Douglas Murray Reacts to Liberal Hypocrisy on Islam

Douglas Murray reacts to Liberal Hypocrisy, a must watch piece of video.

Outrage or no outrage, the 'liberal' dilemma

Outrage or no outrage, the 'liberal' dilemma. Show a 'liberal' this video and ask them if the lady making the speech is exhibiting any signs of racism, then watch their head explode...



"Fuck China Town"followed by a long list of the things she hates about the area, including their noise and strange food, sounds racist ... But the person speaking isn't a white man, she's a black woman... Pop goes the liberal's head!

Coming tomorrow/Monday

Another post illuminating the kind of idiot who thinks Che Guevara was a hero of some sort.

A fine example of refusing to call a spade, a spade...

"Anti-Islamic Hyperventilation" Time Magazine   Dec 8:
 
Exchange from hearing, Wed. between Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., and Paul Stockton, Assistant Defense Secretary for Homeland Defense: The terrorist threat/Hasan/Ft Hood massacre
 
 
"REPRESENTATIVE DANIEL LUNGREN (R-CA): Secretary Stockton, are we at war with violent Islamist extremism?
MR. STOCKTON: No, sir. We are at war with al-Qaida, its affiliates –
REP. LUNGREN: OK, I understand that. My question is, is violent Islamist extremism at war with us?
MR. STOCKTON: No, sir. We are being attacked by al-Qaida and its allies.
REP. LUNGREN: Is al-Qaida — can it be described as being an exponent of violent Islamist extremism?
MR. STOCKTON: They — al-Qaida are murderers with an ideological agenda –
REP. LUNGREN: No, I — that’s not my question. That wasn’t my question. My question was, is al-Qaida acting out violent Islamist extremism?
MR. STOCKTON: Al-Qaida is a violent organization dedicated to overthrowing the values that we intend to advance –
REP. LUNGREN: So is it yes or no?
MR. STOCKTON: Can I hear the question again? I’ll make it as clear as I can. We are not at war with Islam. And it is not –
REP. LUNGREN: I didn’t ask that — I did not ask that, sir. I asked whether we’re at war with violent Islamist extremism. That’s my question.
MR. STOCKTON: No, we’re at war with al-Qaida and its affiliates.
REP. LUNGREN: Well, al-Qaida — how does al-Qaida define itself? Are they dedicated to violent Islamist extremism?
MR. STOCKTON: Al-Qaida would love to convince Muslims around the world that the United States is at war with Islam.
REP. LUNGREN: I didn’t say that.
MR. STOCKTON: That’s a prime propaganda tool.
REP. LUNGREN: Sir –
MR. STOCKTON: And I’m not going to aid and abet that effort to advance their propaganda goal.
REP. LUNGREN: No, no, my question is, is there a difference between Islam and violent Islamist extremism?
MR. STOCKTON: Sir, with great respect, I don’t believe it’s helpful to frame our adversary as Islamic with any set of qualifiers that we might add, because we are not at war with Islam. 


Thanks to 'noggin' at Biased-BBC for the spot that illustrates the linguistic and mental tangles that too many Western governments get into when discussing Islamists.

The envy of the world?

"The NHS is the envy of the world",  so the campaigners tell us when changes to the NHS are discussed; "the envy of the world". Total crap of course; if it was the envy of the world then surely other countries would be queueing up to copy its features. Instead of which they have a selection of other systems that vary quite widely from the NHS's free state provision model.

Two articles about the NHS that appeared on the same page of Sunday's Telegraph really spoke to me. The first told a horrible story of NHS ineptitude and neglect, here's a brief extract from a harrowing tale:

'When Adam Rodin took his 93-year-old father Sam to hospital for breathing difficulties, he was confident that he was in the right hands.

Not only had Mr Rodin had always had good health, the family were confident they could navigate the NHS: Adam is a a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist at Barnet Hospital, his wife Bridget is a retired nurse, and his twin brother Andrew is a consultant physician.

But Mr Rodin died five weeks after being admitted with breathing difficulties to a large teaching hospital in
London.

This weekend his son came forward - despite working in the NHS - to accuse those who were supposed to care for his father of a string of failings.

Mr Rodin jnr said that his father was not fed properly, losing a third of his body weight in hospital, that he was shunted between 15 wards in six weeks, that there was a lack of communication among staff, and finally, that a nurse berated his family for giving the 93 year-old water within his earshot.'

The second story is even more harrowing and disgusting and involves the use of 'DNR' orders. This Telegraph article reports the findings of spot checks of 100 hospitals undertaken by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), an official watchdog, earlier this year.

'A charity for the elderly said the disclosures were evidence of "euthanasia by the backdoor," with potentially-lethal notices being placed on the files of patients simply because they were old and frail.'

There are plenty iof examples, here are just a few:

'* Inspectors who visited Queen Elizabeth Hospital, run by University Hospitals Birmingham Foundation trust, found no evidence that any of the patients whose files were marked DNR had been informed about the decision, nor their relatives told. The hospital's own audit showed that in one ward, 30 per cent of cases did not involve any such conversations.

* At University Hospitals Bristol Foundation trust, there was no evidence that a DNR order placed on a patient had been discussed with the person or next of kin. A junior doctor told inspectors that they did "not tend to discuss" such decisions with families.

* At Royal Shrewsbury Hospital, run by Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital trust, a patient was labelled as DNR based on old medical notes from a previous admission – despite the fact their health had improved.

* Asked how decisions to make such orders were made, staff at Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation trust gave an example of an elderly person on the ward with health problems judged to make "resuscitation less appropriate". The doctor involved did not know if the patient or an advocate had been asked for an opinion, or told that the notice had been imposed.'

This Do Not Resuscitate policy comes very close to state sponsored secret euthanasia and should not happen in a modern, caring, patient-centred health service. The NHS seems to be increasingly run for its staff's benefit not for its patients. The last set of findings released late last week showed that one in five NHS hospitals were actually breaking the law and that in 20 hospitals nursing care was so poor that it breached the Health and Social Care Act 2008. If the law was broken, who has been prosecuted? Nurses have tortured elderly patients by depriving them of water, administrators have been complicit in this torture by requiring form-filling to take priority over patient care, and so on.

When I was in my teens and early 20s I knew quite a few nurses (SRN and SEN) and the care they showed for patients and their adherence to rules of hygiene were laudable. Now nursing has become a degree entry career, the nurses are deemed to be above emptying bed pans or giving care and attention to sick patients. Instead these roles are carried out by often unqualified auxiliaries whilst the nurses sit behind desks on the ward and elsewhere and ensure that all necessary boxes are ticked. The death of a patient requires just another tick, caring for a patient means getting up and talking to & reassuring a scared old lady or gentleman.


The NHS needs improvement and modernisation if it it is ever to be the envy of the world. Will the Conservative party be allowed to carry out such improvements by the chattering classes for whom an NHS that mistreats and often no longer really cares properly for patients is still 'the envy of the world'?

Thank heavens for the bottomless public purse

I caught an interview on the Radio 4 Today programme this morning with a spokesman for the Childrens Society. He seemed most exercised that so many children, around 700, had been held for between 8 and 10 (but 'a number' for up to 24 hours at Heathrow Airport. The children were held on suspicion of being trafficked or claiming asylum but the spokesman's main concern was that the conditions they were being held in were 'degrading'.

Some points struck me, first that although he was reminded that that the vast majority were held for 8-12 hours he kept saying that 'a number' were held for up to 24 hours. 'A number' - how many? 1 is a number.The second point was that he was calling for the children to be released from Heathrow Airport and sent to local authority care as soon as possible. Thank heavens for the bottomless public purse that can afford to house an infinite number of needy foreigners.

Is the BBC now a 'state religion'?

Archbishop Cranmer has a typically well-written piece that you must read in full, here's a short extract to whet your appetite:

'And so it came to pass, in this age of equality and non-discrimination, that BBC Chairman Chris Patten was declared co-redemptrix with a carpenter from Nazareth; that religious relativism trumps the King James Bible; that the ethos of the BBC is equivalent to the gospel of Christ; and that Broadcasting House now constitutes the Church of the state.

And Heaven help anyone who engages in unwanted conduct which has the purpose or effect of –

(a) violating the BBC’s dignity; or
(b) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the BBC (Equality Act 2010 s26).

Religious freedom demands immunity from coercion in civil society. The state has reduced holiness to a form of social contract and relegated the peace of Christ to the absence of civil strife. There is no space for religious dissent: the imposition of the BBC’s liberal creed is now total.'

The thought police of political correctness and liberal bias are still in control, despite/because of ths Conservative led government.

Could the Coalition do with £18.3 billion?

'the Climate Change Act is to cost us all up to £18.3 billion – £760 for every household in the country – as we reduce our carbon emissions by 80 per cent'

Christopher Booker knows where we can fond that sort of money, it's just a shame that David Cameron and Chris Huhne are set on following the self-destructive path of Ed Miliband and the last Labour government.

Apparently the only country it is OK to hate without sanction...

'A friend of mine who works in Israel, was visiting while piling wood in the shed, we got into his favourite topic. Several years of residence in the holy country, he has come to the conclusion that "Israel is a scum state". On the basis of my own visit, which occurred during the 1970s and 1990s for the final time, I agree.'

The words of Finland's Amnesty International chairman Frank Johansson, you can read more here and here. You can read Mr Johansson's claims of mistranslation, quelle surprise, here.

It is incredible how many 'civilized' westerners feel comfortable insulting Israel and how it is always democratic, multi-cultural Israel and not countries that ban the practice of religions, such as Saudi Arabia or hang homosexuals & stone adulterers, such as Iran. This really, really pisses me off - Good Night.

Why do middle class lefties believe stupid things?

The Telegraph's Ed West thinks he knows:

'I know many Left-wing people who don’t have a single conservative friend, and almost never hear a single conservative view expressed directly or on the radio, nor do they read a single dissenting opinion.

And so when I – a seemingly normal person (I hope) – suggest that, contrary to the assumed consensus, the EU is a stupid idea and opponents are not xenophobes, that most social studies do suggest marriage is pretty important for a child’s wellbeing, or – my nuclear option, and only if I never want to get invited back for dinner – Enoch Powell was right in his two 1968 speeches (and he never said “rivers of blood”, yer morons), it’s as if I’d just admitted to grooming children.'

As Winston Churchill, allegedly, put it: "Anyone who isn't a Liberal before the age of 30 has no heart .... and anyone who is still a Liberal after the age of 30 has no brain"

So long as the rules are followed, f**k the public

Two stories that show how the public's safety is secondary to following the rules whether of the EU or liberal society.

1. The Telegraph reports that:

'Murders and other serious crimes committed by prisoners released early from jail may have to be “accepted” by the public as part of attempts to keep down the cost of the criminal justice system, the probation watchdog suggested.'

The article contains this piece as well:

'More than 81,000 prisoners were let out up to 18 days early in an early release scheme under the last government. Of those, 1,234 went on to commit 1,624 offences during the time they would normally have been in jail, including at least three murders.'

This is of course not correct. It should read: 'More than 81,000 prisoners were let out up to 18 days early in an early release scheme under the last government. Of those, 1,234 went on to commit 1,624 detected offences during the time they would normally have been in jail, including at least three murders, and an unknown number of undetected crimes.'


2. The Mail reports that:

'Thousands of foreign nurses will be allowed to work in Britain without any safety checks – because EU rules demand that the tests are axed.

They will not need to sit rigorous competence exams before treating NHS patients. And they will no longer even be required to show they have looked after patients in the past three years.

Critics say the change will 'almost certainly' lead to lives being lost. The Nursing and Midwifery Council will stop administering the tests in the autumn after being told it could be sued by the European Commission for breaking EU law on 'freedom of movement' for workers from the Continent.'

It looks as though this one os down to Labour's supine position to matters EU as:

'Although other EU countries are in theory bound by the same rules, major Western countries including France and Germany opted out of regulations which opened their borders to most Eastern European immigrants.'

So long as the rules are followed, a few people being murdered by a released prisoner or cruelly mistreated by an unchecked nurse are small prices to pay. That's what our lords and masters believe, how do we show them that they are WRONG?

One man,one vote?

Not any more in part of New York where 'cumulative voting' ensures that some voters have six votes. Don't believe me? Take a look at Yahoo News and prepare to be astounded!

'Although the village of about 30,000 residents is nearly half Hispanic, no Latino had ever been elected to any of the six trustee seats, which until now were chosen in a conventional at-large election. Most voters were white, and white candidates always won.

Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that violated the Voting Rights Act, and he approved a remedy suggested by village officials: a system called cumulative voting, in which residents get six votes each to apportion as they wish among the candidates. He rejected a government proposal to break the village into six districts, including one that took in heavily Hispanic areas.'

The 10 Commandments are not as important as you thought

I heard Vicar Tim Jones on the BBC yesterday and it seems that this 'man of God' believes that the the eighth commandment "Thou shalt not steal" can be ignored by the poor as "God's love for the poor and despised outweighs the property rights of the rich". Apparently the Vicar has said that "I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses, but from large national businesses, knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices." Well that's OK then...

The truth can hurt, but does that mean that the truth should not be told?

Fox News and others have been reporting the case of

"Peter Gadiel (who) wants everyone to remember his son, James, who was killed during the September 11 terrorist attacks.

And he also wants people to remember how he died: "Murdered by Muslim terrorists."

For Gadiel, any tribute to his son would be woefully incomplete without those words.

"I think it's important, because I think there's a nationwide effort to suppress the identity of the people who were involved in the attacks," Gadiel told Fox News.

Eight years ago, 23-year-old James Gadiel worked for Cantor Fitzgerald on the 103rd floor of the World Trade Center. He died when a hijacked plane crashed into the North Tower.

For years, Gadiel's hometown of Kent, Conn., has wanted to honor the young man with a memorial plaque next to its town hall. But the tribute has hit a snag because James' father wants to include the phrase, "Murdered by Muslim terrorists," under his son's name.

For Peter Gadiel, it is a central fact of the Sept. 11 attacks that is often left out.

"It isn't just overlooked, it's suppressed," Gadiel said. "It's simply wrong to imply that people just died. The buildings didn't just collapse, they didn't just fall down — they were attacked by people with a specific identity, a specific purpose.""

So on the one side we have the father of a man who was killed by terrorists who killed in the name of Islam, those are incontrovertible facts. On the other side we have the usual 'liberals' for whom facts matter less than hurt feelings:

"Town officials call the phrase too controversial for a small town memorial, and they recently voted against erecting the plaque if Gadiel insists on the language.

"We perceive ourselves as a very warm, loving town," said Ruth Epstein, a Kent selectman and one of two town leaders to vote the plaque down. "To disparage any one ethnic group is just against everything that we stand for here."

Epstein noted that other Sept. 11 memorials, like the one at the Pentagon, don't mention Muslim terrorists, and she said she does not want to alienate any members of her small and close-knit community.

"We have at least one Muslim family living here with children and it — it would be just awful to have them see something like that," Epstein told Fox News."

What's 'controversial' about the phrase "Murdered by Muslim terrorists."? Could the local council explain which part of that phrase is not totally factual? Was James Gadiel murdered rather than dieing of natural causes or in an accident? Were the people who murdered him Muslims? Were the people who killed him committing an act of terrorism? I cannot see how the answers to all those three questions can be anything other than 'yes', in which case "Murdered by Muslim terrorists." is a factual statement. Stating how James Gadiel died is not 'disparaging' all Muslims, just the ones who decided to fly passenger planes into New York office buildings (and other locations) on the 11th September so as to kill as many people as possible and terrorise many, many more. The fact, if true, that the Pentagon memorial does not mention Muslims does not make that the right thing to do. It seems that the local Kent council care more about the potential hurt feelings of one local Muslim family than those of their local resident whose son was murdered.

I remember 9/11 as if it was yesterday. I was due to fly the following day to a business meeting and I, and the others who were to accompany me, watched the burning first tower of the World Trade Centre with horror and then experienced disbelief as the second plane hit the other tower. Later that day as I left for home I and others were passed by two bearded Muslims who were happily telling all passers by that this was a great day and that America had had it coming.

Yes I do remember 9/11 and yes it has affected my world view. Although I had been warning people of the possibility of large scale Islamic terrorist attacks for some time prior to 9/11, the reality was worse than I had imagined.

The serial EDM signatories

Yesterday's post about EDM 2057 brought to my mind the idea of serial Early Day Motion signatories, so I did some research with the following results:

Average number of EDMs signed by party MPs:
Labour - 150 (artificially reduced as Ministers are not meant to sign them) without the non-signatories the figure becomes 227

Conservatives - 47

Lib Dems - 347

Of the minor parties:
DUP - 349
PC - 397
SNP - 228
SDLP - 624
UUP - 281

What does this tell us? Well, that the left love gesture politics and that most EDMs are on matters that the left "care" about.


Who are the biggest serial EDM signatories, who really can't help themselves?
These are the 14 MPs who have signed over 1,000 of the just over 2,000 EDMs since December 2008:
Hancock, Mike - Portsmouth South - Liberal Democrats - 1642 (that's around 82% of all EDMs)

Cryer, Ann - Keighley - Labour Party - 1613

Simpson, Alan - Nottingham South - Labour Party - 1440
Vis, Rudi - Finchley and Golders Green - Labour Party - 1383

Drew, David - Stroud - Labour Party - 1342

McDonnell, John - Hayes and Harlington - Labour Party - 1336

Jones, Lynne - Birmingham Selly Oak - Labour Party - 1322

Corbyn, Jeremy - Islington North - Labour Party - 1306

Caton, Martin - Gower - Labour Party - 1295

Jenkins, Brian Tamworth - Labour Party - 1283

Leech, John - Manchester Withington - Liberal Democrats - 1282

Bottomley, Peter - Worthing West - Conservative Party - 1225

Etherington, Bill - Sunderland North - Labour Party - 1180

Hopkins, Kelvin - Luton North - Labour Party - 1082

So of the 14 biggest serial EDM signatories, 11 are Labour MPs, two are Lib Dems and one a Conservative.
The next Conservative MP appears at position 72.

Interesting?

Compare and contrast (part 2)

The BBC's decision to invite the BNP's Nick Griffin onto Question Time has aroused much anger from the usual suspects. The BBC's local council (Hammersmith and Fulham) are "worried" about protests and want the venue moved. United Against Facism is planning a mass blockade of the BBC studios on the day in a deny them the right to free speech protest. BECTU, The TV technicians' union, has attacked the BBC's decision and pledged to join a demonstration against the recording of the programme.
General secretary of BECTU Gerry Morrissey said: "We believe there should be no media coverage of the BNP." It seems that the argument runs something like this: the BNP must not be allowed to be heard as they are a racist party and their views are abhorrent and likely to cause inter-community strife.

Meanwhile Islam4UK are reported to have launched a campaign to impose Sharia law on Britain. The group have urged Muslims from all over Britain to converge on London on 31 October for a "March 4 Shari'ah" to demand the full implementation of Sharia law. Islam4UK declared "On this day we will call for a complete upheaval of the British ruling system its members and legislature, and demand the full implementation of Shari'ah in Britain." Have United Against Facism complained about this march in favour of implementing Sharia law in the UK? Have BECTU issued a statement decrying this march in favour of a law that would discriminate against women, subject homosexuals to the death penalty and in the words of Anjnem Choudary would mean that "people who commit adultery would be stoned to death and that anyone who becomes intoxicated by alcohol would be given 40 lashes in public" Surely the latter being something of interest to his members.


We seem to have from many on the left a willingness to deny free speech to a legitimate political party with more Local Council seats than the UKIP and as many MEPs as the Greens. Whilst the same people smile benignly as an extreme movement march in London. Double standards anyone?



Sharia law that would

Sharia Law in action

This video is from the Swat area of Pakistan, but rest assured this is what many want to see as our future in the UK. Any comments from Lord Phillips, Rowan Williams or Stephen Hockman?

Racism scandal

News reaches me that a US Supreme Court Judge has been recorded as saying that

"I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life."

It is believed that Barack Obama is looking into ways of dismissing this Judge as he quite clearly has racist tendencies...

In fact the above is not quite true, but nearly... The real story is that Barack Obama's first appointment to the Supreme Court, Sonia "the court of appeals is where policy is made" Sotomayor is reported in the Wall Street Journal as having said that:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Of course as a non-white woman Sonia Sotomayor is beyond reproach and Barack Obama will take no action. What you have to ask yourself is "is this fair"?

What can we ban drivers from doing next?

The ban drivers from doing anything brigade have a new target - listening to the radio whilst driving. How long before drivers have to sit in a sound proof booth in the car so that they cannot be distracted by anything? More likely though is - how long before private cars are banned and all driving has to be done by licensed state employed drivers of buses or trains? Of course an exception will be made for our betters in the perpetual Labour government who will be allocated suitably qualified chauffeurs.

The left don't like facts, it gets in the way of emotional truth

Ann Coulter does well under attack from 5 US liberals, I wish I was that strong under pressure. The antagonism directed at Ann Coulter for daring to state that single-motherhood is bad for children.


"You can dish it out but you can't take it" says Whoopi Goldberg, I think that could be more accuartely applied to her.


In case you don't recognise them all, the five interviewers on The View are Barbara Walters, Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Sherri Shepherd.




Thanks to Gateway Pundit for the tip.