Resident Telegraph liberal Andrew O'Hagan tells the backwoodsmen how it is :
"Those of us who grew up with the obscenities that were the bombings of Eniskillen and Omagh might always wish to understand how they could have happened. Did they happen as a result of the mad actions of a generally blood-thirsty people who craved a United Ireland? Or were they the desperate acts of some parts of that community hounded into extremism by the British State's consistent abuse?"
Gee, I don't know, Andrew. I wonder if there's not some Third Way between damning a whole nation as bloodthirsty madmen and blaming ourselves for hounding those poor automata into planting the bombs ? Like maybe blaming the people who did it ? But you can see which option he prefers.
What is the nature of the feeling in our communities and in our courts against Islam, and how can we put an end to it? Are we not hurting our own society and our own security by making a monster where it shouldn't exist, a monster made from the mania of our own fear?
If we're not afraid, we won't get hurt ! It really IS all about us as far as he's concerned. I knew he was a writer, but I didn't know he was a magical realist.
We are making extremists where they previously hardly existed; this might be termed a suicidal policy.
Is he saying that if we offend them, they'll kill us ? Sounds awfully close.
Islamophobia is where many of our future troubles might be seen to begin. We ignore it, and our part in it, at the peril of everything we claim to hold sacred.
If we offend them, they might kill us AND destroy everything we hold sacred ?
With friends like Andrew O'Hagan to explain them to us, British Muslims certainly don't need any more enemies.
Revert to Default
4 hours ago
6 comments:
"when the matter could have been concluded, as it eventually was, by people willing to listen to the actual experience of people who were willing to compromise over almost everything except assaults on their own communities."
This is total bullshit from O'Hagan. NI was a suppressed civil war between Unionists and Nationalists; the IRA came to terms because they were getting nowhere against the Army and RUC. Settlement came out of exhaustion. The Republicans in fact settled on terms very similar to ones they could have had in 73/74. Wars are not uncommonly settled by the exhaustion of the parties, that doesn't mean there was no reason for the conflict in the first place as half-wit O'Hagen thinks
It was a conflict of incompatible communities, but all, ultimately, Irish - of different traditions. "British" Muslims are totally incompatible, and they breed like rabbits, though of course the bunnies are gentle creatures.
Laban
Here's is a grade A liberal loon you might want to have a look at
http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2008/04/imagine-theres-no-country/#more-178
Buiter
"The wellbeing of the existing resident population is no more, and no less, relevant than the wellbeing of any potential immigrant to the UK, wherever in the world he or she may be. I recognise private property rights. My home is my castle and I can deny entry into it to anybody at any time. I don’t recognise national property rights. A country is not like a private home. A country is an open club."
If we have no rights in our nation any more than some Somali primitive who takes a fancy to come here then why should Buiter's private property rights be recognised? These property rights were secured in the context of the nation state, and indeed by the deaths of Britons in action against enemy powers which would have subjugated us. Who is this economic liberal clown that he should seek to take away our rights in the nation and piss over the work and sacrifice of previous generations?
Why should his individual property rights be sacrosanct - his property might have come from inherited wealth, it might have come from hedgefund speculation(and judging by his potted CV he does appear rather close to that contemptible crew). Why the individual, but not the collective?
Buiter
"They also have the right to expel existing members who are unwilling or incapable of abiding by the rules of the club. Banishment or exile for members of the existing resident population are the natural complement to the denial of membership to would-be immigrants unable or unwilling to abide by the rules of the club."
Truly malevolent stuff, for it is patriots he is talking about expelling. Elsewhere in his malignant musings he opines that "liberalism should develop sharp teeth" and he ponders the possibility of internal exile to the Outer Hebrides. He should be "exiled", straight off Beach Head.
Buiter
"I don’t believe that a substantially larger population for the UK would be beneficial. Quite the contrary, I consider the UK, or at any rate the English nation, to be overpopulated. However, other parts of the world are both poorer and even more overpopulated than the UK, so a significant migration from those countries to the UK would be the desirable from the point of view of global welfare, even if it were to make the existing UK residents worse off."
At least e's honest which is more than you can say for the rest of the mass immigrationist cheerleaders, like Legrain. But of course he won't be living in the midst of the liberal multi-culti-racial dystopia himself, he'll be safely dug in in his "gated community". Then when the alien hordes threaten the fence he'll be off in search of some other "open club". But hopefully he won't find one and he'll be told to xxxx right off!
Er, so why doesn't this loon encourage migration from those extremely densely populated areas to an area on the globe which isn't densely populated at all, rather than one which is currently overpopulated (by his own admission)?
This man is the classic metropolitan liberal intellectual, completely divorced from his nation, people and culture. He lives in a bubble with other similar thinking people. He simply has never considered, will never consider, does not have to consider the effects of mass immigration on culture, communities, crime and national identity.
He is a professor, yes? What we need is mass immigration of professors, lawyers, politicians, journalists, teachers. Bring enough in to force salaries down by 50%. I guarantee that when that happens attitudes to immigration among the liberal establishment will change very, very quickly.
Post a Comment