Biblically Inspired Extremism

The BBC is eager, as we have recently seen from its behaviour when covering the Boston Marathon bombings,  to suppress any speculation that Muslims may have been involved.

This is merely a continuation of a policy that it has adopted and carried out in the UK for a long time in the hope of breaking any association between Islam and terrorism or indeed any activities that would reflect badly upon the ideology in the minds of non-Muslims.

A similar exercise in news manipulation is seen in its reporting of immigration, or  when not reporting the damaging effects mass immigration has had on UK society and infrastructure.

However, as I noted in this previous post, when looking at other countries a more clear sighted and authentic picture appears of the effects of immigration and cultural tensions between different ethnic or religious groups.

One of the most recent such ventures was ‘Frank Gardner’s Return to Saudi Arabia.’.

This was followed by John Ware’s ‘Israel:  Facing The Future’ in which Ware examined the problems facing an Israel with increasing polarisation of its populations between extremes of religion and an increasing secularism.

One stand out comment was this:

‘The Palestinians have found that a more powerful weapon than guns is a receptive Media.’

Just how receptive we’ll never know until the BBC publishes the Balen Report…but Ware makes the point that Israel’s image was tarnished by the use of overwhelming force in Gaza in 2009 in which a watching world only saw dead Palestinians.

There is a reason for that…because that is what the likes of the BBC determinedly emphasized and focused on….and continued to publish the casualty figures for a couple of years after the conflict at the bottom of most reports about Israel.

How fair was this programme though?

Firstly Ware, avoiding upsetting the Arabs, called Jerusalem ‘Israel’s spiritual capital’…no it is its actual capital.

He told us that Israel had been fighting wars for 60 years…..well, only because they have been under attack for 60 years….it’s not a voluntary thing.

Although it accurately pictured the internal pressures upon Israeli society, though not detailing the very successful secular side much at all, it skated over the hardcore Muslim opposition that Israel faces.

Israelis were presented as the bigger part of the problem whilst Palestinians and Israeli Arabs were generally presented as reasonable, undogmatic people just looking for a peaceful life.

It was unfortunate that one Israeli Arab slipped out that ‘we are in a war’…against the Israelis…a comment that Ware left unremarked.

The Israeli Arabs were allowed to present a very one sided view of things, with likeminded, left wing Israelis agreeing.

 

However the main point about the programme that I want to make is that Ware looks closely at the effects on Israeli society of the rise of religious extremism amongst Jews themselves as well as the presence of Israeli Arabs who make up 1/5th of the population.

In the programme he describes what is going on as ‘religious nationalism’…i.e.  Zionism…though just as applicable to Hamas et al.

That’s interesting…he makes the link between religion and politics….Something that is taboo when discussing Islam in the UK or the West….. here we are told ‘Islamists’ are violent extremists who use Islam to further their political intentions whilst ‘Muslims’ are peace loving, spiritual people.

Ware expands on that comment later saying…..

‘Biblically inspired nationalism is challenging the secular and democratic values of Israel’s founding fathers.  Upon the outcome of this battle will depend the next chapter in the history of the Jewish people.’

Now that’s a pretty interesting comment….were the 7/7 bombings ‘Koranically inspired’

You’re not allowed to say they were, and the BBC will deny it till the cows come home.

Does Islam challenge the secular and democratic values of a liberal, secular Britain?

We know Christianity challenges it…on the matter of gay marriage and women’s rights for instance.   Islam also of course challenges the Christian Church itself…..but even the Church is too cowardly to stand up for itself in the face of an insurgent Islam….so perhaps you can’t expect the BBC to do so for it.

You have to ask why is Ware allowed to class the Bible as the driving force behind the politics in Israel when Muslims who express a similar view about the Koran, citing it as their inspiration and guide in life, are dismissed as criminals and madmen who pervert Islam?

And of course it isn’t just that differing approach to handling different religions but also the fact that Ware recognises and highlights that there is a ‘clash of values between secular liberals and the religious’…. and that tensions are growing, with ever more conflict.

That same view could equally be applied here in the UK with the rise of  Islam which is an ideology that opposes most of the values and culture of a secular/Christian Britain.

Or is there no ‘clash of values’ in Britain today between the religious and the secular….or Islam and Western values?

If there is shouldn’t someone be talking about it?  The BBC and the Establishment would prefer you didn’t.

If it is possible to talk about such ‘clashes of values’ in Saudi Arabia or Israel it should be possible to debate them here without the usual charges of racism or Islamophobia being bandied about in attempts to close down the debate.

It is a necessary debate to have.

 

Bookmark the permalink.

58 Responses to Biblically Inspired Extremism

  1. SWPmember says:

    Israel must be destroy so we can have a Marxist world government.

       3 likes

  2. Alex Feltham says:

    And talking of extremism there’s a hilarious take on a Muslim campaign to detoxify the word “Jihad” following the Boston bombings.

    It’s in: “MyJihad” at;

    http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/

       13 likes

    • Timbo says:

      Those ‘My Jihad’ posters are pretty much beyond parody already.

      The equivalent would be a detoxification campaign by Neo Nazis along the lines of ‘My Holocaust is to exterminate all my negative feelings.’

         15 likes

    • Chris says:

      Because “crusade” only means going to the Levant and beating up the locals…

         6 likes

  3. chrisH says:

    Ware is one of the BBCs more experienced commentators, and he does make a few points that show he`s not clueless( e.g…is Israel held to a higher standard than everybody else?)
    Yet when push comes to shove ,it`s the same old stuff from the BBC.
    Any chance of the BBC ever finding a few Jews in Tehran or Aleppo, and asking the local politicos why their Jews are regarded as second-class citizens?
    Oh wait-there`s none there because they were NOT allowed to settle, to get rights or to tell the BBC about their being stereotyped…they`d have been wiped out, or ran out of town in 1948, 1958, 1968 and all years before or since.
    Yet Ware won`t be making any shows about that…the BBC likes Islam to be scary and monochrome with its hateful views on Jews, gays women etc,,,forbidden fruit, and an adrenaline buzz a la Sweeney.
    Piss off BBC!

       30 likes

    • pah says:

      Er, but there are Jews in Iran, about 10,000 or so. Not a lot in a country of 75 million Muslims it’s true.

      It’s hard enough being a Jew anywhere these days but being one in Iran must suck like a Dyson.

         9 likes

  4. pedro says:

    here is my problem comrades,with the bbc and other media outlets coverage of the boston muslim chechen child killing bombers,,,there is no spotlight being shone of these far right muslim hate groups that are on the rise in europe,the uk and north america,,,these far right muslim hate groups have operated in the uk for years and are behind terrorist attacks such as the 7/7 bombing in london and other terrorist plots,,,,far right muslim hate groups led by the likes of anjem choudary,abu hamsa.abu qatada we all know about,,,,many other we dont know about…here is the problem…the bbc and other media outlets ignore these far right muslim hate groups that stoke up racism and fascism not only in the uk but all over the world,,,they ask the question why did these 2 chechen muslim child killing terrorists attack boston,,,well the fact that the muslim world hates the west is one reason,,,but you dont end up hating somebody unless somebody plants the seeds of hatred into your minds…..far right muslim hate groups are the problem here comrades,,and unless we tackle these far right muslim hate group and there message of racism and fascism,,well i am afriad there will be more bostons further down the line not only in the usa but in europe and the uk.,,,,,,,,,

       9 likes

    • Demon says:

      I wouldn’t call them far right. There’s nothing far right about them. I’d agree with you that they are fascistic but has been pointed out many times on here, and many other places too, fascism is a left-wing ideology.

         31 likes

    • Chop says:

      I think you mean far left Pedro, me old mucker. 🙂

         21 likes

    • pah says:

      By definition ‘far right group’ is an oxymoron.

         2 likes

  5. Adi says:

    Leftism is an amoral creed that cannot survive without drawing moral equivalences and equivocates. They will always point out to what happened in the past in order to justify the today.

    This is why lefties have no principles or solid, surviving values: because their moral platform evershifts according to whim and circumstances.

    We can all always talk about Bible extremism all the time, but forbid, the Koranic kind? Never.

    No surprise the discussion about some Islamofascists bombers has turned into a discussion about Judaism and Christianity values.

    The moral-relativist lefties can’t survive otherwise.

       29 likes

  6. Cosmo says:

    It has escaped the bBC that the piece of s**t that planted the bomb is having his life saved in “Beth Israel hospital Boston”. Who freely admited that they were trained for these circumstances by Israel’i surgeons whose experience in these type of wounds are all too common in Israel. The bBBC cannot in any circumstances show Israel in a good light.

       36 likes

    • chrisH says:

      I noted this too in the Daily Mail.
      The BBC won`t be mentioning it if at all possible.
      Sticks too much in the craw to have that word “Israel” in anything other than a nasty light.
      Where`s that Balen report by the way?
      Where are our trolls when we need them eh?

         24 likes

  7. London Calling says:

    You may have seen this piece of Left/Right confusion which popped up in the Daily Wail Comments, which neatly encapsulates post-modern political compass:

    Firstly, socialism is not communism, nor is national socialism, socialism. You show your lack of intellect by calling Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mou Tse Tung ‘left wing’. These people were SO far right wing they were practically falling off the planet. In THIS century, left wing means environmentally conscious, secular, and taking the long view, not just until the next election, to try and cement a sustainable approach for society into the future, something neither of Australia’s 2 main political parties are interested in.
    – Penelope , Australia, 20/4/2013 04:33

    To summarise, “right wing” means anything bad, while “left wing” means anything good. The Australian education system has a lot to answer for, but I suspect it is not alone. BBC College of Journalism would seem equally at home on this page.

       34 likes

    • chrisH says:

      Good old Penelope eh?
      The very voice of the BBC and of all soft left eejits everywhere.

         14 likes

      • stewart says:

        “environmentally conscious, secular, and taking the long view”
        Er couldn’t that description by accurately applied to the national socialist and german workers party (or the Socialist Nationalist [and Scottish workers]Party)?
        I think that penny is showing a lack of historical understanding. But then she is probably a product of state school indoctrination.

           15 likes

        • Albaman says:

          The Scottish “Nationalist” Party does not exist.
          I do not see an issue with any political party (either “left” or “right” or anywhere in between) which considers the environment when making policy, taking a long view of what is best economically and socially for the country and where politics is separate from religion.
          As for “state school indoctrination” it must have failed when you consider the differing political, economic and social views that currently exist across the UK.

             8 likes

          • pah says:

            As with a any left-wing endeavour “state school indoctrination” is bound to fail through the idiocy of its policy and the ignorance and stupidity of it’s champions.

            That’s not to say that it does not work with enough people to be a complete failure. The damage done is immense and deliberate.

               11 likes

            • Albaman says:

              “Indoctrination” – the term that the “right” bandy around without any objective evidence. Strange that the “right”, who continually argue for freedom of speech, find it so hard to accept any views other than those which fit with their own mindset.

                 9 likes

              • pah says:

                LOL!

                The right does not need lessons in tolerance from the left.

                Part of the ‘indoctrination’ is the unwillingness to allow other views to be heard. Students are ‘encouraged’ to respond only in terms provided. Any counter argument is thwarted by marking down. If you want to pass lie thru’ yer ass – so to speak.

                Your intolerance knows no bounds.

                   21 likes

                • Albaman says:

                  “Your intolerance knows no bounds. ” Another assertion with no objective facts to back it up.
                  “The right does not need lessons in tolerance from the left.” Yes, because the pages of this blog are filled with evidence of impeccable tolerance from those on the “right”.

                     11 likes

                  • stewart says:

                    But no ones banning members of the Socialist Nationalist (and Scottish workers) Party from being foster parents or working for Banardos.No one is banning members of the Student W#nkers Party from being a policeman or ,more to the point, a teacher.
                    I don’t know about others on here, but it is the stinking hypocrisy of the bourgeois left that I cant tolerate, not their deconstructionist views.
                    As for evidence of indoctrination instead of education the evidence is legion (for those that will acknowledge it).Not least the persistence of a bogus moral relativist doctrine in all areas of the curriculum.

                       15 likes

                  • Guest Who says:

                    ‘… because the pages of this blog are filled with…’
                    As I pop in for a quick forum scope over a well-earned cuppa, it seems the pages have indeed suddenly become packed out, if mostly by the return of your pithy defensive forays.
                    Too much to hope the recent pause in the deluge was down to you off taking the BBC to task over its woeful coverage? If so, it would be good to learn what their reply is when it comes.

                       3 likes

                  • Andy S. says:

                    Don’t feed the troll!

                       3 likes

                  • Inky Splash says:

                    Throw you a bone and you growl like a cur.

                    I think you’ll find that the majority of those you find intolerant on here are also from the lefts shit pile.

                    Just not your shit pile.

                       2 likes

                  • 5050noline says:

                    pah said: ‘Students are ‘encouraged’ to respond only in terms provided.’

                    I wish to confirm this as being the only acceptable way of answering any recent history course question. My daughter who attended Canterbury University on a history course found this to be true – to her cost.

                    In answering an history question on the Cuban Missile crisis, I was able to assist with accurate information, as I was a serviceman who was heavily involved at the time, for obvious reasons, in the actual event.

                    Her accurate answer to the question posed was rubbished by the tutor, who had apparently written a book on the subject and had provided her with a load of notes reflecting the view that he had proposed as fact in his book.

                    Her essay answer, which accurately related actual experiences, but which reflected a different interpretation of events was given the lowest possible mark.

                    The tutor is a well known Leftist, as I discovered, having deduced this previously from the material provided to answer other questions. If this behaviour from the University Staff is encouraging independent research by university students, rather than Pavlovian regurgitation of the indoctrinated material, then I am a Dutch Uncle.

                       2 likes

                    • Guest Who says:

                      ‘Her accurate answer to the question posed was rubbished by the tutor’
                      It is pervasive, and a real concern.
                      A few years ago Harmless Sky ran a few threads on how the science curriculum was being corrupted by dogma.
                      Like most, I allowed this to wash over me until my sons brought in an AQA exam question that was in my field, and I went ballistic simply on the way the questions were posed, much less what the ‘answers’ were deemed appropriate.
                      I never got a sensible answer out of anyone on what the hell was going on, but their Head of Year confessed to me that they have to teach two paths; one to pass the exams and another to compete in the real world with accurate information. That hardly seems the best use of teachers’ time or students’ capacity to learn based on fact and accuracy.
                      Education in the UK is stuffed unless we are seeking a nation of drones who know only how to tick spurious boxes to get ahead.

                         2 likes

                • Lynette says:

                  I was at the University of Westminster in the late 90’s , I can testify that my history essays were marked down as despite evidence to back up my comments against the labour party , the comments were struck through with the word “NO”

                     20 likes

                  • stewart says:

                    But that’s just anecdotal Lynette,your raw unmodified first hand experience counts for nothing until it has been interpreted for you by one of the holier-than-thou knights of the liberal inquisition.
                    But always remember they seek to guide not punish.

                       14 likes

                  • George R says:

                    Yes, and, of course that sort of ‘leftist’ indoctrination goes on in U.S, as well as in U.K:-

                    “Ten Years of Campus Watch”

                    http://frontpagemag.com/2012/cinnamon-stillwell/ten-years-of-campus-watch/2/

                       4 likes

                  • Guest Who says:

                    ‘comments were struck through with the word “NO”’
                    Such clearly articulated explanatory argument must have marked the examiner as a person with a great future, either as a CECUTT Director or, better yet, an odd jobbing apologist on the weekend graveyard shift trying to clog up blogs highlighting the BBC’s latest descent into the professional integrity mire.

                       9 likes

  8. Alex says:

    Just watching BBC News 24 at the moment and they are consistently referring to the young Muslim extremist/terrorist as simply a ‘terrorist’. NOT ONE mention of the Islam. This has been the tone over the last few days; apart, of course, before they knew who was responsible when they were all too happy to bandy about terms like ‘white right-wing extremist’ and the pathetic term, ‘patriot extremists’. Their censorship is becoming most concerning; it’s almost as if the BBC are blaming American society for their Koran-inspired terror. Also, I almost fell off my chair in disbelief when they focused on the fact that the young Muslim murderer, after being caught, hadn’t had his ‘rights’ read to him. I would have hoped that either he blew himself up there and then or the security services shot him on the spot.

       31 likes

    • chrisH says:

      That`s the BBC for you-majoring on minors as ever.
      And THAT is why Jimmy Savile and the BBC are of one mind!

         15 likes

  9. George R says:

    “That Boston Hospital”

    By Hugh Fitzgerald.

    http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/48640

       4 likes

  10. thoughtful says:

    TWATO wheels out a whole load of Muslim apologists to explain & mitigate the terrorists motives. So we ‘learn’ that someone has radicalised them and that the community cannot be expected to know who they are and what they are up to. And anyway Jihadist attacks in Europe are just 4% of terrorist acts, although there’s no explanation as to how those figures are gathered. Presumably 9/11 counts as just one terrorist attack despite the scale of it, and some animal rights idiot scrawling graffiti somewhere counts equally !

       15 likes

  11. Doublethinker says:

    I have just listened to the one o’clock news on radio 4. As expected, now that the world knows that the Boston Bombers were Muslim, the BBC is adopting its standard operating procedure in the aftermath of yet another Muslim terror attack, and trying hard to ensure that the British people don’t tar all Muslims with the terrorist brush. But how to they try to ensure that Islamaphobia does not take hold is actually making it more likely to do so.
    Firstly, they had interviews with about half a dozen Boston citizens who all said that they were concerned that all Muslims were stigmatised with the terrorist label. If this was a representative sample of the folks of Boston then they are a truly Christian and forgiving lot. But of course we all know that it much more likely that the BBC just didn’t bother to broadcast any contrary interviews.
    Secondly, they had two interviewees on from the UK .One was academic and the other a Muslim spokesman , I didn’t catch the names. The Muslim chap said that Muslims were only responsible for 6% of all terrorist outrages in Europe ,the other 94% being down to animal rights, far right etc. He was not challenged on this figure even though it seems wildly at odds with experience.
    However, he then went to say that there was never any discussion of the grievences of the Muslim community and those who felt disaffected from the host community. He thought this suppression of discussion by the establishment was a bad thing and would only lead to those with grievences becoming more frustrated and ultimately it would make them more prone to being raicalised.
    I thought that his latter point was quite correct. We can see this in regard of the way the BBC refuses to acknowledge that their continued cover up of the issue the West has with Islamic terror, is leading to growing frustration within the host community.
    Surely the best way to treat the British is to be open and honest with us and to have a considered debate about all major issues. The continued attempts by the BBC to suppress debate of major issues , not just Islamic terror, will rebound on them when the pent up frustration of the British people finally breaks out.

       24 likes

    • chrisH says:

      Thanks for listening.
      I`ve now got the script as the BBC want me to, so I just know that it`s a matter of
      a) Obama not being listened to in Congress/Senate
      b) Muslims not feeling able to do anything but bomb us all, because 9/11 has not been seen yet to have been a Jewish conspiracy
      c) Bush, Palin, Tea Party, Charlton Heston and the NRA.
      Thank God for the Internet and the likes of Jihadwatch, Gates of Viennna and this site….just imagine if any of us were truly left with just the BBC to tell us what`s going on.
      “Why” is the question at the top…the answer to that is ISLAM…it`s fun to watch the Guardian Broadcasting Corporation trying to tell me it`s not that simple.
      It is…but too simple for the BBC clearly.

         16 likes

  12. mister choos says:

    This from 2010 shows EU terror attacks. Islamists are indeed only a tiny minority. Separatists (ETA) in France and Spain account for most. Followed by left wing groups. Most threats and foiled plots are Islamist though. Funnily enough no right wing attacks (they say right wing, but mostly looks like white power racist groups) have been made, but they do have concerts.

    https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/publications/te-sat2011.pdf

       3 likes

    • John wood says:

      Well you might as well quote the most prominent sentence at the start of the summary in chapter 2 – Key Judgements

      “The threat of attacks by Islamist terrorists in the
      EU remains high and diverse.”

         4 likes

    • Doublethinker says:

      Interesting, and I must admit that I am surprised that separatist attacks are so high, over 80% of the total, almost all of them ETA or the Irish, and Islamic attacks so low. Although as you say the number of Islamic attacks that are foiled is thankfully very high. So the security forces are doing well, lets hope they keep it up. Of course we never got told this in the news report yesterday as it would have undermined what the BBC were trying to do.
      One curiosity is that all the countries in the tables in the report, apart from the UK, assign a attacks to a variety of groups, but the UK just give totalised figures.

         3 likes

  13. Guest Who says:

    By being on matters sort of biblical, this seems not as OT as it might have blushed at first…
    http://honestreporting.com/uk-media-the-israel-line-or-the-bottom-line/
    (They might like to look at that final para, as days and months appear to have been conflated, like a BBC crowd count – see who gets there first, the flokkers or their ‘story evolvers’).
    It does seem odd that the Graun now feels a person’s religious-based fealty is a cause for concern once entering the palace of objectivity that is the BBC.
    I wonder if they were so overt in their articulated concerns with any other high-profile, tribally baggage-laden BBC appointments, such as Mr. Purnell, or this chap?:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/may/12/aaqil-ahmed-bbc-religion
    Nah, seems they were cooler for some reason then.
    Comments below interesting, mind, being the Graun ‘n all.

       5 likes

  14. Reed says:

       1 likes

  15. stuart says:

    all i hear from the familys of these chechen muslim bombers is denial after denial why these 2 muslim bombers decided to blow up women and children is boston,the media ask the question, why did they do it? the answer to that is simple,from pakistani to saudi arabia to chechyna the mindset is a hatred of america and the west,dont forget the russian communist state have been fighting these chechen al qaeda terrorists for 20 years,so attacking america was an act of hatred for the west by these folllwers of islam and the koran who shout allhu akbar after they have commited there latest murderous atrocity.

       10 likes

    • Andrew says:

      Room 101 for you, Stuart!

      And I’ll tell you why too. Because, according to the Party (BBC Radio 4 news at 18:00, with BBC here standing for “Big Brother Calling”) the bombers were … wait for it … followers of an “ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE” sort of Islam.

      Conservative > Goldstein > Sir Keith Joseph > Thatcher

         6 likes

  16. fitzfitz says:

    Hobsbawm, Hobsbawm : out, out, out …

       3 likes

  17. london calling says:

    bBC are feeling their way into how to play this. A great quote they featured to day was from the elder brother’s boxing coach, who finds “the teenager alledged role in the bombings hard to fathom”

    You have to fall about laughing at the transparent avoidance of offence and never to use the I word or the J word. Its just hard to fathom

    A repeat of the Alu Akhbar shouting American major Nidal. What could he have meant I wonder?

    It all too familiar. When Tony Blair was asked how many illegal immigrants were in Britain, he shrugged. No idea, not the foggiest. Never admit any knowledge, otherwise you can be asked what you intend to do about it, which was nothing.

    Expect Liberals to go on being puzzled by the Marathon Bombers motives. Ji-what? Sorry. No idea. I wonder what drove them to it. Its all a bit of a mystery…

    Its how you know they are lying.

       9 likes

  18. Enoch says:

    I’m just listening to the so-called, “World Have Your Say”, and they have 2/3rd Muslim guests, talking in a clean microphone, about “Guantanamo”. This is disgusting! The BBC has been talking the whole day about the fabricated persecution of Muslims in Birma. They are doing it few days after the Boston atrocity to manipulate the wolrd into forgetting Islamic crime. Shame on you, BBC, you’ve become a disgrace to Britain!

       3 likes

  19. Gary Gimson says:

    Here’s today’s headline (eight days after the attack) from the BBC website, which I think confirms all of the above:

    Boston Marathon bombing: Mystery remains over motive

       3 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      But the BBC news budget is only about £1 billion a year, we can’t expect them to solve this amazing mystery straight away.

      Those 1000 BBC newshounds are still unsure if the Pope is a Catholic, and they are clueless about what bears do in the woods.

         4 likes

  20. pedro says:

    i was just being ironic comrades with this description far right ,,,,its just i heard some asian journalist on sky news describe muslim hate groups in the uk as far right…..thats the point i was tring to make………….

       4 likes