23 January 2015 A.D. Sharia-Governed Countries: Islam is a Religion of
Peace (© All UK politicians, © Obama, © The White House, © State Department, inter alia)
It’s all kicking off in the
Islamic world. Nothing at all to do with Islam, of course
Everywhere you look there is outrage and fury and screaming
and violence
Iranians take part in a
protest outside the French Embassy in Tehran Photo: Getty
They have
been burning churches and murdering Christians again in Niger. You’d think that
they’d have more immediately pressing concerns than worrying about a cartoon,
Niger regularly winning the award for being the worst country anywhere on God’s
earth, and the poorest. But nope, it’s kill-a-kuffar time once more. Some 45
churches set alight and at least five people killed and 50 injured. Adherents
of the Religion of Peace (© all UK politicians) included in their pyromania a
Christian orphanage, which was thoughtful of them. There have also been massed
rallies and protests and the usual effigy-burning business in the vast and
dusty Islamic desert rat-holes next door, Mali and Algeria. Not to mention
Senegal, and the fragrant delight which is Sudan, plus Niger’s red-hot rival
for the worst-country-on-earth award, Mauritania.
Death to
France! Death to infidels! Death to Christians! And that’s just Africa. There
was more effigy and flag-burning plus the requisite homicidal screeching in
good old Pakistan, and next door in Afghanistan, and of course in Iran. Even
the Chechens got in on the act — a massed rally in the central square of
Grozny with an estimated 800,000 people howling their loathing of France and
cartoonists and the West in general, protests which spread over the border into
another backwards enclave which the Soviet Union, to its immense credit,
succeeded in briefly civilising, Ingushetia. Oh, and there was still more fury
in the Philippines, the usual howling at the moon from the country’s Islamic
minority whose political wing, the MNLF, was habituated to kidnapping and
murder in the Sulu peninsula and Mindanao.
Smoke billows in a
street as people demonstrate near the grand mosque in Niamey, Niger Photo:
Getty
Everywhere
you look in the Islamic world there is outrage and fury and screaming and
violence. An anger not occasioned by the vicious executions of 11 people in
Paris, but in response to the ‘Je suis Charlie’ stuff, and the magazine’s
post-murder edition featuring Mohammed on its front page. The murders did not
bother them at all and a substantial majority, by the look of things, will have
wholly approved of them. It’s the cartoons which made them go on the rampage,
killing people of a different faith.
So next
time some jackass of a politician tells you that the Charlie Hebdo attacks
were ‘nothing to do with Islam’, or some hand-wringing, PC, public-school
broadcaster on the BBC puts it all down to ‘extremists’ — point them in
the direction of the millions of people in the Islamic world who rather
fervently disagree with that flip and patently delusional diagnosis. If all
those people are ‘extremists’, then we need to redefine the word ‘extreme’ so
it means something closer to, say, ‘mainstream’ or ‘moderate, consensual
centre’. In this, our own vile and incendiary Islamic preachers, such as Anjem
Choudary, are much closer to the truth than are our politicians: this is not
‘nothing to do with Islam’. It is all about Islam.
A Bahraini protester
takes cover during clashes with police following a demonstration against the
arrest of Sheikh Ali Salman Photo: Getty
If you
doubt it, look around you. It is as the former leader of one of the world’s
more moderate Islamic countries, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia, put it.
It’s a clash of values, he said — and if the West wishes to sort it out, then
the West should give in. I say moderate: under Yudhoyono, Indonesians have been
imprisoned for the alleged crime of blasphemy, many for a term of five years.
It’s that moderate vs extremist thing again — hard one to call, isn’t it?
So the
Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, deserves a bit of credit for his
round-robin letter to our country’s mosques, which has succeeded in shoring up
the familiar sense of acquired victimhood among British followers of Islam.
Pickles suggested that British followers of Islam should ‘prove’ their
identification with British values.
I suppose
it’s a bit late in the day for that sort of thing — remember, 68 per cent
of our Islamic community believe that blasphemers should be punished somehow
— but better late than never. Forty years of being told that their
cultural practices are every bit as valid as those of the Christian majority,
however, has established a mindset which will take some shifting.
And so it
has proved — self-appointed Muslim leaders have reacted with the usual
mixture of petulance and confected outrage. The letter, they insist, is
‘patronising’. One spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain asked: why no
similar letter to Christian church leaders demanding they disassociate
themselves from the English Defence League? It is difficult to imagine a more
lame or ridiculous riposte.
The EDL is
habitually reviled by British politicians and church leaders alike — and
reviled for nothing more than its thuggish opinions and rare, sparsely attended
marches. The EDL has not murdered anyone, nor sent its thick-as-mince legions
to fight for the Islamic State, nor blown people up in London, nor tried to
decapitate British soldiers on the streets of Woolwich. Reprehensible (and,
frankly, laughable) though the EDL may be, there is simply no comparison. And
to make the comparison suggests strongly to me that the Muslim Council of
Britain does not remotely get the point. But then we should remember the former
leader of the Muslim Council of Britain, Iqbal Sacranie, once suggested that
mere death was ‘perhaps too easy’ for Salman Rushdie. A little after he said
that, we knighted him. And for a long while the MCB refused to attend the
British holocaust memorial service.
We have
indulged parts of our Muslim community in epic paranoia, victimhood, clamorous
obsessions and pre-medieval cultural appurtenances for way too long. And so
perhaps it is too late to venture, tentatively, that we got our approach all
wrong.
This article first appeared in the print
edition of The Spectator magazine, dated 24 January 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment