Tooting Popular Front (sorry, I meant to say Labour) MP Sadiq Khan’s appearance on Radio 4’s Any Questions, yielded some exceptionally dull and predictable responses. As one would expect from a Muslim MP, he was quite happy to make a case for British taxpayer’s money (and potentially lives) being wasted in our pointless intervention in Libya. When asked as to whether he thought that no-fly zones ought therefore to be logically extended to Syria, Bahrain and Yemen, he wouldn’t address the question, and instead blathered on at length about the UN Security Council’s sanction of the no-fly zone over Libya. Would Khan define what the objectives for this intervention were? No. Would he explain when the time would come for the intervention to end? No.
Different perspectives were forthcoming from Daily Mail columnist Anne Leslie and Communist RMT Leader Bob Crow. Surprisingly, the two of them were in agreement over the folly of the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya by NATO. Leslie quite rightly underscored the “ill-thought out” nature of the intervention, which at least in part appears to have been driven by television pictures and the misplaced idea of so-called ‘humanitarian intervention.’ Crow however, rightly noted that it was not this principle which constituted the primary driver for intervention, for if that had been the case, then there would have been interventions in numerous other places such as Zimbabwe, Sudan and Burma: “this is about one thing and one thing only: oil. If you’re a dictator who supports the West, you’re fine.” Well, looking at Saudi Arabia, might he not have a point on this score?
Sadiq Khan argues in favour of intervention because he is a Muslim and Libyans are Muslims. This is a clear illustration of the lasting and embedded harm done to our society by the implanting of the hostile alien ideology of Islam, for its followers identify more closely with their co-religionists overseas than with the indigenous British people. The real British people have no interest in intervening in Libya or anywhere else in the Muslim world. Libya’s problems are not our problems, and there is neither reason for us to intervene, nor benefit to be gained from such an intervention. Libya’s problems should be solved by Libyans and Libyans alone. As this intervention is injurious to our national interests and national security and Khan supports it, Khan is a threat to our national security (as, to be fair, are Cameron, Clegg, Hague et al). He represents only a section of his Muslim constituents; he does not represent the will of indigenous Britons. Voters of Tooting: eject Sadiq Khan at the earliest possible opportunity. Elect someone who will seek to represent your interests, not those of the Ummah.
Different perspectives were forthcoming from Daily Mail columnist Anne Leslie and Communist RMT Leader Bob Crow. Surprisingly, the two of them were in agreement over the folly of the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya by NATO. Leslie quite rightly underscored the “ill-thought out” nature of the intervention, which at least in part appears to have been driven by television pictures and the misplaced idea of so-called ‘humanitarian intervention.’ Crow however, rightly noted that it was not this principle which constituted the primary driver for intervention, for if that had been the case, then there would have been interventions in numerous other places such as Zimbabwe, Sudan and Burma: “this is about one thing and one thing only: oil. If you’re a dictator who supports the West, you’re fine.” Well, looking at Saudi Arabia, might he not have a point on this score?
Sadiq Khan argues in favour of intervention because he is a Muslim and Libyans are Muslims. This is a clear illustration of the lasting and embedded harm done to our society by the implanting of the hostile alien ideology of Islam, for its followers identify more closely with their co-religionists overseas than with the indigenous British people. The real British people have no interest in intervening in Libya or anywhere else in the Muslim world. Libya’s problems are not our problems, and there is neither reason for us to intervene, nor benefit to be gained from such an intervention. Libya’s problems should be solved by Libyans and Libyans alone. As this intervention is injurious to our national interests and national security and Khan supports it, Khan is a threat to our national security (as, to be fair, are Cameron, Clegg, Hague et al). He represents only a section of his Muslim constituents; he does not represent the will of indigenous Britons. Voters of Tooting: eject Sadiq Khan at the earliest possible opportunity. Elect someone who will seek to represent your interests, not those of the Ummah.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.