Libtards Wail, Muslims Wait: Why Fans of Abortion Won’t Defeat Fans of Muhammad
As Francis Carr-Begbie pointed out long ago at the Occidental Observer, one cultural phenomenon is guaranteed to cause bafflement among liberals, libertarians and cuckservatives. It is the extraordinary spectacle of Muslims behaving like Muslims. Again and again members of Britain’s intellectual elite have been disturbed and dismayed to learn that Muslims don’t behave like Buddhists, Anglicans or Jehovah’s Witnesses. No, Muslims behave like Muslims.
Ho-ho Mo-Show No-No
Who could have seen that one coming? And while libtards wail about Muslim pathologies, Muslims calmly wait for mass immigration and high birth-rates to bring them political and cultural victory. Now we have a new example of libtard uproar at Muslims-behaving-like-Muslims. A teacher at Batley Grammar School in the heavily enriched English county of Yorkshire showed his pupils some satirical cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad during a religious studies lesson. Did Muslim activists in the area respond like fans of Voltaire and warmly support the free speech of the teacher? No, they responded like Muslims and resolutely opposed his free speech. They demonstrated intimidatingly at the school and issued death-threats against the teacher, who has been driven into hiding with his wife and four children.
Muslims behaving like Muslims outside Batley Grammar School
The school itself and local Labour politicians have, of course, immediately capitulated to Muslim intimidation. The headmaster Gary Kibble grovelled like this: “The school unequivocally apologises for using a totally inappropriate image in a religious studies lesson. It should not have been used. … We have immediately withdrawn teaching on this part of the course, and we are revising how we go forward with the support of all communities represented in our school. … The member of staff has been suspended pending an independent formal investigation.”
But it’s hard to blame the headmaster for grovelling or the teacher for going into hiding. After all, look at what happened in France in October 2020. A teacher called Samuel Paty was literally beheaded by an angry Muslim teenager after showing his pupils satirical cartoons of Muhammad.
Something rotten in the county of Yorkshire
I wrote about the murder of Samuel Paty in “Headchopping for Muhammad” and discussed the dishonesty and reality-evasion of the supposed libertarians at Spiked Online, which is the latest incarnation of the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), a “weird [Trotskyist] sect” founded in the 1970s by the Hungarian-Jewish sociologist Frank Furedi. The libtards at Spiked loudly condemned Samuel Paty’s murder, but they had ignored the very similar murder of Asad Shah on British soil in 2016. Shah, a gentle, tolerant Ahmadi Muslim living in Glasgow, was stabbed to death by a free-speech-hating Sunni Muslim called Tanveer Ahmed, who travelled hundreds of miles from Yorkshire to defend the honour of the Prophet against Ahmadi blasphemies. If Spiked hadn’t ignored Shah’s murder, they could have made an important point in their current noisy condemnation of the “shameful capitulation” at Batley Grammar School, namely, that something is rotten in the county of Yorkshire.
But spotting patterns is not something that libertarians are interested in. Instead, Spiked proved once again the truth of Francis Carr-Begbie’s observation about the blindness of libtards, or liberals and libertarians who support open borders for Third-World people, then bewail the inevitable consequences. According to Paul Stott at Spiked, “Video footage from outside the school is disquieting.” Yes, when Muslims behave like Muslims it’s “disquieting” rather than wholly predictable. Stott went on to claim that “schoolkids” should be free to see satirical cartoons of Muhammad, because “Batley Grammar is a secondary school in a liberal democratic society.”
“What most of the country undoubtedly wanted”
He’s wrong. If Britain were a “democratic society,” mass immigration would never have taken place here against the clearly expressed wishes of the White majority. The treacherous leftist politician Roy Hattersley, a former deputy leader of the Labour party, proudly announced in 2013 that he had refused to support “what a clear majority of my constituents, and most of the country, undoubtedly wanted [in 1964] — the repatriation of all Commonwealth immigrants.” If repatriation had taken place then — or, far better, mass immigration had never begun in the first place — Britain would have avoided all the Third-world pathologies we see flourishing here in 2021, from attacks on free speech to rape-gangs and acid-throwing.
And if Britain were a “liberal society,” it would not have passed so many laws (at Jewish instigation) to stifle the entirely legitimate opposition of British Whites to their dispossession. For example, the British state would not have twice attempted to jail Nick Griffin, then the leader of the British National Party (BNP), for speaking the truth about Muslim rape-gangs in Yorkshire. In 2004 Griffin had made a highly accurate prediction about Islamic terrorism in Britain. He said it was inevitable and that the “terrorists will turn out to be either asylum-seekers or second-generation Pakistanis, probably from somewhere like Bradford.” Whatever you think about Griffin, it’s clear that he isn’t a libtard. He wasn’t “disquieted” by Muslims-behaving-like-Muslims. Instead, he observed their behaviour, analysed it, and understood exactly how and why it would worsen.
Ancient wisdom for modern libtards
But even if Paul Stott at Spiked were correct to call Britain a “liberal democratic society,” he would still have to admit that large parts of Britain have seceded from liberalism. Surprisingly enough, when Pakistanis emigrate to the liberal West, they bring illiberal Pakistani culture with them. Well, it’s surprising to libtards, but the Roman poet Horace did even better than Nick Griffin in predicting the consequences of mass immigration. More than 2000 years ago, Horace said this: Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt — “They change their sky, not their soul, who rush across the sea.”
Horace and other great classical writers would once have been central to lessons at the scene of the current uproar about Muslims-behaving-like-Muslims. Batley Grammar School was “founded in 1612 by the Rev. William Lee” and provided early education for Joseph Priestley (1733–1804), one of the creators of modern chemistry. Priestley “strongly believed in the free and open exchange of ideas” and “advocated toleration and equal rights for religious Dissenters.” But it’s unlikely that Batley Grammar will be producing any more great scientists and supporters of free speech. As the BBC points out, “According to a 2015 Ofsted report Batley Grammar had 689 pupils of which almost three-quarters were from a minority ethnic background [i.e., were Pakistani Muslims].”
More and more pressure against free speech
Have many libtards noticed the irony of pupils who form “almost three-quarters” of a school being described as “from a minority”? I doubt it. I also doubt that Paul Stott at Spiked will celebrate democracy-in-action at Batley Grammar School. If the majority of the parents are Muslim and they don’t want their children exposed to anti-Muslim satire, why shouldn’t they get what they want? As the Muslim population of Britain and other Western nations continues to grow, there will be more and more pressure against free speech and other archaic Western customs. The libtards at Spiked want to pretend that this is the fault of Whites for refusing to stand up for “Enlightenment values.”
It isn’t. When Tanveer Ahmed murdered Asad Shah on British soil in 2016, he was consciously imitating two Muslim hero-martyrs: Ilm Ud-Deen, who murdered a Hindu publisher under the British Raj in 1929, and Mumtaz Qadri, who murdered a politician in Pakistan in 2011. Both men were defending the honour of the Prophet, both were executed by the state, and both are celebrated today in Pakistan as ghazi and shahid — “hero” and “martyr.” And in 1938, Muslims in London “ceremoniously” burned a copy of H.G. Wells’ A Short History of the World “because of references to the Prophet Muhammad which they considered offensive.” Muslims love the Prophet Muhammad and hate free speech not because they’ve been led astray by any Western ideology, but because they are Muslims. How difficult is that to understand?
No limits on Muslim immigration
Very difficult for the libtards at Spiked, it appears. Their chief propagandist, Brendan O’Neill, has announced that “Britain is not an Islamic country. We do not live under Sharia law. It might be a punishable offence in Islamic nations to make or display an image of Muhammad, but it isn’t here.” In fact, “Sharia law” does operate in large parts of Britain that are de facto “Islamic” because — guess what — they have Muslim majorities after relentless Muslim immigration and on-site population growth. And what do the libtards at Spiked think about Muslim immigration? They want all limits on it removed. In 2015 Brendan O’Neill called for open borders under the stirring headline of “Let them in”:
We shouldn’t demonise or infantilise African migrants. We should welcome them. … We shouldn’t pity these migrants; we should admire them, for using guile, gumption and perseverance to come here. They’re precisely the kind of people sluggish Europe needs more of, an antidote to our students who can’t even clap without having a mental breakdown and our new generation who think that being told to ‘get on your bike’ to look for a job is tantamount to abuse. Let’s relax the borders and let them in to try their luck in our countries and see how they fare. If we do that, we’ll put the traffickers out of business, end the deaths in the Mediterranean, and, more importantly, do our part to enable the aspirations of human beings who have committed no crime other than wanting to realise their potential in our towns, our cities, alongside us. (Let Them In, Spiked Online, 21st April 2015)
In 2021 O’Neill is condemning “religious extremists” and “religious intolerance” in Batley. But Muslims there are displaying precisely the “gumption and perseverance” he celebrated in 2015. O’Neill is also condemning the “slippery way” in which the term “Islamophobia” is used to “conflat[e] discussion of Islam with racism.” That is, he doesn’t like Muslims using “guile,” which he thought was such a positive thing in the aspiring migrants of 2015. What’s happening in Batley is the inevitable consequence of the mass immigration O’Neill has so strongly supported for so many years.
Dedicated to narcissistic self-indulgence
He has also strongly supported unrestricted abortion. And here again we see the stupidity of libertarian support for Third-World immigration. Muslims are not merely entering the West in large numbers: they are being subsidized to have large numbers of children here. In my article “Narcissism and Nihilism,” I contrasted Yetto Souiriy, a Muslim woman in France who had had five children, with Julie Burchill, a liberal woman in Britain who had had five abortions. Indeed, Burchill positively celebrated them: “I’m so glad I had all those abortions. … I’d as soon weep over my taken tonsils or my absent appendix as snivel over those abortions. I had a choice, and I chose life — mine.” The fervent philosemite Burchill writes regularly for Spiked and other libtard outlets in praise of Jews and condemnation of Muslims. She’s an excellent example of libtardism in action. Her choice of “life” was actually a choice of narcissistic self-indulgence. And while she was having abortions, snorting cocaine and experimenting with lesbianism, Muslims were having lots of little Muslims and steadily strengthening their political and cultural power.
Sex, drugs and five abortions(!!): the fervent philosemite Julie Burchill
So here’s a question for Julie and her fellow libtards at Spiked: Who’s going to win a demographic battle between those who believe in lots of abortions and those who believe in lots of children? You won’t need many guesses. But let’s be fair: Burchill’s self-indulgence hasn’t just lost her the war of wombs with Muslims. It’s also lost her the war of words. In December 2020, Burchill defended her fellow philosemite Rod Liddle against a Bangladeshi Muslim woman called Ash Sarkar, who had criticized Liddle for making a joke about having sex with schoolgirls. Burchill tried to exploit the historical fact that the Prophet Muhammad first had sex with his wife Aisha when she was nine years old. But Burchill’s choice of words was so crude, intemperate and ignorant, and the behaviour of the supporters she enlisted so unpleasant, that Sarkar was able to bring a successful action for defamation.
“Muslims and Jews are natural allies”
Burchill had to pay “substantial damages,” cover Sarkar’s legal costs, and make a grovelling public apology. Sarkar’s lawyer Zillur Rahman triumphantly announced: “I am delighted for Ash, it really is a resounding victory. As a Muslim myself, this case meant more because of the grossly offensive comment made concerning Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him), who is dear to all Muslims.” If all their enemies were like Julie Burchill, Muslims would have much less need of their good friends in the Jewish community. And they certainly have many good friends in the Jewish community, from Dr Richard Stone, the prominent anti-racist who proclaimed that “Muslims and Jews are natural allies” in 2001, to Richard Benson, the former head of the Jewish Community Security Trust (CST) who began helping Muslims “battle Islamophobia” in 2014. Here are a few more examples of the warm support given by Jews to Muslims:
- Board [of Jewish Deputies] president Marie van der Zyl pledges to be ‘committed ally’ of Muslims at interfaith Iftar, The Jewish Chronicle, 13th July 2018
- Jews and Muslims are natural allies against religious discrimination, Daisy Khan and Rabbi Burton Visotzky, The Hill, 24th August 2017
- Muslims and Jews face a common threat from white supremacists. We must fight it together, Jonathan Freedland and Mehdi Hasan, The Guardian, 3rd April 2019
- Both Feeling Threatened, American Muslims and Jews Join Hands, Laurie Goodstein, The New York Times, 5th December 2015
- Jewish women ‘stand shoulder to shoulder’ with Muslim women over Islamophobic abuse, The Jewish Chronicle, 19th April 2018
- Jewish and Muslim women pledge to work together to combat hate, The Jewish Chronicle, 24th April 2018
- Jews and Muslims should unite in fight against racism, The Jewish Chronicle, 28th March 2018
- Our Jewish community must do more to support Muslims attacked by Islamophobes, The Jewish Chronicle, 8th August 2018
- Jews and Muslims ramp up alliances in wake of Trump’s election, The Jewish Standard, 15th November 2016
- This young Jewish woman and a young Muslim woman teach schoolkids about racism, The Jewish Chronicle, 7th February 2019
But the fervent philosemites Julie Burchill and Rod Liddle have never discussed — let alone condemned — the central Jewish role in fomenting the Muslim pathologies now so prominent in the West. It’s yet another example of libtard blindness. So is the claim made by Tom Slater at Spiked that the Muslim protestors in Batley are “dickheads.” In fact, Muslims aren’t foolish or misguided to oppose free speech, because they know it is bad for Muslim interests. As a former Trotskyist, Slater may recall that Josef Stalin used censorship very successfully to maintain his own power and defeat his enemies. History teaches us that censorship works very well to defend authoritarian systems, while free speech is a very rare and fragile phenomenon. History also teaches us that free speech was created by stale pale males like John Stuart Mill in Britain and the Founding Fathers in America. In other words, it’s a White thing — Muslims, Blacks and other non-Whites neither created it nor want it.
The “libertarians” at Spiked believe in protecting the rare and fragile phenomenon of free speech by opening the borders of White nations to unlimited numbers of highly illiberal tribalists from the Third World. So here’s another question for Tom, Brendan, Julie and the other libtards at Spiked: If you support free speech and open borders for Muslims, while Muslims support censorship and open borders for Muslims, who exactly are the dickheads?
Excellent, thank you for calling out the Spiked “libertarians”. The Islamic invasion of the UK is upon us, and the Jewish role in our destruction, and of Europe has become noticeable, except that laws exist to prevent us mentioning this.
Having enabled the destruction of South Africa, the “progressive” Jewish world-improvers moved on to Australia.
The truly great novel “Camp of the Saints” by Jean Raspail is coming true:
“Submission” is a similar, recent novel by Michel Houellebecq. It’s not nearly as good though, but it does illustrate how a Muslim party comes to power in France by forming coalitions with other parties.
… this contextual note is relevant as the islamic influx tightens its grip in town after town – many blighted by child rape gangs with racialist preying tactics :
Batley, Yorkshire, England : a once high trust town now just part of an islamic influx metroplex. Lost.
***28 ‘local men’ charged in January 2021 with the rape and abuse of Anglo girls as young as 13 years old over a ten year period. Trials set for… 2022 and 2023 (sic) . The tip of an iceberg across islamic-immigrant towns.
For the Batley area scandal, search under Kirklees Magistrates Court …
For the girls and their ruined lives: search— ?
I’m impressed with the no-nonsense writing on this site.
Lib-lefties are suffering from both Stockholm syndrome and a good dose of stupidity. They’re so infantile that they actually believe everyone in the world is just dying to adopt and celebrate their values of atheism, abortion, sexual deviance, and racial grovelling – liberal democratic society be damned in the face of their “superior” moral imperatives.
Islam is right about one thing!
The narcissists at spiked push unquestioningly the COVID19 vaxx if my memory of their pods and writings serves and overall, they are about as independent of the UK’s occupied “Government” policy as Antifa, Hope not Hate and the arse-owned clowns Blacking-up the Bank:
From the (intially anonymous) Report from Iron Mountain (1967) subsequently disclaimed as fiction by its author Leonard Lewin (“The Guest Word”) in The New York Times Book Review of 19 March 1972:
“SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FUNCTIONS OF WAR: MODELS
POLITICAL a) An omnipresent, virtually omnipotent international police force. b) An established and recognized extraterrestrial menace. c) Massive global environmental pollution. d) Fictitious alternate enemies.”
It behooves everyone who claims a thorough knowledge of what ails us, to at least read the Wikipedia entry on the REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN; all the way to its telling end.
If memory serves, it was commissioned by JFK in mid-’63, after the USSR, under Khrushchev, became less of an existential threat. After a participating Professor leaked it in the public interest, it was characteristically belittled as a satire.
Some ” hoax ” when you consider the four REPORT sections in your last paragraph: all of which have become true, except b, an ” extraterrestrial menace ” — and they are working on that one, given their announcement to issue, in June, ’21, a factual Report, founded on increasing UFO sightings and their physics-inexplicable capabilities.
In October, ’38, Orson Wells broadcast the War of the Worlds, on CBS, NYC, creating panic, by reporting, live, the bombing of that city with poison gas cannisters, from flying saucers..
[ IRON MOUNTAIN was/is a 220 ft underground depository/’repository’ for copied, essential records of corporations vulnerable to aerial destruction. The TN small town of the same name also features several enterprises specializing in the shredding of documents, in case you can’t destroy 33,000 emails, after putting the hammer to your electronic equipment. ]
With the growing pakistan population in Grt.Britain – swathes of this particular ethnic group have many children -religiously dutybound, the town in London I grew up in has changed almost beyond recognition as a result the streetscape has a insalubrious appearance to put it politely, and there is an undercurrent of hostility and occasionally it’s not a so subtle- pakistanis have become more brazen and voluble. Maybe I should claim minority-victim status: White-Straight-Male-Anglo-Saxon-Celt+ and lavishly use the race card to any advantage(?). Might even wrangle an invite to appear on the Opera Windbag Show.
Invoking ‘god’ as I heard a caller on the Nick Ferrari (sic) radio phone-in show on L.B.C last week regarding the Batley School controversy went something like this “The prophet is more sacred than my parents”. Yes, this is the quality of the ‘multi-culturally’ citizen in Great Britain in 2021; religious zealots and pathologies welcome.
Thirty four years ago, I recall the Salman Rushdie affair and also what has happened in France and Great Britain in recent history and the past three decades; this is but a foretaste of a civil war on these shores that wouldn’t surprise me to happen prior to 2121. All we need is a Muhammad Ali Jinnah of this generation to foment unrest in the name of ‘blaspheme’ and offence caused.
One of the most difficult and irritating things is trying to explain to a cuckservative that the Muslim threat he’s whining about is ACTUALLY a Jewish threat. Sure, I’d attempt to relate…I’m not arguing that Muslims are good and not a problem within a Christian white Society… I’m ONLY saying that they wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for the Jews fervant desire to enlist them in the fight (demographic, cultural, religious, economic, and physical) against Americans and Europeans. But I can usually but even get this far with them.
We’ve got our work cut out for us… That’s for sure.
Many years ago I attended a talk at school given by a Methodist Minister.
He told us that when we were married we should only have 2 children and the World would follow our lead. I asked how knew this. He said they would. I asked what would happen if they did not. He said they would.
The invaders had just begun arriving from the Windies because the Americans had ordered the British to admit them.
The people from London in the class told me to shut up. The people from the cities voted Labour, moved out of the cities, and pretended to be against immigration, but it benefitted them. They allowed it to continue.
When they say “We were not asked” they did not need to be asked.
They either have bad memories or are liars.
I don’t like Moslems or even empathize with them. However, I find their point of view to be comprehensible. If you believe that Mohammed was a true prophet and that the Koran and the Hadith contain divinely revealed truth, then their truculent ways are not only justifiable but imperative. Liberals are the ones who are totally incomprehensible and utterly odious. The only way to fully account for their behavior is to regard them as malevolent nihilists who take the side of evil, falsehood, ugliness, and destruction on all issues, all the way, all the time. Quite frankly, I no longer seem them as fellow citizens but as vermin. What’s more, because of the disparity in military and other technology between White Christians and Moslems in today’s world, Moslems only pose a threat to us today because liberal cockroaches invite them into our countries.
Brilliant article. Langdon is an exceptional writer.
I don’t agree with the demographic doom-mongering: whites are already greatly outnumbered by other races yet our cultural and genetic characteristics keep us disproportionately powerful. Population quality and the environment’s carrying capacity are just as important for a successful culture as raw numbers. In addition, the birth rates in the rest of the world still keep falling; if anything, the West, having undergone the demographic transition first, holds an eventual fertility advantage in the form of a “breeder” genotype best suited to the antinatalist conditions of modernity. And with forthcoming advances in genetic engineering, the future is less certain than ever.