Two British articles are connected by a single emotion. Acceptance. The first is a Telegraph article describing the “thousands of [Islamic] extremists” who are active in the UK, living in known neighborhoods, sending large quantities of money to Southwest Asia to support the Jihad and are planning attacks on British government centers.
“The main extremist concentrations are in London, Birmingham, with significant extremist networks in the South East, notably Luton. Extremist networks are principally engaged in spreading their extremist message, training, fund raising and procuring non-lethal military equipment to support the Jihads in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, and sending recruits to the conflicts.
“UK-based extremists, either under the direction of al-Qaeda, or inspired by al-Qaeda’s ideology of global Jihad, have also engaged in attack planning in the UK.”
Although the document specifically names London, Birmingham and south east England as areas of extremist activity, MI5 believe that the threat posed by Islamist extremists comes from across the UK. In an attempt to deal with the growing number of terrorists, MI5 now has nine regional offices and has almost doubled its staff numbers from 1,800 in 2001 to 3,500 today.
There are around 1.5 million Muslims in Britain, a million of whom live in London. There are 150,000 Muslims in Birmingham and a further 27,000 in Luton. There are also an estimated 10,000 Afro-Caribbean Muslims or white converts.
There’s isn’t much talk of final victory or reaching a long term solution to the problem: only a sense that the worst is yet to come.
Patrick Mercer, the Tory MP for Newark, said al-Qaeda now had support in large parts of the country, especially around Luton which was the spot where the 7/7 terrorists assembled before travelling to London to mount the Tube bombings.
He added: “We know that subversion and support for al-Qaeda is taking place in campuses and prisons all over the UK. The fact that we have not been attacked for over two years should not be taken by anyone as evidence that the threat has gone away, in fact it is just the contrary.”
The other article is the diary of Dr. Robert Mayer, who documented his treatment for pancreatic cancer under the British National Health Service. “The drugs he needed to prolong his life were not funded by the NHS, so he enrolled in a drug company trial to get other treatment. His wife Susan, also a GP, believes that the drugs gave her husband an extra nine months of life. Here, in an extract from Robert’s private diaries, he writes movingly about his illness – and the NHS.” Mayer’s diary begins with these words:
I do not feel ill. But I am. More than I care to know. I think back to a few weeks ago, before the symptoms started. When I was well. Of course I didn’t know it then, but already there were cells in my pancreas starting their mitotic frenzy. The first thing I was aware of was a vague discomfort on the left side of my abdomen, which sometimes kept me awake at night.
But some months later, Mayer is no longer thinking about beating the cancer. He is talking about coping. He is beginning to accept his fate.
And so the crash. As the steroids and their artificial boost leech away, I can see it all clearly. Just waiting around, waiting to get ill again, waiting to die. And madly envious of those with lives to look forward to, with holidays to plan. Envious even of my wife and children. Only wine and sleep will do – and to hope to wake in a different mood.
When the words “nothing can be done” are spoken for individuals they sometimes mean precisely that. For nations the meaning is different. They don’t mean everyone will cease exist. But it means they will change into something they never dreamed possible. When Winston Churchill struggled against Hitler, he did not imagine he was fighting to save the individual lives of the populace. They would be needed, even as slaves. He was fighting for the survival of nation in the sense of its conciousness. It’s culture. He knew this, but it has been forgotten. And forgetfulness is perhaps the real dementia of civilizations. William Manchester wrote of Churchill’s curious exaltation during the Finest Hour.
He possessed an inner radiance that year and felt it. In his memoirs he wrote that “by the confidence, indulgence, and loyalty by which I was upborne, I was soon able to give an integral direction to almost every aspect of the war. This was really necessary because times were so very bad. The method was accepted because everyone realised how near were death and ruin. Not only individual death, which is the universal experience, stood near, but, incomparably more commanding, the life of Britain, her message, and her glory.” …
And now, in the desperate spring of 1940, with the reins of power at last firm in his grasp, he resolved to lead Britain and her fading empire in one last great struggle worthy of all they had been and meant, to arm the nation, not only with weapons but also with the mace of honor, creating in every English breast a soul beneath the ribs of death.
Like the Mayer’s chemotherapy it gave time. How long, who can say?
Tip Jar
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.
38 Comments
1. Dan Collins:Thanks, Richard. Great piece. You’ve done yeoman’s work on this and other writings, lately. It’s obvious you are well sorted unto yourself.
Cheers.
Nov 8, 2008 - 6:17 pm 2. Zim:I once visited England in 1988. Fresh out of school I decided to visit some of my relatives there. I visited many places, but the one that has never left me was speakers corner in London. While watching a group a people yelling and making fun of a Christian preacher delivering a sermon, my attention was diverted by a chorus like sound behind me. When I walked over I noticed it came from a large group of very serious looking dark men shouting towards, what I now know was, their Imam. I wondered at the time why no one was heckling them the way they were the preacher. Of course, now I know why.
Nov 8, 2008 - 6:17 pm 3. Cannoneer No. 4:Half of all British servicemen say they want to quit
Nov 8, 2008 - 6:32 pm 4. NahnCee:Are we saying that the cancer that is eating Britain is Islam?
Nov 8, 2008 - 6:56 pm 5. ricpic:Extremist, extremist, extremist. How about criminal? Modern criminal codes make even the most upright citizen guilty of some minor infraction. It’s almost certain that each and every mullah is operating outside the law, way outside. Can’t criminal charges be brought against them? Can’t they be imprisoned? Can’t they then be expelled? Why the impotence?
Nov 8, 2008 - 7:47 pm 6. Brock:Britain must die.
By which I mean, the Britain that tolerates this sort of thing. It must become something the politically correct, progressive globalists cannot imagine. It must become proud of itself, and be willing to defend, with force if necessary, those cultural institutions which are the source of its pride, and its strength.
Nov 8, 2008 - 8:15 pm 7. AZM:Yes, NahnCee we are. Because it is. And not just Britain either.
Nov 8, 2008 - 8:21 pm 8. AZM:Brock:
There is no pride in being British. If there were, you would not see this state of affairs.
There is in Britain (and in Western society in general) and among the elites in particular, a very deep sense of shame and guilt at having been victorious over lesser peoples. Hence the social, political, and legal contortions to be more “inclusive”.
I don’t see this so much as acceptance, as a conscious policy of making “amends” for the colonial (and therefore “shameful”) past.
They’re effin’ stupid.
Because they’ve given their (and our) enemies a staging ground in the heart of Western civilazation whence to launch attacks.
Nov 8, 2008 - 8:32 pm 9. rumcrook:I dont see a way out for western civ in europe. its got maybe 30 or 40 years than its dead.
Nov 8, 2008 - 9:12 pm 10. tanarg:It would seem necessary to expel Muslims from the West entirely.
Nov 8, 2008 - 9:57 pm 11. whiskey:Britain is dead the way the West is dead.
All the Western nations are dying, because they are run by single women.
Ask, what was the difference between Churchill’s day and today? The same stock, the same general culture, the same language? WHAT CHANGED.
Death of marriage. Single life. Nothing to fight or die for, to quote Lennon. No family, no children. Instead, one giant episode of Oprah that never ends (Single Women gave Obama his victory, according to Women’s Voices and most other polling groups).
A nation run by single women will NEVER confront and fight evil. They will always appease it to their last day because fighting it would mean giving up the power than demography and modern urban life with the pill, Condom, and social mobility enables.
I am not arguing, btw, for a Kinder-Kuche-Kirche society which is a dead end also. But single women running a nation (UK’s birth rate is 50% illegitimate) is a recipe for surrender to whatever male-dominated society decides to conquer them.
Nov 8, 2008 - 10:04 pm 12. gumshoe:they’re convinced they’ll *replace*
the patriarchy,whiskey.
islam included.
Nov 8, 2008 - 11:04 pm 13. bogie wheel:All the Western nations are dying, because they are run by single women.
Got prejudice?
It’s one thing to criticize unhealthy social and political trends and try to classify them. It’s another thing to lapse into risibility. The latter never helps your case.
“All the Western nations” are not “run by single women.” Not in the basic sense of who holds the majority of the most powerful government positions. Not in the sense of who holds the majority of CEO positions in business and industry. Not in the sense of plain demographics (# of marrieds [current or past] vs. # of never-been-marrieds). Not even in the sense of who are the most influential female media personalities (make a list, any list – most of them are married).
But has there been, over the past several decades, an “excessive feminization” of American society? I think most conservatives would answer “yes” to that question, if you define “excessive feminization” as (1) the pre-eminence of the touchy-feely approach [as opposed to reason and constructive, hard-headed debate] in problem-solving and conflict resolution; (2) the shameless and constant denigration of men, masculinity, and fathers in the media; (3) the devaluation of our military whenever liberal politics is ascendant; (4) the ensconcement of women’s studies programs (all too often unscholarly, intolerant, and heavy-handed in nature) in our universities; and (5) the indoctrination of girls and young women into identity politics that encourage them to view all gender relations as a zero-sum game (girls win only if boys lose, and vice versa).
Is Oprah a single woman? Yes.
Does Oprah have an enormous amount of cultural influence? Yes.
Is Oprah a media powerhouse? Yes.
And yet, look at the entertainment industry as a whole. Porn generates more revenue than all of pro sports. Video games outsell Hollywood movies. Hollywood movies are dominated by flicks geared towards young males. Every single one of these categories is guy-centric.
Politics? While I don’t give Condi Rice great props for her performance as Secretary of State, I would venture that her worldview and her values are far closer to Sarah Palin’s than to Bill Clinton’s. Dr. Rice has never been married.
Does marital status have a bearing on one’s political outlook and voting patterns? Of course. But is it the only factor? No. Is it the primary factor? No, probably not with anyone.
People are complex. Last time I checked, single women are people.
Nov 8, 2008 - 11:28 pm 14. Rob Murphy:Hey NahnCee. You awake?:)
“All the Western nations are dying, because they are run by single women.” 11.Whiskey
Nov 9, 2008 - 4:11 am 15. oecumena:Historically, on many occasions Britan was a harbor for extremists of various kinds. Eastern European revolutionaries in the late 19th century, anarchist and communist factions later. Yes, they did commit attacks on the British soil (for example, the Siege of Sidney Street), but somehow main effects of their labors usually happened far for London. Too often, surprisingly, in countries that were at odds with England at that time. Or maybe not that surprisingly after all, once one remembers that a few chief IRA counterintelligence officers turned out to be British secret service agents on a payroll.
Nov 9, 2008 - 4:53 am 16. KennyB:I agree with Whiskey, but not to the extent of “run”. Face it, while the Mommyists have been expanding the federal government’s intrusion into every aspect of our lives, the feminists have declared the uterus to be the sole property of the woman and not the child occupying it. Now we have the lowering of traditional family values, declining birth rates, disrespect for the military, wussification (metro-sexification) of the male population, female sexual-preference confusion (lesbianism), and pure unbridled feminism.
I am not sure if it is a worse cancer than Islamism, but it is long term just as deadly as Islamism to our western civilization. I would probably say that both of these cancers metasticized from the original cancer, prosperity.
“The historical cycle seems to be: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.“
Nov 9, 2008 - 5:04 am 17. lc:Bogie # 13
Whiskey seems to turn over the right rocks and point out the right creepy crawlies underneath, yet he is sometimes a bit over the top.
I agree that our society/culture has become feminized….I think the changing state of the nuclear family is another indicator of that.
For an interesting take on a women centered culture, the controversial anthropologist Marija Gimbutas has written several books, such as “The Civilization of the Goddess.” This does not bode well against virulently male centered Islam.
Nov 9, 2008 - 5:12 am 18. Voltimand:Single women?? You people want to quarrel over that? Wha?
What Hitler could not achieve by non-stop bombing the muslims are achieving simply by moving there and “being muslims.”
I like the “guilt” argument of 8. AZM, but unsurprisingly there’s more. That “more” whatever else it comprises includes the welfare state, which springs into being not as the cause of a will-less population but as the result. People die physically posterior to their dying mentally and spiritually. Keep the anger, brothers.
Nov 9, 2008 - 9:04 am 19. NahnCee:Rob – yeah, I know. I’ve decided that Whiskey is an obsessive loon when it comes to that particular idea and just won’t raise to the bait any more. Doesn’t do any good.
In his previous incarnation, his name would have been Cotton Mathers and he’d be drowning single witches, which is what he’s gearing up to do now only with the “w” changed to a “b”.
Unless, of course, they agree to join his polygamous harem.
Nov 9, 2008 - 10:21 am 20. Herb:Spengler at Asia Times http://www.atimes.com/atimes/others/spengler.html
Nov 9, 2008 - 10:45 am 21. NahnCee:has a theory of the world that the cause of distopia in the world is the recognition that large numbers of nations are dying (loss of language is the death of the people) because their birthrates are below the replacement rate required for survival.
My theory for England goes back to an interview with some bimbette (not pretty enough to rate bimbo) I saw from BBC. She was asked some question about what England should do about something or other international. She started her answer with the disclaimer “I’m not a patriot or anything like that…….” She demonstrated the absolute triumph of the left in destroying the will of the english to live as a people.
Sad.
It’s difficult for me at work because I have two extremely vocal anti-American BDS Obama supporters whom I work with. For months now I’ve been listening to their hourly diatribes about Bush and the Republicans, and how great it will be when Obama wins. ANd believe me, some of their comments are extremly uninformed and ignorant, as well as being loud and carrying.
The thing is, the election is over, they’ve won … and they’re STILL hating. One of them came in the other morning and immeditely engaged in a full-scale bellowed rant about America having the worst car industry, the worst manufacturing industry, the worst military, and even the worst farmers in the world, so how can America call itself a world power or a world leader.
I just don’t want to listen to this America-hate any more and am considering filing a complaint with management asking them to intercede to put a ban on political discussions in loud voices during office hours. It’s every bit as offensive as pornography or off-color jokes, and these progressive liberals need to start hearing that they’re being jerks.
Nov 9, 2008 - 11:09 am 22. Meredith:Herb,
Yes isn’t that shockingly sad. Bit like the auto pilot of righteousness that switches on when people blindly hate (it is almost polite to these days) the USA. The even sadder part is if you asked the bimbette “Why aren’t you a patriot?” Or the USA critic “why does the USA suck?” They could throw a few clichés at you but probably couldn’t answer you in any depth at all.
It is ill for sure, but is it terminal? Is it possible it will not run a course like cancer does but more like a flu, knock us flat until our immunity kicks in and kills it off… Surely there has to be a point where we will fight back…The Danes did with the cartoons! I also believe once we kick in and fight, we will win.
But then I don’t know what it will take, I always think that if 9/11 didn’t and doesn’t today , wake people the f*#k up, nothing will, not even a nuke.
Nov 9, 2008 - 11:10 am 23. Herb:M:
It takes two things to fight; Energy and inspiration. If you dont get feedback to your ideas they lose energy. If you dont see others fighting, you lose inspiration. The coming attempts to silence talk radio and impose speech controls will do both.
Yes, It can be fatal. The UK is lost.
They dont have to answer in any depth. They are RIGHT!
Nov 9, 2008 - 1:55 pm 24. Karen:The self-hatred of Western civilization knows no bounds, and no aspect or detail of it is overlooked, as demonstrated by this AP news article I read in my local paper, “Britain’s Councils are no Latin Lovers”:
London – It’s a bona fide scandal.
Britain’s Latin and Greek aficionados are outraged at a decision by some local councils to veto the use of Latin words and phrases – including bona fide, ad lib, et cetera and e.g. – in official documents.
The councils say Latin is no longer widely understood. But classicists say axing Latin phrases is an attack on the foundations of English – the linguistic equivalent of “ethnic cleansing.”
“Think of the number of words from Latin that are now part of the English language: alias, alibi, exit, terminus,” said Peter Jones, a retired professor of classics at the University of Newcastle and founder of Friends of Classics. “Are they going to cut out those words?”
Latin’s backers say thousands of common English words have Latin roots, and argue the replacement phrases can be even more difficult to understand. To some ears “existing condition” is less harmonious than “status quo,” and “the other way round” less snappy than “vice versa.”
Google ‘ban on latin words’ (or similar phrase) if you want to see the articles in the Daily Mail, the Telegraph, the BBC, etc. (oops).
One of the excuses given is that Latin words are confusing for immigrants.
Nov 9, 2008 - 4:17 pm 25. Mike Sylwester:Telegraph:
“There are around 1.5 million Muslims in Britain, a million of whom live in London. There are 150,000 Muslims in Birmingham and a further 27,000 in Luton. There are also an estimated 10,000 Afro-Caribbean Muslims or white converts.”
————–
The population of the United Kingdom is about 59 million.
The population of Birmingham is about 1 million.
The population of Luton is about 230,000.
The Muslims in the United Kingdom are influenced much more than they are influential.
Nov 9, 2008 - 5:22 pm 26. Mike Sylwester:Telegraph:
“There are around 1.5 million Muslims in Britain, a million of whom live in London. ”
———-
The population of the Greater Urban London Area is about 8.3 million.
The population of the London metropolitan area is about 13 million.
Nov 9, 2008 - 5:27 pm 27. Karen:Mike Sylwester, if Muslims have so little influence, how do explain the acceptance of a parallel sharia law for domestic matters in Britain?
Nov 9, 2008 - 6:06 pm 28. Meredith:Will sharia courts will give the OK to various stuff that is a criminal offence in the UK?
Nov 9, 2008 - 6:41 pm 29. Mike Sylwester:Karen:
“if Muslims have so little influence, how do explain the acceptance of a parallel sharia law for domestic matters in Britain?”
———
Those sharia courts affect only the few Muslims who prefer to use those courts to settle their own disputes with each other. Nobody else is subject to those courts’ decisions.
Nov 9, 2008 - 8:12 pm 30. Meredith:So Mike, can a muslim get the OK to do stuff that is illegal for other Brits? As in settle their disputes with sharia law which over British law.
Nov 9, 2008 - 8:27 pm 31. Meredith:Correction: As in settle their disputes with sharia law over British law.
Nov 9, 2008 - 8:29 pm 32. Karen:Mike Sylwester, it doesn’t help to cite from the article the numbers of Muslims in proportion to the rest of the population. The fact is, with this partial acceptance of sharia law in Britain – which is due to the influence of Muslims living in Britain, regardless of how many there are – a primary principle of Western society, i.e, equality in law, is rendered null and void for some citizens. But I guess, judging from your remarks, that doesn’t worry you; you’re okay with that.
Nov 9, 2008 - 8:42 pm 33. NahnCee:Don’t you suppose that Mike thinks that Muslims are animals anyway, so who cares what they do to each other. THe problem with that attitude is that pretty soon they start doing it to everyone else around them, too, in the sure certainty that their Islamic law will back them up. That’s it’s OK to kill infidels, that it’s OK to rape CHristian women, that it’s OK to harass and torment Jews, etc., etc., bloody etc .
Nov 9, 2008 - 11:06 pm 34. Karen:NahnCee, I’ve no insight into how Mike thinks but you may be right that to him they’re just animals, or at least nothing to bother about. There’s certainly something callous at worst in his comments or at best comfortably complacent.
Nov 9, 2008 - 11:17 pm 35. krontekag:Mike Sylwester: “Those sharia courts affect only the few Muslims who prefer to use those courts to settle their own disputes with each other. Nobody else is subject to those courts’ decisions.”
Frog in the pot, Mike…. the temperature is rising, and forces inimical to Western culture are taking baby steps right now, but are gaining in confidence with each such victory.
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:20 am 36. Jay:The crime rate in the UK is continuing to grow. Parts of London are dangerous. The criminal gangs have automatic weapons while guns are banned.
Nov 10, 2008 - 10:41 am 37. Al_Batross:“There are around 1.5 million Muslims in Britain, a million of whom live in London” – Mike Sylwester.
The 1.5 million figure is wrong, and the Telegraph should know better than to quote it.
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:36 pm 38. Ms. Know:It may have been correct in the 1980s, but the high birth-rate and uncontrolled immigration of the last 10 years mean that the Muslim population of Britain is now at least double that, and may well be triple that.
The goverment will have a more accurate figure, derived from National Insurance and other official processes, which it is choosing not to share with us.
This Labour government is borrowing at a rate equivalent to that during 1945, when Britain still had the second-largest Navy in the world, a huge and modern Air Force, and armies in action across Europe and the Far East.
Why does it need to borrow so much ? There are many reasons, but the funding of Muslim immigration and the consequences thereof is a major factor, increasing costs in almost every area of national life.
Labour is no longer the party of the working (blue-collar) man, it is now The Party of Islam, and so I see little chance of any real improvement for as long as it remains in office.
Wait till we have the muslim influence deep here in the US, led by the liberal illuminati party.
Nov 15, 2008 - 9:12 am