The subjects covered in this blog include Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Philosophy Now, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here

Tuesday, 10 May 2011

Birmingham's Muslims are appeased over the 'spy cameras'

[Top: a Birmingham mosque and a 'spy camera'. Many people have said that mosques are at the very heart of Islamoterrorism - and not just in Pakistan or Gaza. Under the top image: Assistant Chief Constable Sharon Rowe. Left: aren't we likely to see more of this, not less, as a result of taking down the cameras in Birmingham's Islamoghettoes?]

So Muslims have got their own way yet again!

This time it’s the turn of the Birmingham’s Muslims. They threatened direct action and even violence if the ‘spy cameras’ of Sparkbrook, Washwood Heath, etc. weren’t taken down. Even that Muslim lord, Lord Ahmed, threatened direct action if they weren't taken down.

In the end, then, Assistant Chief Constable Sharon Rowe and West Midlands Police appeased the Muslims. They gave in to the blackmail and threats and pretended, all along, that it was all about Community Cohesion and Respecting Diversity.

Thus the 'spy cameras' are now being taken down. Victory for Islam? And even victory for Islamoterrorism?

You see, every single day (in some part of the UK or the world) Muslims threaten direct action, riots or ‘further atrocities’ (as with the bin Laden commemorations in London) in order to get exactly what they want. And, of course, the ultimate threat threat from Muslims has always been Islamoterrorism! (And my God, that often works - as Hamas, etc. know full well!)
The point is that many in the Muslim communities of Birmingham never had ‘confidence in the police’ in the first place - well before the spy cameras! The very fact that the police take any measures to counteract terrorism, or prosecute or investigate potential and actual terrorists, will, by definition, create a degree of bad feeling between Muslims and the police. After all, these Muslim areas have been designated as ‘terror hotspots’ by various authorities, including West Midlands Police and the security services. And what if militant Islam or Islamism by definition alienates Muslims from non-Muslim forces?

This seems to be like the recent case of the Pakistani state's friendship with al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden - but on the smaller scale. That is, just as the Pakistani government doesn’t like to be accused of sponsoring terrorism, or even to be advised about terrorism (despite a mountain of evidence that Pakistan is the base of a vast amount of terrorism and its ideological home), so the Muslim residents of various Islamoghettoes in Birmingham not only don’t like being ‘singled out’ by the authorities, but also don’t like being associated with terrorism at all. All this is depsite the evidence which clearly shows not only terrorist links and activity in these areas, but political support for the political ends of the terrorists.

Therefore are the Pakistani government and the ‘community leaders’ of Birmingham telling the authorities to keep quiet about such matters as Islamic terrorism? Are they telling them to otherwise sweep all these problems under the carpet? Councillor Salma Yaqoob certainly calls any action against terrorism, as well as all talk about terrorism, ‘hype’, as though 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, etc. never actually happened and were instead made up by ‘neo-liberals’, ‘Zionists’ or whatever.

In other words, what Salma Yaqoob and Muslim community leaders are asking the police and other authorities to do is, basically … nothing! Or to keep quiet otherwise the Muslim community will become 'alienated' and Community Cohesion will be threatened. Either that or they will riot or even use terrorism to silence all critics.

Of course Muslims are angry. Let’s face facts. The police are a non-Muslim organisation which has 'targeted Muslims' – some of whom will almost certainly be terrorists or terrorist sympathisers. So almost by definition this will make Muslims’ ‘tempers flare’. The only solution to this is either for the police not to ‘hype up’ the terror threat, as Salma Yaqoob puts it, or to make Sparkhill, etc. self-governing Muslim enclaves or ghettoes, which is what some of the outraged Muslims really want.

Sharon Rowe again? Yes, this is the very same Assistant Chief Constable who was publicly humiliated in front of foaming Muslims over a year ago. These Muslims got precisely what they wanted – a non-Muslim scalp.

Sharon Rowe, a couple of weeks later than that, proved her respect and subservience to the Muslim community by turning her force against English Defence League demonstrators and systematically feeding small pockets of them to the Muslim youths who were allowed to maraud through Dudley town centre on July the 17th. I wonder if that was recompense enough for the Muslims who earlier had harangued the Assistant Chief Constable?

In any case, originally, what would have been the point of ‘public consultation’ about the CCTV cameras if Muslim Community Leaders (whoever they are!) and Islamists were bound to have said ‘no’ to them? That would have been to simply go through the motions for the BBC and Birmingham Mail journalists.

So how would ‘trust and confidence’ be brought about between the police and the Muslim community? By the police doing nothing about terrorism? By the police bending over backwards yet again? By the creation of the Sparkhill Islamic Republic? God knows how you satisfy the every demand and accommodation which Muslim communities seem to demand.

If that ‘trust and confidence’ has already been there, then there would have been no need for the CCTVs in the first place. It is these Muslim communities which have created Islamic terrorists. These Muslim communities also have many terrorist sympathisers. How amongst all this was there have been previous ‘trust’ between these communities and the police when this is the culture we are dealing with?

So which ‘community’ should the police ‘stigmatise’ instead? The Buddhist or Hindu community? Why would they want to stigmatise Hindus or Buddhists? However, the police has a thousand reasons to 'stigmatise' a large minority from these Muslim communities. No doubt the Islamists and IslamoTrots would be happy if the police stigmatised the EDL instead for doing nothing except believe the wrong things. That would be acceptable stigmatisation according to Salma Yaqoob and the leftists.
What I don't understand is that the Muslims of Birmingham have argued that CCTVs used to counteract ordinary crime are fine, but wrong when used to counteract terrorism.

That's why there are CCTVs up and down the country without much of a problem - they are used to counteract petty crime. However, when they are used to counteract Islamic terrorism, then there is uproar from Muslims. And yet the reasons for using them for terrorism are far better than using them for (sometimes) petty crime.

The logic of this is perverse.

No comments:

Post a Comment