Wednesday, February 13, 2008

That's about it, yep.

Trust the commies:
For what began as an attack on the archbishop of Canterbury has shifted rapidly – and with grim inevitability – into a yet another assault on Britain's two million Muslims.

Former home secretary David Blunkett joined the fray on BBC Radio 4's Today programme. He laid into "well-meaning liberals" who "believe that we have to accommodate something which is external to our country".

The logic of Blunkett's position is chilling. If Islam is an "external" religion then Britain's Muslims – who are overwhelmingly from ethnic minority backgrounds – do not properly belong in Britain.

But of course, I'd like to issue a clarification of my own. It's not because of their "race" (whatever that is) that I think these people don't belong in Britain. It's their "religion". I'm as tolerant and understanding as the "moderate" "mainstream" Imams of Afghanistan were when they offered to allow Abdul Rahman to revert back to Islam without killing him. (Yeah, remember that guy?) I'm more than happy to let them stay in Britain on the condition that they convert to Christianity. I'm not fussy either. I'm fine with Methodist, Anglican, Baptist...whatever. Very open minded, me. (We can work out the details of the Protestant Problem later.)

The thought has been creeping up that Rowan's intervention could not have been more welcome or better timed. Under what other circumstances would the somnolent British people have been stirred up to this extent?

We've finally got to the point where the British loathing of this foreign ideology has been heard, loud and clear.

Kelvin McKenzie, the Sun's former editor, appeared on a Sunday morning BBC show denouncing Islam as a "medieval" religion and slating its mistreatment of women – this from a man who introduced topless darts to our television screens.

The subtext to much of this argument is that Christianity is more "enlightened" than Islam.

Dja think?

Really!? The subtext eh?

Sheesh, these people are going to be the death of parody.

No comments: