By VennerRoad, 27th Jun 2016
An analysis of the dishonest rhetoric surrounding the issue of the supposed Islamisation of the West.
The Shah Jahan Mosque, Woking
The ongoing Syrian crisis and the resultant exodus has led to the polarisation of views on immigration, particularly in Germany, Eastern Europe and the UK. On the one side are the social justice warriors, anti-racists and other left wing morons who seek the destruction not only of Europe but of everything it stands for. On the other side is everyone else from ordinary people for whom enough is enough to all manner of conservatives who want to see an end to this madness.
Because of the wave of Islamist terror that followed the beginning of the war on terror in the wake of 9/11, there has been genuine concern that we are sleepwaking into a bloodbath. The latest outrage was the massacre by a lone wolf of fifty clientele of a homosexual club in Orlando, Florida.
Those beating the drum against Islam include the flamboyant homosexual Libertarian Milo Yiannopoulos. Recently he cited the following statistics from a UK poll of Moslems:
52% believe homosexuality should be illegal
23% would like to see Sharia law in England
39% believe a woman should always obey her husband, as opposed to 5% of English overall
31% consider it acceptable for a man to have multiple wives.
For Milo, the Islamic intolerance of homosexuality is a litmus test of what is to come. These figures prove that Islam is incompatible with Western liberal values, and presumably that we should expel all Moslems forthwith. Considering he has done sterling work exposing the toxic ideology of feminism, it is surprising that he appears not to have carried out the same unbiased research on Islam. Before returning to the homosexual issue and the above statistics, let us do what Milo has not, and examine the historical context.
Let’s forget for the moment the usual gates of Vienna narrative, and go way back. The Ottoman Empire was founded in 1299, and it had good relations with England from certainly the age of the Virgin Queen. Elizabeth reigned from November 1558 until her death in March 1603, and during that time there were tiny numbers of Moslems in what was then England. There is actually tenuous evidence of contact between the denizens of these islands and Arabs if not Moslems as we would understand them from around the time of The Prophet himself, but the first Moslem communities as such were not established until the early 19th Century. In 1810, the Hindoostane Coffee House was opened in London by Sheikh Din Muhammad, an immigrant from Bengal.
The late 19th Century saw prominent white converts, in particular the Christian convert William Henry Quilliam and the Orientalist Gottlieb Leitner. In 1889, each founded a mosque: Quilliam’s in his hometown of Liverpool; Leitner’s, the magnificent Shah Jahan Mosque at Woking (photographed here by Roger Haworth). Although there were earlier editions, the first faithful English translation of the Holy Qur’an was made by another Christian convert, Marmaduke Pickthall, in 1930. While by the beginning of the 1960s there were still around only 50,000 Moslems in England and Wales, there is no way Islam could by this time be considered an alien presence. It should never be forgotten that Islam is a religion, one whose door is open to all regardless of race, nationality, social status, or criminal antecedents. There are many reformed criminals and other unfortunates in the UK and elsewhere who claim to have been saved by Christianity; Islam can make a similar claim on both sides of the Atlantic.
Although Islam has not been in North America as long as in Europe, it has likewise been established long enough for it to be considered anything but an alien presence. Now let us turn to terror.
If you are of a certain age, you will recall the terror campaigns in the British Isles. Throughout the 1960s and 70s, terrorism was synonymous with the Irish Question, in both Northern Ireland and on the Mainland. In the United States, terrorism had many faces. In France, it had an Algerian flavour, but the word Islam was on nobody’s lips. The implications of this are that the terrorist acts that have been associated with Islam primarily since 9/11 but also going back to the first attack on the World Trade Center, in 1993, and in a small way to the 1980s, are not central to the religion. One might just as well argue that the nominally Catholic Provisional IRA or the Catholic conspirators of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 are proof of the unique wickedness of that particular branch of Christianity. Indeed, some secular humanists do, they tar all religion with the same brush, apart from Marxism.
If Islam is not the problem in the West, what is? The simple answer is Islamism, which is first and foremost a political creed, even though it has stolen the garb of Islam, but this is nothing new. Furthermore, when one takes a deeper look, this great megalithic Islamic conspiracy simply does not exist. To take just two examples, Iran and Iraq have been at loggerheads since 1980, and the Saudi régime is despised by much of the Islamic world.
Recognising this simple reality will save much time and effort agonising over the non-existent problem of Islam’s jihad against the West. Let us return now to self-styled dangerous faggot Milo Yiannopoulos and his facile concerns for the safety of his fellow homos.
Nearly a quarter, 23% of Moslems, would like to see Sharia law in England.
That is truly shocking. One would have thought 100% of Moslems would have. Strangely, London has a Moslem Mayor who supports “gay rights”.
The mythical patriarchy appears to be alive and well in Islam, because 39% of Moslems believe a woman should always obey her husband, as opposed to 5% of the English overall.
According to the official 2015 statistics, the UK has around 2 million lone parents living with dependent children, 90% of them women. If those women had husbands to obey, we would see a lot less in the way of broken homes and child delinquency; in any case, under Islam the man is not only the head of the household, he is responsible for the well-being of his wife, as Milo surely knows.
Nearly one third, 31% we are told, consider it acceptable for a man to have multiple wives.
The man who has no objection to having anonymous perverted sex with other men finds polygamy offensive.
And the big one, 52% of Moslems believe homosexuality should be illegal.
From this we are supposed to conclude that Islam is a threat to our liberal democratic values? Although Milo was not born until 1983, unlike his airhead feminist opponents he has no excuse for peddling this piffle. Briefly, until the so-called Wolfenden reforms, homosexuality was illegal in the UK. Furthermore, while ordinary people did not generally persecute homosexuals, this was contingent on their staying out of the public space. Mainstream Islam takes a similar position. In the UK we have seen not only the legalisation of homosexuality but the reduction of the age of consent from 21 to 18 to a mere 16 for perverted sex, and unbelievably some homosexual activists are unhappy with that, they want the age of consent lowered still further, to 14.
While the overwhelming majority of Moslems find male homosexuality depraved and disgusting, this is a sentiment that is still shared by a sizeable minority of the rest of the population, the big difference being that most people are too afraid to state so openly. Does any father want his son to grow up to be a homosexual? Does any mother, seriously?
It is not Islam that is out of synch with Western liberal democratic values, rather it is liberal democratic values that are out of synch with our heritage, from back before the 1533 statute An Acte for the punishment of the vice of Buggerie, from before the founding of Islam in 622AD, from before the Crucifixion and the founding of Christianity. From year dot until the third quarter of the 20th Century, all the world’s great religions condemned homosexuality. With for the most part trifling exceptions, homosexuality was condemned and punished severely by the secular authorities throughout history, including by death. As recently as November 1835, two men who were convicted at the Old Bailey of sodomy two months previously were hanged, while a third was transported. That may sound a tad extreme today, but up until the 1960s, there was no profound disapproval of the sanctioning of homosexuals when they dared to step out of the closet.
In his 1966 autobiography, the former Scottish Chief Constable William Merrilees reported with alacrity on what he called his campaign against homosexuality in Edinburgh before World War II, yet a mere half century on, this diligent public servant would be condemned as a homophobe? While laws, customs and even entire societies can change over time, some truths are eternal. As the Holy Qur’an is believed by all Moslems to be the literal word of The Man Upstairs, as far as homosexuality is concerned, there can be none of the casuistry we find in the modern church of whatever denomination. In short, it is either bend over for Milo or bow down to Allah - either, not both.
Which brings us to the real issue. The problem we in the West are facing is not an Islamic invasion, it is mass immigration per se. And what is Milo’s position on this? In a recent video he complained that Pakistanis for example refuse by and large to integrate into British society. And this is a problem because?
If one looks at both the UK and North America, one finds small, insular ethnic, mainly religious, communities who are no trouble to anyone else precisely because they keep themselves to themselves. The prime example are the ethnic Chinese. Most major cities have a Chinatown - some larger than others. Ultra-Orthodox Jews inhabit Stamford Hill in North London and Monsey in New York; unlike the secular Zionists, they never cause anyone any trouble. The white minorities of the Amish and Hutterites are well known.
The real problems between racial groups begin with forced integration, the root cause of which is political meddling by social justice warriors and their fellow travellers. The professed goal of the misnamed civil rights movement was a colour blind society in which all - including the government - were subject to the rule of law and in which no one suffered ill-treatment on any arbitrary basis, be it race or something else. What has come about instead is a society in which racism is found in every nook and cranny, in which whites but now increasingly others, are branded bigots on the slightest pretext from a racial epithet mouthed in anger or humour, to supposedly discriminatory patterns in everything from criminal prosecutions to employment to bank loans. And, most of all, to resistance to uncontrolled immigration and forced integration.
So what is the solution? The bottom line is first and foremost to end the migration madness. The UK in particular is seen as a soft touch, which it should not be. The way the asylum system is played by especially women was documented here recently. Now that it has voted to leave the misnamed European Union, we can hopefully look forward to the break up of the whole project, and see nation states reasserting their identities. There has to be too a permanent solution to the madness in the Middle East so that those who wish to return there can.
None of this will be easy, but the solution does not begin by starting some sort of crusade against Islam, because Islam is not and have never been either the problem or part of the problem, although with the proper approach it could be part of the solution.
To Wikinut Articles Page