IT’S NOT JUST JEREMY CORBYN WHO’S GOT THIS SO VERY WRONG

There is understandable anger and revulsion at Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s speech today drawing a link between the Manchester bombing atrocity and British foreign policy.

It is, of course, a frequent claim by Muslim terrorists that they are only killing western civilians because the west has killed civilians in the Islamic world. Indeed, they often specifically target for attack children and young people – as they did in Manchester and as they have often done in Israel – in revenge for what they claim to be the killing of their own children by the west.

It is therefore beyond nauseating for Corbyn to echo their attempts to shift the blame for their own heinous murder of innocents onto Britain or America. Which, despite his caveats, is what he did.

However, those who are rightly denouncing his remarks are themselves failing to acknowledge a crucial point. For Corbyn said this:

“… many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services, have pointed out the connections between wars that we have been involved in, or supported, or fought, in other countries and terrorism here at home”.

That, as far as it goes, is correct. Many of those now loudly denouncing Corbyn themselves just as viciously blamed Britain’s role in the Iraq war for radicalising British Muslims who murdered other British citizens. This was said over and over again, not just by the left but by conservative media and establishment figures who were virulently against Britain’s involvement in Iraq.

No less a figure than Eliza Manningham-Buller, who was head of MI5 when 52 people were murdered in the 2005 London Tube and bus bombings, said in 2010 that the invasion of Iraq had “radicalised, for want of a better word, a whole generation of young people – not a whole generation, a few among a generation – who saw our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as being an attack upon Islam.”

The crucial word here was “saw”. For the point people are missing is that many in the Muslim world view reality as if in a mirror. They get it precisely back to front.

This is how the thinking goes. Islam is deemed to be perfection. All beyond it is evil and must therefore be conquered and brought under Islamic rule. Because Islam is perfection, pious Muslims can never be guilty of evil deeds such as the murder of innocents or the waging of aggressive wars of conquest. All such acts are instead defensive measures to protect the Islamic world.

All Muslim acts of terror or wars are therefore never aggressive, only defensive; and all defensive measures taken by the west to protect itself against such an onslaught are deemed to be aggressive attacks on the Islamic world.

That is why so many never, ever take responsibility for the terrible things that are done in the name of Islam.

That is why all military action taken by the west in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and so on, or any similar action by Israel in Gaza – which, whatever your view of the wisdom or otherwise of such action, are mounted by the west or Israel solely to defend themselves against further attack from within the Muslim world – are viewed by Muslims as an aggressive war to kill them and destroy Islam.

That’s why the all-important distinction between, on the one hand, Islamists setting out to murder as many western or Israeli children as possible and, on the other, western or Israeli forces unfortunately killing Muslim children in a just and necessary war of self-defence in which every attempt is made to avoid civilian casualties, is simply not recognised or understood at all.

This inversion of reality therefore makes it simply impossible for the west to take the measures necessary to defend itself without its Muslim attackers crying foul. Those like Corbyn or all the others who blame Muslim radicalisation on the west’s involvement in Iraq or Syria are therefore parroting what is nothing other than a moral and intellectual derangement. And just like the Muslim world, they would thus make it impossible for the west ever to defend itself against Islamic attack by defeating and destroying the purveyors of Islamic terror.

Jeremy Corbyn is not just expressing a disgusting far-left viewpoint. He is also echoing a widespread and catastrophic western mis-reading of a prevalent Muslim mindset – a mis-reading which has helped paralyse western defences against Islamic supremacism and which unfortunately continues to this very day.



http://www.melaniephillips.com/not-just-jeremy-corbyn-whos-got-wrong/

The trouble is that both "sides" are going to say they're defending themselves, and nobody can really say for sure who started it.

Here we have a problem with some British Muslims not identifying as being British. Michael Adebolajo spelt it out for us when he murdered Lee Rigby. He didn't leave some vague statement on Facebook, and he didn't leave it to the authorities to guess why he acted as he did. He stood there in the street with blood all over his hands telling us why exactly he did what he did. He's British, but he identifies more with other Muslims in other countries - countries which he perceived are being attacked by the West simply because those countries are Muslim. He wasn't mad, he was very lucid and very clear in his explanation.

I don't think there's any way to change that mindset.  I think people have to make up their minds. If they don't want terrorist attacks here, we simply have to stay out of Muslim countries, even on humanitarian grounds. We simply have to say - it's not our business, and if you want to kill each other, it's entirely up to you.

Well as seen the terrorism started long before any western intervention. And if we really want to be pedantic over this. It started with the Arabization of the Middle East and North Africa. People are quick to condemn colonialism, but the Arabization is essentially colonialism.

You point to the major elephant in the room on this and why it is all about Islam. That we see extremist Muslims only see other Muslims as victims and not anyone else. That its as if any Muslim death is an attack on Islam itself. That is troublesome to say the least. Which goes back to my original point with religious racism. That it allows for a collective view within the faith to place Muslims above all others and a deity seen as first and foremost to obey. Thankfully most Muslims do not view the world this way, but the religion is engineered to view Muslims as superior to others. The same can be found within all 3 Abrahamic faiths. As they look to reward followers of that faith and punish those who are non-believers.

This allows for the normalization and justification to murder those deemed as non-followers of that faith. It happened for centuries within Christianity also, but now where people are less literal within their beliefs, that problem has dramatically decreased. Most Christians do not as Muslims do, when Christians are persecuted, murdered and oppressed in the Middle East. Seek any form of vengeance. There is two reasons or this, Jesus taught a message of peace and there is no view around any Transgressions. Where in the past and rarely today Christians did commit violence based of the bible. The justifications came from the Old testament works. So where many Christians are rightly outraged, you rarely see (Lord's Resistance Army is one example) in any shape or form any Christian inspired terrorism against Muslim majority countries.

So the core problem is Islam itself, where they collectively view themselves separate and above all other people. Why you see them based off doctrine believe they should use violence against Non-Muslims. Where violence from Muslims against other Muslims is deemed a lesser crime to when Non-Muslims kill Muslims.No matter the intent, of which with the west they try to prevent any loss of civilian life. Islamic terrorists go out of their way to ensure as many innocent people die as possible. So the claim to equivalency from western foreign policy simple does not hold true.

The fact is time and time again people ignore what is the real problem here. How an ideology can bind people together in importance over everyone else. Like I said, a religious form of racism.

I think that the issue is this one about all Muslims being "brothers and sisters". They identify with each other, and an attack on one is attack on all. Looking out for each other is a good thing of course, but it can be taken too far.

Raggamuffin wrote:I think that the issue is this one about all Muslims being "brothers and sisters". They identify with each other, and an attack on one is attack on all. Looking out for each other is a good thing of course, but it can be taken too far.

I agree and as seen its very problematic.

Ah Melanie Phillips. I'll just leave this here

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/aug/06/anders-behring-breivik-melanie-phillips#ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/aug/06/anders-behring-breivik-melanie-phillips

She was quoted in his manifesto.

And of course this

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/six-times-tories-said-exactly-10511011

6 times Tories said exactly what they are now attacking Jeremy Corbyn for saying about the war on terror

sassy wrote:And of course this

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/six-times-tories-said-exactly-10511011

6 times Tories said exactly what they are now attacking Jeremy Corbyn for saying about the war on terror

What did you miss in regards to the title?

Those Tories who agree with Corbyn are also idiots.

sassy wrote:Ah Melanie Phillips.   I'll just leave this here

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/aug/06/anders-behring-breivik-melanie-phillips#ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/aug/06/anders-behring-breivik-melanie-phillips

She was quoted in his manifesto.

And there you have it. What does sassy say in regards to the content of the article?

Nothing.

What does she do instead?

Attempt to deligitmize the author of the article


This is all the Far Let can ever do.

And of course, let's not forget what Dodge said on here:

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t4682-let-s-be-honest-about-britain-s-islamophobia#96928

I mean based on Sassy's premise with Brevik liking views by Melanie Phillips. 

Is she going to hold responsible the Beatles for Charles Manson?

Now I do not even agree with all of her views and in fact am against some of them. Does that mean I dismiss everything she then writes?

Of course not.

sassy wrote:And of course, let's not forget what Dodge said on here:

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t4682-let-s-be-honest-about-britain-s-islamophobia#96928

Yes lets not forget, that I realized how very much I was wrong in the past and have the ability to admit I was wrong.

So thank you for sharing that.

It shows I do critically look at everything and look at both sides to an argument.

So now that she failed on trying to deligitimize Melanie, she turns to try and attempt to do the same to me and ends up with egg on her face, as she ends up showing me in a far better light. One that shows I can admit to previously being wrong on something

Thanks again Sassy