Theresa May Prime Minister of UK – Islam a religion of peace
It really does beggar belief that our leading politicians are so ignorant of Islam. This is
what I would have said if I believed it. Yet I doubt anyone would ever believe this of any informed, intelligent person, much less a powerful politician who has a staff of researchers at her finger tips and the detailed analysis of the British Intelligence Service, the Home Office and the Foreign Office. They should be among the most informed persons in the world?
It all sounds so good to the ill informed that in Islam there is no compulsion in religion, therefore, it is a religion of peace, yet this has been debunked so many times it is embarrassing that our Prime Minister still regurgitates this nonsense.
When you listen to this section of Theresa May’s speech on the Islamic State it reads straight out of the speech book of Barack Obama and you could probably find hundreds of such Statements by other Western leaders.
And this week, in my speech to the United Nations General Assembly, I made very clear we are not at war against Islam. Islam is a religion that preaches peace and the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful. But in the Muslim world right now, there is a cancer that has grown for too long that suggests that it is acceptable to kill innocent people who worship a different God. And that kind of extremism, unfortunately, means that we’re going to see for some time the possibility that in a whole bunch of different countries, radical groups may spring up, particularly in countries that are still relatively fragile, where you had sectarian tensions, where you don’t have a strong state security apparatus. That’s why what we have to do is rather than play whack-a-mole and send U.S. troops wherever this occurs, we have to build strong partnerships. We have to get the international community to recognize this is a problem. We’ve got to get Arab and Muslim leaders to say very clearly, “These folks do not represent us. They do not represent Islam,” and to speak out forcefully against them.
We have heard this so many times it has entered our consciousness and the ordinary person on the street are expected to swallow such blatant lies. The Nazis’ were masters of propaganda. They told so many lies that were blatantly so, and people believed them because they said to themselves that the political leadership could not possibly be telling us such blatant untruths. It was inconceivable that they were lying and this is what the political elites count on. So either our politicians know the truth and are telling us the opposite, or they are so ignorant of what traditional Islam teaches, and the threat it poses, they really are showing us they are not fit for office.
Douglas Murray has given us an insightful and telling response to Mays view on Islam being a religion of peace (September 2014). Link embedded in the above sub title.
I’m not keen on politicians quoting any religious verses at me in any situation. It’s just not their job.But if you are going to do such a thing, at least be honest. But May, or her speechwriters at least, were not honest today. After all these years she can’t seriously believe what she said, can she? She can’t seriously not know about this, can she?
I am sure like Murray we are saying the same thing, senior politicians can’t seriously want us to believe that they actually believe what they are saying – that Islam is at its core a religion of peace? May can’t seriously expect us to believe this can she? Do they think that if they say it often enough we will finally believe it no matter the evidence to the contrary? Is their opinion of the British public, you and I, so low that they really believe we are so naive and ill-informed that we are incapable of making informed conclusions on any issues? Reminds me of the reaction to BREXIT, all who supported LEAVE were ignorant and ill-informed about the EU and most likely racist bigots.
After discussing the violent teachings in the Quran Murray goes on to say:
After all, that is what is going on in Iraq and Syria right now. It happened in Woolwich last year. And it was attempted in Norway and Australia just in recent days. And Isis and their ideological bedfellows are behaving the way this way, and calling on scriptural and religious authority while doing so, not because they didn’t get the memo, but because they did and have not been sufficiently countered from within their own faith. This is a huge problem for Muslims. As I have said many times, the extremists like Isis may have a terrible interpretation of Islam. Obviously for all our sakes – Muslim and non-Muslim – they have adopted the very worst interpretation of Islam. But it is an interpretation of Islam. They do not get to where they get from nowhere.
Then we think of Chattanooga, San Bernardino, Orlando, Paris once again, Nice, Tunisia, the metrojet airliner and so many more, we lose count. All in the name of Islam. Yet we have Obama in the USA telling everyone that will listen that all these attacks have nothing to do with Islam. He has forbiden his law enforcement to use the term Islamic terrorism. They are radical extremists or something similar but not Islamic. As if by not saying the words it will make it true that these attacks are not related to Islam.
Then we have the left telling us that any mention of Islamic terrorism having its roots in Islam is bigotry, racism and Islamophobic. All terms to ensure we are silenced because they believe we would never want to be associated with such terrible people. It is time for us to cast aside the fear of being labeled as such and worry more about what is going to happen if we allow our voices to be silenced in this way.
Anjem Choudary expounds the real position of Islam
In many ways, Anjem Choudary is seen as a radical that does not represent the Muslim community in the UK. Yet this is hardly based on the facts. See Islam: a Nation within Nations – Islamic Supremacism for some insights on the view of the Muslim community.
He has been demonized yes, but he does speak the truth, a truth that May et al do not want to face. It is the truth of Islam at its core. As Nation within Nations points out it is a narrative of Islam that is shared by many Muslims in the UK.
If his interpretation of Islam is so wrong then what we need is Muslim leaders in the UK to clearly state that when Muhammad spoke to this violence, then he was wrong and that such violence has no place in a modern society. Yet for them to dare say such a thing would put them in danger from within Islam. It is not for non Muslims to repudiate the violent nature of much of what Muhammad taught and practiced. If `moderate Muslims’ want us to take them seriously when they tell us `real Islam is a religion of peace’ then they have to clearly repudiate Choudary and all who follow his ideology and not merely in general terms but specifically repudiating the Qurans’ violent passages. As Murray points out this is not our problem it is the problem of Islam and thus the problem of Muslims.
In September 2014 Murray in the above article says he would predict that in 4 1/2 years he expects a Home Secretary to start discussing the link of Islamic terrorism with Islam. Then we get Cameron saying in a speech:
From Tunisia to the streets of Paris – these murderers all spout the same twisted narrative that claims to be based on a particular faith.
So to deny that is to disempower the critical, reforming voices that want to challenge the scriptural basis of which extremists claim to be acting.
The voices which are crucial in providing an alternative world view that could stop a teenager slip along the spectrum of extremism.
We cannot stand neutral in this battle of ideas.
This was stated when Cameron was still Prime Minister and in response to the latest Paris attacks. Is this a case of Murray again being right about the change within government? It seems a hopeful sign and after Nice we can only hope that politicians are finally waking up to the fact that we no longer believe them when they tell us Islam is a religion of peace and expect them to protect us from it. If calling a spade a spade offends British Muslims then this is their problem and not ours.
Cameron went on to say in this speech that: It is that same resolve that will defeat this terrorism and ensure that the values we believe in – and the values we defend – will again in the end prevail. The hope that we have is that our new Prime Minister has started to see the light in this and will be moving to a more realistic view of the dangers of Islamic supremacist tendencies. Yet is this hope realistic or just fanciful thinking?
I have done a number of pieces on sharia in the UK and specifically on the sharia councils and how these are incompatible with British law and should be banned completely. See my article: Position of Sharia councils strengthened in UK next step full legal status but also follow the link to the One Law for All web site.
May’s view that many Britain’s can benefit from sharia in the UK fly’s in the face of the gathering evidence that it does not. Yet, as is pointed out, she is putting the very people deeply involved in the sharia system in charge of reviewing it.
The perceived benefits for British women as laid out by the supporters of sharia
Here are some Muslim women protesting outside of parliament in London. These supporters of sharia lay out among other things the benefit of sharia for British women. Among other things they lay out how British women should be dressed. Their analysis is that not wearing such dress is that you (women) are like apes from the jungle without honour and that your way of life is rubbish. Not dressing in the way these Muslim women are dressed can be the cause of rape and sexual assaults (because they faunt themselves before men and can they blame the men when they rape them?). Obviously British women are at fault when they are raped or assaulted because they did not cover up. Is this the benefit that the Prime Minister is telling us comes with sharia? Or maybe the message on one of the home made signs is the benefit that we are to take from sharia: Freedom Go to Hell.
If May is unwilling to accept the evidence right in front of her face re sharia in the UK what hope is there of her coming to accept Islam is not at its core a religion of peace? As I say in my piece, is it going to be like the Labour party’s`inquiry’ into antisemitism within its ranks – I have looked at my views and I am not guilty lets move on and forget about it?
Islam is a religion of peace and sharia law is good for Britain. This is still May’s official position and it can only lead us to believe that if she stubbornly clings on to such misguided views the UK is heeding to a dark place in our history.
We have seen in recent days a French crowd booing their PM over his failure to protect them from Islamic terrorists in France. Yet just like a typical politician who is still living in his own fantasy world, he dismisses the criticism as a minority view. Before Nice-Head of French police: France is on the brink of civil war in this article I report that The chief of security, Patrick Calvar, is considered one of those in France with the best insight into the inner threat situation in the country, writes Le Figaro and that he has warned, on more than one occasion, senior French officials that France was on the verge of civil war. It does not matter how accurate Calvar’s analysis is, what it clearly shows is that he does not agree with the French PM that this is only a minor issue caused by a minority of the population.
It makes you ask when are politicians going to wake up to the fact that we expect them to do their duty and protect us from violent ideologies like traditional Islam? An ideology if taken literally is violent at its core. Murray argues quite rightly that we do not need politicians to try and tell us Islam is peaceful:
We don’t need them to do this. We just need them to uphold the laws of the land, our principles and traditions. The waters they are leading us into are murkier than they can possibly imagine. But ignoring the violent traditions of Islam only benefits – as I have also said many times – those Muslim extremists who are enraged that a British Home Secretary should be presuming to tell them what they should or should not believe. And it also benefits the growing number of non-Muslim members of the public who wonder why there is such an appalling effort to cover up what anybody who opens any Islamic holy text can tell straight away.
Cameron in my opinion has opened the door to this in the above speech, but will May go through this door? Does she have the courage to put Britain’s safety above the sensibilities of the Muslim community in the UK? Or will she continue to tow the politically correct, multicultural line that traditional Islam is not a threat to the UK? How will she ensure, in Cameron’s words:
It is that same resolve [if May has the resolve] that will defeat this terrorism and ensure that the values we believe in – and the values we defend – will again in the end prevail.