| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| A rant from Hez ut-Tahrir... |
| 2002-09-23 |
| Oh, cheeze. It seems like today's the day for long posts... Sorry... Courtesy Hezb-ut-Tahrir On 16 September it was reported that the Home Secretary David Blunkett had yet again entered the minefield of British race relations. Blunkett said that speaking English was essential for immigrants to become involved with in his words "wider modern culture". His comments were made in an essay included in "Rethinking Britishness", a review of modern British identity published by the Foreign Policy Centre think tank. In the essay Blunkett is quoted as saying 'Citizenship should be about shared participation... one factor in this is the ability of new migrants to speak English - otherwise they cannot get good jobs, or share in wider social debate'. Sounds pretty self-evident, doesn't it? Reactions to Blunkett's remarks were swift, direct and savage with one Labour ex-minister calling his comments silly and demanding an apology from the Home Secretary. For suggesting that immigrants learn to speak the national language and participate in society? Ah! The Attack of the Multiculturalists! However the reaction to Blunkett's comments has completely missed the point with a futile and irrelevant discussion centring on the use of the English language in one's private home. Those who support integration for the Muslim community are really not interested in whether people can speak English or not, they are more concerned about which values people are adopting. Consequently the real debate for Muslims centres on whether we should adopt the fundamentals of Western culture namely the pursuit of freedom, democracy and capitalism or do we protect in full our Islamic identity? The "Islamic identity" emphatically not including freedom, democracy, or capitalism... The supporters of integration, who want the Muslims to adopt the values of the Capitalist society, are ... attempting to hide behind a smokescreen of deceit. Through concentrating on peripheral issues such as language, they hope to deflect attention from their real agenda, which is that ideological capitalist societies will always seek to indoctrinate the minds of all citizens so as to ensure there is a uniformity of shared values and ideas. This is one of the things that makes a culture. It's kind of like the uniformity of shared values and ideas in Muslim culture... This is more pressing, since the British Government is about to embark upon a war in Iraq. Muslims should pause and think long and hard about the liberal values that are being offered to them, presumably the same liberal values that have driven two senior policemen involved in the Soham murder case to be accused of distributing child pornography. Or the liberal values of freedom that have caused an unprecedented growth in crime, or the capitalist values practised by the current generations, which dump their parents into care homes, and the materialistic values which kill innocent civilians abroad to fatten corporate profits at home. A taste for kiddy porn is considered aberrant in Western society, which is why they heard about it in the first place. It's rather more the exception than child buggery is among Muslims. Much of the unprecedented growth in crime coincides with the appearance of large numbers of Muslims in an area, so it's probably better not to dwell on that subject too long or too deeply, either. And putting grandma in a nursing home when she's no longer able to care for herself represents a better option than keeping her at home and using her for a footstool or abandoning her to beg on the street because her old man's dead. Let us be clear that integration for Muslims means agreeing with democracy, a ruling system that allows alcohol to be legalised, adultery to be rampant and Afghanistan to be bombed. All such values contradict Islam, and thus must be rejected by all Muslims. Legal alcohol is part of the deal. So is chasing women (or chasing men, if that's your pleasure). The basic idea of Western culture is for the individual to make his/her/its own mistakes. And bombing Afghanistan was a fine idea, whether it contradicts Islam or not. Western society is fine with the idea of Muslims not drinking, chasing women, or bombing Afghanistan, but not with the idea of all of society adhering to the mores of Muslims because Muslims say they should. The desire to dictate what one's neighbor do is arrogant and, to Western eyes, uncivilized. It should be very plain to Muslims that integration and support for democracy are completely contradictory to the Islamic 'Aqeedah (belief). The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) refused to integrate into Quraishi society and nor did he participate within their political systems despite numerous opportunities and incentives. The clear vision outlined in the aforementioned conference on 15th September was for the Muslims not to integrate or isolate but to actively present the Islamic ideology by continuously pointing out and exposing the contradictions within the Capitalist system and by always remembering our responsibilities to the Global Muslim Ummah. The Muslims needs to be on their guard, and understand the reality of the plan for integration. We call you to study this deceptive plan, comprehend Islam as an ideology and present it as a clear alternative to the decadent Capitalistic ideology. In other words, they're determined to inflict their vision of how things should be on the rest of the world. We knew that before they had their meeting. At some point Western society is going to have to bite the bullet and do the unpleasant things that will be necessary to root out this sort of incipient dictatorship. No doubt we'll all be very sorry when it's over, and we'll wish for years that there had been some other way. Eventually, though, our descendents will talk about the Muslims the way we today discuss the Gepids and the Ostrogoths, the Avars and the Veps — and that's not very often, or with much interest. |
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #3 I've got it on my News page under South Asia, but it should really fall in with the Ummah press. A lot of the stuff it carries comes from Azzam. I'm still not too sure about its affiliation - it does carry stuff from Hizb ut-Tahrir regularly, but that could just be part of its general jihadi/anti-government orientation. |
| Posted by: Fred 2002-09-23 16:10:55 |
| #2 Just looked at that site. The rag IS published in Pakistan - Quetta, to be precise. I wish Perv _would_ shut that fountain of sedition down; I'd buy him a beer. Oh, that's right, he's Moslem, he doesn't drink beer. *sigh* |
| Posted by: Joe 2002-09-23 15:22:09 |
| #1 The Balochistan Post is published in Pakistan, isn't it? (Unless I am making a horrible mistake in my geography, Balochistan - also spelled Baluchistan - is a geographical region divided between Iran and Pakistan). It strikes me that if Perv were _really_ the tyrant with bloodied fangs the Balochistan Post is always shrieking about, he'd have closed down the rag long ago and flung every one of its personnel into jail. |
| Posted by: Joe 2002-09-23 15:18:39 |