In Keir Starmer's second intervention on the current disorder, he was not willing to entertain the idea that there could be any legitimate sentiment behind it.
Para 5: "He's not laying down the law that we are not entitled to object or protest". Do you mean "He's NOW laying...."?
Last para: "The rest of his term will now be devoted to forbidding the British people from noticing what us done to us". I think you mean "...what WAS done to us".
“This doesn’t end well.” I’m not surprised either that we’ve reached this point. It was inevitable and better now than later although too late to stop the march of radical Islam which will one day rule this country unless things change. At what point do the police and armed forces stop supporting the government?
We should remember that Islam is first and foremost, a geopolitical force. A true follower cannot accept democracy or Common Law. They must be overthrown and replaced.
That is not to say that there aren't many 'good' cultural muslims.
The armed forces have very little ability to act independently unfortunately. They've sworn to follow the monarch and the monarch has accepted Starmer's government. I doubt he will withdraw support for Starmer, so unfortunately they have to accept his authority.
Wasn’t it 1975 and Harold Wilson resigned soon after? I wonder does allegiance to the crown mean country more than government? Starmer will definitely push ahead with an Islamophobia blasphemy law which will further enrage. Neither he nor Cooper seem to have a grip on reality.
I fear the next thing Starmer will do is to rush through an "Islamaphobia" law. If you want to see how something like that will work out, check out the outworking of the Blasphemy Law in Pakistan where it is often used to settle grudges or to make the life of minorities difficult. I genuinely fear for my country now. These fools in Government are playing into the hands of extremists.
I think you’re right about a blasphemy law Dan, which was trailed before the election. If Starmer wants to show that he represents all parts of society and not just Muslims, he’ll make the law equally applicable to all religions. He won’t of course. It’ll be an Islamophobia law which will further fuel the anger of large parts of the country who see this religion as the problem rather than needing protection.
Starmer talks about country first party second while his actions suggest he’ll worry about the Muslim block vote for Labour and the country will pay for that.
I did wonder about this over the weekend - have we reached the point now where actually whether you believe in basic stuff like the rule of law, equality before it, bona fide free speeech for all (up to the line of literal incitement) and politicians serving the electorate that elected them (including those who didn't vote for them) is actually a radical political position in and of itself?
Your interest in the SDP got my grey matter stirring here - are things so bad that actually the SDP and sane centre-right 'sovereign democrat' types have got far more in common with each other than either has with the Tories or Labour...based on the paradigm above? Is 'giving a shit about the people who voted in the election you won' now considered a political USP of some sort?
It's safe to say that many wouild struggle with this, including a lot of the tribal left and the 'political Islam' crowd who use democracy as a vehicle to look after their own.
Do we need to form some sort of political umbrella that actually says "reject the left-right paradigm of the past and work with anybody who's on the right side of the honesty/sovereignty paradigm" Left-right and Labour-Tory battles sort of work on the underlying assumption that even if one of them is profoundly wrong, they are at least sincerely so and meant well.
If we agree that bus left quite a while ago do we need to think about a new paradigm to operate on?
Good piece.
Para 5: "He's not laying down the law that we are not entitled to object or protest". Do you mean "He's NOW laying...."?
Last para: "The rest of his term will now be devoted to forbidding the British people from noticing what us done to us". I think you mean "...what WAS done to us".
“This doesn’t end well.” I’m not surprised either that we’ve reached this point. It was inevitable and better now than later although too late to stop the march of radical Islam which will one day rule this country unless things change. At what point do the police and armed forces stop supporting the government?
We should remember that Islam is first and foremost, a geopolitical force. A true follower cannot accept democracy or Common Law. They must be overthrown and replaced.
That is not to say that there aren't many 'good' cultural muslims.
At the point somneone else offers to pay their wages (and so rent and mortgage).
The armed forces have very little ability to act independently unfortunately. They've sworn to follow the monarch and the monarch has accepted Starmer's government. I doubt he will withdraw support for Starmer, so unfortunately they have to accept his authority.
The armed forces came quite close to a take over in 1979. Yes, we swore allegiance, but that only goes so far.
Wasn’t it 1975 and Harold Wilson resigned soon after? I wonder does allegiance to the crown mean country more than government? Starmer will definitely push ahead with an Islamophobia blasphemy law which will further enrage. Neither he nor Cooper seem to have a grip on reality.
I wasn't aware of rumblings in '75 but was very aware of them in '79.
Yes, country not government.
Governments having a grip on reality? Now that's a novel idea. :-)
I fear the next thing Starmer will do is to rush through an "Islamaphobia" law. If you want to see how something like that will work out, check out the outworking of the Blasphemy Law in Pakistan where it is often used to settle grudges or to make the life of minorities difficult. I genuinely fear for my country now. These fools in Government are playing into the hands of extremists.
I think you’re right about a blasphemy law Dan, which was trailed before the election. If Starmer wants to show that he represents all parts of society and not just Muslims, he’ll make the law equally applicable to all religions. He won’t of course. It’ll be an Islamophobia law which will further fuel the anger of large parts of the country who see this religion as the problem rather than needing protection.
Starmer talks about country first party second while his actions suggest he’ll worry about the Muslim block vote for Labour and the country will pay for that.
Good content Pete - thought-provoking as ever.
I did wonder about this over the weekend - have we reached the point now where actually whether you believe in basic stuff like the rule of law, equality before it, bona fide free speeech for all (up to the line of literal incitement) and politicians serving the electorate that elected them (including those who didn't vote for them) is actually a radical political position in and of itself?
Your interest in the SDP got my grey matter stirring here - are things so bad that actually the SDP and sane centre-right 'sovereign democrat' types have got far more in common with each other than either has with the Tories or Labour...based on the paradigm above? Is 'giving a shit about the people who voted in the election you won' now considered a political USP of some sort?
It's safe to say that many wouild struggle with this, including a lot of the tribal left and the 'political Islam' crowd who use democracy as a vehicle to look after their own.
Do we need to form some sort of political umbrella that actually says "reject the left-right paradigm of the past and work with anybody who's on the right side of the honesty/sovereignty paradigm" Left-right and Labour-Tory battles sort of work on the underlying assumption that even if one of them is profoundly wrong, they are at least sincerely so and meant well.
If we agree that bus left quite a while ago do we need to think about a new paradigm to operate on?
Or maybe "the correct or true side of.......