Wednesday, 31 March 2010

Religions Can Live Together

From editorial in issue No 27 by Robert Edwards

When religious affairs in Britain are used as a political football then surely some of us have regressed in terms of civilisation.
For centuries, Christians, Muslims and Jews lived peaceably together in parts of the world now troubled by the war plans of American neo-cons. The hawkish attitude of Israel, with its Zionist doctrine of Jewish supremacism, seems certain to exacerbate the difficulties, not only in the Middle and Far East but here in Europe, as well.
Nick Griffin continues to use his one and only political playing card, that of the perceived threat of Islamisation, yet another newly constructed buzz word in the ‘nationalist’ lexicon, although still not yet entered into the Oxford Concise Dictionary. Not only is it not a legitimate word but its continued use by a bunch of illegitimate thugs with little else on their election stall, calls for some serious comment from us.
Let us take a look at these Islamophobes, a term that accurately describes their mental condition ... fear of Islam. The difference? Islamophobes do exist whereas ‘Islamisation’ is a product of their imagination ... an imaginary nightmare world calculated to scare the delicate among us.
The BNP has been coerced, albeit by law, to adopt a multi-ethnic membership policy and one of its first ‘ethnics’ is an excommunicated Sikh by the name of Rajinder Singh (right). Although born a Sikh in the Punjab, he no longer sports the obligatory beard and his turban is brought out only for photo opportunity shoots. In short, he is a phoney.
The Sikh community has sent him to Coventry and created in him a minority of one. Griffin had placed all his chips on Rajinder Singh bringing all other Sikhs in Britain onto the side of the BNP in the mistaken belief that they all hate Muslims with the same rabid intensity as ‘good old Rajinder’ (Griffin’s hatred of Muslims is purely venal). As such, Rajinder becomes the BNP’s first ‘ethnic’, now in complete isolation and very lonely. He will end up as an albatross around their necks, the curse of the Muslim-hater rejected by his own community and now of no use at all to anyone else.
Can you see the patriotic lads from Dagenham or Burnley giving him three loud cheers as he froths at the mouth, telling them how he would like all Muslims snuffed out? Can you really see them embracing him as one of their own? No, they will revert to type and eventually kick him out. They treat Sikhs with as equal contempt as they do Muslims. To them, they are all ‘rag heads’.
Over in the land of the clogs and tulips we have an even more bizarre Islamophobe. The flamboyant, platinum blond Geert Wilders of the Dutch Freedom Party has come out with what he calls “a rational deterrent to radical Islamists bent on using weapons of mass destruction against America and the West”. He wants to drop a nuclear bomb on Mecca. I am not surprised to learn that the English Defence League endorses Wilders’ mad proposal as many on the English Defence League’s forum have echoed the same.
There used to be a regular feature in Private Eye magazine under the moniker of ‘A Taxi Driver Writes’ and it always ended with “hanging’s too good for them”. Essex Man behind a wheel.
Comments on the EDL forum (in response to Wilders’ proposal) include the Neanderthal-speak, “Nuke em all thats [sic] what I say” and “I say the only way we will find out what will happen is to give it a try”. So much for ‘only against Islamic extremism’.
A few details regarding Geert Wilders need airing here. He regularly visits Israel and considers it his ‘second home’. He also regularly visits the Israeli Embassy in the Netherlands. We can only conclude that, with such unsavoury connections, murdering millions of innocent civilians will come as second nature to him.
Without the poison from these Islamophobes, we could all live in the tolerant spirit of civil and religious liberty ... a very English tradition since 1689. This was the case in the old Yugoslavia until Serbian nationalism reared its ugly head and embarked on ‘ethnic cleansing’, for which one of its main protagonists is now on trial in The Hague.
People professing different faiths can live together in peace and harmony, so necessary for stability within a Europe a Nation of the future. A new Age of Tolerance would ensure that. In the meantime, we need to stand up to and expose the hate-mongers ... those dupes doing the dirty work of the Zionist neo-cons in what is largely an invented ‘war on terrorism’ serving the interests of the globalists based in Washington and Tel Aviv.



Zionism is a plague !
Mais je ne suis pas d'accord avec vous !
Les communautés religieuses ne vivaient pas des ces conditions coertives où elles sont forcées de vivre ensemble par la main capitaliste Juive !

Anonymous said...

The religious debate is a difficult square to circle. In my mind it opens a Pandora's box.

What I seem to fail to understand is that we are still deeply concerned with religion at all. Surely, we are now beyond religion.

Did we not experience the enlightenment? The era or rationalism. Are we not now over two centuries away from religious dogma? Yet, it is still with us.

How is it that the powers that be have succeeded in exploiting sectarian divides or differing interpretations?

The way I see it, we are all being played. Muslims, Christians and the rest.

Whilst I understand that religion fulfills a social function I'm failing to understand how it is of real political relevance in the modern world.

As a political force I merely see it as anachronistic. People have moved on.

It is whipped up because beneath this religious politics there is an agenda. In other words, it is a tool for a purpose. That purpose is still being outplayed today.

How it impacts is difficult to say but certainly we can say one point as a certainty. That where ever religion manifests there is war.

The BNP is falling into the trap laid before them. The designed clash of cultures between Muslims and Christians. To a certain extent we are all falling into this trap. It is easy to denounce Islam and hard to denounce the real perpetrators to the conflict.

Had the BNP stood outside the box we could respect them. In reality, they fell into it. It is hard sometimes not to. After all, we all believe that we stem from certain core belief systems be it heritage, culture, religion, etc. But, when you realise that you have fallen into a trap and that in the worse case it could escalate to world war than you have to either fall silent or make a stand to denouce it.

Robert Edwards said...

The issue here concerns religious tolerance and the right to worship unhindered.
Religion fulfils more than a 'social function'. It also fulfils a spiritual need. If you do not feel this, then do not deny it for others.
The anti-Islam campaign perpetrated by the BNP is simply thinly veiled racism because Islam is largely identified with 'brown' people. It is no more than abusive and insulting.
It is not religion that is the cause of war ... but political forces using religion for secular purposes.

Europe a Nation blog by Robert Edwards

Posting on here for Europe a Nation