Towards what, or to whom, are they showing solidarity ?

jihad1

Red, white and blue Floodlights and lighting on buildings across the world? Candles in the bloody wind? Holding hands? What on earth for? The dead as they lie scattered or shattered on the pavements and tarmac streets of Nice?

jihadi2

(The image of a Shanghai floodlit tower, symbol of yet another bloodthirsty regime, is ever-so-slightly toe-curling; especially when it comes to alleged sympathy for a jihadi masscacre!) Spare me!

Instead of raiding known nests of bloody jihadis, or bringing back the guillotine for terrorist treason; they form committees, light ’effing candles, and hold bloody hands!

What should the West be doing? My views, being slightly more robust than some, include the following:-

  • Close ALL the Saudi-funded Wahabbi-led mosques, and deport immediately all the Saudi-funded imams and mullahs; along with their extensive families, broods and supporters.
  • Close down, immediately, all Madrassas and so-called Islamic schools, and either deport or restrict the so-called teachers.
  • Ban, immediately, all Sharia courts, and deport or imprison, if necessary, those who push this alternate justice system; as by allowing ‘sharia’, they push the system which encourages the diminution of women to a second class status.
  • Ban not only the burka, but any form of head covering which is worn to signify religious observance. Ban also any dress, garment or covering which signifies adherence to the Muslim religion or belief.
  • Remove, immediately, the offer or existence of translation services from any Court, local council or national Government office or website. The language of the United Kingdom is English, and the Stormont Assembly, along with the Welsh and the Scots crew should be also reminded of this fact. (and the Cornish can get stuffed as well!)
  • Polygamy is illegal, and all the jungle-bunnies should be reminded of this fact; and if any attempt to claim for two, three or more so-called wives, they should be reminded by a hefty fine and at least three years in the slammer.
  • The State Religion is Anglicanism, based upon Christianity, and nothing else. If anyone wishes to live under Islamic law, they should move to a bloody Islamic country!

24 comments for “Towards what, or to whom, are they showing solidarity ?

  1. The Jannie
    July 16, 2016 at 10:58 am

    You old softie!

    • July 16, 2016 at 11:52 am

      I’ll have you know I’m not ‘old’; I am ‘mature’!

  2. barnacle bill
    July 16, 2016 at 11:14 am

    I fully support the agenda you propose, it should be adopted immediately by our government but of course we all know that they will instead bow down to any demand by the folowers of the RoP. Whilst giving their own fellow country folk the finger.

    Well soon the finger maybe coming from the opposite direction!

    • Brightside Bob
      July 16, 2016 at 9:31 pm

      TWO fingers!! We (‘Brits’) are NOT ‘mericans. *sigh*

  3. Henry Kaye
    July 16, 2016 at 11:41 am

    Time for another Crusade.

  4. Mudplugger
    July 16, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    Just think what you can charge Mr Trump for the copyright in his manifesto.

  5. Richard
    July 16, 2016 at 12:10 pm

    All very reasonable except for a couple of points. One, the ban on head covering. What about the Sikhs? They seem to be harmless, as do Rastafarians etc. All head-coverings? A step too far when it’s just one ideology which is menacing the Western countries.
    The migrant crisis is nothing other than an invasion and right of abode in the West for foreign Muslims must be revoked for our own safety. Not, by any means, old Mr. Patel in the corner shop but the current crop so foolishly permitted entry to the European countries by virtue-signalling fools with no grasp of history. If we don’t protect our borders we’re toast.
    Two, the State religion. I don’t like the church of England, it’s a happy-clappy irrelevance of empty pews in beautiful old churches. It isn’t the religion to which the Vikings would have converted, nor would it have sustained the Knights of St. John, in 1565, when they stopped a Muslim invasion with a very small force, 2000 against 40,000, in the great Siege of Malta. One thing the Muslims have which we don’t, to their great benefit but not to ours, is widespread pride and devotion in their religion and they value their culture, inferior though it is.
    Courts: If you want Sharia then by all means go for your civil justice or mediation, but if you commit a crime here you must get a fair trial with your case heard by a magistrate or a jury.
    Finally, it’s the Western mindset of conceptual thought, reason and evidence that’s the prize worth fighting for. There’s hope that eventually it will prevail because it’s getting through to some Muslims but nowhere near enough. We must serve as an example to Muslim countries in our achievements and as this guy has realised they must change themselves.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUQh_4DxUrM
    NB translation services should be on offer in court but the defendant should choose it himself and have to pay for his own, win or lose, or get a friend to help him – or it isn’t going to happen and then tough shit. Councils and Government must of course use English rather than increase the expense to the taxpayer by pandering to linguistic hobbyists with an axe to grind.

    • Ed P
      July 16, 2016 at 11:48 pm

      I agree – the Sikhs etc should not be dragged down by efforts to deal with medievalists.

  6. Mazz
    July 16, 2016 at 1:36 pm

    If only!

  7. July 16, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    It is odd, innit. Catholics are hardly a threat to the fabric of our society, yet they are still restricted in public office and treated as second-class citizens. But Muslims who threaten, rape, kill, blow up things are treated with ‘benefits.

    I agree with you. we have to go in hard and comprehensively. Arrest, deport, declare ILLEGAL any adherence to Mohammedism in any of its forms. Any sign of Islamic ‘respect’ should be a hate-crime and the person ejected from the country.

    Islam has declared war on the west. We must fight them. Not ‘tolerate’; not see ‘equivalence’; not offer ‘equality’. It is a disease.

    • Hereward Unbowed.
      July 16, 2016 at 6:18 pm

      Amfortas: always on the money.

      ***************************************************************

      Mike, the current state of affairs, what is our position here in a UK societal hierarchy.

      I deem that, already Britons live under a creeping dhimmitude, and jyzra is paid to ‘them’ out of our taxes. We tread in fear of the Moslem – in our own lands.

      All of your proposals have great merit.

      Indeed, it is way past time to slay the monster, the egregious surrender of our nation; pride, language, sensibilities, traditions and culture to the multiculti faceted HYDRA of Political Correctness and furthermore: Foxy Theresa had better get with the people’s choir.

  8. Errol
    July 16, 2016 at 7:26 pm

    If solidarity is shwing the same interests and feelings one must assume it is remorse for the deaths. Yet… what is the point of such remorse if you continue to tolerate the threat? Are we not showing ‘solidarity’ in tolerating the muslim danger?

  9. mona
    July 16, 2016 at 8:27 pm

    There are no Jihadis in China, I wonder why>

  10. July 16, 2016 at 9:28 pm

    Mike, don’t hold back like that, tell us what you really think. 🙂

  11. Happy Bunny
    July 16, 2016 at 10:58 pm

    I might agree with much of this except for head covering: nuns and I suppose monks might well wear something on their heads, and all sorts other religions might want to wear a headpiece. What I would go all out on is a ban on covering the face. I have seen too many burqa/niqab clad females — I used to live in Rotherham — and it is the most alienating thing of all (I once saw a niqab-wearing woman driving a car so badly she almost lost control and narrowly missed a wall when she careered on to a pavement. Of course in her much-admired Saudi she wouldn’t get to drive but then again, she clearly couldn’t drive here)

    Trouble with all this is two-fold: first the government has no will to do anything about the problems of islam and second, it would take so much organising we would need some sort of police state to push it all through. And the trouble with police states is… that’s right, they tend to stick around to see what else they can sort out. They don’t go away afterwards.

    Sadly this muslim business in our country has all gone too far, but a quiet if determined start should be made somewhere and now is as good a time as any to start casually picking off some of the above list without creating a new gestapo.

    • Errol
      July 17, 2016 at 6:45 am

      Start with translation services. This is the UK. We speak English. Scrap translations. If such are needed then the individual can pay for them.

  12. July 17, 2016 at 1:28 am

    If closing down Saudi-funded Mosques and Madrassas threatens the removal of 20% of your economy, would you risk the impending recession?

    That’s the dilemma that politicians are in. Just how do you curb the Saudi extremism in your own country when they and the rest of the Gulf states own so much of it?

    But an honest debate about it would at least let us start to talk about it and inform the public. Maybe the public would say “ok, I’ll take the hit for a safer country”. Its better than sucking up to the Saudis and sweeping the problem under the carpet.

    • Graham Wood
      July 17, 2016 at 6:40 am

      But if that is the price of freedom, then it must be paid. The “economy” in that context is really quite irrelevant.

    • Hereward Unbowed.
      July 17, 2016 at 6:41 am

      20%?

      From where did you pluck that figure, to me it sounds a tad like the way the Socialists argue about the ‘benefit’s’ of mass immigration: all about the upside and never about the downside.
      Further and I don’t think you’ve considered just how much trouble we’re looking forwards to, it’s going to be Bosnia on speed or, Syria – in comparison, 20% is a trifling bagatelle…….. yeah, we’d take that.

    • July 17, 2016 at 4:53 pm

      If the economeeeee is to be the be-all and end-all and continue as it is run by the bad for the mad making everyone sad, then I for one will be glad when it recesses. Up or down will not matter a jot if the society it serves is changed to an alien creed-driven charnel house with its only point of difference from Saudi Arabia being that you have to pay a death tax and VAT when you are beheaded in the town square.

  13. Stonyground
    July 17, 2016 at 6:32 pm

    I have always thought that freedom of thought and the freedom to choose your religion, or to reject religion entirely, is very important. It took the western civilisations centuries to get to the point were the right to freely choose your religion is pretty much universal. We should think very hard before we take any steps to reverse these hard won rights. Is it practical to make a single exception for Islam?

    The whole basis for freedom of religion is tolerance. Both Judaism and Christianity have intolerance written into their creeds, but modern day adherents prefer to ignore those inconvenient parts of their scriptures. Islam, on the other hand, seems to have failed to learn the lessons of history and remains as intolerant as its holy book demands. So, the question is, have the intolerant relinquished their right to be tolerated?

    • July 18, 2016 at 2:40 pm

      Stoneyground is an apt name for someone who cannot distinguish tolerance and intolerance. Christianity tolerates quite well, thank you. The person, that is. It does not tolerate lies and falsety. But then science, reason and logic do not either. Islam does not tolerate the person at all. Tolerance of the person is written into the Christian Creed in large type for those who bother to read it. Love the sinner; don’t love the sin.

Comments are closed.