Email This to a Friend
UK Shouldn’t Kowtow to Islamic World Like Obama
Why would we want to flatter backward nations whose attitudes to women and to religious minorities are medieval?
In Great Britain there are a lot of Muslim commentators. I have no objection to this and some of them are eloquent and informative.
Rageh Omaar is a beautiful Somali-born reporter who has set many a female heart aflutter since his debut on BBC television in 1992. He left the BBC to work full time for the Al-Jazeera English channel in London.
At the end of May he penned an opinion piece in London’s popular Evening Standard newspaper entitled “How Britain Blew Its Chance with the Muslim World.” His premise is that Britain “should stand shoulder to shoulder with Obama as he faces the Muslim world afresh.” Omaar goes on to say that Great Britain ought to have used the Obama victory to “remake itself in the eyes of the Muslim world.”
Oh, please. Do I want to kowtow to a host of backward nations whose attitudes to women and to religious minorities are medieval? Omaar refers to the “animosity and mistakes of recent years.” Just whose animosity are we talking about? Much as I criticize the UK for appeasing British jihad I find it incomprehensible that Rageh Omaar says, “No other country is as implicated in the most glaring schisms between the West and the Muslim world precipitated by George W. Bush as the UK.”
This is laughable on two levels: 1) The pandering to Muslim radicals and the proliferation of radical British Muslim websites and groups that incite hatred of “Zionazis” is out of control; if anything, Britain has bent over backwards in the era of multiculturalism to make even the most vile of imams welcome in our green and pleasant land. 2) Britain has a dynamic and flourishing Muslim community very possibly unmatched anywhere in the West. There are Muslim spokespeople on radio, on television, in the print media, in politics as high as the House of Lords, and in academia; believe me, they are ubiquitous. When BBC broadcaster Yasmin Alibhai-Brown did not eulogize our beloved queen mother when she died I was offended but realized this is a dynamic democracy and Yasmin is entitled to her opinion. Imagine if I went on Saudi telly and bashed one of the royals.
Where, Mr. Omaar, in the Muslim world that you see as so hard done-by, could white middle-class folks screech anti-government slogans in public squares and hold up incendiary posters without being carted off to an abattoir for humans? Daniel Pearl tried to “reach out” to Muslims and was chopped up. Dora Bloch was murdered in Uganda for being Jewish. And as I write this article reports have come in that Ed Dyer, a British music festival attendee in Mali, has been beheaded by “al-Qaeda in Africa” because they do not like radical imam Abu Qatada being locked up in the UK.
Rageh Omaar says that the July 7, 2005, transit bombs and other foiled plots were inspired by Muslim rage over British foreign policy. So, when Britain does not do things to make diaspora Burmese, Venezuelans, Chinese, or Sudanese happy, it is okay for them to blow up our buses? Omaar says that Obama has taken a firm stand against Israeli settlement building and that had Gordon Brown done the same “Britain’s interests” would have been served. Is this a threat to Britain’s security? Hello? Is anyone listening?
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Carol Gould is the Philadelphia-born author of Don’t Tread on Me: Anti-Americanism Abroad, Spitfire Girls, and A Room at Camp Pickett, a play about her mother’s experiences as a WAC in World War II; she has just completed films about black GIs and GI babies. Carol has been a panelist on BBC's Any Questions?, hosted by Jonathan Dimbleby, and is a commentator on Sky News, Press TV, the BBC World Service, and Five Live.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
36 Comments
1. Mary Jackson:Well said!
Perhaps the “muslim community” in the UK should put its own house in order by “reaching out” to the girls and women who are victims of forced veiling, forced marriages, honour killings and all the other delights of Islam.
Note the constant implied threat: Britain will be “safe” if we toe the line on Israel, change our foreign policy to suit Muslims.
Next time Obama wants to reach out to the Muslim world, let him do it from the highest cathedral in Mecca.
Jun 11, 2009 - 2:33 am 2. Snake eater:Give Muslims any more concessions and you’ll be paying for it for generations. The rise of the BNP is a direct result of all the coddling of these master grievance mongers. The English have had it with the Muslims and their increasingly illegitimate political elite. Get ready for a wild ride.
Jun 11, 2009 - 2:47 am 3. Ed Wallis:“Rageh Omaar needs to know that no matter how much “reaching out” is done there will always be jihad and mayhem and Jew-baiting and persecution of Christians. He needs to get to work on his own people before accusing Britain of committing ‘the original crime.’”
Bingo.
Force Islam to clean up its own house first, before it expects to be dealt with as anything remotely recognizable as civilized.
Jun 11, 2009 - 4:04 am 4. Realist:Oh yes lets clear up all the problems with this violent expansionist CULT which thinks it and it alone follows the true God and thinks it has the right and the duty to rule the whole world. Lots of room for compromise there NOT
Jun 11, 2009 - 5:11 am 5. Terry Gain:I would like to comment but how does one say something substantive without spreading negative sterotypes about Islam. As we know post Cairo 6/4/09, that is no longer allowed.
Jun 11, 2009 - 5:44 am 6. Kelly:If Islam is so great, so peaceful, so wonderful – why are so many Muslims so desperate for change?
Jun 11, 2009 - 6:22 am 7. Middleman:The UK SHOULDN’T kowtow???? They have already 100-fold. Most of the worlds Islamic radicals are probably on the dole in the UK.
Jun 11, 2009 - 6:29 am 8. arhooley:Middleman, you took the words right out of my mouth! The U.S. for all its Muslim-coddling talk has a long way to go to catch up to the the U.K.
Jun 11, 2009 - 7:00 am 9. Peggy:I think that Muslims just automatically assume that their is the superior and more advanced morality simply because they are Muslims. This is what they are taught by their religion. So therefore, what Muslims think is wrong, is therefore wrong, and they feel obligated to lecture the rest of the world in order to bring us up to their standards.
This can be the only possible underlying assumption in cases like this. Only a person who believes that they hold THE standard of right behavior, regardless of whether that standard can actually withstand rational and objective examination, can speak like this to other people.
The other assumption is that since their standard is superior, then their reactions to violations of it will always be just. Truly moral people never react without just reason or provocation. Therefore, there is always a “cause” for Muslim “defensive” behavior. Since they are a just and moral people just by dint of being Muslims in the first place (The Koran equates being truly righteous with being Muslims as if only good people would submit to its message and bad people would not) they would never resort to violence unless they had the best of reasons, therefore a reason has to be found (always after the fact just like Mohammad always did) to justify their behavior and give it a retroactive justification. Since we live in a world where there is no shortage of excuses to resort to violence, the Muslims are kept busy adding to their list of greivances and so their rabid and aggressive actions will always be someone else’s, always non-Muslims btw, fault.
Jun 11, 2009 - 8:49 am 10. logdon:Omar made his name as BBC man in Baghdad during the coalition offensive. The clip of his overexcited and puerile glee as Saddam’s statue came down has been used many times. Then the invasion was a good thing.
Now he turns around, decrying the war and our imperialism.
To be expected. He’s a Muslim and full of the customary taquiya, arrogance and blind certitude.
All I can say is thank god he took the Arab shilling, we have enough of his ilk already.
Jun 11, 2009 - 10:07 am 11. JOE KAFFIR:Re: Rage head Omar and izlam
I think it’s high time Britain threw izlam down the loo and brought back the longbowmen.
Jun 11, 2009 - 11:10 am 12. Derek:Does telling the UK to not elect racists involve “kowtowing?”
I mean seriously. You make an article like this after the BNP gets some victories? Really?
Jun 11, 2009 - 11:40 am 13. Paul -Indiana:#9. Peggy, that was a very fine analysis. I wonder how many Obama votors are having buyers-remorse?
Jun 11, 2009 - 11:52 am 14. Scott:I can’t say whether or not the BNP is racist or not, but I can say that the Left and Liberals label anyone who is a white Christian and isn’t filled with guilt and self-loathing over their heritage a racist. Since they can’t argue against the reasoning and logic they attack the person or group instead and I’m pretty sick of it.
Didn’t vote for Obama? Well then you’ve got to be a racist, because it couldn’t possibly have anything to do with his policies, character, or inexperience.
Oppose illegal immigration? It must be because you’re racist because there is no way that you could have an issue with someone breaking the law or taking from the system without giving back into it.
Don’t want to give special preferences to this or that group? It must be because you’re racist because there’s no way you could be interested in equality under the law.
Don’t care for Muslims? It must be because you’re racist, it has nothing at all to do with the fact that most terrorist acts and current armed conflicts around the world are perpetrated by Muslims trying to force Sharia, their religion, or slavery upon the rest of the world.
Jun 11, 2009 - 12:51 pm 15. Chino:Unfortuately Scott the BNP is a racist organisation with white only membership and antiquated beliefs of racial groups. They suppport paid repatriation for non-white citizens without regard for history or birth. They are pretty renowned in Britian, even the police and prison services won’t employ BNP members. It’s leadership are also documented holocaust deniers.
Parties like these are not what the anti-Islamisation movement needs. The BNP is only gaining ground because it offers tougher immigration controls, something poeple are clamouring for. Unfortunately it colors the call for anti-muslim immigration as racist and irrational.
I don’t think the English can get anymore illiberal these days, they live under a big brother surveillance system soon to be fitted with listening devices(and flying drones…), they ban crosses, censor political discussion, they even banned security officers wearing the Union Jack at Hethrow. The muslims are a god send for the illiberal elite, muslim sensibilties offer an excuse for anything they want to implement.
Jun 11, 2009 - 2:08 pm 16. no name:england and amerika will reap the whirlwind of their own stupidy for allowing the turd heads into their countries. how quickly doth the caca approach the fan!
Jun 11, 2009 - 5:14 pm 17. Derek:What Chino said.
I don’t use hyperbole when i call the BNP racist. They literally are a racist party.
Rhetoric like Gould’s feed anyone trying to make muslims into victims. I mean you have this naive “who’s holding down muslims” thing going on at the same moment your country men are giving the BNP electoral victories. I don’t even live in the UK and this article strikes me as ridiculously tone deaf.
Jun 11, 2009 - 8:12 pm 18. Terry:No one’s kidding anymore when they talk about Eurabia & Londonstan. The politically correct, multi-culturalist, moral relativists are leading Europe to national suicide & Obama wants to take America in the same direction.
Jun 11, 2009 - 8:39 pm 19. The Infidel Alliance:Question: Is the term “submission” antithetical to the term “liberty”?
Answer: Yes, it is absolutely antithetical.
The word “Islam” means “submission” or “to submit”. Muslims submitting to Muhammed & Allah, women submitting to men, “infidels & kafirs” submitting to the “supremacy” of Islam.
Islam is trying to to force submission upon liberty, which will only create a destructive implosion of society, a black hole that will suck everthing into it against its will.
This is why we must resist “submission”, why we must resist Islam. We must resist with the strength of knowledge that liberty is superior to submission. We must resist forcefully yet peacefully, however, with the power of words, and the power of freedom.
As for me, quite obviously….I will not submit!
~ The Infidel Alliance
(standing up for all non-Islamic faiths, athiests & agnostics, women, gays, and most importantly the good Muslims caught in Islams deadly catch 22: “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, then kill them”)
Jun 11, 2009 - 8:40 pm 20. The Infidel Alliance:Europe seems to be coming to its senses at the same time the United States is losing its.
Question: Why did the 57 nations of the Organization of Islamic Conference reject the U.N. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”?
Answer: Because they adopted the Islamic Sharia law based “Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam”.
Conclusion: It is clear that Islam doesn’t believe in the concept of universal human rights, only the supremacy of Islamic rights, under which non-Muslims must submit.
This is why we must resist Islamization by exposing it with the truth, by exposing it with their own “holy” books, by exposing its sadistic, murdering sociopathic “prophet” Muhammed, and exposing the facts about the current Islamic World War.
~ The Infidel Alliance
Jun 11, 2009 - 10:24 pm 21. The Infidel Alliance:The ISLAMIC WORLD WAR???
Yes, THE ISLAMIC WORLD WAR:
Islam against:
- the Catholics in the Philippines
- the Buddhists in Thailand
- the Hindus in India
- the Zoroastrians in Iran
- the Jews in Israel, Yemen, and everywhere
- the Coptic Christians in Egypt
- the Chaldean Christians in Iraq
- the animists & Christians in Sudan
- the Christians in N. Nigeria
- the athiests in Europe
- gays, women and girls schools
- office workers in New York (twice)
- defense workers in the Pentagon
- cafe customers in Bali (twice)
- train commuters in Spain
- tube riders in London
- journalists like Daniel Pearl (beheaded)
- countless peaceful Muslims (beheaded or blown up)
- novelists like Salman Rushdie (death fatwa)
- cinematographers like Theo Van Gogh (brutally slaughtered)
and on, and on……
This is no “War on Terror”. It is Dar al-Islam against Dar al-Harb (the rest of us).
The ISLAMIC WORLD WAR.
Think about the truth of this. Then repeat:
The ISLAMIC WORLD WAR
~ The Infidel Alliance
Jun 11, 2009 - 10:31 pm 22. RAP:I think cluster bombs and drone attacks would be more effective than the power of words. Nukes anyone?
Jun 11, 2009 - 10:43 pm 23. Simon:That piece was brilliant.
It’s actually terrifying how slowly it appears attitudes in the media, politics, and the general public are shifting. Terrorists are being relabelled as “freedom fighters.” The targets of these attacks “started it.” Anyone white person who criticises another culture is “racist.”
Jun 12, 2009 - 12:16 am 24. Bohemond:DereK;
The only reason the BNP oiks got anywhere is the fact that Britain’s mainstream parties have cravenly refused to address an issue the overwhelming majority of Britons care about: unrestricted immigration, and with it the abject kowtowing to “Muslim sensitivity.” If, say, the Tories had any testes on these issues (and the EU) they would be romping, and the fringe parties left to their Sheffield workingmen’s clubs.
Jun 12, 2009 - 7:18 am 25. Scott:Chino, thank you for the information. Can I point some things out though?
In America we have:
The Nation of Islam, The Black Panthers, Black Fraternities, Asian Fraternities, Jewish Fraternities, and many other organizations that are exclusive based upon ethnicity, skin color, or religion, does that make them racist? I believe it does, since if you substitute White, Anglo, or Caucasian for any of those there would be a lot of people up in arms and lawsuits filed.
I just went to the BNP website, and there was not much in the way of racist polities there. Unless of course you think a “Britain First” theme is racist. The following is their Immigration policy:
“On current demographic trends, we, the native British people, will be an ethnic minority in our own country within sixty years.
To ensure that this does not happen, and that the British people retain their homeland and identity, we call for an immediate halt to all further immigration, the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants, and the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question.
We will abolish the ‘positive discrimination’ schemes that have made white Britons second-class citizens. We will also clamp down on the flood of ‘asylum seekers’, all of whom are either bogus or can find refuge much nearer their home countries.”
Sounds pretty reasonable for the most part, preserve British culture/heritage, get rid of the criminals (illegal immigration is a crime), end preferences that favor one group over another. The “voluntary” repatriation is where it gets dicey in my book since it has the greatest potential for abuse and misinterpretation. However if a legal immigrant doesn’t want to integrate into British society (that doesn’t mean abandon their own heritage either) an assisted repatriation isn’t a bad solution.
Have you really thought about this? A person leaves one nation to reside permanently in another nation because the culture and heritage (heritage includes Nation infrastructure, legal protections, etc) of the new nation afford them greater opportunity. Now why shouldn’t this person adopt the language and general culture of their new home? Why not keep the best of their former home and combine it with the best of their new home? Why should an entire nation be forced to adopt the Culture, language, and laws of a group from another nation that is most likely poorer for them? Also having all immigrants adopt the language and general culture of their new nation is the most feasible, effective, and egalitarian solution. I mean do you really want to pay the expense of printing every government document and street sign in every language? Because that is the fair way to accommodate all ethnic groups that immigrate to a nation. Otherwise you are showing preference to one group of ethic immigrant over another.
(Note: Becoming an “ethnic minority” is not primarily concerned with skin color and could apply just as easily to French, German, Spanish, or American immigrants rather than Muslim. It is my understanding that Muslims who refuse to integrate into British society just happen to be the problem right now as they are in much of Europe.)
Jun 12, 2009 - 9:25 am 26. peace:Well said #25!!! If I would immigrate or visit another country, isn’t it customary to respect their cultures and languages…Our countries (US and UK) have gone out of our way to try and welcome immigrants from other countries, friend or foe…Goodness will always overcome evil even though evil is so rampant. Unfortunately, our hospitality has gotten us in a mess! The only way to deal with it is to go on and live our lives as if it were the last day…No problem! The (so-called religion of peace) will be the downfall of governments; as we see this unfold before our very eyes, as our politically correct governments and organizations will go down protecting the evil ones. No problem; a solution will unfold before mass harm is done. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!!!!! PROUD TO BE A CHRISTIAN!!!!!
Jun 12, 2009 - 9:31 pm 27. Michael Lonie:Sorry Derek, what you are looking at there is the propaganda for public consumption. The BNP has long been known for racism (they are not only against just Muslims, but also against Hindus and other peaceful immigrants). They are antisemitic. They are fascists. They are, incidentally, also socialists, so they could legitimatly be called national socialists. Hmmm. As people noted about the recent elections they take voters away from Labour, advocating anti-Capitalist, anti-Globalization, and protectionist policies.
Mark Steyn pegged it years ago. He wrote, about the time of the 2002 French Presidential elections, when Jean-Marie Le Pen unexpectedly came in second, that if respectable political parties did not address the issues the people were concerned about, non-respectable ones would take over advocacy. BNP now joins Vlaams Belong in this matter, just as Steyn fortold.
Omar’s indignation against Bush is hypocritical, as is the Muslim “rage” against the USA for alleged “crimes”. Are we to think that liberating 40 million Muslims from tyrannies was a crime? In the 1990s under Clinton the US stopped the mass murder of Muslims in Bosnia by Serbs, then prevented the Serbs from doing similar against the Kosovars. Those must have been crimes to the Muslims, eh? (By the way, Britisdh Muslims like the Underground bombers, have cited the lack of British action to help the Bosnians as a reason for becoming radicalized.)
George Bush even came out in favor of a state for the Palestinian Arabs, albeit he said they should live at peace with Israel and elect leaders who were not tainted by terrorism as criteria for the US supporting such a state. Fat chance, they have refused to meet those criteria. Indeed, Bush was more in favor of a state for the Palestinian Arabs than the Arabs were themeselves. The Palestinian Arabs, in 15 years since the Oslo Accords, have made no moves actually to set up a state, let alone one that would live in peace with Israel. All they are interested in, it seems, is killing Jews. Whatever tyrant wants to oppress them beyond that, and keep them in wretched poverty and squalor while he sends millions to Swiss bank accounts, they are copacetic with it, so long as they can kill Jews. Even handing them land, as Israel did with Gaza, does not interest them, Jew-killing comes first. And the Israel government ethnically cleansed Gaza of Jews to hand it over to the Palis. Not even land for peace will satisfy the Arabs, only the genocide of the Jews will sate their blood-lust, for a while.
I could recite further good deeds the US has done for Muslims, but why bother. The Muslim elites and intellectuals will lie that the US is hostile no matter what we do to help them. They will pick some mote in our eye to denounce hysterically, while being blinded by the beams in their both own eyes.
Jun 13, 2009 - 10:32 pm 28. Meryl:Well, well, well…Britain has come a long, long way since 1939. Backs against the wall, they are trying to placate Muslims who want them dead.
In 1939, when a few Jews who were desperately fleeing Germany in order to LIVE…arrived in England, they were given brochures which included the following lines:
“Do not make yourselves conspicuous by speaking loudly, nor by your manner or dress. The Englishman greatly dislikes ostentation.”
In addition, “Do not expect to be received into homes immediately because the Englishman takes some time before opens up his home wide to strangers.”
(This “code of conduct” was prepared by “the Board of Deputies of British Jews”.) From Robert Kee’s book, 1939:In The Shadow of War, (C)1984
If you want to give your brain a charley horse, try to imagine Brits standing up for themselves and their culture (what’s left of it) by speaking so plainly to Muslims today:
“Do not conceal your face in public. The Englishman values face to face recognition in communication.”
“Do not behead anyone in public. The Englishman values public order and decorum.”
“Do not demand that English laws and courtrooms be changed to satisfy Sharia law. The Englishman values his form of government and do not intend to change it to satisfy you.”
Jun 13, 2009 - 11:22 pm 29. Meryl:last line previous post….”…DOES not intend to change it to satisfy you.”
Why does vision suddenly go 20/20 right whe you hit “submit”?
Jun 13, 2009 - 11:23 pm 30. Meryl:…right WHEN you hit “submit”??????? What is it Delia says? “Pfffttt!!” or words to that effect…
Jun 13, 2009 - 11:24 pm 31. LeftyK:C’mon. Be honest. ALL RELIGIONS THINK THEY ARE BETTER THAN OTHERS.
Fundamentalism is leading to the end of the world, no matter which creed it comes with.
Jun 14, 2009 - 9:40 am 32. Dave ll:LeftyK-
Does the “K” stand for “Knownothing”???
Read #21 Infidel Alliance’s post again.
WHERE in the MODERN world does ANY OTHER RELIGION come close to the violence committed GLOBALLY in the name their God????
In the words of Sgt. Schultz:
“I know nothing… I see nothing…”
Jun 14, 2009 - 1:46 pm 33. The Infidel Alliance:Dear #31 “Lefty K”,
Killing is an animal instinct ingrained into the DNA of humans. So killing is not necessarily because of religion.
Some of the greatest killers in history have been athiest (Mao, Stalin, Ghenghis Khan(?)).
The important thing to understand about killing is why people kill.
When a Christian, Buddhist or a Jew kills, for example, they are doing so in contravention to the teachings and examples of Jesus Christ, Guatama Buddha, and Moses.
When a Muslim straps on a suicide vest & slaughters innocent infidels sitting in a cafe or riding the bus, however, he is following the teachings and examples of Muhammed precisely.
Muslims kill because their “prophet” Muhammed killed, and because Muhammed commands his minions to kill. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.
The Koran is full of commands to kill, enslave, decapitate, amputate. Muhammed killed, enslaved, decapitated & amputated.
Islam is a Killing Religion.
~ The Infidel Alliance
Jun 14, 2009 - 4:17 pm 34. Greg:We should give Islam one huge collective fist right in the nose and dare them to fight like men. Then nuke the F out of Mecca to get things rolling. Islam is a cancer that needs to be cut from the body of humanity. The sooner the better.
And Obama? What a curse to America he’s turned out to be.
Jun 14, 2009 - 4:39 pm 35. Greg:LeftyK: You really believe that, I’m sure. You’re an idiot.
Jun 14, 2009 - 4:40 pm 36. steveg:#32 Dave. The K stands for Koz Kid, as in dopey indoctrinated koz kid.
Jun 14, 2009 - 7:23 pm