Saturday, 23 March 2019

Violence: The only option?

Given that only groups that use violence are ever taken seriously, for instance the IRA and Muslim extremists.

Given that the government has broken it's democratic agreement with the majority and us actively seeking to not implement an exit from the EU.

Is Violence the only path forward?

Does blood have to be shed to focus the minds of the elites?

If it does, I have a unique set of skills....

But seriously, what is happening in Parliament at the moment is a big "fuck you" to the 17.4 million people that voted leave.

Parliament is relying on the fact that the 17.4 million or at least a significant proportion of them don't say fuck you back.

Thursday, 21 March 2019

Response To Theresa May's Speech.


I DO NOT STAND WITH YOU. You may say you stand with me, but I fear that you are at odds with the majority of the nation. You are deluding yourself if you actually think you are in step with the majority of people outside of Parliament.

The majority wish to leave on the terms set out leading up to the 2016 referendum. Those terms were clear and unequivocal: We were told if we voted leave, The UK would leave the EU apparatus, we would leave the customs union, we would leave the single market and we would leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

These were couched as threats prior to the referendum. If we voted leave, we would suffer the consequences of exiting all of the apparatus and institutions of the EU politically, economically and legally.

And we still voted to leave, because those terms were exactly what the majority of the country wanted.

However, the deal that you have  done with the EU reneges on every one of those threats or promises that the Conservative party made prior to the vote.

If MPs vote to accept your deal, we will be tied all of the above for at least 2 years and possibly for ever. Especially if the backstop is triggered.

The people were clear in June 2016 on what they were threatened with should we dare to vote leave. We know what we were promised. We voted leave anyway, because that is what we wanted.

Your cowardice after the vote is clear for everyone to see. I know you are scared, I know you fear being the person responsible for legislation. But that's what the people want: someone responsible that they can vote in our out of office. We do not want unelected beaurocrats in the EU making our laws.

We voted leave in 2016, despite the warnings, despite project fear. We gave a clear mandate to the government, YOUR Government to leave the EU. It was then the job of government to manage the process of leaving.

It was not for government to keep us in the customs union, despite the threats and promises government made to us.

It was not for Government to keep us in the single market, despite the threats and promises made to us by Government.

It was not for Government to keep us in the EU tariff area. We wanted a clean break so we could start negotiating deals around the country.

It was not for government to tie us to the ECJ. We wanted rid of the idiocy and bias of the European Courts.

We wanted to be on our own.

Last night, your speech proved to the population of the UK that you had not understood a single iota of what we wanted and voted for back in June 2016.

You do not stand with us. You stand apart. You stand alone. You have no support from the majority of the population, nor the majority of MPs in Parliament.

It is time you considered your position and the position of your government.

Wednesday, 20 March 2019

Let's Start the Muslim Debate....

Okay, first I have to say this unfortunately because there are a fuckton (scientific unit) of people that will instantly be triggered and take offence.

I'm not referring to ALL Muslims, don't forget I have family that are Muslim. I am quite happy to be around Muslims. I don't see them as the enemy like the far-right would.

There's an enlightened side of the Muslim culture that quite happily co-exists with Western culture. The Persian side, the pre-revolution Iranian side, the pre-PLO and Hamas Lebanese side.

A side of Muslim culture that does not crave world domination, that does not crave political control, that does not demand subjugation or extermination of other religions.

BUT (a lather large but)…..

We have to talk about the Muslims that Do want world Muslim domination and actively work towards it.

We have to talk about the Muslims that do crave political control.

We have to talk about the Muslims that put Sharia law above the law of the land they are living in.

We have to talk about the Muslims that define a female child differently than Western Law.

We have to talk about the Muslims that practice Female Genital Mutilation.

We have to talk about the Muslims that hold to the "Muslim Nation" concept.

We have to talk about the Muslims that put the Muslim Nation above the country they live in.

We have to talk about the Muslims that see it as their religious duty to rape Western children.

We have to talk about the Muslims that refuse to integrate into Western Society.

We have to talk about the Muslims that live in the west but describe it as immoral.

We have to talk about the Muslims that are against the LGBTQ+ community.

We have to talk about the Muslims that are against feminism.

We have to talk about the Muslims that have fought against our soldiers and against our national interest.

We have to talk about the Muslims that refuse to tell the authorities if they know of  another Muslim doing something illegal (like raping a child).

We have to talk about the Muslims without and within the UK that finance the subversion of Western Culture.

We have to talk about the Muslim Imams that come into the West and preach hate against us and our culture.

We have to talk about how our culture copes with a society that stands apart and refuses to integrate.

We have to talk about what happens when Muslims gain political control.

We have to talk about what happens when Muslims gain financial control.

And that lot is just from the top of my head, with a pretty dodgy memory. It's a pretty long list of items.

I'm sure there will be more. But the salient point is there are things we need to be talking about and now.

If we are to beat the "otherness" of Muslims and work with them and integrate them into Western society, we need to discuss these issues and other parts of Muslim culture.

For instance the dishonesty when talking to certain Muslims. The Muslims that do not discuss openly their agenda, or those who will say one thing in public and to non-Muslims and then something completely different to their Muslim brothers.

We have to come to understand that Muslims will use our own laws against us when it suits, right up until the point they can take control and make the laws to suit themselves to the exclusion of others.

This is not islamophobia, but an honest discussion on the issues surrounding the integration of Muslims into the West.

I hold back from saying Western Society, because there may never be full integration and inclusion. Again, that's something to debate: how do we cope with a society that refuses to integrate?

But the debate has to be above all honest, frank, without agendas and in public.

If things are left in the dark and are not brought into the spotlight of debate, then the risk of violence from both sides is real and is high. Until there is an honest and open debate and a consensus formed, we cannot more forward. The current stalemate on both sides has to be resolved.

Monday, 18 March 2019

Christchurch Shooting: Totally Avoidable.

I've been advocating for some years on this blog about talking about the issues surrounding Islam, immigration and the lack of integration into Western society. I have predicted for years that without inclusive dialogue, niches will open allowing extremists to exist on both sides of the debate.

The lack of debate and an agreed consensus has brought about the widening of the division between left and Right, Christian and Muslim. The wider the divide gets, the more insular each side becomes.

To the point that eventually the "other" side becomes dehumanised, at which point they become fair game for violence. Not that I'm advocating violence, just that the current climate makes it more likely now and further into the future, unless we get a grip on this and the debate is opened up and everyone has a say.

The real people to blame are those that close down debate. The Far left and the devout Muslims.

The leftists that are so inclusive they fail to understand what Islamic ideology is political as well as religious, the leftist feminists that fail to understand that Islam would crush feminism, the gay people that support Islam, that fail to understand gay people are being hung in the name of Islam.

The devout Muslims that refuse to adapt: The ones that refuse to accept that Britain is their home. The ones that stand apart. The ones that class Western Society as evil. The ones that reject inclusivity. The ones that fail to reject the more extreme teachings of the Koran. The ones that drum up dissent when a gay teacher tries to provide an inclusive curriculum. The ones that condemn apostates. The ones that would fight against British soldiers in foreign countries. The ones that put the Muslim world community ahead of their local community, those that lie in wait to do us harm. The ones that vote en-masse as they are told by Imams.

Our government, that kowtows to Gulf State money and shuts down dissent, Our government that actively harasses anyone that speaks out against Islam, Our government that allows Saudi preachers to enter the country uncontested to preach hate against our society.

The debate has to be had and it has to be had freely and publicly. Islam cannot be protected as it is, allowed to spread hate as it is, allowed to continue uncontested as it is. The Left have to stop shutting down debate. The government has to stop shutting down debate and harassing those that try and throw light on the issue.

The beheading of Lee Rigby should have been enough to start the debate. The rape gangs of Rotherham should have started the debate. The rape gangs of Leeds should have started the debate. The rape gangs of Oxford should have started the debate. The rape gangs of Telford should have started the debate. The rape gangs of Bristol should have started the debate.

The murders in Christchurch Should. Start. The. Debate.

The debate has to be had, or the alternative is violence. Up until now, the violence has been from the Muslim side. More and more you'll see it from the opposite side as well, the disenfranchised that feel not listened to, that see violence from the other side and see their view effectively winning. Where will the government act? Where will it stop? Until we are all consumed in a civil war?

Will it stop when Muslims are attacked? When the left start to be attacked? Will it stop when the government is attacked?

It certainly hasn't  started when ordinary citizens (of all faiths and ethnicities) have been attacked by Muslims.

Debate has to start on how we address the issues of a society within that stands apart.

It may be that the elites in government think the Muslims are useful to provide the votes and muscle to implement policy. They are wrong. Like bringing up an orphan Tiger, once it gets big enough it will see you as prey and turn on you.