Anyone who tries to tell us that Islam is not a vile, misogynistic and violent cult is lying.
David Cameron faces calls to intervene in the case of a 15-year-old female rape victim sentenced to 100 lashes in the Maldives as new figures showed the appalling state of women’s rights in the Commonwealth country.
Yup, that’s right a child is raped and she is the one facing a harsh punishment. Though, to be fair, they are leaving it until she is eighteen years of age, so it’s not all bad. Presumably the 100 lashes won’t hurt so much then. They do have a kind heart after all. How awfully considerate of them, doncha think?
Islam is not only a ridiculous superstitious cult invented by a deranged medieval warlord, it is a political system that is rabidly right-wing, authoritarian, reactionary and violent when it gains the reins of power. This is the result – children are raped and punished for it. Oh, of course, she must have flashed a bit of ankle, the brazen hussy and the rapist just couldn’t control himself – only being a man, after all. Clearly she was asking for it, apparently having confessed to consensual sex outside of marriage. Given that she was repeatedly raped by her stepfather who then murdered the child she conceived, and that no one can identify who it was she had this consensual sex with, I think large doses of salt are in order here. Sharia is not a competent legal system by any recognisable standard – anything that uses the word of a made up mythical deity instead of hard, verifiable evidence (and weighs a witnesses’s testimony on the basis of their sex, fer cryin’ out loud) is not competent and should be treated with nothing other than contempt – along with all the rest of the utter bollocks that comprises religious belief. This is the usual “blame the woman” approach used by Sharia when dealing with such matters – and the outcome is the inevitable primitive and barbaric one we have come to expect from the religion of peace.
Elsewhere when this deranged, despicable system takes hold, they string up homosexuals.
So, yes, Islam is vile. An anagram of vile is evil. It’s that, too.
What you said can’t be true – Imam Cameron, the world’s leading islamic scholar, told me so!
Be mindful that a Home office spokesman said, “”We condemn all those whose behaviours and views run counter to our shared values and will not stand for extremism in any form.” Clearly the ‘shared’ values of the Home Office are more akin to those of their new friends in the Maldives, Syria, Egypt etc. than those of Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights.
How very racist of you to point out how very evil Islam is, you clearly are not culturally aware. In more news regarding the religion of peace:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/islamists_murder_children_for_going_to_school/
Lovely, lovely people, how much poorer the world would be if pedoMo had not invented Islam as a gift to all of us.
‘Rabidly right wing’? What’s going on there? I’ve followed your blog for yonks, and we are broadly of the same mind: small state, personal responsibility, etc., which rather classifies you as, er…Right Wing. Islam, as a political entity, requires total control from the centre and is quite definitely Left Wing. Terminology is important, the BBC has hijacked the debate and anything they dislike has been smeared with Right Wing…disappointed that you’ve slipped into the same fetid hole.
I am neither left wing nor right wing. The stance I take will vary from policy to policy. I share a platform with the right when it comes to taxation, but the left when it comes to free movement of labour and the right again in insisting that incomers should integrate and learn our language.
I chose my words carefully. Authoritarianism is not the preserve of the left. Indeed, the left is everything that Islam, a deeply conservative ideology abhors. So, yeah, it is of the extreme right – being fascist rather than socialist – unlike, say, the BNP. The lefties who leap to Islam’s defence would be first up against the wall come the Caliphate.
Again, I’m not in any way critical of your stance and not accusing you of being Right Wing, which you seem to find offensive. Perhaps you could give your definition of ‘Extreme Right’? Socialism and Fascism are each end of the same turd (lovely quote I read somewhere). Left politics equates to State control, Right politics equates to the individual having control over himself, ergo, ‘extreme right’ is anarchy, where no one is in overall charge and the individual looks after himself = anarchy.
I’m not remotely offended. I just don’t accept that the term applies. You appear to be conflating two axis. The left/right is not the same thing as authoritarian/libertarian. The conservative right will happily clamp down on others’ liberty if it suits their ends, although, yes, usually the right will favour individualism and less state interference, but not always. Augusto Pinochet was pretty authoritarian and no one is going to claim that he was a lefty, now, are they?
As for two ends of the same turd – nice description, I agree, but it does demonstrate that the two extremes will meet in the middle eventually. Whatever the labels, the outcome is the same.
The reason I suggest that Islam is right rather than left is due to its profound social conservatism, which is a right wing trait..It is also incredibly authoritarian.
Thanks for your considered reply, and for not being offended(!). I’m genuinely interested in this aspect of terminology. It seems that ‘Fascism’ has been hailed by all and sundry as ‘Right Wing’. Why? The Nazis were Fascist, self-proclaimed, but of course, they were the National SOCIALIST German Workers Party…Socialist, Left Wing. Pinochet? yes, a Socialist, authoritarian, State Control…Left Wing. The turd description is not between left wing and right wing, its actually Communism and Fascism, with Socialism the soft centre! These days, extreme Right Wing and Left Wing seem to equate to the same thing, both in the end have an authoritarian State Control, its just that the BBC approves of one and disapproves of the other…To my mind, they are nothing of the sort, extreme Left Wing has your total State Control, ending up with the likes of Mao, Hitler, Stalin, PolPot (Pinochet?!), while extreme Right? A reduction of the State to the least possible factor? Don’t think its been tried in recent times and certainly couldn’t work in the modern world.
Islam? Where every aspect of one’s life is dictated by the State (Allah in this case, or the odd Mullah), how much more Socialist can you get?
“…Left politics equates to State control, Right politics equates to the individual having control over himself…”
Close, but not quite right.
Left politics equates to State control of the economy, industry & utilities.
Right politics equates to private individuals’ control of the economy, industry & utilities.
Just as it is possible (even probable) to be left wing AND authoritarian, so it is possible (in theory, at least) to be right wing AND libertarian.
This is why I can never come to terms with the concept of “left-wing libertarian”, despite the fact that this (or terms roughly equivalent) has become commonplace and, indeed, the lefties usually portray themselves as being more libertarian than the right.
It is my understanding that the left believe everybody (excluding state officials, a practical requirement glossed over in their theories) should be entitled to equal life outcomes regardless of background, skill, capability or motivation. Since this situation never naturally arises they propose a state apparatus which takes control of resource redistribution and allocation of some or all products and services to the inhabitants of the state. The left believe that the individual is too stupid or selfish to make and bear the consequences of their own life choices, whilst ducking the issue that the state officials are imperfect human beings too. The only way that the leftist ideal can “work” (in the loosest sense of the word) is if it applies universally. This never comes close to happening unless backed by force – immediately demonstrating “equality” to be a myth, since the enforcers assume a privilege over the general population.
In short, left wingers desire greater state control of what effectively constitutes many aspects of peoples lives. If somebody can explain how this is possible without the enactment and rigorous enforcement of a huge array of rules then I might start to believe there is such a thing as a “left-wing libertarian”. Until then, no chance!
They just want to co-opt the libertarian name, like they did with liberal.
Except we all know that sharia Islam is the closest thing to Fascism since….. well…… Adolph Hitler, Muslims often sing Hitler’s praises, they see him as a bit of a poster pin up!
Right wing and Left wing are redundant terms, certainly in terms of UK politics the labour party under Tony Blurrrgh moved so far towards the tories in its determination to win the general election and now Camoron is moving towards the Labour party in political correctness terms and his dedication to appease the Muslims, it’s impossible to get a fag paper between them! There is no choice between the parties and only which policy is least damaging! Left and Right are superfluous terms in British politics these days!
Dark Ages child-rapist for Mahmud, please!
Ted Treen
Spot on.
See the State capitalism under the Nazis for right-wing authoritarian.
Or Prince Peter Kropotkin for left-wing Libertarianism – all of his followers got wasted by Stalin, what a surprise!