As some people (myself included) have predicted, there are moves afoot to formalise the turning of a blind eye to Muslim radicalism except in the most extreme cases.
As The Express reports, police in particular are to be told not to press for conviction is many instances, including "borderline" cases.
Note that this is effectively a form of racism (a term that these days goes beyond just "race") — but then, who truly believed that any of our current so-called anti-discrimination legislation was really that? As has been voiced by many commentators for years now, it was in reality intended to favour preferred interest groups. This latest revelation is just another part of the same agenda.
As critics of the move are reported as saying, yes it will be a green light to those Islamic radicals who wish to push their hatred further. One can imagine being in their place, with their warped outlook, and see that as the only possible outcome — more violence, more intimidation, and an increase in radicalisation.
That must be what is intended, as surely no-one in government would be so stupid as not to realise this. Oh, the justification looks all very plausible — but why does it apply only to Muslims?
As Goodnight Vienna mentions at Voice of the Resistance, the proper response to the whole issue is to tackle it head-on — not through attempts at appeasement. That short article contains these two most useful words: "Get tough!"
Over and above that, though, get fair, and stop slanting anything at all in favour of (or the opposite) any particular group or groups. We are all equal under traditional British law and its enforcement structure, and attempting to skew that is in itself a form of corruption. Those found to be responsible for this racist plan will need to be dealt with once we have a new government in place in this country…
The PB Predictions 2009 Part 1- How did we do?
2 hours ago
3 comments:
John,
I always enjoy reading your blog, but this time you seem to have missed the point a little. Firstly, an 'intelligent' person would never beleive anything verbatim they read in the Express, and secondly the move is designed to reduce the 'excuses' / justification of these extremists. By the police NOT prosecuting/ arresting marginal and less important cases, those Muslims and others involved are less likely to side with those radicals/ extremists. Its no different to the community relations our police (rightly) practice on Medways rougher estates to get the youths 'onside' - and arguably no different to Medway Council approving planning for a Sikh temple when it (arguably) was 'in the wrong zone'. Lets all learn to live together and co-operate, rather than rely on downmarket tabloid chatter. Isnt that what true Conservatism is all about?
Thank you for your comment, Anon.
I don't often quote from The Express, but this story does fit in with information I have been getting from other sources as well, so I thought it worth using.
As long as this policy (so far expressed as "guidance") turns out in practice to apply to all, and not just to particular groups or sections of society, then that will no turn be judged pragmatic and fair.
My point was that it appears not to be intended to apply equitably. We shall see what happens in practice, and then I shall no doubt review this.
As far as the "getting youths onside" applies — yes, I and my colleagues did this ourselves, as well as supporting the police officer who did such work in a neighbouring ward (we shared him at the time). That, of course, applied to all our/their youth.
I am having difficulty with the Sikh Temple reference, though, as I cannot equate that (which was a planning matter) that solved a problem in one place and also brought a disused and apparently unwanted building back into use, mainly on Sundays when the local business community would be expected to be closed for the weekend.
"Firstly, an 'intelligent' person would never beleive anything verbatim they read in the Express..."
The 'Express', like all MSM organs, might shade the story to suit their own viewpoint, but they rarely outright lie.
Particularly when they are quoting people like David Davies...
"Lets all learn to live together and co-operate..."
By bending rules such as planning laws for one small section of the population only? Strange idea you have there of the definition of 'co-operation'...
Post a Comment