British Multiculturalism & Its Arbitrators

Andy Padan outlines how to pursue the war on terrorism: 

1. investigate radical mosques

   support anti-Islamofascist freedom fighters

   thwart attempts to impose Sharia law

   form an anti-Islamofascist publishing network

   create an anti-Islamofascist portal on the Internet

   establish an anti-Islamofascist speakers bureau

   wage an ideological assault on Islamofascism

   support efforts to evangelize Muslims in Europe and the Middle East

   create a global anti-Islamofascist coalition

   reframe the illegal immigration issue as one of national security

   end dependence on foreign oil that's funding the Islamofascists.  

   We need a serious dialogue -- not knee-jerk hysteria -- about the 1st Amendment, what it protects and what it should not protect. Here are a few baseline principles to consider:

   • We should be allowed to close down websites that recruit suicide bombers and provide instructions to indiscriminately kill civilians by suicide or other means, or advocate killing people from the West or the destruction of Western civilization;

   • We should propose a Geneva-like convention for fighting terrorism that makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction and those who would target civilians are in fact subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous. A subset of this convention should define the international rules of engagement on what activities will not be protected by free speech claims; and

   • We need an expeditious review of current domestic law to see what changes can be made within the protections of the 1st Amendment to ensure that free speech protection claims are not used to protect the advocacy of terrorism, violent conduct or the killing of innocents.The most effective form of counterterrorism fights not the terrorists but the ideas that motivate them.

   • This strategy involves two main steps. First, defeat the Islamist movement just as the fascist and communist movements were defeated - on every level and in every way, making use of every institution, public and private. This task falls mainly on non-Muslims, Muslim communities being generally incapable or unwilling to purge their own.

   • In contrast, only Muslims can undertake the second step, the formulation and spread of an Islam that is modern, moderate, democratic, liberal, good-neighborly, humane, and respectful of women. Here, non-Muslims can help by distancing themselves from Islamists and supporting moderate Muslims.

Posted by Tufail Ahmad at 09:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From Steph's Blog:

A quarter of Dutch Citizens support the banning of the Koran and half think its text is more violent that the Torah or the Bible according to a recent poll conducted after Geert Wilders of the right-wing, anti immigration and anti-Muslim, Partij voor de Vrijheid, called for it to be banned. The poll doesn’t say how many people actually bothered to read it. A lot less than a quarter I’d guess.

6.5% of the Dutch population is Muslim, which is probably less than France but more than the UK. France’s uncompromising stance and marginalisation of Muslims led to riots and now they’ve elected a fascist as president, the chance of community relations improving have got to be slim. Holland’s political elite has also marginalised and vilified its Muslim population, which has led to a wave of Islamophobic violence, a rise in fascism and Islamic extremism. <Quick Read>

 

Posted by Tufail Ahmad at 05:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the desk of Jenny McCartney:

It is difficult to avoid the suspicion that what pricked Livingstone's imagination, provoking him to tears, was not so much the hard fact of the slaves' misery as the poignant image of Livingstone himself being moved by the slaves' misery.

Milan Kundera, the Czech writer, has a phrase for such a process, which is particularly widespread in modern politics. He describes it as "moral judo", whereby the practitioner takes every opportunity to trap his opponent in a tight hold that proves his own moral superiority.

It is worth remembering that Livingstone's weeping for slavery has come just as he is engaged in a very vigorous bout of moral judo regarding the London mayoral contest. <<Quick Read>>

Posted by Tufail Ahmad at 11:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

My view is that cultural relativism is incorrect as a philosophy. For instance, if one believes everything is relative how can it be that cultural relativism is the correct view? Is this not itself  exculsive and therefore not relative? And, if say, Mr or Mrs Ahmed from Pakistan or Somalia, wishes to leave their country of origin to come to live and work in England, is this choice not  showing a preference for a different culture and country? And, if they vote with their feet to come to live in another country and culture why would they wish to subscribe to cultural relativism? Surely, their decision to leave suggests that they accept a different culture and show a preference for English culture. <Read Post>

Posted by Tufail Ahmad at 11:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)