That's Not What the Police are for...

Police to 'learn' Kran, Sharia. Uh, no.

The police aren't there to promote 'community cohesion'. We have more than enough state-paid loser leftist idiots to do that - the police are there to enforce the law of the land.

How about the muslims' getting lessons in our laws and culture, and the importance of respecting those laws and cultures, the laws and culture of the Christian majority, which have obtained in this country for a thousand years. And if they don't want to - well, there are plenty of Shari'a shitholes they can go live in.

The Decline of Britain

Hyprocrisy doesn't seem a strong enough word. Many many years ago, when I studied the English Constitution, we learned about a concept called Collective Responsibility, whereby members of a government are bound publicly to support the decisions made by the government, even where they disagreed with the decision.

Not so for the partymen of IngSoc. And so they drive yet another nail into the coffin of the British way of life. Incompetent, corrupt, self-serving buffoons - it's long past closing time for this bunch of morons.

Our Wonderful Broadcasters

As always with such things, I think the best way to appreciate it is to substitute the situations. Imagine it's 1984; it becomes known that a BBC producer had contact with Patrick Magee, or his handlers in this country, but "did not contact the police because she felt under "no obligation". Truly, truly astonishing.

But then again, he only had a 'home-made' bomb, so it wouldn't have mattered that much - would it?

The Definition of chutzpah

They're kidding right? On the other hand, mawzlem 'scholars' have not, in the past or now, been noted for a sense of humour or of irony. So one must assume they are being serious.

"There is more in common between our religions and peoples than is known to each of us" - like what? When last I checked, only one religion inculcated its children with hatred and disdain for all others. Only one glorifies murder, only one teaches that all others should be subordinate to it, only one teaches its children that to die killing Jews (oops! is that a clue?) ensures a swift passage to G-d's eternal whorehouse. What is in common? We are all human, but that's pretty much where it ends...

"Memories of positive historical encounters will dim" - thats funny. Like the decapitation of the bound prisoners of the Banu Qurayza? Like the assualt on the Khaybar oasis? Like the more modern encounters of 1948, 167, 1973, 2006?

I have a better idea. You want to promote goodwill with the Jewish community? Stop firing rockets at Israel, stop glorifying the murder of children and old women. That would be a start.

The Biased Broadcasting Corporation

Why do I bother listening to the Today Programme? It only makes me angry. They were up to their usual tricks again this morning.

Apparently, there is a 'reformation' of Islam under way, in Turkey of all places; and here were sensible people noting that country on the verge of sliding into Islamism, as popular votes return Islamic parties, and the ban on the islamic symbol of women's oppression is gradually relaxed.

But I will return to that topic later. Firstly, though, let's talk about language. It seems to have escaped the notice of just about everyone at the BBC, but the founder of the islamic religion is considered a prophet by no one other than mahometans, and thus it is insulting to everyone else to speak in reverent tones of 'The Prophet Muhammed'. One can actually hear the capitalisation when they say it. What do they imagine they are doing? Striking some great blow for multiculturalism, and the equivalence of all religions? Are they afraid there will be blood in the streets if the followers of the Religion of Peace™ don't hear their founder threated with reverence.

If you think this is an overreaction, imagine hearing a reporter use similar language whilst speaking of Christianity, and more importantly perhaps, think about what the general reaction would be:

"The new testament, which details the mission of Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ"

Difficult to imagine, isn't it? And yet, it is now entirely routine (and these things are not accidental), to hear reporters and presenters refer to 'the Prophet Muhammed'. Not 'the muslim prophet'. Not 'the islamic prophet'. Not 'founder of the religion of islam'. It won't be long before they start adding the PBUH and SAW nonsense as well.

They've been having a field day with the perfectly reasonable defensive measures taken by Israel against the toxic cesspool of hatred and violence that is Gaza. Its a blockade by those heartless, cruel, thuggish Israelis, of the poor starving Gazans. They can't get their luxury electrical goods anymore, and even when they can, there's no power to run them anymore.

But, but, but...wait. Doesn't Gaza also border Egypt? Surely, they can get their essential humanitarian supplies (AK47's, Semtex, C4) from across the border in Egypt? Oh, the border with Egypt is also closed, you say? By the Egyptians, you say? So why do all the BBC reports begin 'Israeli blockade of Gaza'