Heard on PM last night (on the drive home from helping to
shore up Britain’s ailing economy by being a tax slave) David Aaronovitch and
some female muslim commentator – I didn’t catch her name - discussing today’s
leaked Charlie Hebdo cover. Despite her overly reasonable intonation she seemed
unable to accept that for the free-thinking world (muslims need NOT apply) maligning
a D-List historical celebrity through cartoonery is neither a crime nor even much of an insult. And
while there was some mild outcry over The
Life of Brian a third of a century ago, the Christian world got over it
with barely a severed head to show, let alone whole villages raped and murdered
and hundreds of thousands of people banished from their homes forever.
Still we get the pleas for moderation in our reaction to islamism
which, no matter how hard you pretend otherwise, is still all to do with no other ideology than islam.
I’d say cartoon mockery and a few goat-shagging jokes is pretty damned moderate
in comparison to wholesale massacre; the muslims are getting off pretty lightly
and they should suck it up. She said it was still some form of religious
persecution – well, she would, wouldn’t she? That’s some definition of persecution;
maybe she ought to examine her own religious superstition’s record in this
regard?
Twitter is fond of repeating the quote usually credited
to François-Marie Arouet: “If you want to
know who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise."
But of course, he was writing in the eighteenth Century when the islamic world
was of little real concern to the civilised world. Oh but wait… in Le Fanatisme ou Mahomet, in 1736 Voltaire
(for ‘tis he) described mohammed as an "impostor", a "
false prophet", a "fanatic" and a "hypocrite". In it he
said that he "tried to show in it
into what horrible excesses fanaticism, led by an impostor, can plunge weak
minds".
In 1899 Winston Churchill similarly observed, in The River War: “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.”
I don’t know about you but I reckon they nailed it. Far
from being nothing to do with islam, so-called islam-ism appears to be nothing new at all, carrying with it a
murderous fanaticism rooted deep in the words of their fictitious object of
worship. And lest you are wont to drift into the lazy aphorism that the
majority of followers of the humourless prophet are peaceful and peace-loving,
take five minutes to listen to Brigitte Gabriel’s response to one of their
number. Now, watch it again.
mohammed... not as funny as Brian!
None of this is the fault of any other religion. Neither
is it a reaction to western foreign policy nor some form of racism, mistaking a
belief for a race. It isn’t even a Zionist plot, no matter how gullible you are
and how desperately you wish it were so. All – absolutely all – of the ills of
islam are entirely the fault of islam and its deranged adherents and no amount
of ‘bullying’ by the likes of ‘O-Whine’ Jones and other ridiculous apologists
should deter us from ridiculing what we despise; islam, to me you are nothing
but a deeply unfunny joke.
