Arrest this man!

The claim that immigrants are necessary to do the jobs that Britons can't or won't do is a favourite of the liberal-left, and like most of their favoured claims, is untrue. However, there is one job where this particular assertion is indeed accurate: the post of Archbishop of Canterbury. Because while the present incumbent, Rowan Williams, is an indescribable idiot, whose buffooneries are too numerous and too well-known to be worth listing, the Ugandan Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, sometimes talks sense, and Michael Nazir-Ali, the Pakistani Bishop of Rochester and son of an Islamic apostate, has often done so. Today, Mr Nazir-Ali has once again come out and said the (to the likes of Rowan Williams) unsayable:

Islamic extremists have created "no-go" areas across Britain where it is too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter, one of the Church of England's most senior bishops warns today.

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester and the Church's only Asian bishop, says that people of a different race or faith face physical attack if they live or work in communities dominated by a strict Muslim ideology.

The Muslim Council of Britain today described his comments as "frantic scaremongering", while William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, said the bishop had "probably put it too strongly".

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg said the idea of no-go areas was "a gross caricature of reality".

Really? We already know that in places like Oldham, Pakistani thugs are creating no-go areas for whites. We know (although Messrs Clegg and Hague may not, since the MSM utterly failed to report the story) that John Payne was almost killed for being white in a Pakistani area. I also recall an incident in which a British home secretary was told that he should not "dare" to set foot in a "Muslim area" - the area in question being Leytonstone, East London. Obviously race was the dominant factor in the first two incidents, but it is quite possible that Kuffarphobia was also a motivation for these attacks, and it is clear that this was the basis for the third incident. Certainly, the existence of cases such as these indicates that Clegg and Hague are utterly wrong to dismiss Michael Nazir-Ali's comments out of hand, without giving even the slightest consideration to what he says. The fact that Clegg, in particular, did so in such strong, almost vituperative, terms, tells you rather a lot about the liberal-left, and their desperation not to face up to any of the negative facts attendant upon the multicultural Eden that they have created in parts of this country.

Mr Nazir-Ali, whose full article may be read here, also makes sensible points about the negative effect that the decline of Christianity has had on Britain, the increasing Islamification of British public life, in at least some areas, and the failings of multiculturalism. But it is his remarks about the creation of no-go areas that have attracted the most attention. As I recall, similar points about the takeover of certain areas by Muslims have been made by Lionheart. I wonder whether Mr Nazir-Ali will soon be getting his dog collar felt by the Kent filth...?

Update: Hazel Blears has also weighed in on the issue, declaring that she "does not recognise" the existence of no-go areas. Which sounds to me rather like the numerous Islamic countries that refuse to recognise Israel, and which certainly invites the same reply: just because you don't recognise them, doesn't mean that they're not there. She also asserted that Islamic extremists were a "tiny minority". Isn't it about time that someone thought up a new cliché?

Meanwhile, two Muslim organisations have demanded that Mr Nazir-Ali resign, on the grounds that he "is promoting hatred towards Muslims". One wonders what their views are on imams, such as those featured in Undercover Mosque, who actually do incite, not only hatred, but murder as well?

SIOE in London

Just a brief note to say that my report on Friday's SIOE demonstration in central London is now up at ATW, together with photographs and a video from the protest. Click here to go to the report.

Fascist thugs threaten SIOE demonstrators

Last week, I alerted readers to the demo that Stop the Islamisation of Europe plans to hold in London on October 26th. Well, it seems that some Muslim contributors to the Muslim Public Affairs Committee UK's forums have also got wind of the demonstration, and one of them started a comments thread on the subject.

Some of the comments are perfectly harmless, albeit utterly delusional. One commenter even compares Muslims who oppose SIOE to Burmese monks who marched to oppose the military junta ruling their country. Because, of course, opposing the SIOE demonstrators carries with it the risk of being rounded up and imprisoned or killed, doesn't it? Various other commenters accuse SIOE of being fascists and racists.

But among these generally harmless examples of common or garden Islamic lunacy, are some somewhat less peaceable offerings. Consider, for example, this comment, from "venceremos":

...these racist Islamophobes should either be banned from marching or challenged.

They must not be allowed the opportunity to hide behind the freedom of speech to spread their vile poison.

By which he means, they must not be allowed the opportunity to exercise free speech.

If they can get away with marching in London this time, they'll be back --cowards that they are-- in larger numbers the next time.

London Jews learned that in the 'thirties and confronted Moseley's [sic] thugs in Cable Street in 1936. The Nazis were given a good duffing-up and never reared their ugly heads in Britain again.

This new generation of white supremacists are no different. You either stamp them out or they'll spread like an uncontrolled virus.

So, once again we see the lie that anyone who opposes Islam is a "white supremacist" and a "Nazi" blackshirt. At the same time, Muslims are equivalent, not only to Burmese monks, but also to Cable Street Jews. One wonders whether there has ever been an oppressed group to whom Muslims will not compare themselves? Other than the many groups who have been oppressed by Muslims, of course.

However, of rather greater importance is the fact that this thug appears to be advocating violence against peaceful demonstrators. Possibly even lethal violence: I'd be interested to know what it was, precisely, that he meant by "stamp them out".

Since this comment has been allowed to remain on the MPACUK forum, can we assume that it is endorsed by this Islamic organisation? After all, even the most ardent advocates of online free speech tend to draw the line at threats of violence.

Certainly, it seems that at least some of the MPACUK forum's other commenters agreed with "venceremos". Not one of them condemned him for the threat of violence, and at least one other commenter, "IbnTamiyya", agreed with him:

Yes brtoher [sic]! These people need to be taight [sic] a lesson.

We should take a lesson from the [inappropriate language]and sort these kuffars ourselves. The british government and police will not do it for us as they agree with everything these [inappropriate language]say and do.

This post had been edited by a forum moderator, to remove the "inappropriate language". What that inappropriate language was, I don't know. In the context, I'd imagine that the first instance contained some form of derogatory reference to Jews, but I really can't guess at what the second "inappropriate" phrase might have been. I also note, that while the moderator was quick to remove "inappropriate language", he did nothing to restrict or oppose the expression of views supporting violence against peaceful protesters. Nor did he deem the obviously threatening phrase "sort these kuffars" to be inappropriate. Again I ask, does MPACUK endorse threats of this nature?

As I mentioned above, the commenters at MPACUK repeatedly denounced the supporters of SIOE as being fascists and Nazis. However, I would say, that while there is an abundance of fascism on display in the comments quoted, absolutely none of it is coming from SIOE. On the contrary, it is coming from Muslim commenters, who, rather like the Burmese junta, wish to violently suppress the exercise of free speech by those who oppose them. It is because of people like these, that it is imperative that we do all that we can to resist the Islamification of Britain.

Muslims ask: "Will the victimisation never end?"

Islamophobia is on the rise in Europe and governments should do more to protect the continent's 15 million Muslims from discrimination, experts meeting in Spain said Monday.

"The situation is very serious," said Mustapha Cherif, an expert on Islam at the University of Algiers who is known for his commitment to battling religious hatred.

Really? I wonder what he's ever done to challenge anti-Christian prejudice in the Islamic world. You know, the kind of real prejudice that leads to people being tortured, imprisoned, attacked, and murdered. Does he stand up and confront this, or other instances of prejudice against non-Muslim minorities (the Mandaeans, for example)? Or does he just whinge about European "Islamophobia", which generally consists in little more than some mildly unhinged Muslim getting their delicate little feelings hurt?

"Islamophobia is a rising phenomena," added Jasser Auda of Britain's Forum Against Racism and Islamophobia, which is made up of representatives of the British Muslim community.

Hardly an impartial "expert", is he? On the contrary, he's a professional player of victimhood poker, whose very job consists of affirming that Muslims are the Most Oppressed People Ever.

The two were speaking at a meeting in the southern Spanish city of Jaen of some 30 non-governmental organisations from across Europe.

The gathering was held ahead of the start on Tuesday in the nearby city of Cordoba of a two-day conference on the issue organised by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

[...]

The non-governmental organisations will present a list of recommendations on how to tackle the problem to delegations from the 56 nations that make up the OSCE, and that are set to take part in the Cordoba conference.

Oh goody! So we can soon look forward to yet more demands for preferential treatment from the Mohammedans, all dressed up in the language of promoting equality.

Cordoba was chosen as the host for the event because for centuries the city was a symbolic centre of coexistence between Christians, Jews and Muslims.

Yes, coexistence in which Muslims ruled, and Christians and Jews were second-class citizens. Arguably, it was considerably better to be a non-Muslim there then that it is to be a non-Muslim in an Islamic state now, but still it was not the epicentre of world tolerance that Muslims and their apologists commonly make out.
I would, however, agree that the Caliphate of Cordoba has symbolic significance for the future (and indeed, the present) of Europe, and for this conference. After all, dhimmitude, of the type practised by the Jews and Christians of Cordoba, seems rapidly to be becoming the norm across Europe, and it is often those who cry the loudest about "Islamophobia" who do the most to facilitate this.

SIOE demo in London

Just a brief note to let readers know that the next demonstration organised by the campaign group Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) will be held in London on Friday, 26th October, with an especial theme of resisting Islamic Kuffarphobia. Those taking part are asked to assemble in Whitehall Place at midday, with a procession to Temple Place beginning at 1pm. Full details and rules of the demonstration are available here.