The testimony from one of our members about being arrested yesterday without charge, gives yet more red lights not only about the dangerous level to which the right to free speech has deteriorated in Britain, but also the incompetence of those in charge of defending it.
The main priority the police seemed to have set themselves yesterday was avoiding bother at all costs, and this is a recipe for disaster where Muslims are concerned because civil disobedience is a religious calling for Muslims. Knowing trouble is likely to happen at any given event means more police officers need to be called, more incidents take place, and of course the obligatory paperwork piles up (not to mention damage/theft during rioting).
While it’s possible to understand the police’s viewpoint and their complaints of underfunding, what is happening is that the Muslim community is manipulating the law enforcement apparatus of a sovereign democracy with the threat of violence, and as a result the freedom of speech is disappearing.
As the saying goes, if the freedom of speech means anything, it’s the freedom to tell people what they don’t want to hear. But what we have here is Muslims not only calling for the effective genocide of the Jews, but abusing anyone they wish, and the rights of those on the receiving end of racist, lewd, and derogatory comments are inhibited because they aren’t allowed to reply because of the police's fear of civil disobedience.
But this blackmailing over the threat of violence isn’t anything new; it is a well rehearsed tactic by Muslims from the earliest days of Islam.
Andrew G Bostom writes in The Legacy of Jihad how the Christian community of Spain in 711 were collectively held hostage. Having been conquered (dhimmi), their only choice was death, or paying the jizya, the Islamic tax like protection money you pay to the mafia not to harm you, your family or your business. But if, during Muslim rule, ‘one dhimmi harmed a Muslim, the whole community lost its status of protection, leaving it open to pillage, enslavement, and arbitrary killing.’ (p.56)
This was a very effective tactic in enslaving the entire nation, whether conquered or not. It would’ve made vigilante-type raids and attacks impossible, because the whole Christian community would suffer as a result, regardless of whether the vigilantes are related to their fellow Christians or not.
And given the contempt Muslims have for the truth, claiming ‘massacres’ or ‘racism’ whenever it suits them, the fear this rule would’ve instilled on a defenceless population would make for a terrorised, unenviable existence.
Additionally, as the Islamic empire colonised more and more territories, it came to rule over more and more Christians (and others). Again, the fate of these dhimmis was tactically linked to Islam’s successes or failures elsewhere in the world. Bostom quotes the Greek historian Constantelos when he writes:
“Their [the Muslim] attitude towards the Orthodox Church was determined by the relations between the caliphate [Muslim empire] and Constantinople [the heart of Christendom, before Rome]. Their tolerance in peace-time changed during hostilities into violent outbursts which resulted in persecutions, the death of many Christians and the destruction of churches and other ecclesiastical institutions. For example, when the Arabic armies suffered repeated defeats during the reign of Emperor Tiberios II (698-705), Abd al-Aziz, governor of Egypt and brother of Caliph [Islamic pope] ...unleashed a persecution against the Orthodox in Alexandria in 704. The mobs attacked the Christians, and Abd al-Aziz ordered that all crosses be removed from Christian churches ... The persecution was especially severe against monks and lasted for several years. The Ecclesiastical administration of the Orthodox (Chalcedonian) patriarchate in Egypt was abolished for ninety-one years.“
So much for that mythical ‘golden age’...
Back to today, so while the Muslims are allowed to engage in their calls to erase Judaism from the Jews’ holiest city, Jerusalem, Jews in Britain aren’t allowed to answer back.
If the police are complaining of not being able to do their jobs due to underfunding, it means democracy is failing.
A situation in which only violence, or the threat of violence, gets you what you want, then we don't have a rule of law but anarchy. In this kind of scenario, the more Muslims demand the more they're likely to get, thus the process of Islamisation accelerate.
Does anyone think things are going to get any better?