I have stated before that liberty, freedom, and democracy face three very closely aligned adversaries: progressive socialism, Islamo-fascism, and secular humanism. These three forces seem to collude in the ideological fight against Constitutional conservatism, which advances the ideals of economic, individual and religious liberty.Recently we witnessed the liberal progressives of the Obama administration seek to undermine the reelection bid of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by driving out an Arab vote. And now we have another example of such perhaps odd, but vital alliance all in the name of retention of power. This time it’s just right across the Atlantic as part of the impending British elections.
As reported by the Gatestone Institute, “The leader of Britain’s Labour Party — Britain’s liberal progressives –, Ed Miliband, has vowed, if he becomes the next prime minister in general elections on May 7, to outlaw “Islamophobia.”“The move — which one observer has called “utterly frightening” because of its implications for free speech in Britain — is part of an effort by Miliband to pander to Muslim voters in a race that he has described as “the tightest general election for a generation.” With the ruling Conservatives and the opposition Labour running neck and neck in the polls just days before voters cast their ballots, British Muslims — who voted overwhelmingly for Labour in the 2010 general election — could indeed determine who will be the next prime minister.”
“In an interview with The Muslim News, Miliband said: “We are going to make it [Islamophobia] an aggravated crime. We are going to make sure it is marked on people’s records with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime. “We are going to change the law on this so we make it absolutely clear of our abhorrence of hate crime and Islamophobia. It will be the first time that the police will record Islamophobic attacks right across the country.”
So imagine this, a word created by the Islamo-fascists in order to force self-censorship and the intolerance of political correctness is being fully embraced and adopted by progressive socialists in order to win an election. If this is not the pure and unadulterated definition of “pandering” then tell me what is?Sadly though, this pandering involves the disintegration of the most fundamental individual right — free speech. This is the manifestation of the UN Resolution 16/18, which we have discussed on these pages before.
And consider this, we just reported about an Islamist al-Qaida supporter residing in Britain on the public dole who has staved off his deportation. Now it seems this Labour Party leader, Ed Milliband, will stoop to the depths of advocating for the eradication of criticizing Islamic terrorists, jihadists, and the ideology that fuels them to conduct their horrific acts. Does Mr. Milliband not realize that he is condemning anyone that would dare point out the truth behind the savage attack against British Soldier Lee Rigby?
Or consider these attributed words from Sir Winston Churchill:
“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.”
Yet a British politician was arrested for quoting him!
For Mr. Milliband, would those words now be made criminal and Churchill guilty of “Islamophobia”? It seems to me Mr. Milliband is nothing more than a political pandering Islamapologist. And others seem to believe so as well: “Miliband’s renewed promise to make “Islamophobia” (a term he has not defined) an “aggravated crime” may signal an attempt to turn the 2006 Act — which already stipulates a maximum penalty of seven years in prison for stirring up religious hatred — into a full-blown Muslim blasphemy law.“According to British commentator Leo McKinstry, “Miliband’s proposal goes against the entire tradition of Western democracy, which holds that people should be punished only for their deeds, not their opinions.” In an opinion article, he added: “In Miliband’s Britain, it will become impossible to criticize any aspect of Islamic culture, whether it be the spread of the burka or the establishment of Sharia courts or the construction of colossal new mosques. We already live in a society where Mohammed is now the most popular boy’s name and where a child born in Birmingham is more likely to be a Muslim than a Christian.”
“If he wins, Miliband will ensure that the accelerating Islamification of our country will go unchallenged.” McKinstry says Miliband is currying favor with Britain’s three million-strong Muslim community to “prop up Labour’s urban vote.” Muslims are emerging as a key voting bloc in British politics and are already poised to determine the outcome of local elections in many parts of the country, according to a report by the Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella group.”
Seems this is a group similar to the Council for American Islamic Relations — CAIR — a group deemed a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and Egypt because of its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Could this be coming to America? Of course, we already hear everyone proclaiming how politicians must pander to the fastest growing segment of our population — Hispanics. Therefore, are we in America willing to sacrifice our fundamental principles just to win elections? It doggone seems that Britain’s Labour Party is well on that path. And just what was that 2006 Act of which we referred?
Gatestone Institute writes, “In January 2006, the House of Lords approved the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, after amending the text so that the law would be limited to banning only “threatening” words and not those that are merely abusive or insulting. Lawmakers also said that the offense would require the intention — not just the possibility — of stirring up religious hatred. They added that proselytizing, discussion, criticism, abuse and ridicule of religion, belief or religious practice would not be an offense.”
We have already seen the fate, the sentence issued by Islamic terrorists when they deem offense — Charlie Hebdo comes to mind. So now could it be that a major political party in Britain will now give the Islamo-fasicsts what they have so desired in Western civilization: cover from criticism? And you can bet that if the Labour Party is successful in the coming elections and does institute such a fool-hearted and ill conceived policy, a precedent will be established.
And here in America, the small but highly influential Muslim community that already demands us not to show certain movies, will take this to our courts where THEY WILL find a sympathetic activist progressive socialist judge who will rule on their behalf.
This is how the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Strategic Memorandum written in 1991 by Mohammed Akhram and discovered in an FBI raid in northern Virginia in 2004 will come to fruition, “their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands”.
Thanks to the compliant and complicit progressive socialists and Islamapologists such as Ed Millibank, Islamo-fascists are being enabled to attain their goal by way of our own doing.