The BNP Crusaders are here!


2:46 pm - July 15th 2010

by Septicisle    


      Share on Tumblr

Ever since I signed up on the British National Party website to harangue someone linking to my blog, I’ve had the pleasure of irregularly having all the latest missives from the Fuhrer himself, Nick Griffin, arrive in my inbox.

Here’s the opening paragraphs of the most recent example:

As predicted, the only outcome of the election is that one set of self-serving crooks has replaced another, and our country continues its decline and disintegration. It is time we reflected on the terrible future that awaits our country, our children and grand-children.

If the politicians and the media have their way, our country will be totally overrun by the masses of the Third-World, we will be ruled from Brussels, we will be a despised, second-class minority in our own homeland.

Is that the future you want for your children? Will you regret it when it is too late and you wished you would have joined the British Resistance when you had the chance?

They’ve decided at this inauspicious moment to relaunch the Young BNP, not to be confused obviously with a group with a somewhat similar name which was fairly massive in the 30s and 40s in a certain foreign nation.

Perhaps because of the connotations with that other youth organisation, as well as journalists infiltrating the grouping, the group has been renamed and is now aimed at the slightly older 18 to 30 market.

For those imagining this might be an exercise in encouraging the master race to procreate in a Club 18-30 style, you’ll probably be disappointed.

No, it seems the most exciting antics the BNP Crusaders, as they will be known from now on, involve themselves in is that old hardy perennial, fancy dress, of naturally, the war-time variety.


Aren’t they gorgeous?

The entire ethos of the group seems to be based around having good, wholesome, clean fun. Griffin introduces them as such:

The BNP Crusaders is a group of 18-30 year old BNP activists. We prove that there is more to the British National Party than just politics, with social gatherings arranged all year round. From trips to theme parks to just simple get togethers and nights out, the Crusaders do it all.

From trips to theme parks to simple get togethers and nights out! The whole spectrum of youth interaction covered! There is of course more to the BNP than just politics; it isn’t just a party, it’s a way of life.

It doesn’t help that Griffin comes across as the slightly creepy uncle in his introduction to the Crusaders, nor that his description of the Crusaders’ leader, Joey Smith, is cringe-inducing:

The leader of the BNP Crusaders is BNP activist and super-star Joey Smith (pictured right). “The BNP Crusaders is a great idea and I look forward to working with my new team, and meeting lots of new members and activists. We have already had a few outings and I look forward to seeing you all on future ones.”

Thankfully, super-star Joey is quite the dish, not too dissimilar to heart-throb Robert Pattinson. In fact, they both share another similarity, Pattinson portraying the oppressed minority of vampires in the wider community in the Twilight films, while Smith is from the heavily discriminated against and ignored young white male demographic.

As if you couldn’t have guessed, the choice of Crusaders is meant as a “homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam”, which shows the BNP’s usual level of historical literacy.

Quite what they’re crusading against in our modern times however is unclear.

With almost unabashed racism back in fashion on the front pages of the Daily Star and Daily Express, it could be a good time for those on the far-right to try and create youth groups with some real influence, highly organised and dedicated to the cause.

Thankfully, the BNP Crusaders isn’t it, and frankly the likes of the Bullingdon are almost certainly more dangerous. They’d also be more likely to be the ones goose-stepping down the high street, sieg heiling their hearts out.

Compared to the English Defence League, a genuinely dangerous organisation with the potential to incite riots, with links to hooligan firms and which is far more attractive to those with actual radical views, the choice between the two couldn’t be any plainer. Got to laugh though, haven’t you?

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
'Septicisle' is a regular contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He mostly blogs, poorly, over at Septicisle.info on politics and general media mendacity.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Race relations

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Is this the BNP trying to do “cool”? I can see those “hip” young things flocking to a simple get together with Uncle Nick.

As if you couldn’t have guessed, the choice of Crusaders is meant as a “homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam”

Bags I get to be Jan Sobieski! Um, except I thought the BNP didn’t like Poles?

come on have a heart,you’ve almost got to feel sorry for the bnp. the appalling election results and now massive internal dissent. fuhrer nick has almost got as many enemies within the bnp as externally.

[…] frankly the likes of the Bullingdon are almost certainly more dangerous.

Too right. Any Oxford students on LibCon wanna leak the current membership list? 😉

Hmmm. Any lawyers out there who could say whether the Crusaders’ Union (a youth group run by religious groups) might be able to make a case against the BNP Crusaders using a similar name?

5 – Sounds like the old test when the Morning Star tried to get the Daily Star for passing off. The judge commented:

“Only a moron in a hurry would be deceived.”

#6

What, by the rantings of the Morning Star?

In this case though it’s clearly an attempt to play off the name of the pre-existing group, whereas I don’t think anyone would seriously imagine the Daily Star or Morning Star would want to have themselves associated with the other.

Tim J, you’d be surprised how often people confuse them. When being asked what national newspapers I buy (the answer is none usually, but the Mirror, FT and Morning Star in that order of frequency when I do buy them), I’ve often had people look at me all puzzled wondering why I would buy the Daily Star before I explain the difference.

Tim J, you’d be surprised how often people confuse them.

I guess that’s evidence of the decline of the Morning Star more than anything – it’s circulation must be pretty tiny by now. When the Daily Star started, on the other hand, I think it was still quite widely-read. In any case, I think the judge meant that anyone who accidentally bought a copy of one when looking out the other must be less observant than the norm.

I’m all for this. Nothing wrong with a bit of dressing up. Better than the usual youthful BNP activities of posting dog poo through peoples mailboxes.

11. journeyman

(not a member)…ok ?

@Septicisle

Quote : “a homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam.” Which shows the BNP’s usual level of historical literacy.”

Wait a minute ! Correct me if I’m wrong, but until the 7th century, Islam didn’t exist.
The story I’ve been told is that before some pagan Moon worshipping Bedouin ultra-far-right-wing, fascist desert con-man counjured up the most vile genocidal protection racket mobsters syndicate in history —–both Europe and the entire North Africa and Middle East were a patch work of Christian, Jewish , Zorostrian, Pagan –what-have-you, religions.
Mohammed plagerised a bit of the Judeoism and Christianity announced himself as the prophezied Messiah–and was promtly laughed at for 11 years because “Mister Big” Allah his boss , kept on getting his story in a twist (Satanic Verses).
Now, at that time the Islamic scriptures ( Meccan Period) were reasonabley tolerant of other faiths. ( i.e. There is no compulsion in religion / you for yours and I for mine .ect. ect: )
However, this pacifist attitude wasn’t having its desired effect and bringing in the converts. It wasn’t easy in those days trying to muscle in on the territory of two other well established religions who had spent many years getting established.
A change of tactic was needed.
First step: Have another chat out in the wilderness with “Mr Big” Allah over a glass of brandy and a cigar—-get all the fluffy-luvvy tolerant, interfaith-outreach-dialogue ” edicts Abrogated ” (cancelled) from the “Quaran” ——( but….leave it in there so the dum kaffir won’t know that you’ve abogated it and you can always quote it later to show him it’s a ” religion of peace.
Second step. Mohammed gets deeply spiritual new commands from “Mr Big” Allah to replace those that have been ( secretly cancelled) ., but left in the Quaran as a deceptive decoy of duplicity.
Here they are: (The Medina Period)
61% of the contents of the Koran are found to speak ill of unbelievers or call for their violent conquest.
75% of Muhammeds biography ( Sira) consists on jihad waged on unbelievers. And in particular , people not of ” The Book ” –Polytheists ( Hindus ect)

Big Mo wanted to take a little interfaith hoilday to Tours in the South of France , but getting a visa wasn’t easy.
A strategy was needed that would make Sun Tzu envious, like
Lying, deception, smoke and mirrors, duplicity, hypocrisy, endless patience, false temporary truces until regrouped, victimhood mongering, grievance mongering, accusations of being kidnapped at knife point and driven to Epping forest by the BNP,
accusations of Islamophobia, emotional blackmail and racism ad-nauseam / ad-infinitum.

The effect this had on the enemy was to divide him, confuse him, demoralize him, humiliate him, undermine him, terrorize him, in to becoming a bunch of headless chickens —–by the death of a thousand cuts.

Another stoke of luck was about to take place for Big Mo and his spiritual henchmen.
The plague was about to ravage Europe and destroy a large percentage of its population.
Big Mo set out and within a hundred years Islam had slashed its way all the way to the French Riviera.
It was easy to tell the conquered Jews and Christian from the markings on their clothes.
A yellow star for the Jews and an Aparthied system of humilation for all non-Muslims.

Big Mo was by now long dead of course, but “The Firm ” we have all now learned to accomodate with such defferential respect , moved now eastwards through Persia , Afghanistans Hindu Kush ( meaning HIndu Kill ) and Northern India —in a blood bath killing tens of millions of Hindus over hundreds of years of warfare. ( Sunny should know all about that)

Having enjoyed their sojourn on the Riviera but getting booted out by Charles Martel and company out of Andalusia and across the straights of Gibraltar and further on to liberate the Holy Lands. Islam and the Turkish Caliphate wanted to have a sight seeing trip around Vienna. They were met with a blatantly illdisguised diplay of racism and Islamophobia in Austria and pushed back over several decades all the way back to Turkey.

The Holy Roman Empire now set about attempting to liberate all the lands conquered and ” illegally” occupied by Islam , who were still making a nuisance of themselves as pirates and raiding villages as far away a England and Ireland and carting of hundreds of thousands as slaves.
Meanwhile over the centuries, Islam had managed to run a massive Black African Slave trade which dwarfed the American one by a factor of ten. ( 40-50 million slaves)—none of these slaves bred or had off-spring, they were castrated.

I have to nip off and take a break for a couple of hours, and look in later to see my thesis torn to shreds and get the ” real story” Thanks for indulging

Thanks journeyman, that was fascinating. Consider myself contradicted.

13. journeyman

I know you not going to believe this Sceptisle ” sob-sob” ,
but it’s the ” weep-weep” ….first time anybodys said …” sob-sob”.
anything nice to me at Liberal Conspiracy…..”wipe runny nose on sleeve”

This could be the start of a beautiful friendship.
If it it wasn’t for the fact that I suspect you’re taking the piss.
Or is that just my paranoia.
Sorry , but i’m just not used to people agreeing with me here and it has come as bit of a shock to the system.
Not only that but it doesn’t give me anybody to argue with.. What a drag !

Order of the Knights Templar
Journeyman

Here they are: (The Medina Period)
61% of the contents of the Koran are found to speak ill of unbelievers or call for their violent conquest.
75% of Muhammeds biography ( Sira) consists on jihad waged on unbelievers. And in particular , people not of ” The Book ” –Polytheists ( Hindus ect)

Dear god. One of you obsessives actually sat to figure out the percentages or are you pulling figures out of your arse again?

Did I read that right, the BNP think that Mohammed fought against Hindus?

Hey and I guess Christianity was entirely non violent historically?

@Sunny 14

well get this:

The following is the Koran’s 164 Jihad Verses: K 002:178-179, 190-191, 193-194, 216-218, 244; 003:121-126, 140-143, 146, 152-158, 165-167,169, 172-173, 195; 004:071-072, 074-077, 084, 089-091, 094-095,100-104; 005:033, 035, 082; 008:001, 005, 007, 009-010, 012, 015-017, 039-048,057-060, 065-075; 009:005, 012-014, 016, 019-020, 024-026, 029,036, 038-039, 041, 044, 052, 073, 081, 083,086, 088, 092, 111, 120, 122-123; 016:110; 022:039, 058, 078; 024:053, 055; 025:052; 029:006, 069; 033:015, 018, 020, 023, 025-027, 050; 042:039; 047:004, 020, 035; 048:015-024; 049:015; 059:002, 005-008, 014; 060:009; 061:004, 011, 013; 063:004; 064:014; 066:009; 073:020; 076:008

17. Chaise Guevara

I can see the Matrix!

I am the One!

18. Chaise Guevara

Seriously, Carl, given that ‘Jihad’ means ‘struggle’ rather than ‘burn them all’, and given that the violence encouraged by the Koran is entirely dependent on which translation you happen to own, a load of numerical verse citations means very little indeed.

The version I read (as far as I read) preached non-violence except in defence. Although I admit it had a lot of Pythonesque stuff along the lines of “And God will send them into the eternal fires, where they will scream in torment forever, in his mercy”.

19. Chaise Guevara

“Order of the Knights Templar”

I’m currently playing Assassin’s Creed 2. You are in SO much trouble.

20. journeyman

@14 Sunny Hundal

Quote: Dear God. One of you obsessives actually sat to figure out the percentages , or are you pulling figures out of your arse again.?

Mmmm ” One of you”

Mmmm ” obsessives”

Mmm ” actually sat down to figure out the percentages”

Ok, Sunny. Lets dissect this.

” One of you ” ….as in what ? One of who ? Bugger the message. Go for the messenger.

“obsessives” Well, how do I explain this. ? OK, you know when you walk into somebodies office and they’ve got one of those gizmos with 5 steel balls on a strings on one side and 5 steel balls on strings on the other, and you if you push swing one steel ball and it hits its opposite number……you get….
“AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION”…….laws of motion Issac Newton.
Do you follow me. ?
And who is “obsessive” me or Islam . For Christ sake get your sense off proportion right.
When does something become ” not ” an appropriate reaction under the circumstances but ……”.obsessive” ..and who is to be the Judge ? Should the judge come from the same side of the political spectrum in the west that has formed a somewhat hypocritical unholy alliance with Islam ( my enemies enemy is my friend) ?
In other words, don’t you have a “conflict of interest here.

” actually sat to figure out the percentages”

As in ..(.how utterly pathetic ) Thats emotional blackmail and nothing to do with the matter.

And now to give a source: Quote:

“According to Moorthy Muthuswamy, an expert on political Islam “61% of the Koran talks ill of unbelievers or calls for their violent conquest and subjugation, but only 2.6 percent talk about the overall good of humanity. (A lot of offending pages)
The “Sira” biographies of Muhammed. Of 130 short chapters which detail his life, after arriving in Medina over 70 are about raids, battles, and assasinations, divisions of spoils, odes upon battles ect.ect.
According to Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam , 75% of the Sira is about Jihad.
The good parts of the Koran are so bound up with the bad parts, that trying to seperate them is an impossible task.”
End Quote:

islam cannot defend its faith with reasoned argument. and therefore defends it with intimidation , victimhood and violence.

Quote: Islam is an absurd theology of an immoral Bedouin, a rotting corpse which poisons our lives”
Kemal Ataturk

21. journeyman

@Dereck Wall

” hey , and I guess Christianity was no violent historically. ”

Come on Dereck now. Pull yourself together. I’m not going to condescend and insult your intelligence by pointing out the cultural relatavism and moral equivalence in your argument. You yourself can make a little mental experiment and pretend you are arguing against yourself.
Clue: Subsitute ” Islam ” with ” Nazism” or any other non-democratic totalitarian cult and see if the same logic works.
As much as you might despise me for saying this, there is such a concept as us and them. Of course we could always “Unilatteraly” disarm ourselves leaving “them” with a “them”…while in order to be nice we have decided to suicidally dump our concept of
“us”.
“Patriophobia” is a nasty affliction.

According to Moorthy Muthuswamy

Some random dude from India, who I see from a quick Google search has been praised and interviewed widely on FrontPage magazine (the bible of wingnuts) – and you expect me to swallow this codswallop? You must think I was born yesterday. Try coming out with something credible next time.

23. Chaise Guevara

Yo, Journeyman,

Not arguing against your attack on Sunny’s little list of ad hominems. Fair play there. However, I think the stats below are suspect:

““According to Moorthy Muthuswamy, an expert on political Islam “61% of the Koran talks ill of unbelievers or calls for their violent conquest and subjugation, but only 2.6 percent talk about the overall good of humanity. (A lot of offending pages)”

Talking ill of unbelievers is not the same as demanding their deaths. This needs to be broken down into its component parts to be meaningful.

“The “Sira” biographies of Muhammed. Of 130 short chapters which detail his life, after arriving in Medina over 70 are about raids, battles, and assasinations, divisions of spoils, odes upon battles ect.ect.”

I could write a book called “The Evils of Raids, Battles and Assassinations”, and 100% of it would be about the things you speak of. Wouldn’t mean I support them.

“According to Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam , 75% of the Sira is about Jihad.”

‘Jihad’ being close to being the Muslim word for ‘faith’.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, just saying the stats here are dodgy. And based on a couple of people’s interpretations of a historically controversial text.

“islam cannot defend its faith with reasoned argument. and therefore defends it with intimidation , victimhood and violence.”

True, but why pick on Islam?

24. journeyman

@Chaise Guevara

“Guevara” ? What else was I expecting?

Chaise: The entire world now, must be familar with the discusson about what “Jihad ” means. Is it a defensive measure only ? Or is it offensive ?
And when a representative of Islamic jurispridence uses the word ” defensive” does that mean the same as “defensive ” in the Western concept of the term.
And there in my friend is the very heart of the matter. We have just peeled another layer of of the endless layers of the “onion”.
As we are all fallen Muslims anyway who have decided to reject the teachings of Gods prophet Mohammed and the whole world belongs to Allah….
and there are only to regions of the world…..Dar al Islam..(the House of Islam) and…
Dar al Harb….( the House of War) then what “defensive ” meant yesterday….doesn’t have to have the same meaning today.
The Koran is an infinitley elastic and plyable work of deception.
“War is deceit” Mohammed:
And consider this. A totaltarian cult doesn’r normally say ” hey, how ya doing, I’m just dropping by to enslave you ”
It would give the game away . wouldn’t it.?

Tedious distractions aside that drag the argument away from what the post is actually about (and indulge certain people’s deep set fear of Islam, failing to see that by inserting such fears into a post on the BNP makes you look as if you are justifying their horrendous crusader imagery and all that goes with it and also perpetuating the myth that if we get rid of all those bloody Muslims in the UK, we’ll be alright…sigh), a grand post that makes the BNP look very pathetic and shit.

I for one am very grateful for the fact that someone has mentioned esoteric Muslim theology rather than the “vague” [1] threat of White Supremacist Violence.

Phew!

Abusive, sarcastic or silly comments may be deleted.

Sorry? Pardon?

27. journeyman

@Sunny Hundal

There you go again ! It’s frigging unbelievable.

Muthuswamy.

” has been praised and interviewed widely on FrontPage magazine” (the bible of wing nuts)”

Jesus , do you mean there are two wing-nut bibles ? The Koran and Frontpage magazin.

How to discredit and rubbish the argument as being utterly beyond the bounds of the laws of physics.
To bannish the entire argument to the realms of being as possible as my armchair defying the laws of the universe and levitating itself up to the ceiling.
That many non-Muslim-ophobic passages being spewed out as a religion. Nah..can’t happen,
Why ? Well , Sunny Hundal has just said the magic word “Front Page Mag”

I think we’ve got a bit of a conumdrum here Sunny.
As most Left media organisations associate any such discussions as “Right-Wing-Nut -Racism” anyway
it is doubtful that Muthuswamy’s observations would end up on Conservative Home
or Anti-Fascists-Unite for obvious reasons.
In other words. Who the F***K nows if Muthuswamy is Left or Right in his views.
Maybe even Muthuswamy doesn’t know himself.
Maybe Muthuswamy was a marxist/ trotskyist / alinsky freak who got curious and made a spred sheet of naughty verses percentage in the Koran.
Maybe he should have gone to the Guardian with it first.
It would certainly press all the right buttons here.
But there.are………er…..certain journalistic rules to follow from what I hear considering a certain religion and how to portray it…right. So I doubt they’d print it.

28. journeyman

@Daniel Gill Hoffman

Daniel mate. How the crap would you feel if you had spent 9/10 ths of your existence indoctrinated with the idea that the Americans and British started WW2 by attacking Hitler.
And then day you find out it was a dirty great fib.

Well, I spent most of my life with the “narrative” that for no concievable reason whatsoever. Christendom looked over the sea and said , oh. look at that innocent , pious defencless bunch of Muslims , lets go kill em for nothing.
Not only did I believe it . But the rest of “Christendom” as well.
So I took exception to Septicles revisionist insinuations.
And why, because most of “Christendom”, in particular the Left wing part of it , is still pumping out the same monstrous ignorance in our class rooms..

I’m no fan of Islam as you can see. I just dropped by to see what was on the menue.
If it hadn’t been for that one sentence in the article I wouldn’t have bothered.

29. Just Visiting

Chaise / Sunny

Why don’t you guys read Carl’s list of Jihad verses – and then come back with some reasoned thoughts on them in toto.

Otherwise you response is just cherry picking, when you say things like
* ‘Jihad’ means ‘struggle’ rather than ‘burn them all.

You need to do you research and follow-up Carls’ list.

After all, you’d be shot-down here on LC if (making an analogy) you said the Tory manifesto and actions were not hurting the poor if your case was with cherry-picked factoids like ‘well as far as I read they raised the income tax threshold, so …’!

30. journeyman

@23 Guevara

” True , but why pick on Islam”

1) There was a beauty contest and Islam won first prize

2) The leading offically recognised spokesmen for Islam have not as yet denounced, or distanced themselves or shown any sign of willing to reform or even question the text fundamentally.

3) In fact the opposite is happening with 1% of the Muslim worlds population , Saudi Arabias Wahhabist controlling and funding 90% of the worlds mosques and what is taught in them.

4) Europenews: National Review on Line:

Saudi Text Books:

” Nearly two years after the deadline by which the Kingdom’s education curriculum was to have been completely reformed.
As the U.S. Commision on International Religious Freedom wrote to the president last week.

” This promise remains unfulfilled”

Saudi textbooks teach, along with many other noxious lessons, that Jews and Christians
are “enemies” and they dogmatically instruct that various groups of “unbelievers” –apostates (which includes Muslim moderates who reject Wahabbi doctrine )
polytheists ( which includes Shiites) and Jews should be killed.

Under the Saudi Education Ministry’s method of rote learning, these teachings amount to indoctrination starting in first grade and continuing through high school, where militant jihad on behalf of “truth” is taught as a sacred duty

These are shipped and distributed by a vast Sunni infrastructure established with Saudi oil wealth to Muslim communities throughout the world. End Quote:

Nonie Darwish: Apostate Muslim: Quote: ” I have always maintained that ” moderate” Muslim is an oxymoron. We have two kinds of Muslims. The former are those who know Islam well and live by its dictums. The latter have no clue about their religion and have an idealized image of Islam that has no basis in facts ”

.

31. journeyman

@29 Just Visiting

Under normal circumstances ( if the article was specifically about Islam)
I am sure there would be more interest from the gang here in engaging.
However , as the subject matter has to do primarily with the BNP, I suspect they don’t feel too comfortable diverting away from the main points of the article and may interpret it as support for the BNP, and I can understand the dilemma.
And paradoxically enough , thats just what it might be “a dilemma”

Always a guilty treat to see BNP mentalists frothing about how violent and intolerant Islam is.

They never seem to realise that they are describing nothing but themselves.

It’s horribly entertaining. Like watching a blind man trying to negotiate traffic or something.

Actually, the line was not some revisionist attempt at suggesting the “Muslims didn’t start it” to generalise wildly your point, more that as I’m sure you’ll agree, the crusades were not all one-sided and that the BNP’s idea of it as some holy jihad to get the Muslims out of Christian Europe is just as wrong as the idea that Islam was entirely the victim. I suspect Griffin and the BNP Crusaders know even less about the reality of the crusades than the average person, it just makes for a wonderful modern analogy.

When does something become ” not ” an appropriate reaction under the circumstances but ……”.obsessive” ..and who is to be the Judge

You only post here about Muslims. You only post here to tell us how evil Muslims and Islam is. I think it’s a valid characterisation to call you ‘obsessive’.

As for your protesting about how great this Muthuswamy guy is – there’s actually nothing to illustrate that he is well known and respected outside the usual wingnuts. Just because you call him ‘respected’ doesn’t mean I would. In fact I’d be instantly suspicious of such a person. The fact you have nothing useful to say in response defending him just shows you do actually pull facts out of your arse while trying to malign all Muslims.

35. journeyman

@PDF

I did start of with ” (not a member) Ok ? ”

Neither have I had any contact with that organistion, it’s members or any other similar organisation on any occasion.

36. journeyman

@34 Sunny Hundal

I didn’t call Muthuswamy “respected” . The source I quoted him from did.

Quote ” The fact you don’t have nothing to say in response defending him just shows you do actually pull facts out of your arse”.

I come across claims. Muthuswamy made a claim.I don’t know yet if this is true or false. How many Lefty chic radicals would even bother or wonder how many psychopathic edicts the Koran contains. Anybody who went to the trouble would be a “Right-Wing-Nut by defintion for merely doing so around this neck of the woods.

No, I don’t post here only about the Muslims., but mostly about Muslims.
I don’t post here about most of the subject matter you discuss here because I know bugger all about it.
Mechanics fix cars and bakers bake bread.
Bakers are not very good at fixing cars.
If you write something about Geert Widers here and I come across it, I won’t apologise for coming in and posting an alternative view point.
Especially as he is on trial under “Sharia Law” in all but name–as confirmed by the Judge.

Quote: “The trial is not concerned with if the statements of Mr Wilders are true or false–but if he has broken the law” End Quote:

Sounds like the O.I.C’s “defamation of Islam” United Nations motion that was past by majority vote, has crept in through the back door.

quote: “pull facts out of your arse while trying to trying to malign all Muslims”

Lets get this straight Sunny. Your argument reeks of emotional intimidation and emotional blackmail.
Which is a paupers reponse to the realms of post that I have put up for debate here.

The traditional last refuge of the scoundrel “trying to malign all Muslims” fall-back , I didn’t even believe you were capable of sinking too.

Lets try ” trying to malign all Nazis” or
” trying to mailgn all Stalinists or
” trying to malign all Maoists or
“trying to malign all Aztecs”

I am “maligning” an “idea” Sunny.

If your so Godamned concerned about Muslims getting ill treated and “maligned” I’ve got just the culprit for you. He does more to “mailgn” Muslims than the entire anti-Islamification movement put together.

Its called Islam and its doing an incredible job.

You have a most lethal and dangerous attitude Sunny. You either want or at least actively faciltate in Islam having a privileged status beyond the bounds of scrutiny.
What has Islam done to earn this “get out of jail free card” which it appears to strive for with ever more frantic desperation.
It is petrified of being exposed to the light of day. It is petrified of scrutiny. It riggles, it squirms, it rages, it intimidates, and plays the “race card” at every available opportunity.
It has a particular DNA. the DNA of a malignant narcissist.
You have fallen for the cognitive dissonace that putting it under the microscope will so offend its delicate sensibilties so much that it will be the very factor driving its devotees to become radical–when in fact the very opposite is the case.

The desperation, the protest and emotional blackmail to illegalise critcism is because the cabal that enslave and exploit the ignorance of those masses have an uncomfortable feeling that if people like me can’t be shut up —-the “Jig is up” .

Muthuswamy made a claim.I don’t know yet if this is true or false.

Thanks, that’s all I wanted to establish really.

Quote: “The trial is not concerned with if the statements of Mr Wilders are true or false–but if he has broken the law” End Quote:

That’s got sod-all to do with sharia, it’s just standard practice in cases of incitement.

If I were to stand in the street outside your front door with a megaphone screaming that you were a wife-beater and a paedophile and a pickpocket, then even if all my accusations were true, I’d still be breaking the law.

When it comes to the Koran, I never got past the moral bankruptcy in the first few verses – 2.5 – 2.15. It’s no worse than the christian styling, of course – but we’re more used to that, as a culture.

As for the BNP – we can but hope they’ll fade into obscurity sometime very soon; and the more money they waste on pointless ‘outreach’, the faster that’s going to happen 🙂

Modern Jihadism and al-Qaeda probably owe more to Sayyid Qutb than to the Koran:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb

See too this BBCTV2 doc by Adam Curtis: The Power of Nightmares (Part 2):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XmPJhurB0k&NR=1

Journeyman- to some extent this may be feeding the troll but I’m going to respond to you seriously. Ok the points you make about Islam:

1. As someone said above there are different translations of the Quran: some have the texts you speak about translated in that way, some dont’. The Quran was written in classical Arabic- a language that noone now speaks- and may have had Syrian and other linguistic importations as well. Basically to suggest that by counting verses you can come up with the viciousness of the text is to ignore the big problems in the text that we face.

2. The Bible too contains many vicious texts- reccomending genocide for example. That doesn’t mean that either Christianity or Judaism are religions of genocide. Religions of the Book are not actually often solely about the book.

3. The authority of the Quran is mediated in Islam. In Sunni Islam through the hadith and judgements of jurists, in Shia Islam through the judgements of the descendents of the prophet. The point here is that the Quran is not the only authority that Muslims claim for their actions, anymore than the Bible is the only authroity that Christians claim for their actions.

4. There is plenty of evidence that at many points in history religious Muslims have been comparatively tolerant. Take for example India in the 17th Century- if you read Muzaffar Allam (University of Chicago) The Languages of Political Islam India 1200-1800, you’ll find plenty of examples of Muslim scholars and rulers arguing for toleration in very similar ways to the ways in which Christian scholars and rulers argued for toleration in the comparative period of European history. The only difference is that in Muslim India there were more of them. Most historians of Judaism would agree that it was far better to be a Jew in the medieval Islamic empire than to be a Jew in the West.

5. The conquests of the near East by the Islamic world were not pleasant- conquest never was in that period, the conquest of the Vikings to which that of the Arabs can usefully be compared wasn’t pleasant either. However once the Arabs seized control, they mostly left the existing structures of rule in place and did not force conversion (see Hugh Kennedy’s recent study of the rise of Islam for details).

6. You confute things which didn’t happen at the same time. The Muslims conquereed the Byzantine and Persian Empires and up through into Spain in the 600-700 period. Various Islamic dynasties then rose and fell. Charles Martel won his battle in southern France in the early 8th Century. THe Holy Roman Empire was founded by Charlemagne briefly and defeated the Muslim rulers of Spain (not all Muslim rulers) nad was directed as much and possibly more against pagan rulers in Germany. The Holy Roman Empire fell apart under Charlemagne’s successors and was reinvented in the 11th Century by Otto of Saxony. The Empire was based in Italy and Germany and its main claims and wars were about authority in Christendom not outside of it. The main competitor for Islam was the rejuvenated Byzantine Empire which was slowly swallowed by the Muslims in the West down to 1453. Those Muslims changed their nature though as increasingly groups from the north- Turks and Mongols- pushed into the Middle East- the Seljuk Turks were the group against whom the crusades were launched. The crusades were an attempt to recover the Holy Land- Jerusalem- and were often mass religious movements (see Gary Dickson’s superb The Children’s Crusade as an example) and not neccessarily directed from the top or directly against Islam (indeed the most significant and successful crusades happened in Lithuania and Latvia against pagans). The crusades were not a response to the threat against Christian Europe either and their most significant accomplishment was the conquest of Byzantium (a Christian power) and the establishment of a Venetian protectorate in Constantinople.

Byzantium fell in 1453 to the Turks whose empire extended up into central Europe and was gradually rolled back by the Habsburgs after 1683 and the Russians.

History is a little more complicated than you are making it- I’m not an expert in Islam but I think your picture of the Quran relies on particular translations, and your picture of Islam is monolithic and simply wrong.

I should mention that the plague did not happen when Islam made its first conquests- but the great plague happened about 800 years later. Go and read some proper history books please.

43. journeyman

@john b

There is a suspicion that anything less than a highly visible state persecution of Wilders could lead to an Islamist assault on Dutch commercial interests at home and abroad, similar to those that cost the Danes so heavily during the Mohammed Cartoon Affair.
An indication of possible caprice in the matter comes from a startling statement atributted to authorities.

“It is irrelevant whether Wilders witnesses might prove Wilders observations to be correct”………

….the “Openbaar Ministere” stated.

” What is relevant is that his observations are illegal”

The Dutch has made sure that the verdict is contained in the charge itself.
The ethos of relatavism finds the demographic question so saturated in revulsions that it is rendered undiscussable.
Gert Wilders is on trial for wanting to discuss it.
Gert Wilders is on trial for his opinions. Which makes a mockery of article 19 freedom of speech. Declaration of Universal Human Rights.
It is a political trial on par with the recent Canadian Human Rights Commisions trial of Mark Steyn and MacCleans magazine which led not to the indictment of Mark Steyn but to a parliamentary commisions investigation into the tactics which led to the 100% percent conviction rate of the court which had not been equalled since the days of the Soviet show trials —-and the reform of the entire ” hate-speech” “incitement”
laws, in Canada.

You are right John B., the truth is no defence.
In Islamic law, slander does not have to mean untruth.
It can mean anything a person dislikes.
Actually, looking at the ten foot long charge sheet against him, it looks like he is being charged for everything he ever said……among which…
They really want him. And if he gets it. Everybody will shut up afterwards. Mission accomplished. And you’ll no doubt be happy.

Quoting Oriana Fallaci
Rejecting Islamisation
Calling to ban the Koran (as Mein kampf is banned in Holland.

One alleged offence is Wilders statement:

” we must stop the tsunami of Islamization. This hits us in the heart, in our identity, in our culture”.

Can you imagine somebody saying ” we must stop the tsunami of Sovietization. This hits us in the heart, in our identity, in our culture.

No John B. Extra super-special consideration has been given this time to a highly sensitive, quick to anger and privileged group of people.

We have been trained well. The Mo Cartoon event has led western goverments in no doubt who they must support and who they must sacrifice.

““homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam”, ”

Absolutely bloody marvellous idea!

The history of the crusades (as opposed to battles like Tours etc which were defence) is essentially the history of large numbers of dodgy people (landless younger sons etc) being sent off to die in various non western European parts of the world. Gaza, Antioch, hundreds of thousands died marching through Turkey, The Teutonic Knights in the Baltics. There was also the Cathars bit, in the Languedoc.

Fortunately RyanAir seems to run services to pretty much all these places so it’ll be cheap: so the real part of this is that we get to send all the musclebound thickoes off somewhere else. Bit hard on Johnny Foreigner, I know, but needs must: at least they won’t be around here causing problems any more (umm, although, given that one of the Crusades “liberated” Portugal, perhaps that should read there in the UK).

45. journeyman

@friend

Thanks for your reply . I shall study all your points carefully.
And as you pointed out among other things, the actual order and dates of battles and campaigns is not necessarily in the order I put them. It was meant to be a rough sketch
I have always been aware that Christianity during that era was not exactly a paragon of virtue either.

Quote: ” I think your picture of the Quaran relies on particular translations:”

I,ve followed so many debates about this point and heard this argument so many times,
but to be honest I believe this “depending on the translation” thing is counter intuitive.
This is a “how many angels on the end of a pin ” deception.
This is nothing more than what some Muslim has told us because either he has be told this himself or because he knows other wise. and doesn’t want to say its a right load of bollocks because it would give the game away.
I don’t believe for a second that Islam would tolerate dozens of “translations ” to wander around that its experts in Jurisprudence wouldn’t make absolutely sure did not stray from the central cannonical themes. We would , but they wouldn’t.
Just exactly how differently can one translate.

Koran 3.25. Don’t be friends with the infidels

Koran 9:107 Infidels are liars.

Koran 8: 55 The vilest of animals are infidels

Koran 2:96 Jews are the greediest of all infidel

Koran 98.6 infidel are worst of all beings.

Koran 4.89 Kill infidel wherever you find them.

This narrative that Islam and its ideology is some form of unclassifiable, willow the wisp, elusive, multi-interpretational , impossible to exactly pin down, exists every where and no where is getting a bit tedious.
It seems to mean that it means whatever you want it to mean, whenever you want it to mean it, and not to mean it when you don’t. Like a peace of wet soap in the bath , you can never quiet get your hands around it.
Which now that I come to think about it could explain why it seems recently to be having so much success. You cannot defeat what you can’t understand.
Why, fancy that, it’s a totalitarian despotic ideology in 46 shades of green.
We might as well say—-well yeah, it is what it is–whatever it is.
Thats the most fantastic get-out clause I’ve ever heared off.
If Islam was really like that , it would be the spitting image of the morally-relatavist , “progressive ” Left.

Quote: “And your picture of Islam is monolithic and simply wrong.”

Ah, its the slippery soap , exists every where and no where place again.
This is another endlessly repeated cliche , and do you know what, your absolutely right.
And its also another get-out clause. Just how many brilliant get-out clauses does the 57 nation state O.I.C have. The same 57 nation state organisation that refuses for some mysterious reason to sign on to the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
Hey, wait a minute, did I say O.I.C. . Well thats close enough to a Monolith for me.
Your right, I agree, Islam is not a monolith. Which is something to be greatful for.
But what it loses by have the misfortune of not being a monolith, it certainly seems capable of making up for in other ways as we witness on a daily basis.

So what are we left with. We don’t know what it is. We don’t know where it is.
It doesn’t have a head office to contact or a complaints department.
In fact its all relative. Maybe its the Middle East version of the Old ladies vicarage tea party.
If only they beleived that Friend, it would save us all a lot of worry wouldn’t it.
But ” IT ” is conscious of itself, it understands us, how to manipulate, and it understands that we don’t have a blind clue about them. Islam is not the dum, disorganised, directionless, unthinking , idiot that we would all desperatley love to believe.

Quote. Daniel Maris.

” We have to understand that the free democracies face a much more determined and organised threat from this totalitarian political ideology–the pro Sharia movement–than is generally recognised.
There are ten of thousands of Madrassas and Islamic universities every year who promote the ideology .
There are numerous institutions promoting the ideology backed by goverments and Islamic charities.
The ideologies have a very good idea of what they are trying to do—-and demanding self-censorship is an effective way of extending Sharia into democracies.
The champagne dinner party “progressives” have not the faintest idea of the truth of the cultures over which they swoon.
It has become a fashionable display of class and style to laud another culture or even what one imagines another culture to be, over ones own.

Best Regards
Journeyman

You list the horrors of the Koran as if Islam has the sole rights to being a thuggish, awful religion. Christianity is more of the same.

47. journeyman

@Daniel Gill Hofmann

Luckly for us Daniel and unlike the 57 nation states of Islam which are despotic Theocracies….we happen to have seperation between church and state.
In Islam the religion is the state and governs every aspect of your life.
The other thing is that the sentence for leaving the islamic religion in many of their countries is death at worst and prison at best.
Western society doesn’t subjugate half it population either . (Women)
In fact there so many crappy things about islam that it has hardly any redeeming features whatsoever. They execute women for witch craft in Saudi Arabia still.
You are confusing Christianity with modern western society. it’s two different things all together.

You might not identify with the natural hard wired instinct of there being an “US” because you’ve brain washed yourself through decadent hedonist bohemian civilizational white guilt to think theres something disgustingly immoral about having a tribe, an identity and a culture or even worse, claiming that we are ” a people”.

I’ve been there Daniel

” How morally superior I am that I denounce my entire culture as criminal”

Well, I know that that kind of ” see how nice I am , I despise western culture ”

gives one a nice cuddly smug, cosey , sophisticated feeling, but that is in reality nothingless than a form of radical chic neurotic pathalogical altruism.

Either that or the rest of the non-western world and in particular Islam must be crazy, because they don’t seem to be afflicted with this same urge for self -flagellation.

Most Europeans are idiots who have no qualms about ethnically cleansing themselves and their culture, in the name of “social justice” and “non-discrimination”.

The one problem is that third world cultures wouldn’t entertain this idea if you put a gun to their head. They think we are stark starring raving mad.

You might be ashamed of your ancestors, history, culture and countrymen. But I’m not
I think western societies are superior to third world societies. We are simply better in every possible area one could speculate on.
We have banned slavery in most Islamic countries. (Saudi Arabia 1962)
Medicine has saved the lives on millions in the third world and prolonged their lives
Electicity, gas, cars, planes, parliaments, human rights laws, agricultural advancements, tractors, to increase food supplies.
Philosophy, law, knowledge, conmputers. The list is endless. Do you think Islam would have been so accomodating if the scientific revolution and all its military power had by some historical accident been at their disposal.

The only people who have this habit of spitting on western culture are those trendy, arty types that have benefited most by it..

Good grief you’re making a fool of yourself with your fevered, pathetic, bigoted ramblings. Pull yourself together man and show some dignity!

I’m done here, once again a BNP thread is used as a hosting site for bigoted views in its comment thread. And if you can’t grasp that your off topic trolling on a thread about the BNP makes you look like a BNP sympathiser then you’re more of a fool than your words paint you as.

I get the sense that any opportunity to mount your hobby horse on Islam will be embraced, that speaks volumes about your ignorance and desperation of ideas.

Also, I’d ease off telling me what I think, seriously, don’t presume to know me you moron as you scatter your myopic generalisations about what I believe, all your assumptions about me are wrong.

Despise western culture? You wish I did but I don’t you awful hack. What I do have a strong dislike to is those that point out the flaws in the cultures of others (whilst wildly generalising about that group, turning them into a homogenous mass in their hapless bigotry) whilst refusing all criticism upon their own cultural mores (whilst simultaneously creating a similar, incoherent but convenient blob of homogeny) and confusing elements that they believe in as representative of all.

For the record, all religion to me is awful, a terrible weak excuse for the feeble minded, all of it is littered with Bronze Age thinking which is of little use to us now and a poor reflection on humanity as a whole.

The fact you are so rabid in your declarations of loathing for one particular brand of backwards thinking over another, is the typical peccadillo of the bigot.

we happen to have seperation between church and state.

No we bloody don’t. Many of us wish we did, but it’s not so.

50. journeyman

@Daniel Gill Hoffman

Daniel, as you so rightly pointed out, this is not the right thread to keep on about this matter. I will take your advice and call it a day. So I’ll just signoff with this, so you know.
I’ll probably drop in again sometime and it pains me to be so blunt, but over the last couple of years when I’ve had the occasion to drop in here and glance through the posts,
the Sally-Neo-Con-Under-The-Bed-Brown-Shirt types and I’m afraid also yourself, have got stuck in my gullet.
You think I’m a narrow minded bigot with an unhealthy and unjustified fixation on one particular quaint, colourful, culture.
And I think the entire “progessive” ideological morally-relatavist political cast that you associate with here and all the despots it never ceased to jump in bed with over the last 70 years, are the biggest threat to civilization that ever stalked the planet .
So I’ll leave it there and take the matter up on a more suitable occasion.
Nothing personal.
Regards
Journeyman.

your fevered, pathetic…….. bigoted ramblings………you moron ………you awful hack……….hapless bigotry……..you are so rabid………

Great to see you back, Daniel.

Your research, analysis and razor sharp wit has been sorely missed…………..

52. journeyman

Spot on!

You think I’m a narrow minded bigot with an unhealthy and unjustified fixation on one particular quaint, colourful, culture.
And I think the entire “progessive” ideological morally-relatavist political cast that you associate with here and all the despots it never ceased to jump in bed with over the last 70 years, are the biggest threat to civilization that ever stalked the planet .

Bravo, sir! That’s the second funniest thing I’ve read all week.

(This was the funniest, so I’m afraid you’ve still got quite a way to go.)

54. Chaise Guevara

““Guevara” ? What else was I expecting?”

That’s the last time I back YOU up on ad hominems…

“Chaise: The entire world now, must be familar with the discusson about what “Jihad ” means. Is it a defensive measure only ? Or is it offensive ?”

Most of the world is now seriously incorrect about what it means. It can mean holy war. It can mean individual, internal struggle. And many things in between. The problem is when everyone assumes that it always mean the first of those.

“And when a representative of Islamic jurispridence uses the word ” defensive” does that mean the same as “defensive ” in the Western concept of the term.
And there in my friend is the very heart of the matter. We have just peeled another layer of of the endless layers of the “onion”.”

I was using it in the Western sense. It’s the word I chose to describe my own reading of (some of) the Koran. People less lazy than me have properly studied less belligerent versions and come to the same conclusion.

“As we are all fallen Muslims anyway who have decided to reject the teachings of Gods prophet Mohammed and the whole world belongs to Allah….
and there are only to regions of the world…..Dar al Islam..(the House of Islam) and…
Dar al Harb….( the House of War) then what “defensive ” meant yesterday….doesn’t have to have the same meaning today.
The Koran is an infinitley elastic and plyable work of deception.”

If it’s infinitely elastic, why are you arguing about what it says and means?

“And consider this. A totaltarian cult doesn’r normally say ” hey, how ya doing, I’m just dropping by to enslave you ”
It would give the game away . wouldn’t it.?”

Nor do people who don’t want to enslave you.

55. Chaise Guevara

“Why don’t you guys read Carl’s list of Jihad verses – and then come back with some reasoned thoughts on them in toto.

Otherwise you response is just cherry picking, when you say things like
* ‘Jihad’ means ‘struggle’ rather than ‘burn them all.”

Firstly, using words accurately is not cherry-picking.

Secondly, I’ve addressed this already. As I don’t know which translation he’s reading (and might not have access to it if I did), how can I be expected to be able to find these verses?

Why can’t he actually quote them instead of just throwing up numbers that refer to nothing specific (because of the different versions of the text) and that for all I know might just be random?

56. journeyman

@Chaise Guevara
I apologise to anyone I may have offended here.( including Sunny and Gill Hofmann)
The quip about “Guevara” was actually meant in a more light hearted way that you may believe. I Shouldn’t have been so impulsive.
I admit it was a bit cheeky of me after the unexpected but welcome back up on the
ad hominens. My gratitude and
my apologies if I offended.

Jihad: ” The problem is that everyone assumes that it always means the first of those ”

I have made a different observation and I would put it like this.
The problem is that there is a relentless attempt to convince us by every Muslim spokesman that Jihad “NEVER” means an open ended duty for all Muslims to wage offensive Jihad in all its possible forms and methods by stealth, political, psychological or warfare or otherwise whenever one is confident in winning and the odds are favourable.
We are asked to believe it is always meant at most as a defensive action.

Now I do not claim to be an expert either. But there is something perplexingly frustrating and highly suspicious about the entire ideology. Its a bit like discovering that everytime the cheese is missing that MIckey Mouse is in the kitchen. Eventually one can hardly aviod reaching certain conclusions. Even worse, as I believe I like many others have intuitively broken through what some term the “cognitive dissonace wall” or ” mental disconnect ” and finally being able to visualise in ones mind how Islams shape-shifter chameleon ” modus operandi ” works—-It then becomes quite frustrating that finding the words to convey that concept to another person is really the greatest barrier—-and especially if the “anti -racist ” defence mechanism of certain people come in to play then it is impossible.

Lets run through a few claims, right or wrong that have been made about this.
As much as they may offend some people, the elephant in the room is growing by the day and it would be prudent to at least consider them

1) For all religions except Islam, religion and deception are not intermixable. In Islam, deception and religion mutually support each other.
In other words “pliable” and “elastic” “duplicity”?
In fact deception may be a duty not only defensively but offensively.

It is difficult looking throught the lens of western cultural psychology to actually comprehend that a religion would advocate dishonesty—-even to advance its postion agains its enemies. If this is true then we shoud be aware of it. But it sounds immidiatey like a massive generalisation.

2) The koran is a declaration of open ended war against the kaffirs.???

Another claim that is difficult for a westerner to digest because religions just don’t do that, otherwise they wouldn’t be called a religion. We have difficulty imagining that large tracts of it are a war manual.
For us the word “religion” is automatically associated with a spirtitual quest.

Electicity, gas, cars, planes, parliaments, human rights laws, agricultural advancements, tractors, to increase food supplies.
Philosophy, law, knowledge, conmputers. The list is endless. Do you think Islam would have been so accomodating if the scientific revolution and all its military power had by some historical accident been at their disposal.

Spelling, grammar…

*Ahem*

Aside from the rest of your racist ramblings, and in the full awareness that I am feeding a troll, are you really so ignorant of history that you no nothing of Islamic achievements in cultural, scientific and artistic [to name just three] realms?

And why aren’t you a member of the BNP? You seem to have much in common with their views, after all.

Oh and I forgot, that quote is from journeyman @47.

59. journeyman

@57 Mr.S. Pill.

I,ve been on L.C. quite a few times particuarly when Islam comes up for debate.
It’s unfortunate that the thread centres around BNP. I can understand it looks deadly suspicious.
I should have waited.

Name three Islamic achievements you enquire? Fascinating subject Islam. Goes on for ever.
I read a whole treatise debunking Islamic scientific achievements by Fjordman.
Their entire culture is a hinderance to such things.
But , well, er…..exploding underpants maybe an exception.

“racist ramblings”

Ah yes . Racism. One could write a whole book about that as well.
According to the World Wildlife Assocation, there are only a few individuals left who have not as yet been accused at one time or another of racism. They are becoming extinct.
But I guess thats what happens when the term gets thrown about with the gay abandon of a kindergarden snowball fight.

Why not a BNP member ?

I’m very cautious about the baggage that some organisations have been associated with.

I prefer UKIP.

You seem to have much in common with their views after all.

And Hitler was a vegetarian as they say.
I’m a former -1968, 16 year old left-wing socialist , bohemian who got hit mugged by reality.
I am many like us watched in horror and dibelief as a chunk of the Left did the sideways shuffle like it did with Hitler (see Orwell), Stalin, Mao, Castro and Pol-Pot
and decided to do an encore with Islam which is in direct contradiction with everything the Left is supposed to stand for.
Both ideologies have found a common temporary agenda and have a common enemy.
I cannot abide far-right wing clerical fascism..

60. Chaise Guevara

Journeyman

“The quip about “Guevara” was actually meant in a more light hearted way that you may believe. I Shouldn’t have been so impulsive.”

No, that’s cool. I was recently attacked by an idiot who claimed that the word ‘Guevara’ in my name must mean I was ok with terrorism. As a result, I’m somewhat defensive about the whole thing. From your response, it’s obvious that you were just bantering, and I’m cool with that. Shouldn’t blame you for another person’s faults, so I apologise too.

Jihad: ” The problem is that everyone assumes that it always means the first of those ”

“I have made a different observation and I would put it like this.
The problem is that there is a relentless attempt to convince us by every Muslim spokesman that Jihad “NEVER” means an open ended duty for all Muslims to wage offensive Jihad in all its possible forms and methods by stealth, political, psychological or warfare or otherwise whenever one is confident in winning and the odds are favourable.
We are asked to believe it is always meant at most as a defensive action.”

That’s fair. Words can be misused by both sides. I’m not sure who is asking you to believe it, but there are certainly people out there who will shout ‘Islamaphobia!’ every time you criticise Islam. And they can fuck off.

“Now I do not claim to be an expert either. But there is something perplexingly frustrating and highly suspicious about the entire ideology. Its a bit like discovering that everytime the cheese is missing that MIckey Mouse is in the kitchen. Eventually one can hardly aviod reaching certain conclusions. Even worse, as I believe I like many others have intuitively broken through what some term the “cognitive dissonace wall” or ” mental disconnect ” and finally being able to visualise in ones mind how Islams shape-shifter chameleon ” modus operandi ” works—-It then becomes quite frustrating that finding the words to convey that concept to another person is really the greatest barrier—-and especially if the “anti -racist ” defence mechanism of certain people come in to play then it is impossible.”

Right, this is where you start to worry me. First, the Mickey Mouse analogy is worrying. Muslim terrorism is on the ascendant ATM, but there’s actually very little of it. We’ve had plenty of IRA terrorism, and all sorts of others if you go back far enough. What concerns me is that you’re deploring the terrorism (rightly), blaming Islamic tradition for it (also rightly) and then bringing that to bear on Muslims as a group.

I’m sure you’d say that’s not the case, but if so, why go to great lengths to point out that Islam is an evil influence? No one’s arguing with that, I hope. And while I think your beauty contest analogy is, well, beautiful, I don’t see any reason to write long, aggresive posts about Islam when they could just as well be aimed at religion in general.

“It is difficult looking throught the lens of western cultural psychology to actually comprehend that a religion would advocate dishonesty—-even to advance its postion agains its enemies.”

Really? What about evolution and all that jazz?

But your broader point does nothing to demonstrate that Muslims are a threat. It just proves that they might be, which we know anyway. For all I know, people who work for MSF might be a theat, That doesn’t mean I’ll assume they are.

“2) The koran is a declaration of open ended war against the kaffirs.???

Another claim that is difficult for a westerner to digest because religions just don’t do that, otherwise they wouldn’t be called a religion. We have difficulty imagining that large tracts of it are a war manual.
For us the word “religion” is automatically associated with a spirtitual quest.”

Again, no. I find that very easy to digest. What worries me is that you feel the need to talk about the potential threat of Islam – which any thinking person would surely agree with – without also talking about the potential threat of Christianity, Hinduism, capitalism, Marxism, liberalism, conservativism and so on. It looks paranoid and obsessive, although that may well not be a fair interpretation.

I don’t want to sound aggressive, especially considering that I feel I misjudged you earlier. But you seem to have, say, a bee in your bonnet about Islam, and that seems rather reactionary to me.

journeyman bigot:

To be clear, it is personal. Your views are incoherent and centred around bigotry. And to repeat, your ramblings are utterly off topic.

pagar:

Hello my little fan boy! Best if you run along before you start showing off in front of your…err…”friends”.

62. Rhys Williams

Journeyman.
What do you suggest we do with the Muslims in this country ?

“And Hitler was a vegetarian as they say.”
No he waasn’t. He enjoyed sausages but they gave him wind. Therefore his mainly vegetable diet.

“”I’m a former -1968, 16 year old left-wing socialist , bohemian who got hit mugged by reality.””
Oh dear, poacher turned gamekeeper complex. A server case of the Nick Cohen’s

“I am many like us watched in horror and dibelief as a chunk of the Left did the sideways shuffle like it did with Hitler (see Orwell), Stalin, Mao, Castro and Pol-Pot.”
A certain type of leftist. Did not E Bevan,set up NATO

“and decided to do an encore with Islam which is in direct contradiction with everything the Left is supposed to stand for.”
But you said earlier that you have rejected the left and therefore their values. So you have the values of the Islamic right.

“Both ideologies have found a common temporary agenda and have a common enemy.”
I think you find that is true of many factions and personalities. Christians admired the Mongol hordes because of their genocidal attacks on Islam. In the early thirties, Churchill admired Hitler because of his anti communist stance.

“I cannot abide far-right wing clerical fascism”
True but surely for all fundamentalists should be opposed.

@59

You use the racist Bosnian genocide denier Fjordman as a source and expect to be taken seriously? Heaven help us…

As for just three achievements of Islamic culture: Mohammad Al Khwarazmi was one of the founders of algebra; Al-Zarqali wrote masses of literature about astronomy and invented various advanced time-keeping devices; and this should serve as an example of Islamic architecture.

Your woeful ignorance and/or distortion of history only serves to undermine the main thrust of your argument. Ignoring and having such a bigoted view of the faith and culture of an estimated 1,000,000,000 people on the planet does you no favours whatsoever.

I dislike fundamentalism of any hue and argue against religious mentalism all the time, but spreading lies and hate as you seem to be doing is no way to go about it and yes frankly it does look racist when the only people you seem to be worried/angry about are Muslims.

Oh, and as someone else pointed out, Hitler wasn’t a vegetarian.

64. Just Visiting

very interesting to catch up with debate.

It is the furthest that a discussion of Islam on LC has gone without being swamped with cries of Islamophobia.

Well done Chaise for saying:
“there are certainly people out there who will shout ‘Islamaphobia!’ every time you criticise Islam. And they can fuck off”.

And the debate also seems to reach some common understandings not reached on LC before:

> why go to great lengths to point out that Islam is an evil influence? No one’s arguing with that, I hope

Actually Chaise, on LC many people have argued with that! I’m glad that you and Journeyman and others have reached agreement on that.

But I must also disagree with where you seem to go next.

I can think of no evidence to support your claim that:
> Muslim terrorism is on the ascendant ATM, but there’s actually very little of it. We’ve had plenty of IRA terrorism.

Just listen to the news and use Google – there are Islamic killings EVERY DAY around the world.

And lastly – I can think of no evidence for :
>long, aggresive posts about Islam … could just as well be aimed at religion in general.

They can’t be aimed at religion in general – unless you have evidence of daily killings in the name of Buddhism and Hinduism and Christianity and Judaism and so on.

65. Just Visiting

M S Pill

The simplest 6th form ‘compare and contrast’ exercise shows that in 2010 Islam is out there on it’s own by far as a religion lof violence: measured purely on the evidence of violence and incitement to violence by people claiming Islamic inspiration and quoting Islamic holy books.

It’s time to give up the comforting illusion that ‘All religions are equally bad’ and start to compare and contrast: using what they do and say TODAY as the benchmark.

After all, claiming that all religions are the same is as stupid as saying all political parties are the same – a mistake no one on LC would ever make!

( some of the more ideologically driven atheists here willl now be tempted to chip in and say _we believe all religions are 100% equally bad_ – but that has already been shown wrong on earlier LC threads where others have said that for example the judeo-christian tradition was much more favourable to the rise of democracy than Islam)

@65

Depends where you’re looking at it from. Some might argue that the Christian fundamentalist government of the US from 2000 – 2008 was responsible for far more deaths than all jihadi terrorist atrocities put together. George W. Bush, after all, claimed divine inspiration.
To blame one billion Muslims for the acts of a tiny few is irresponsible and as wrong as blaming one billion Christians for the acts of a tiny few governments, and smacks of prejudice.

67. Chaise Guevara

Just Visiting

“Just listen to the news and use Google – there are Islamic killings EVERY DAY around the world.”

OK, I was talking in a UK context, because we’ve got here via discussion of a British political party. But that still doesn’t give people the right to blame all Muslims for the actions of some, or to refer to ‘Jihad’ in the Koran as if it’s a clear sign of violence and aggression when that’s not always what the word means. It’s like saying I’m a violent person for using the phrase “kill the engine”.

“They can’t be aimed at religion in general – unless you have evidence of daily killings in the name of Buddhism and Hinduism and Christianity and Judaism and so on.”

Really, well, what about this statement of yours: “For all religions except Islam, religion and deception are not intermixable. In Islam, deception and religion mutually support each other.”

Most if not all religions mix religion and deception, and you could argue that many rely on it. For a clear-cut case, take those religions that disbelieve in evolution and thus encourage people to knowingly lie about the science to advance their theocratic position. Less obviously, take the self-deception needed to believe in any named, specific God and the resulting act of deceiving children raised in that faith.

I really don’t see how “deception and religion mutually support each other” in Islam any more than they do in Christianity. They’re both about living a lie, surely?

68. Just Visiting

Mr S Pill

> To blame one billion Muslims for the acts of a tiny few is irresponsible and as wrong as blaming one billion Christians for the acts of a tiny few governments, and smacks of prejudice.

I wasn’t blaming anyone – – I was talking about ideologies and how they influence what people do.
The facts suggest that
i) a huge amount of killing round the world is done by those who themselves say they are motivated by Islam.
ii) there is a startling silence among leading Islamic theologicans/religious figures round the world to condemn such violence
iii) many such people do actually make public pronouncements supporting the use of violence on theological grounds.

That needs an explanation.

69. Just Visiting

Chaise

>But that still doesn’t give people the right to blame all Muslims for the actions of some,

I agree 100%. But please stop bringing up the strawman that to question Islam is to ‘blame all Muslims’.

>or to refer to ‘Jihad’ in the Koran as if it’s a clear sign of violence and aggression when that’s not always what the word means.

Again – s atraw man – yes Jihad can mean something that is not violent. But the interpretation of most Islamic scholars is that it’s main meaning concerns fighting: and those scholars interpretation is based on the Islamic Holy books and mainstream.

If it wasn’t mainstream, we would see a concerted effort by Islamic leaders worldwide to say so – and to correct the ‘misunderstanding’ of all the terrorists who claim Jihad.
But we see not such concerted campaign….

70. Chaise Guevara

“i) a huge amount of killing round the world is done by those who themselves say they are motivated by Islam.
ii) there is a startling silence among leading Islamic theologicans/religious figures round the world to condemn such violence
iii) many such people do actually make public pronouncements supporting the use of violence on theological grounds.”

OK, people under the brackets i) and iii) are either arseholes or they’ve been taken for a ride. Or both.

However, ii) isn’t true. The MCB regularly condemns Islamic extremism, as do many other leading Islamic sources. There seems to be this myth that most or all moderate Muslims will quietly accept such extremism even if they don’t openly condone it, and that just isn’t true (unless of course said Muslim lives in a country where to speak out might lead to punishment).

I think that might be at the heart of our disagreements on this thread: you’ve correctly identified and correctly condemned extremist Muslims, but gone on to assume that all other Muslims approve of their actions. If you’re hearing ‘silence’, that only means you’re not listening.

I’m aware I’m cutting in on your conversation with someone else here, so apologies if you’d rather I’d butt out.

71. Just Visiting

Chaise

You quoted my words but you didn’t respond to them:

>“They can’t be aimed at religion in general – unless you have evidence of daily killings in the name of Buddhism and Hinduism and Christianity and Judaism and so on.”

And then you address something I didn;t say: “For all religions except Islam, religion and deception are not intermixable”

72. Chaise Guevara

“I agree 100%. But please stop bringing up the strawman that to question Islam is to ‘blame all Muslims’.”

If you agree, fine, although that does make me wonder about the above-mentioned ‘silence’. I don’t want to straw man you though, so I’ll wait to see what you say to that before saying anything that could turn out to be presumptive.

>or to refer to ‘Jihad’ in the Koran as if it’s a clear sign of violence and aggression when that’s not always what the word means.

“Again – s atraw man – yes Jihad can mean something that is not violent. But the interpretation of most Islamic scholars is that it’s main meaning concerns fighting: and those scholars interpretation is based on the Islamic Holy books and mainstream.”

Hang on. Islam can be considered violent because of some scholars’ interpretation, yet they interpret it that way because it’s violent? That’s circular.

I’d like to remind you of the context in which we began this discussion (if I’m right): I attacked someone for saying Islam was evil or similar just by citing the ‘Jihad verses’ in the Koran, and you defended him. If you agree it doesn’t necessarily mean violence, what do you object to in my assessment of his post?

“If it wasn’t mainstream, we would see a concerted effort by Islamic leaders worldwide to say so – and to correct the ‘misunderstanding’ of all the terrorists who claim Jihad.
But we see not such concerted campaign….”

Firstly, a ‘concerted campaign’ does not have a set definition, so you could claim any existing campaign was not concerted enough. Ignoring that, though: does it have to be organised? What about the individual Muslims and individual Islamic organizations that DO condemn atrocities commited in the name of Allah?

73. Chaise Guevara

“You quoted my words but you didn’t respond to them:

>“They can’t be aimed at religion in general – unless you have evidence of daily killings in the name of Buddhism and Hinduism and Christianity and Judaism and so on.”

And then you address something I didn;t say: “For all religions except Islam, religion and deception are not intermixable”

Fuck. I’ve conflated you and journeyman. Full apologies. Would also explain why I seem to be strawmanning you. I think you picked up where he left off and it turned into a single conversation in my head. Sorry.

74. Just Visiting

Chaise

Because you didn’t respond to my question, can I assume you no longer believe that:
> Muslim terrorism is on the ascendant ATM, but there’s actually very little of it. We’ve had plenty of IRA terrorism.

For more examples of violence promoted by Islamic religous figures: this weekend is just one:

“PAKISTAN
“Christians flee violence by Islamic extremists in Faisalabad
“Local mosque launches protest action against Christians in Waris Pura. Police and government prevent more incidents. Yesterday, flyers calling for mass action against Christians were handed out. A Catholic church was attacked with rocks and stones. An alleged case of blasphemy involving two Christian brothers is the cause of the latest episode of anti-Christian violence, which brings back memories of last year’s destruction in Korian and Gojra.

“Yesterday, hundreds of Islamic militants joined a protest march, calling for the death of two Christian brothers accused of blasphemy. During the procession, the mob stoned a Catholic church.

75. Chaise Guevara

“Because you didn’t respond to my question, can I assume you no longer believe that:
> Muslim terrorism is on the ascendant ATM, but there’s actually very little of it. We’ve had plenty of IRA terrorism.”

I did respond. I said that I was speaking from a UK context. I’m not disagreeing with you globally.

@68

I wasn’t blaming anyone – – I was talking about ideologies and how they influence what people do.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for now then.

The facts suggest that
i) a huge amount of killing round the world is done by those who themselves say they are motivated by Islam.

Yes. And also a lot of killing (as I pointed out in my last comment) is carried out by people claiming to be Christians. I’m reminded of this old Onion article. And as I also pointed out, a lot more killing has been, in recent times, carried out by fundamentalist Christians.

ii) there is a startling silence among leading Islamic theologicans/religious figures round the world to condemn such violence

As Chaise points out, the MCB frequently denounces terrorism committed in the name of Islam. No-one expects the Pope to apologise everytime a Catholic nutjob goes postal in Northern Ireland, do they?

iii) many such people do actually make public pronouncements supporting the use of violence on theological grounds.

Yes, and they are the ones who should be argued against. Look, I’ve no time for Islamist “thought” (such as it is) and I reserve my ire for the misogynistic homophobes who (ab)use their positions of power to talk shit. Not the huge majority of Muslim folk going about their day-to-day life, being accused of being somehow complicit in terrorism because they don’t wear a sign saying “I do not like terrorism” all day long.

You won’t publish but so long as the author of the article gets to read I’ll be happy.
I must take issue with this paragraph:

As if you couldn’t have guessed, the choice of Crusaders is meant as a “homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam”, which shows the BNP’s usual level of historical literacy.’

Sorry but that is EXACTLY what happened.

Google my username for further info. That’s the problem with self loathing idiots – it’s always the white man’s fault, isn;t it?

Sobieski:

Well you are wrong on two counts, first up, your comment is published and second, you confuse your opinion of what the Crusades were with what they actually were.

Facts are tough things to wrestle with I know.

Islam is the new Judaism.

Usually the left is allergic to dissent so I just assumed.

Secondly, I have confused anything. It looks like you have though.

Not in this case, so you were wrong and yes, you’ve confused your take on events with fact.

Easy mistake to make.

I’m afraid I haven’t.

Like you say it’s an easy mistake to make so you shouldn’t feel too bad but you might like to read a few books every now and then.

77 – hence my post at 2

Bags I get to be Jan Sobieski! Um, except I thought the BNP didn’t like Poles?

It’s always odd these right-wing goons that turn up, you’d think that the fact their dross isn’t deleted and the fact that they are allowed to pop up here and chat shit, they’d be grateful but no, they just keep coming back.

Sorry pal, you’re tedious, you plugged your shit, stop coming back to say: “ER! ACTUALLY YOU’RE WRONG” for all eternity.

None of us here believe in your interpretation of events. Deal with it, if you can’t handle us disagreeing with you, stay away from blogs that you don’t agree with.

Ponce.

As if you couldn’t have guessed, the choice of Crusaders is meant as a “homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam”, which shows the BNP’s usual level of historical literacy.’

Sorry but that is EXACTLY what happened.

As a handy guide, the people who ‘saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam’ – people like Charles Martel in the 8th Century or Jan Sobieski in the 17th (or indeed Don John of Austria in the 16th) – weren’t Crusaders, and the Crusaders weren’t saving Christian Europe from anything. They were trying to reconquer the Middle East.

Tim J,

You’ve got to love the idiots here:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

It is not as if Europe hadn’t come under other threats. But these boyos have a unique viewpoint.

It’s the Muslims!

Fuck me!

I’d stay well clear of that blog Douglas, it’s a hellhole of bigotry and fear.

>>>>>>>It’s always odd these right-wing goons that turn up, you’d think that the fact their dross isn’t deleted and the fact that they are allowed to pop up here and chat shit, they’d be grateful but no, they just keep coming back.

Sorry pal, you’re tedious, you plugged your shit, stop coming back to say: “ER! ACTUALLY YOU’RE WRONG” for all eternity.

None of us here believe in your interpretation of events. Deal with it, if you can’t handle us disagreeing with you, stay away from blogs that you don’t agree with.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

I can handle it perfectly. You’re the one who’s getting worked up. Please calm down. Find a dark room and lie down. You might also want to read some history books.

>>>>>>>>>>As a handy guide, the people who ‘saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam’ – people like Charles Martel in the 8th Century or Jan Sobieski in the 17th (or indeed Don John of Austria in the 16th) – weren’t Crusaders, and the Crusaders weren’t saving Christian Europe from anything. They were trying to reconquer the Middle East.

>>>>>>>>>>

You’re cherry picking what is and isn’t a crusade? REally? Sobieski was most definitely a ‘crusader’. The violent muslim hordes had made it all the way to Vienna. Where they were smashed everywhere by inferior numbers.

The muslims, once they had slaughtered they way through the holy lands had set their covetous eyes upon Europe, as evidenced by their advance into Spain.

Their can be no doubt what there intentions were. In fact you owe your freedom to these people so show a little more gratitude please.

This a little link to start your education:

http://www.christian-community.org/library/crusades.html

I can provide more links and titles of some rather illuminating books if you so desire.

Thank you for your time.

With regard to Muslims in History and that, has anyone brought up how much more scientifically advanced, tolerant and administratively competent the Ottoman empire was in comparison to the rest of Europe until the beginning of the industrial revolution?

We only know about lots of ancient greek philosophy because it was reintroduced to europe through the muslim world.

>>>>>>>>With regard to Muslims in History and that, has anyone brought up how much more scientifically advanced, tolerant and administratively competent the Ottoman empire was in comparison to the rest of Europe until the beginning of the industrial revolution?

We only know about lots of ancient greek philosophy because it was reintroduced to europe through the muslim world.>>>>>>>>>>>

This is a common myth but unfortunately it’s just that.

What claim to greater ‘toelrance’ do they have? They subjugated, enslaved, tortured, killed and invaded. If that’s ok because they were muslims then fine. I just disagree.

Scientifically advanced? Well they DID invent algebra. Not a lot else. Also we built westminster abbey, winchester cathedral, cambridge university, salisbury cathedral and many, many more buildings whilst in our ‘dark age’. Hardly the works of uncivlised and unadvanced savages.

Aminstratively competent? I don;t really know what this means and I suspect you don;t but felt compelled to come up with another example to fit the convention of having three examples in any list.
I’ll give you it if you like. The Ottoman Empire was peerless when it came to administrative competence.
Happy?

The greek works of philosophy? Not a single translation of Aristotle from Arabic to Latin was performed by a Muslim.

You might like to look up a couple of srticle by Dr. Jonathan David Carson.

HE can educate far better than me. I’ll even provide the links.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/07/hyping_islam_s_role_in_the_his.html
http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/08/the_notsogolden_age_of_islamic.html

Thank you for your time.

Have you heard of the slaves of Barbary? Do you know the ARabic slave trade dwarfed the transatlantic slave trade?

Sobieski:

You’re a desperate, prejudiced bigot, using this forum to expound your falsehoods.

Thanks Daniel but as you’ve called me ‘prejudiced’ and ‘a bigot’ and you don’t even know me it blunts the sharpness of those words and exposes you as a hypocrite.

What I said at 91.

I now see why you expected your comment to not appear, you’re a troll. You’ve made your point here, now bugger off.

Seriously now why is it every damn thread about the BNP turns into an argument about Islam? This has nothing to do with Islam at all and everything to do with the BNP training up children to be neo-Fascists.

Sobieski: I am happy to debate Islam with you via my email address on my blog but please stop trolling here. It’s not helpful to you or anyone else.

Mr S Pill:

Tell me about it, every BNP themed thread here becomes a car crash full of BNP supporters and their prejudiced and bigoted offspring.

“Seriously now why is it every damn thread about the BNP turns into an argument about Islam?”

Because it’s less risky than publishing anti-Semitic pamphlets.

You’re cherry picking what is and isn’t a crusade? REally? Sobieski was most definitely a ‘crusader’. The violent muslim hordes had made it all the way to Vienna. Where they were smashed everywhere by inferior numbers.

Um, yes I am cherry picking what is and isn’t a crusade. It’s a word that has a specific meaning – a papal-endorsed military campaign to end the Muslim occupation of the Holy Land. So, Frederick Barbarossa – a crusader. Richard the Lionheart – a crusader. Don John of Austria – not a crusader. Charles Martel – not a crusader. Jan Sobieski – not a crusader.

Taking up the cross meant ignoring matters of national interest in favour of the interests of ‘Christendom’ as interpreted by the Pope. What was the English interest in the Third Crusade? Pretty much nil – indeed the loss of money and manpower was detrimental.

Whereas Martel, Sobieski and Don John of Austria (is marching to the war…) were soldiers fighting in the defence of their countries or their countries’ allies. Fighting a war in the national interest is the antithesis of the crusader ideal.

“It’s a word that has a specific meaning – a papal-endorsed military campaign to end the Muslim occupation of the Holy Land.”

Nearly but not quite. It’s “papal-endorsed military campaign to …..” and fill in the blank as you like. The slaughter of the Cathars in the Languedoc was a crusade (Simon de Monfort was thus a crusader), the Teutonic Knights in the Baltics, a crusade, etc.

It’s not just that there’s nothing specific to the Holy Land about a Crusade, there’s nothing specific to Muslims or Islam about one either.

98 – that’s a fair point, although the Albigensian and Baltic crusades were something of an innovation. The point I think stands though that crusades were almost always supposed to be separate from the national interest, though those pesky French managed to do pretty well out of the suppression of the Cathars.

>>>>>>>What I said at 91.

I now see why you expected your comment to not appear, you’re a troll. You’ve made your point here, now bugger off.>>>>>>>>

Ok I’ll let you have the last word.

>>>>>>Seriously now why is it every damn thread about the BNP turns into an argument about Islam? >>>>>>>

Seriously, the author tried to perpetuate the myth that the Crusades were an unprovoked act of ‘western’ aggression.

I took issue with that, I was then subjected to ludicrous attacks on my character.

These people let this blog down imo.

Tim J>>>>

Semantic quibbling at best, deliberately mendacious subversion of truth at worst.

Sobieski prevented the muslims hordes advancing into civilised Europe.

You should show a little more gratitude.

“Because it’s less risky than publishing anti-Semitic pamphlets.”

HA! Brilliant.

Semantic quibbling at best, deliberately mendacious subversion of truth at worst.

Sobieski prevented the muslims hordes advancing into civilised Europe.

You should show a little more gratitude.

God forbid we should seek accurate language… And why should I be particularly grateful that Sobieski helped create a strong and powerful Austrian Empire – it’s not like that didn’t cause greater existential problems for Britain than a marginally greater Islamic European presence would have done.

105. Sobieski

>>>>>God forbid we should seek accurate language… And why should I be particularly grateful that Sobieski helped create a strong and powerful Austrian Empire – it’s not like that didn’t cause greater existential problems for Britain than a marginally greater Islamic European presence would have done.>>>

Marginally greater Islamic presence? MArginally? Would’ve casued less problems?

Look at Spain to see what a ‘marginally greater’ presence would’ve looked like.

Also look at the occupation of Spain’s citizens during this time and the subsequent fall out after the Spanish fought back.

I can provide links if you like.

Thank you for your time.

105 – well, they were already rulers of Hungary and were at the extreme limits of their supply and logistics line. So the fall of Vienna, while it would have been disastrous for the Hapsburgs would certainly not necessarily have led to a much greater territorial presence within Europe.

It’s also simply unhelpful to see Ottoman imperialism as being solely a religious conflict. Why did we go to war with Russia in the Crimea? In defence of Turkey (or at least, that was the excuse). France was allied to the Ottomans – England had a partial understanding with them in the 16th Century. The overwhelming tide of Islamic expansion was stopped in the 8th century by Martel at Tours-Poitiers. Had he lost then, then Gibbon may be right that there would have been minarets over Oxford University. But even that wasn’t a crusade, it was a war.

Look, feel free to continue with your bizarre politics. It’s entirely your prerogative and nothing I can say will change your mind. But sharpen up your history.

107. Sobieski

106.

Tours was a magnificent victory for Christendom. It was a war but all the crusades were so that’s a daft point and one I don’t really understand.
Feel free to illuminate me as I never turn down those that offer me greater knowledge.

The crimean war was to take control of the falling ottoman empire, nothing to do with protecting Turkey.
I won’t ask you to illuminate me here as I’m of the opinion that you’re simply wrong.

If you think the battle of Vienna wasn’t religiously motivated then I can’t really help you.

Thank you for your time.

Stop confusing your opinion with fact, all you keep doing is saying that people are wrong and then offering your opinion as evidence, that doesn’t cut it.

That’s not what I’m doing, Daniel. Try to keep up.

Yes you are. Now go away, you keep threatening to do so.

111. Sobieski

I never threatened anyone or to anything whatsoever.

You’re wrong. Again.

Go away.

113. Rhys Williams

S man and Journeyman,
Do you have your own Knight’s templar costumes . Just in case the Muslim hordes invade Surrey.
Papal Bulls , you have got to love them.
Also wasn’t the greatest threat to medieval europe from rodents and the Mongols not the Islamic chaps.

You’re wasting your time Rhys, S is trolling a thread on a blog he doesn’t agree with, he has left his opinion on matters but seems desperate to have the last word.

If his argument were that convincing he could simply leave it here and let people make their own mind up but no, he can’t.

Weak cretin.

115. Sobieski

>>>>>If his argument were that convincing he could simply leave it here and let people make their own mind up but no, he can’t.>>>>>>>

I was thinking the same thing. About you.

>>>>>>Also wasn’t the greatest threat to medieval europe from rodents and the Mongols not the Islamic chaps.>>>>>>

Islam was definitely a greater threat than the Mongols. Your point is rather silly anyway.

Crossing a motorway on foot is more dangerous than not wearing a seat belt but I still remember to buckle up.

You’re a troll, all you have is opinion and calling people silly who disagree with you.

Weak.

117. Sobieski

All you have is calling people trolls so even if you were right (you’re not) then i’d still win.

I’d hate to be you.

You are trolling. Fact. No go away.

119. Sobieski

I’m right after you, danny boy.

dull

121. Rhys Williams

Well the black detah killed more Europeans than Muslims did.
I think more Europeans were killed by Mongols than by Muslims.

Also since 1980 Christians, secularists and Jews have killled far more Muslims than the other way round.
I think they should fear us more than the other way round

122. Rhys Williams

Islam was definitely a greater threat than the Mongols. Your point is rather silly anyway.
Have you read a history book

Crossing a motorway on foot is more dangerous than not wearing a seat belt but I still remember to buckle up.
Please try

123. Sobieski

It depends what you define by threat. The mongols had some success in Eastern Europe but by then their resources were stretched so thinly it was never going to last.
When they did invade they respected local traditions and customs.

This is rather silly anyway as he mongols also don’t exist today. That’s a point you have conveniently forgotten.

You know has killed more muslims than Christian, Jews and secularists put together?

Muslims!

Perhaps muslims should be afraid of muslims?

Thank you for your time.

The Mongols certainly operated under a system of tolerance, something you yourself do not believe in, you are not tolerant are you?

But any failure to follow the clearly set down rules was met with collective retributions and terrifying violence.

And what difference does it make whether or not the Mongol Empire exists today?

You come up with the most facile reasons to dismiss points that prove you wrong, even stopping as low as to merely so: “no, you’re wrong.”

Your tiny mind, as embittered as it is with its hatred of Muslims, cannot grasp that you’re prejudice cripples your ability at rational thought.

You’re a one-trick pony.

125. Sobieski

And what difference does it make whether or not the Mongol Empire exists today?

This is quite simple. Something that doesn’t exist can not be a threat.

But you’re basing your entire argument on past threats as justification for being a bigot.

127. Sobieski

No, I was correcting the original claim that the Crusaders wren’t a response to violent Muslim extremism.

You started talking about mongols and what not. Not sure why.

And in using that analogy, you did not achieve your aim.

All you are capable of is going: no and denying, ducking and the tactics of a coward.

Cheers.

It wasn’t an analogy.

Are you always this stupid?

Well that took you long enough.

Desperate for the last word much?


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  2. Tim Ireland

    RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  3. Sarah Raphael

    RT @ibcon

    The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  4. UniteAgainstFascism

    RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  5. James Brown

    RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  6. waine james

    Look at the inbred youngsters! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd (via @libcon)

  7. Paul Nolan

    RT @libcon The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/dytE3j

  8. Ross Watkins

    RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  9. Leicester UAF

    RT @uaf: RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  10. coalvilledave

    RT @uaf: RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd

  11. Ames Claxon

    RT @libcon: The BNP Crusaders are here! http://bit.ly/am3Qtd tee-hee what are Dad's Hapless Army up to now?

  12. andrew

    The BNP Crusaders are here! | Liberal Conspiracy: anything nice to me at Liberal Conspiracy…..”wipe runny nose on … http://bit.ly/b11mVw





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.