be more *productive and constructive* to assume that they were kids who needed to see “Islamophobes” who were *not* what they expected and were not kicking them in the teeth and behaving in a way they’d *likely* interpret as “hateful”, having their possible (I think *likely) prejudices confirmed.

          And I wasn’t criticizing posts for being “strongly worded”. I wasn’t disappointed in everybody’s responses that took the students, or “students”, to task for their faulty thinking and errors of knowledge. I was objecting to the posts that used personal insult.
          __________

          Jihadski, quoting Buffster: “’…instead of treating these students as kids who might be open to our point of view if it’s presented with patience and by people who take the kids’ concerns seriously.’”

          Jihadski as himself: “Since when is it incumbent upon me or anyone else, to spend our valuable time being “patient” and “serious” when who we are dealing with are obviously brain-dead Kalifornia Kids who have lapped up the CAIR/Lefty talking points and regurgitated them here, or CAIR plants, themselves?

          Buffster: Those are exactly the kids we need to spend time on. To assume that they’re brain-dead, that is, closed to a new perspective on things, is to give up the fight too soon.

          My husband has been campaigning for capitalism, free markets, individual rights for many years. He even had a radio show here in Melbourne where he did interviews and gave free-marketers and individualists a place to have their say on the radio. He works tirelessly in the cause of liberty.

          But when he was in high school and into his 20s he was a communist. He’s no dummy, and he’s definitely not brain-dead, but back then he even carried around Mao’s Little Red Book. He was a communist because, from what he’d read and his history classes in his particular Australian school, he’d come to believe that Marxism was the only *scientific* and reason-based system there was. He had never been introduced in school to the American founding fathers or British Enlightenment thinkers or even British or Australian history. His school history classes focussed on *Chinese* history, and his teacher put a beautiful sheen on Mao Tse Tung.

          There were things in Marxism that he wasn’t comfortable with, but he didn’t know of any better system, within his context. But sometime in his 20s a very friendly acquaintance who he respected recommended an author to him, and when he read the works of that author he saw that there *was* a more rational point of view that he needed to investigate. He did. He discovered the Enlightenment thinkers and began to read widely in the pro-liberty literature. That one helpful acquaintance changed his life and resulted in a tireless campaigner for liberty.

          I have plenty of other stories that could illustrate my point.

          Jihadski: “Besides, it was quite evident that those supposed “students” were not in any considerable fashion, “open to our point of view, as is evidenced by the almost robot-like counter-responses of those “students”, such as “Tyler”, “Chris”, “Natomas Native”, etc.”

          Buffster: Fine. Make snap-judgments if you prefer. Insult people on the assumption that their present way of thinking can’t be disturbed and opened. But I prefer to make the most of my opportunities to open minds. It might seem like you’re not getting through at the time, but it’s what they take away and mull over later that matters. Also, how about the kids from that school who may have come to read their friend’s posts and see what’s going on, but didn’t post themselves? You don’t know *who* is going to read what you’ve written and who you might influence for the better, especially if you come across as a civil, thoughtful, not-prickly person

          I’m always trying to get the most out of my encounters with opponents, because this war *must not* be lost. I – we – can’t afford the self-indulgence of turning minds away with insult. I don’t consider it a waste of my time. Even if a given opponent is unreachable, I get practice working on ways to get people thinking. And I’ve had success with this method often enough to feel confident that I’m on the right track.

          _________________________________

          Jihadski: “I think Mr. Weston has his particular style of writing – a little rough around the edges – but certainly within the bounds of righteous, focused anger.”

          Buffster: I think Mr.Weston’s article is fine just the way it is. I didn’t criticize him for the writing style in his article, attacking a person in public life whose job it is to move heaven and earth to get to the truth and protect her country’s liberty. I only criticised him for his overtly insulting reply to Hurricanegrade.

          Jihadski: “This is cyberspace. Old notions of “civility” and “bad words” are brought into question, anyway, with the fact of anonymity. It is very arguable that there is no such thing as a “personal” insult, in the first place, in cyber world.”

          Buffster: That makes no sense to me, Philip.

      • Wellington says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 9:23 pm

        I just wanted to tell you, Paul Weston, that your decimation of May was brilliant. As for your writing style, if it is “trollish,” then I say troll away because I will henceforth refuse to look upon anything in “troll world” as a negative. In fact, seems to me Britain (and all the West) could use more trolls and fewer Mays. Yep, more trolls, fewer Mays and no Islam. I submit that here’s a trinity that the entire West could prosper by.

        Again, my compliments. Great good luck to you.

        • terry says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 11:15 pm

          I completely agree with you!

    • TheBuffster says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 8:20 pm

      Hurricanegrade, I take it that you prefer a writing style that criticizes with less bite and anger, and that you are put off by a writing style that attacks in a sarcastic and insulting way, even when the informational content and criticism is sound.

      I get that, and I also prefer a tone that treats one’s opponents with courtesy, even while ripping their statements and policies to shreds. However, it is not illegitimate to write with the anger one rightly feels at politicians who don’t tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth about a deadly danger to every freedom-loving soul in the country. We need to shame our politicians when they appease evil and cover the facts, when it’s only straight-talking and clear thinking that will save our rights from those whose prophet commanded jihad from the most devout of his followers.

      At a time when people need to know the whole truth, politicians need to stop being politicians and to become statesmen, who seek out the whole truth and stand by it. We need leaders who care more about convincing the population rather than appeasing it to get elected.

      If a politician appeases the voters in order to get elected, instead of winning over their minds with what he or she really believes is true, and then takes measures that go against what the voters expected, that politician will be gone in the next election. He won’t have the people onside. Nor will he be surrounded by people in Congress or Parliament who will help him install his policies. But a statesman of integrity who continues to insist on what he believes is true, and who is shown to be right as time goes on, will more likely win in the end and be able to get something done.

      • James Foard says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 12:43 pm

        The Lord told us to be as wise as serpents and as gentle as doves.
        Diplomacy is the fine art of telling someone to go to hell in such a manner that they look forward to the trip. Let us be wise and prudent in our conversation. The Bible is the sword of the spirit, and “sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart”.
        Let us use our words wisely, “seasoned with salt” in this battle. Let us be faithful, in prayer and fasting, in charity, for our true enemy is ancient, and cunning, “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
        We must win this war in the spirit in order to win it in the flesh.

    • Denis MacEoin says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 8:10 am

      I completely agree. Weston’s language is rude, vituperative, unbalanced, and often crass. There may be much truth in saying May (like all other politicians) is foolish to believe that Islam is a religion of peace and that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. I have made the same point many times in articles of my own. But saying this in argumentative language will only raise hackles and harm our work to show Islamic realities. Shouting at politicians (which is what this amounts to) destroys any credibility one may have hoped to possess. This has to be a face to face debate, in which individuals with seriou qualifications in Islamic studie can demonstrate the roots of radicalism in scriptural and other texts, and in Islamic history. Everything like this (and many comments here) makes that debate less likely. I often feel angry too, but I know when being offensive is counter-productive.

      • terry says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 4:40 pm

        I completely disagree! You, Hurricanegrade and TheBuffster You came unjustifiably, in my view, very hard on Paul Weston’s style in the article above.

        This indicates very clearly to me that you didn’t grasp yet what special times we’re living in and what kind of enemy we’re facing!

        It’s exactly like this: you, three, Paul Weston, and several other tenants living in a high rise building and a fire has started and spreading rapidly in the building. Paul started calling people out of the building with a very loud booming voice, necessary to wake up those who are still asleep, those listening to loud music and those making love (in 7th heaven!).

        You three instead of appreciating what he’s doing, you come and say “Why you’re yelling at us? Why you’re aggressive?” Worse the manager of the building Theresa May is advising idiotically all tenants to stay in their apartments (flats) and that every thing is under control, which is clearly not the case, and even the three of you agree that it is not.

        Can you really turn around in that kind of emergency situation and say “we don’t like his style of how he’s warning us”? That would be ridiculous!

        You see, without being conscious of it, not only you three but many people in the west, who were born and raised in the “we’re not like them, savages, we’re civilized” kind of mentality still approach this problem of Islam’s Jihad and threat, with not enough emotional intensity to match that of millions of Muslims, world wide, and even safe to say, without a language to match theirs.

        Many people in the west are as hard conditioned in so called “civilized ways” as many Muslims In Pakistan, Afghanistan and other Muslim parts of the world, conditioned in their Muslim ways. When one is born and raised up in a place, he/she won’t be conscious of the significance, insignificance or the relation of its attributes to those of the world outside of it. Only when he/she goes outside that place and looks at it from far enough, will he/she see things more clearly in relation to one another.

        I don’t mean we have to start acting like those, we see almost regularly these days, out of their minds kind of multitudes of people hitting their chests or throwing their fists in the air while shouting our own version, here in the west, of “Allahu Akbar”, protesting something or another that happened somewhere.

        I simply think that it’s necessary to bring our emotional intensity level to a high enough regarding that threat, which already led to the death of many innocent victims here in the west, last of whom those of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, so as to start taking concrete, strong and courageous actions and also to adapt our language to different people, situations and circumstances and not to be overly sensitive to some strong wording which sometimes is not only the best but the only effective choice.

        Look at Dr. Wafaa Sultan, look at this courageous woman debates with Islamists on YouTube. I am sure many here in the west will not identify with her style and language in those debates. Meanwhile, I tell you this very few people were as successful as she was in similar debates. In addition to her profound knowledge about Islam and the mentality of her debaters, she also had her emotional intensity level as high as theirs, if not even more, and she spoke the same kind of language they spoke. Go see it on YouTube.

        Here is an example to illustrate some of the essence of what I was saying. Imagine a very well educated and articulate westerner with Phd in logic, in a suit a tie, comes to debate a devout Muslim in a “jallabiya” who only has a 20 cm. knife in his hand. Who do you think will be more convincing in and ultimately win the debate?

        • terry says

          Feb 5, 2015 at 11:37 pm

          Philip Jihadski,

          “All of us, who comment on this site, who hold dear to their hearts spreading the truth about Islam, should always remember that it’s not one-size-fits-all kind of responses that will help us achieve just that. A response to someone like Shabeer Hassan, who comment regularly on this site to continue misleading and lying to infidels, should be different from a response to, let’s say, another Muslim who comes for the first time and who may be sincere in his comment, to a response to a student like the one I mentioned above or to one given to one of us, a fellow “kaffir” or infidel because of a difference of opinion on a specific subject or point of view.

          Meanwhile, TheBuffster, I think it’s completely a different case, here. Paul Weston was responding in the article above not to a young student, who may be sincere, genuine in and open to seeking the truth but to a senior government minister, who may very well become prime minister, in the near future, Theresa May is in a position of authority and a supposed leadership, her opinions, comments and policies could literally affect the point of view, lives and even destinies of millions of people both in UK and outside of it, for the worse of course, given her record on this issue, so far!”

          Philip, how come you only read the first paragraph, in my comment? I copied and pasted above, for your convenience, the third and fourth paragraphs.

          You will find in there, exactly what I meant and that there is no contradiction.

          Next time, if you want to comment on someone else’s comment, read his/her comment carefully and in its entirety, before you post yours.

      • Linda Rivera says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 8:56 pm

        You state: Shouting at politicians (which is what this amounts to) destroys any credibility one may have hoped to possess.

        It is the ruling elite politicians who have no credibility whatsoever! They must be called exactly what they are Liars, Deceivers, TRAITORS, and more. Paul Weston has total credibility. He courageously tells the truth It’s why Paul Weston is respected. It’s why people want Paul Weston in Parliament.

      • TheBuffster says

        Feb 7, 2015 at 7:52 pm

        Hi, Terry.

        There was no “reply” to click under your comment, so I chose the next best thing.

        You said: “I completely disagree! You, Hurricanegrade and TheBuffster You came unjustifiably, in my view, very hard on Paul Weston’s style in the article above.”

        You’ve misunderstood my position.

        I had said to Hurricanegrade: “Hurricanegrade, I take it that you prefer a writing style that criticizes with less bite and anger, and that you are put off by a writing style that attacks in a sarcastic and insulting way, even when the informational content and criticism is sound.

        “I get that, and I also prefer a tone that treats one’s opponents with courtesy, even while ripping their statements and policies to shreds. However, it is not illegitimate to write with the anger one rightly feels at politicians who don’t tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth about a deadly danger to every freedom-loving soul in the country. We need to shame our politicians when they appease evil and cover the facts, when it’s only straight-talking and clear thinking that will save our rights from those whose prophet commanded jihad from the most devout of his followers.”

        Note that I’m saying that while I (tempermentally) prefer a more courteous style with opponents, *it is not illegitimate* to write with anger at politicians who screw with the truth, and that we need to *shame* those politicians. I was telling Hurricanegrade that while I understand the frame of mind that wants argument to be kept on a civil plane, that in the case of poiticians who are supposed to be safeguarding our rights and freedoms and are playing politics instead of doing the jobs they’re paid to do, they deserve to be called out. I approve of Paul Weston’s style in the article.

        What I disapprove of was Paul’s using the same level of anger and insult on Hurricanegrade in a place meant for discussion and debate. Calling out a politician for playing politics when she should be doubling down on getting the truth and telling it, giving her hell for not being a statesman when we desperately need statesmen and shaming her for her failure is perfectly legitimate and necessary.

  10. Mirren10 says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 5:10 pm

    Paul Weston, I *love* you, and I love LibertyGB !

    ”I have to ask you, in all seriousness Ms May, are you A) Suffering from a form of mental illness? B) Both remarkably stupid and illogical? C) A coward? D) A traitor? E) A typical careerist politician engaging in lies and deception in order to ensure the inevitably violent racial/religious break-down occurs only after you have retired somewhere safe with your gold plated pension?”

    I pick E).

    She, like camoron, clegg, et al, couldn’t give a damn about what happens to the rest of us. She and her vile ilk will be AOK, and that is **all** this bitch gives a damn about.

  11. RCCA says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 5:40 pm

    Remember who ran for class president when you were in high school? Were those “student leaders” ever the smartest people? Same goes for grown up politicians; except they are better and more accomplished at saying what people supposedly want to hear, regardless of any truth or accuracy. The point is simply to be popular and stay in power.

    • Alissa says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 6:37 pm

      Yes! I agree! They are the same ones who smarmed the schoolyard bully and joined in with picking on some poor kid…whoever the bully’s victim of the day happened to be. They are self-serving opportunists, void of conscience. Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden come to mind immediately.

  12. Georg says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 6:24 pm

    I think the contradictory statements and seeming dissonance are a fairly simple defense mechanism. These politicians are being confronted with the reality that their hypothesis about multiculturalism’s benefits has not borne out, and instead has endangered society. When she makes contradictory statements, she is simply hedging. She proclaims mutually untenable positions in an effort to satisfy virtually all constituents (at least the vast majority, which carries enormous political currency). The politicians will not and can not admit their failed experiment.

    They will not, because it is so far out of the nature of anyone who’d reach their position in politics to begin with. There is a massive selection bias among politicians to be egotists and endlessly self-promoting and power-hungry. And they cannot admit the failed nature of their experiment as it would be seen as “racist” and would offend such a large part of their constituency. For argument’s sake, assume the premise that multiculturalism has indeed failed. How could a politician express this in a way which doesn’t imply Islam is a failed experiment in Britain? It’d not only be political suicide, but it’s so far out of the bounds of what’s considered allowable in the modern discourse, due to it’s necessarily offending nature, that the words cannot be said by the establishment at this time.

    This calls for a new establishment with people who will declare the failed nature of the experiment. The problem cannot be fixed by the system which spawned it. A group and person exemplifying a new establishment would be UKIP and Nigel Farage. I don’t agree with many of his positions, but he is surely right on this issue in a way in which the others will not and cannot be.

    • Paul Weston says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 6:44 pm

      Georg without an E, I agree with the thrust of your argument, but not about UKIP or Farage. Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen yes; other European parties in the ascendent yes, but really not UKIP. Can you show me anything in their manifesto about their commitment to resisting Islam in Britain? The UKIP leader in waiting is Douglas Carswell, who has talked about the “angry nativism” of some UKIP supporters. You are living in a dreamworld I’m afraid.

      • Georg says

        Feb 3, 2015 at 7:00 pm

        Hello, Paul. It is an honor to correspond with you. I’ve erred in making assumptions about UKIP at large based upon interviews I’ve heard with Farage where he speaks of a “fifth column” and is direct in describing a subgroup which “hates” Britain. I stand corrected, as I didn’t expect a person holding such views to be allied with someone who’d describe this as “angry nativism”. I have done what little I can to support your efforts in Luton.

        All Best.

        • Paul Weston says

          Feb 3, 2015 at 7:22 pm

          Georg, I am very grateful to you! Sorry if I sounded abrupt, I have little patience re UKIP and resisting Islam. They will not, but many people think they will despite their refusal to even talk about it. I don’t really blame Farage. He has a nice life, he is married and he has children. All of these things mean he will never confront what needs to be confronted – not because he is a coward, but simply because he cares about the safety of his family. This is how bad it is in Britain.

          And thanks again for supporting the Luton bid Georg 🙂

        • Georg says

          Feb 3, 2015 at 8:38 pm

          No need to apologize, Paul. I included UKIP with Farage on an unwarranted assumption (as you can see, I’m not steeped in UK politics). The hesitance of Farage to get involved for the reasons you’ve mentioned is a woeful commentary on the state of Britain, and for that I’m sorry.

          I’m proud to have given some support- it’s the least I could do considering I’ve enjoyed your speeches and social media so immensely. Cheers!

      • cs says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 2:16 pm

        I agree with your views Paul about Islam, it is exactly how you present it, but I only heard you talking about Islam, you do not talk about anything else, besides the media put you completely aside, you have been detained once, forgot the name of the town, for using a patriot speech, what is preposterous btw. So, what are your plans apart from spreading awareness about Islam??
        I am not Brit, but I live in Britain, and I am really scared, but really, of what is coming ahead of all of us.
        Thanks for dealing with reality.

    • Dave says

      Feb 3, 2015 at 10:33 pm

      Georg your analysis is spot on and very articulately presented. However I don’t believe there’s any dissonance in the minds of these pollies. More likely is a deliberate, highly-scripted deception with political (self-interest) and social (altruistic) objectives:

      Political: pretty much as you say to keep on-side Muslim supporters and the non-Muslims who genuinely want to believe, and therefore need to constantly hear in the face of masses of conflicting evidence, that Muslims do not pose a serious threat (ironically a Western politician’s version of the Islamic taqiyya strategy). These non-Muslims will view any statement critical of Islam, regardless of its accuracy, as an unacceptable racist and bigoted attack on all Muslims. They probably constitute most centrists and significant numbers of the center-left and center-right and are therefore crucial swing voters of the major parties – piss them off at your own political peril.

      Social. The nation’s leaders openly declaring that Islamic doctrines are the root cause of nearly all terrorism in the UK and elsewhere will be seen by many Muslims as a formal declaration of war against Islam & no doubt create more Jihadists thus increasing the number of terrorist attacks & casualties. Another likely result is that many non-Muslims will then feel it is their right, even duty, to confront this declared enemy within and take matters into their own hands. It’s easy to foresee a rapidly escalating spiral of violence as a consequence of this, beginning with street attacks, then riots, more terrorist atrocities, and if the worst case plays out, all the way to civil war. The consequences could be catastrophic. Maybe avoiding this possibility is how the pollies justify to themselves their blatant lies and deceptions.

      I’m not making excuses for the pollies, but if there’s truth in the social objective it’s interesting to ponder how we might choose if we were presented these two options:

      1) Tell a lie and 100 people will die
      2) Tell the truth and 1,000 people will die.

      • Michael Copeland says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 6:16 am

        “will be seen by many Muslims as a formal declaration of war against Islam & no doubt create more Jihadists”.
        Two points:
        Islam is in a permanent state of war with “Dar al Harb”, the realm of War, the West. The declaration was made nearly 1400 years ago.
        It is Islam which “creates” jihadists, not Western politicians.

        • Dave says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 7:32 pm

          Your comments are factually correct yet clearly not all Muslims in the West have taken up arms against the infidel – there are those that never will, those that may or may not, and the signed-up Jihadists.

          If PM Cameron came out and said “Islam is not a religion of peace; it is a supremacist ideology of hatred, violence, and war and must be defeated” (i.e. for once told the truth about Islam) you don’t think it’s inevitable that significant numbers of the “may or may not” will choose to join the Jihad camp?

          Activist Muslims are experts at playing the victim, and victimhood is a very effective tool for recruiting people to a cause. In the absence of any real persecution or discrimination, can you think of better raw material for promoting victimhood amongst devout Muslims, and justifying a “defensive” call to arms, than an infidel nation’s leader effectively declaring war on your faith?

      • Georg says

        Feb 4, 2015 at 7:20 am

        @ Dave

        Your analysis speaks precisely to the realpolitik I was/am trying to elucidate. When I said “seeming dissonance” instead of “dissonance” I did so because, like you, I think it is put on and disingenuous. I know TM’s behavior is contemptible and we could hardly disagree with her more, but we have to at least admit she’s intelligent and educated enough to understand the contradictory nature of her statements; they are therefore made intentionally and with some goal/strategy in mind.

        • Dave says

          Feb 4, 2015 at 9:55 pm

          Agreed. It’s therefore time for the high profile critics of the pollies who push the “religion of peace” BS to move on from the “how can such a smart person be so blind & stupid re the nasty realities of Islam?” commentary. The focus now should be on discovering the real reasons behind the governments obvious lies. Who are the government’s advisers on public statements about Islamic terrorism (police, intelligence, military, private consultants,…)? What are they saying behind the scenes? Is anyone digging around to find out?

          This is not just about the UK either. The governments of Australia, France, Germany USA, etc. are all reading from the same “It’s nothing to do with Islam” script when it’s obvious to everyone else bar the deluded “liberal left” that Islam as the only significant driver of global conflict today.

  13. Linda Rivera says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 8:41 pm

    What is the going price to sell out your nation? Our nation and people have been sold out by UK ruling elite traitors to totalitarian, colonialist, imperialist, racist, fascist Islam.

    Join English Defence League street demos! Join in the fight for freedom! Join Liberty GB patriotic, anti-Islamisation party! http://www.libertygb.org.uk/

    Please help to get Paul Weston elected MP for Luton South! We desperately need outspoken, extremely courageous Paul Weston to speak for our people in Parliament!

    “Cameron is a traitor” – Paul Weston at Downing Street 20.09.2014

  14. Linda Rivera says

    Feb 3, 2015 at 11:10 pm

    Please help Liberty GB’s courageous leader, Paul Weston, get elected MP for Luton South! We desperately need Paul Weston to speak for our people in Parliament!

    Very sad to say, that veteran Tim Arnold raised only 150 pounds out of his personal goal of one thousand pounds, in the ultra marathon in Thailand, for Paul Weston’s campaign for MP.

    Tim ran the ultra marathon, but you can still donate:
    http://www.gofundme.com/j3nfbk?fb_ref=Default&fb_source=message

    Tim says: Take a look at what Paul Weston believes and how he can save Luton from the established liars in Westminster:

    Islam Is NOT a Religion of Peace, Mr Cameron – Paul Weston 13/12/2014

  15. Arjuna Krishna-Das says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 4:16 am

    Paul Weston is singularly potent as an educated and erudite politician who states the plain truth. Corrupt and self-seeking establishment politicians like Teressa May can only attempt to bend the truth so far, until their credibility, and the whole charade inevitably break. The longer the lies go on, the more violent will be the moment of reckoning. Ridiculing the nonsense vomiting from the mouths of our establishment so-called ‘leaders’ with plain facts is an essential tactic in restoring real democracy and freedom, and defeating the forces of fascism and darkness.

    Only this morning, the lies continue. Piers Morgan in the Daily Mail states:

    “King Abdullah of Jordan described ISIS today as a ‘criminal and misguided group which is not related in any shape or form to our great faith.’

    He’s absolutely right, and it’s a massively important distinction.

    As I wrote after the Charlie Hebdo in Paris, these people are not real Muslims. They’re terrorists who have hijacked Islam for their own nefarious gain.”

    All the polls say otherwise, and their findings, together with quotes from the unholy trinity of Koran, Sunnah and Hadith need widespread repetition:

    An October 2014 Times report* stated that, according to a Populus survey, one in seven young British adults and 10% of Londoners have “warm feelings” towards the Islamic State. Since there are around one million Muslims in London where they make up 12 percent of the population, these figures indicate that the vast majority of UK Moslems (around 80%), and practically all young UK Muslims support the Islamic State.

    * http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/10/31/shock-poll-one-in-seven-young-britons-sympathises-with-isis/

    UKIP still appear to be expelling members and candidates for speaking the truth about Islam, but many of their membership (judging from unofficial Facebook groups last year) have no such delusions. The coming round of elections over the next months and years will be the most critical since WW2 in determining the survival of civilisation.

    • Michael Copeland says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 6:36 am

      Islamic scholar Piers Morgan is rusty on his Sharia. One of the hi-jacking terrorists who he says are not “real muslims” said,
      “If someone offends the Prophet no problem, we can kill him.”
      What does the Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller”, say?
      To “revile Allah or his messenger” is one of the “Acts that entail leaving Islam” (o8.7, o8.7(4)).
      The penalty is death, and can be carried out, vigilante style, by anyone without legal consequence, “since it is killing someone who deserves to die” (o8.4).
      See: THE BBC’S USELESS WAFFLE ABOUT “BRITISH ISLAM”
      http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/6697-the-battle-for-british-islam

    • Georg says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 7:48 am

      Outstanding post, Arjuna. Although there are certainly problems with multiculturalism in Britain in general, the crux of the problem lies with Islam in particular. This is politically and socially inconvenient (as discussed above), to say the least, but it’s now obvious it must be repeated until pragmatic steps are taken to deal structurally with this burgeoning crisis.

  16. Tommo says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 5:00 am

    Does that mean our brand of Muslims is different to all the other horrible mis-understanders of Islam and that its ok to bring thousands more into the country because they become transfigured into harmless UK Muslims once here? Answer the question cutie pie.

  17. John Collignon says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 5:07 am

    Amazingly these people are in power to begin with. Such a breakdown of university, government and the entire political system !! Is it being orchestrated ? Must be !!

    • TheBuffster says

      Feb 8, 2015 at 6:25 am

      It doesn’t need to be “orchestrated”. All it needs is a bad ideology being pushed at the university level for decades, including the teachers’ colleges, and the ideology trickles down to high school and grade school teachers and into the arts and entertainment, journalism and politics. The orchestrator is the ideology. Once that’s been accepted, people will follow their premises to their logical conclusions. Once it’s permeated the culture, it just rolls along of its own accord to its natural destiny.

      We have to win the culture.

  18. duh_swami says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 5:31 am

    Layers and layers of cognitive dissonance. Clarity is beyond her.
    Unfortunately this seems to be contagious among the elite and multitudes of useful idiots, especially when it comes to Islam. It is obvious the Mr Wesson has escaped Allah’s net, can think for himself, and knows BS when he see’s it…Mz May, not so much, she seems completely tangled up in it……

    • Linda Rivera says

      Feb 4, 2015 at 7:36 am

      British, European and other Western leaders and media are NOT deceived. They are evil. They are deliberately deceiving for Islam. They sold their souls. British and European leaders are the biggest traitors that ever walked on God’s earth.

  19. Laura says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 3:18 pm

    Leaders know that if they tell the truth about Islam, they will be targeted… like Theo Van Gogh…therefore, cowardice trumps good sense and…bravery.

  20. avu15 says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 7:08 pm

    The fate of Kobani shows what will happen to those British cities that fall prey to the Islamic insurgency that this incompetent government is ushering in. Yes, the army will be able to take back Luton, Bradford, Leicester etc but they will be in ruins, as will British society. Thank you Theresa May.

  21. abad says

    Feb 4, 2015 at 9:27 pm

    Strictly out of curiosity here – but do UK politicians like Theresa May have difficulty saying that much-dreaded six-letter M-word? Do they get all sweaty and start shaking all over if that word starts to creep into their minds? Because it must require a tremendous amount of restraint to not mention it. Oh, something along the lines of mentioning that once much-dreaded four-letter N-word.

    The UK has some VERY serious problems, problems that will never be resolved so long as they allow their domiciled enemies to have the upper hand in their lives.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Michael Copeland on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship
  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian top dogs approve bill to end UN nuclear inspections, increase enrichment
  • Dude on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.