This blog initially set out to focus primarily on Islam and the Islamisation of the UK. However, since that time the subjects covered have broadened. They now include (amongst other things): IQ tests, Jean Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Marxism, Trotskyism, David Cameron, Foucault, Nazism, Ralph Miliband, economics, statistics and so on. - Paul Austin Murphy
I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here.)

Monday, 18 June 2012

Leftists & Liberals Lie and Die For Islam [E]

[Image above: a Italian Leftist, Vittorio Arrigoni, who lied and then died for Islam in Palestine.]

- By Babs Barron (edited by Paul Murphy)
... The UK and other western governments make the same mistakes again and again: instead of trying to apprehend the influence of Islamism from within its own world view and in terms of how it perceives the kuffar or non-believers, and reacting accordingly, they persist in superimposing a western, liberal, inclusive veneer upon Islamism's motives. Perhaps they believe that if they do this often enough and for long enough they will turn this magical and woefully misguided interpretation into reality; perhaps they lack the moral courage to confront the dangers Islamism presents to western values of pluralism; perhaps they are criminally ignorant of those dangers; perhaps all of the foregoing or none of them.

... Islam is a supremacist religion. Its self-declared aim is to rule the world. ... I use "fascinates" in its psychological sense — for I believe that the West has fallen under the spell of the notion of a mythical, peaceful Islam in its midst, deliberately promoted by its spokesmen...
... One is that Islam is a "religion of peace", for example, when more terror attacks are perpetrated by Muslims than by any other faith system. There are also sundry other statements regarding Islam's being-in-the-world, all of which are deliberately aimed at mollifying rather than being totally honest about Muslim intentions. These, I would argue, have a very similar effect. There is also the deliberate use of taqiyya, dissimulation and sometimes outright lying sanctioned by Islam for Muslims in their dealings with non-believers when they believes themselves to be under threat...

Most ordinary people in western cultures hold truth-telling to be sacrosanct and, because it is natural to assume that the other person is also telling the truth, we are all too easily fooled by those who, for example, avow the peaceable nature of Islam even shortly after innocents have been killed in its name... 

Islam, however, has kept itself apart and, moreover, has insisted that it be awarded special privileges and that notice be taken of its hair trigger sense of grievance. Alongside this it conveys a sense of menace about what might happen if its grievances are not taken on board and changes made to accommodate them. When Geert Wilders was invited to the UK House of Lords in 2009, for example, Lord Ahmed, a Muslim peer, threatened to mobilise 10,000 Muslims to prevent Wilders from entering Parliament if the visit was allowed. The British police had had experience of dealing with violent Muslims in the protests against the Danish Embassy in London in 2006 as a result of the Mohammed cartoons, and Wilders was made persona non grata in the UK in 2009 because the UK did not want a repeat performance. The ensuing outcry led to Wilders visiting subsequently, however, and without significant incident.
... Islamists, whilst condemning western democratic processes on the one hand, never hesitate to use them on the other, against those whom they perceive to be acting against Islamist interests. Each Islamist protest against real or imagined infringements of Muslim human rights (human rights which, under sharia law, would be dispensed with in a flash for Joe and Jane Public) comes with a reminder that although Joe and Jane Public may resent such behaviour, for them to show their resentment openly would mean that they do not support those human rights for Muslims. Joe and Jane want to perceive themselves as decent human beings, and may define "decent" in pluralistic, inclusive, "live and let live" terms. At the same time, however, they recognise the unfairness and manipulativeness of Islamism's demand to be treated as a special case and to be allowed to impose more and more of its values on them, and they deeply resent it...

... They can ignore the excesses of Islamism, its treatment of gays and women because these get in the way of their support for the "oppressed Palestinians." They are focused, obsessed even with the wrongs perpetrated against Palestinians for which only Israel and America are to blame.
Western leaders will do almost anything to be seen to be "nice people" in their attitude to Islamists so as not to incite riots among their Muslim populations and to get more Muslim votes.

European governments in particular carry with them folk memories of two world wars and their impact. This has led to an inclination towards appeasement, a belief that anything is better than fighting (literally) for what is right, and the adoption of "multiculturalism" as a foolish attempt to co-opt those who would destroy Europe, rather than opposing them...


  1. Would you say the IRA terrorism was a direct correlation to. Catholicism's stranglehold on the domination? No.

    Enough said.

  2. Two sentences and this man thinks "enough said"! He must have the intellectual powers of Buddha or Wittgenstein.

    Almost from the very beginning of the IRA, most IRA activists and leaders were Communists, socialists and/or atheists. They not for one moment fought for Catholicism. They were nationalists as well as socialists (which has often happened). The people they were "defending" were mainly Catholic, sure. But that was almost coincidental in that any religious group could have felt 'oppressed' by another religious group.

    Now, with Muslim terrorists the situation is the exact opposite. They are killing for their religion. They kill with passages of the Koran on their tongues. Everything they do they do for Islam. Even if you think, classically, that they are 'distorting Islam', they are still distorting ISLAM.

    The IRA fought for a united Ireland, not for Catholicism. Show me a single IRA directive or bit of propaganda which says ANYTHING about the theology or even reality of Catholicism.

    What does "Catholicism's stranglehold on the domination" mean? Have you been spoon-fed some Leftist literature? If so, I'd swallow completely before you regurgitate it.