Drunken Blogging: January 2007

Muslim Anger. Because Police tried to stop a Muslim (well he did work for the infidels) being Beheaded

5 Comments Published by jonz on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 at 8:33 PM.

The BBC has has made it clear it doubts the validity of the arrests and quoted Muslims who clearly couldn't give a shit if the brave Muslim soldier who went to Iraq got beheaded by animals.

'Anger and cynicism'

Police have cordoned off roads around Jackson Road and Foxton Road, in Alum Rock, and Poplar Road and Stratford Road, in Sparkhill.
The BBC's Phil Mackie said there had been some anger and cynicism among locals who had witnessed previous terror raids in the area without anyone being charged.

And? Who gives a fuck? The "locals" who want Sharia law? Any decent societal response would be in utter shock and disgust at the alleged plot. This isn't a fucking communist or totalitarian country whereby the authorities just make things up - FFS

Baswant Kant, who lives in Stratford Road, near the junction with Poplar Road, said about 55 police officers "turned up in white vans" in the early hours of Wednesday morning.
"They went into shops and restaurants along the road - a lot of people got arrested," he said.
Saqib Hussain, of Sparkhill, said he had visited the raided book shop many times and "had never seen any suspicions of terrorist activity".
Mohamed Barber told BBC News his cousin was one of the men arrested in Alum Rock.
"We can vouch for him he is innocent. He doesn't even have time to go to Friday prayers - that's how busy he is," he added.

If any of those arrested turn out to be innocent, this should be made clear

Ayub Pervaz, mosque president

Abdul Ghaffoor, a regular shopper at the general store, said he had never heard politics being discussed in the shop.
Leaders at the Alum Rock Islamic Centre, the main mosque in the area, said the community was shocked at events, but urged calm and appealed to people to co-operate with the police investigation.
Ayub Pervaz, the mosque's president, said: "If people have broken the law they should be brought to justice.
"But we also appeal for no trial by media. If any of those arrested turn out to be innocent, this should be made clear."

Update: Terror arrests on their doorstep

Note: Absolutley no words or accounts from the BBC from the intended victim's family or from the British public in general. Victimhood oozing from the pages.

This is what's wrong with Palestinian society

3 Comments Published by jonz on Tuesday, January 30, 2007 at 7:42 PM.

Kids, they blow up so fast...

The family of the Palestinian sucide bomber, who bravely blew up three inncoent civilians in a bakery in Israel, are proud of their son for killing civilians.

"The whole family was very happy when it heard that Muhammad is the hero who carried out the attack," said Naim Saqsaq, the brother of Muhammad Saqsaq, who carried out the suicide attack in Eilat that killed three people.

What a guy. So brave... Daring.

Bolton Council led by MCB, Bans Holocaust Day

8 Comments Published by jonz on Saturday, January 27, 2007 at 4:59 PM.

IN A move widely seen to be bowing to Muslim pressure, Bolton Council has scrapped its Holocaust Memorial Day event.

The council is to replace it with a Genocide Memorial Day in June. This is in line with the policy of the Muslim Council of Britain, which continues to boycott HMD and is asking for a Genocide Day, which will also mark "the ongoing genocide and human rights abuses of Palestinians" by Israelis.

Oh fuck off you delusional fucks. There's no fucking Palestinian genocide. If you really gave a shit about "genocide" you would be seeking to reel in your brethen in Sudan who are systematically trying to wipe out the blacks in Darfur.

The council decision was made in consultation with the town's Interfaith Council.

Interfaith - euch. MAJOR cringe alert.

But Rabbi Joseph Lever of United Synagogue who has participated in the Bolton event for around three years was not consulted on the decision. He said: "I mourn the fact that the Holocaust Memorial Day event will not take place in Bolton this year."

Louis Rapaport, president of the Jewish Representative Council of Greater Manchester, was equally disappointed that the Jewish community was not consulted.

Interfaith Council huh? Would that be an interfaith council with only Muslim members?

He said: "Bolton, alone of all the local authorities in our area, is not having an HMD event which is a government recommendation." He added: "There may not be many Jews in Bolton but the day is supposed to have an educational message to the whole community.

That educational message to Muslims in Bolton:

"Nazi germanys systematic killing of 6 million Jews is not important enough to merit a specific commemoration, and that actually the Israelis are trying to kill all Palestinians. Down with Israel."

Great educational message, pricks. In places like Bolton, Jews are FOUR times more likely to be attacked than Muslims. (who's doing the attacking huh? -the highest level of attacks on Jews are in highly Muslim populated areas)

"I can't help feeling the decision was influenced by Bolton's large Muslim community."

No surely not? Not local authorities in the UK cotowing to the prejudices of certain distasteful elements in the Muslim community?!

Holocaust educator David Arnold said: "It is more than unfortunate that Bolton has seen fit to trivialise the remembrance of the Shoah."

Mr Arnold regretted the intrusion of "politics" into the issue.

The politics in this case would be holocaust denial and Muslim anti-semitism.

Busy

11 Comments Published by jonz on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 8:02 AM.

I must admit I cringe when I see bloggers say "Sorry everybody I apologise for not posting as I have been busy" posts. Smacks of egotistical self-indulgence, if you ask me. Like people actually give a shit, huh?!

Anyway, well, I am a bit busy, and looking for new directions in life, and shit. I will be back, I promise.

Tickets Available

4 Comments Published by jonz on Monday, January 15, 2007 at 2:59 PM.

The Clash of Civilisations

Daniel Pipes v Ken Livingstone

Starts 9.30am Saturday 20th January, London

If you would like tickets please email me

drunkenblogging AT gmail.com

University study: Ethnic Disadvantaged Get More Money Than White Disadvantaged

9 Comments Published by jonz on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 11:37 AM.

The British public are well aware of this already. Immigrants and ethnic communities do NOT get equal treatment. They get special treatment.

Of course it takes a University study before it can be said out loud in media publications.

White working-class boys are under-performing badly but they do not get the grants immigrant groups receive

White boys from poor backgrounds are falling further behind their black and Asian classmates in exams, official figures have revealed.

The breakdown of the 2006 GCSE results has fuelled concerns, already voiced by the Conservative party and by teachers’ unions, that a lack of financial support for these pupils could boost racist groups such as the British National Party.

The figures come as research by Manchester university confirms that poor white pupils are losing out in the battle for funding. The Manchester academics conducted a detailed case study in an unnamed, deprived inner city, which received a “disproportionate” level of funding to tackle inequality. Money was being targeted at pupils with English as an additional language, but “white learners from highly disadvantaged backgrounds were reportedly often overlooked”, they said.

From TES

Media Bias against US, in favour of Islamists? Surely not...

4 Comments Published by jonz on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 at 11:53 AM.

Updated at bottom

Well they seem to be doing a pretty good job of it, as they have in Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank.. and today Somalia.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6243459.stm

US Somali air strikes 'kill many'

and

'Boy killed'

Witnesses told the BBC Somali service that an area near the town of Afmadow was being bombed on Tuesday.

"My 4-year-old boy was killed in the strike," Mohamed Mahmud Burale told the AP news agency from the area.

Yet Islamists kill and maim pretty much indiscriminately, use civilians as shields and this is rarely mentioned at all. But this is the US after all, the real terrorists in all this.

On a related note, I have chanced upon a brilliant article; Africa: a key battleground in the global war on terror

"We must learn that a terrorist sanctuary anywhere endagers people everywhere"

Indeed.

The headline in this evenings The LondonPaper, if you squint you can see that by "Britons" they actually mean Al-Qaeda. Still great for whipping up anti-US sentiment, eh?

Kick Miltia Arse

3 Comments Published by jonz on Sunday, January 07, 2007 at 1:30 AM.

Fantastic news, US and Iraq commit to militia crackdown. 'Bout time.

Impeach Ken Livingstone

3 Comments Published by jonz on Saturday, January 06, 2007 at 11:38 AM.

The egomaniac Ken Livingstone who, somehow, still retains the title of Mayor of London, is blatantly bankrolling extreme leftist proganda using taxpayers money.

Fucking outrageous. Here's the government website www.london.gov.uk

To the left is on the front page of the london.gov.uk website

Clicking the link will provide you with Ken's unashamed Cuban proganda piece

"Cuba has been subject to a blockade by the US which has been condemned by almost every country in the world for more than 40 years. It also has a US military base, Guantanamo, on its territory which is held clearly contrary to the rights of the Cuban people"

Etc etc ad nauseum.

How ironic for Ken to talk of the rights of the Cuban people, when if they oppose the Cuban government, they have none, and face imprisonment or worse.

He also is using taxpayers money to bankroll anti-government policy pieces, and fund campaigns by far-left environmental organisation Greenpeace.

How can this be funded by tax payers? How on earth does Ken get away with this?

Niqabs are fringe, Angers moderate Muslims

3 Comments Published by jonz on Tuesday, January 02, 2007 at 3:17 PM.

The Veil... and why these leading Muslims won't wear it

As Channel 4 controversially celebrated women covering their faces and critics are dismissed as Islamophobics, Joan Smith talks to a group of women who fear the consequences of the veil's acceptance

For many observers, it was the moment when demands for public acceptance of the niqab went too far. Earlier this week, Channel 4's Christmas message was delivered by a veiled woman, a Muslim convert, who criticised the Leader of the House, Jack Straw. It might have been dismissed as a stunt, the kind of provocation Channel 4 is known for. But the spectacle of a woman attacking an elected politician under, literally, a veil of anonymity brought into sharp focus the reasons why its growing popularity in this country makes so many people uneasy.

That includes many Muslims, some of whom are as unlikely to wear the hijab (headscarf) or niqab as I am. A few days ago, in an elegant apartment in the centre of London, I met some of them: smart, articulate, beautifully dressed women from very different backgrounds. They all feel strongly that the voices of moderate, rational Islam are not being heard.

Most outspoken of all is the Iranian writer Shusha Guppy, who tells me how she feels when she sees covered women in London. "I feel ill and very angry because it gives a bad image of Islam and provides ammunition to Islamophobes," she declares. "It's theatre - it's saying, 'look at me'."

Yasmine Pawar, a widely travelled woman who was born in Pakistan, agrees. "It's attracting attention in the wrong way, like a child." Amal Ghandour, a strikingly beautiful woman who is visiting London from Beirut, joins in. "I find it bizarre that a woman who is educated or has a PhD finds it normal to be covered."

Dr Khadiga Safwat is a distinguished Sudanese academic and former director of the Middle Eastern and African Research Centre in Wales. When she speaks about the growing popularity of the veil, she immediately puts it into a political context. "I suspect political Islam of being behind all this. It's a political statement, a reaction to globalisation," she tells me.

All the women believe the veil debate demonstrates the fondness of the media for highlighting extreme views. Women who wear the niqab "represent a fringe", says Amal Ghandour, a communications strategist, "but the media tend to focus on them."

All the women are angry about the people chosen to represent Muslims on TV and in newspapers, whether they are male clerics or women wearing the veil. So contentious are these forms of dress among Muslims, one of them points out, that women who cover themselves are known dismissively in parts of the Middle East as "ninjas".

In this room, two of the women - Shusha and Amal - are Shia, while Khadiga and Yasmine are Sunni. The problem, they all insist, is that this diversity has been lost as self-appointed Muslim "leaders" push themselves forward.

It's certainly bizarre that when women in Iraq and Afghanistan are dying for the right not to be covered, there is a furore in this country over the rights of a minority of Muslim women who want to wear the veil. Few of them have been wearing the niqab and jilbab for more than three or four years, yet most journalists don't question the notion that it's an absolute Islamic requirement.

Speaking with the confidence of a woman whose father was a grand ayatollah, Shusha insists that the Koran does not require women to wear the veil. "When the veil was abolished in 1936, the women of my family came to my father," she recalls. "They wanted to know whether they would have to stay at home. He said, not at all. Nobody says you should cover yourselves. You must dress modestly, just as men must dress modestly."

The others join in, confirming that their religion makes exactly the same demand - modesty - on men and women. They are very firm on this point, scoffing at the notion that Islam would impose different rules on the sexes. "The Koran is very precise," Shusha says. "If it wanted to say cover your head, it would have said so. It didn't." Khadiga launches into a scholarly disquisition on the Koran, insisting that the hijab is pre-Islamic and arrived in her home country, Sudan, from Persia.

For all these women, who were among the first in their families to be educated and live as equals with men, seeing younger women adopt the veil in its various forms is a strange and troubling experience. "I didn't have to wear a veil," says Khadiga, thinking back to when she was growing up in Sudan. "Sometimes I would borrow one but it was my choice. No one forced me. The whole of my generation was the same. That was a long time ago. Now we've gotten ourselves entangled in political Islam."

She shakes her head over the case of a young teaching assistant in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, who was dismissed from her job because she refused to remove her niqab in class. "She thought this was God's will," she exclaims. "Now they veil girls at the age of three. It's unheard of. There's some madness. It has to do with a climate of complete cultural confusion."

Amal agrees. "There's always been a fundamentalist current in every ideology," she says. "Religion is a form of identity. The hijab has become a political statement in the Middle East and Europe. Since September 11 it's taken on a new dimension altogether within the context of this clash of civilisations."

It's clear from talking to these brilliant, thoughtful women that the clash isn't between Christian and Muslim cultures; it isn't even between Shia and Sunni, judging by the ease with which they get on with each other. The central conflict is between modern, secular people and the fundamentalists of all faiths who insist that their lives must be lived according to a single interpretation of ancient texts. The British government, which has belatedly recognised the danger of talking to unrepresentative "community leaders", might have had more luck in combating extremism if it had listened to women like these years ago.

Hat tip USS Neverdock

Veil Comments

5 Comments Published by jonz on Monday, January 01, 2007 at 2:05 PM.

Jack Straw's comments on the Muslim veil have caused an outburst of infidelaphobia, as a white man was viciously headbutted, braking his nose and teeth. Why?

"The victim’s wife made a comment directed to her husband that she thought it must be difficult for the woman wearing the veil to see out of it as it covered her face," a police spokesman said.

So, Khadija, in her video message asserts that British society needs to be more tolerant of religion. She cites the Danish cartoon controversy. She was not condemning the reaction of Muslims, but the actions of the cartoonists. She also condemned Jacks Straws comments, and oh so predictably cited the veil removal incident as a direct result of Jacks Straws comments.

But it is Britian that needs to be more tolerant. Never mind that the most violent reaction to Jacks Straws comments was that of a Muslim man braking somebody's nose and teeth.

In fact nobody has died as a result of "Islamophobia" in this country. Yet we have 52 dead people from the July bombings. And we need to be more tolerant.

Update: Alison points to this

AL-QAEDA'S deputy leader said yesterday that any Muslim woman who wears the veil in Western countries is a supporter in what he described as a fight between Islam and "Zionist Crusaders".

No whites please, this is Croydon

1 Comments Published by jonz on at 1:31 PM.

Two of our more enlightened councils, Wolverhampton and Croydon, are showing the way forward. They have instituted Asian-only swimming nights, where people from the sub-continent who feel uncomfortable swimming within the gaze of their white fellow citizens, can happily retreat into their own pristine, watery, laager. No whites allowed within spitting distance; not even white pool staff.

It's Ok to be racist. As long as you're not white, that is. As Rod Liddle explains;

Imagine that our municipal swimming pools had evenings set aside for white people only. There are some members of the white community who — unaccountably perhaps — feel uncomfortable sharing the same stretch of water as Asian people, despite the purifying effects of the chlorine. Partly it is a question of raw proximity, the fear that one might pick up a particularly virulent verruca, say. Or simply be forced to look at them, doing their strange Asian breaststroke, up and down the pool. Or worse in such damp and intimate surroundings, having them look at you, peering lasciviously from behind a pair of aqua goggles.
Of course this proposal would not be put forward in a racist manner, heaven forefend. In a way, it’s anti-racist. It’s a case of ensuring that every British community, no matter how insular and distraught, should have access to public facilities, without having to worry too much about members of the public who don’t look like them. Or you can think of it as a health and safety issue: there are white people who simply cannot bear to be alongside Asian people — and whether you like it or not, they need to learn to swim too. It is no use suggesting to them that their revulsion at being forced to mix with “foreigners” might be misplaced. So for one evening each week, get the Asians out of the pool. And the blacks too, for that matter. And the disabled. Better safe than sorry.

This is exactly the kind of racism we need if the BNP are to increase their power. Fucking twats. What kind of twisted multi-culti mindset excludes people based on the fact of skin colour?

This kind of thing will be on the increase the more "ethnic minorities" are given elevated status and treated with kid gloves when they're naughty.

Looks odd? Use Firefox!

Email drunkenblogging AT gmail.com

XML