Apparently this was too “controversial” a joke to be left in the “public eye” on Jihad Watch, so I’ll repost it here. It’s an oldie, but a goodie.
Q: “Why are there no Muslims on Star Trek?”
A: “It’s in the future.”
It’s been a long time since I’ve said the following, too, so while I’m on a roll:
There. No sugar-coating. No hand-holding or hand-wringing. No apologies.
This is war, you bastards. Islamists: you’ve been asking for it. You’ve got it.
I’m going to start to get bigger, meaner and uglier than ever now here at the Anvil. I might even turn green!
Hell, I might even start calling Congress! This is America last I checked. I have a right to help run things as much as any other American, isn’t that so? I think it’s time to stop playing softball. It’s time to start getting loud, getting heard, getting uppity. It’s time to really get outraged.
If I don’t — if we don’t — get outraged, we won’t have a country left to recognize. I’m simply not going to sit back quietly on my hands and allow that.
And if you can’t take a joke, then I must be getting under your skin. And if I’m getting under your skin, I’m making you think; no more than that, I’m making you feel.
Mission accomplished!
Podcasts Archive
Foehammer,
You make Robert Spencer look like a pussy cat. You practice what you preach. You have more guts to speak out against Islam than RS does. I know that RS has silenced critics of Islam by banning them because Naseem complained of them possibly. Sometimes the truth hurts and truth of Islam shall set people free. Imagine that! The truth setting America free from radical Islam. It is possible.
Mr. Foehammer:
You have more guts to speak out than Robert does. He has even silenced some Islam critics by banning them on his website. He doesn’t even acknowledge your website on his website! Does he find your site offensive? Does he not like your style? What is RS’s problem?
If you think the Islamic joke to too hot to handle… Check this out!
youtube.com/watch?v=CjbYNgIi5ss&mode=related&search=
[quote comment=”6495″]Does he find your site offensive? Does he not like your style? What is RS’s problem?[/quote]
Believe me, you’re not the first to notice or ask. I let it go, despite the fact that I’ve massively supported Jihad Watch since 2001.
His lack of even a simple link won’t deter me. I have my own stand, my own style. If I don’t fit into the nice little box with a bow on it for the MSM, too bad. There’s enough of that around. Right?
PS Love Monty Python.
Foehammer,
Your humor was not offensive. They should all stick to what is offensive, the everyday killing machine that is Islam. A little humor along the way dosen’t hurt. I would say JW is getting some pressure from somewhere, maybe? Then again your missing post may have been accidental too.
I seriously doubt it was an accidental deletion. It’s not the first time I’ve been censored at JW — it’s just been quite awhile.
And frankly, I actually expected it.
Hammer
This is a little OT, but it is a small indication that the British are just starting to get an inkling that there is a problem [Well - apart from we ordinary folk, of course, who full-on know there’s a problem, know exactly what it is, and know exactly what to do about it
]. Cameron (or C.A.Moron, as many of us call him) will be the next British Prime Minister after Brown’s passed a couple of years at it when T. B Liar resigns later this month. Be as well to become knowledgeable about him. Personally, I reckon he’s far too soft, being myself a BNP voter and local activist-behind-the-scenes. What is it the Greens say? “Think Global, Act Local”. Take wisdom wherever it’s to be found … and adapt it.
archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2...n-i-am-zionist-and-im-proud.html
@Sir HM: You mentioned the BNP. How do you feel about the negative press the BNP so often gets? Is it deserved at all? It reminds me of how the Minutemen are treated by the Left here in the USA, though the BNP has some rather controversial ideas that I find myself not completely agreeing with as a whole either. But I’m not a Brit, so I can’t accurately gauge what rightly motivates the average UK citizen and what most likely lead to the formation of the BNP.
It is natural for me to find sympathy for the BNP to some degree at least, however, because at least there’s a group that’s willing to stand up to the Islamofascists. And as your link shows, you have Jewish members. That’s a very interesting fact.
(Note: I myself am not Jewish; I just happen to be a staunch supporter of Israel. Perhaps I’m even a Zionist at heart.)
I’ve written Congress and have gotten no replies recently- though a co-worker I encouraged did get something back… a canned reply stating the importance of the new immigration legislation. It strikes me as worrisome that the people who are supposed to listen to us do not- simply because we are not the fanatic and truly intolerant minority.
@Chris: I’ve experienced the same thing, time and time again. It is one of the reasons I began this blog. It is one of the reasons I intend to expand beyond it one day. All any of us can do is keep raising our voices and hope to be heard. At least you’ve taken that step. Far too many don’t even attempt that much.
Morgan,
Well, that was one in-depth reply. I hope you will try to post it in the comments again. I’m not sure why there might have been an error. And I definitely did not find it in any of my comments holding bins.
I learned much from this and I definitely would choose the BNP over most of the parties involved in the EU and UK. No doubt about that. I often discuss with my own family that the only way to beat the Islamists will entail a hardline stance. We’ve had far too many anarchists on both sides of the water mucking up the works and leading us down this dangerous multiculturalist path run amok.
Keep standing up for what you believe. I may not hold out the greatest faith for the future of Europe, but I do know that if the UK starting showing real backbone, Americans would wakeup faster, and we would come to your aid when needed.
Thanks again for taking the time to enlighten me.
Foehammer
Morgan wrote:
Hammer
This is the second time I’ve sent this - first one disappeared off somewhere:
The difficulty for the BNP is that it has unsavoury origins in the National Front. Nick Griffin, the chairman of the BNP started his political life as a teenager in the NF. Is the NF Nazi, or otherwise Fascist? It’s really difficult to say; let’s just say they are seriously hard. A breakaway faction of the original NF joined forces with The British Movement in 1982 to form the new party - the BNP, led by a man named John Tyndall. Hang on - this’ll be a lot easier for me, and will probably be more coherent, if I just copy and paste a bit of the history of the BNP that I included in a talk I gave about our recent council election performance to the local party last month. I included it to give a bit of context to our performance.
” In 1982, the New National Front and a faction of the British Movement merged to form the new British National Party. Tyndall was elected leader. So this BNP of ours has only existed for 25 years.
The increase in the deposit required of Parliamentary candidates hindered the party during the 1987 elections when it received 553 votes having put up 2 candidates.In the early 1990s, the party saw a growth in popularity mainly in London and the urban south east, and especially in the borough of Tower Hamlets in the inner East End where increasing immigration from Bangladesh in an area of housing pressure led it to campaign for “Rights for whites”. At two local council by-elections in 1990, the party came in third, and on October 1, 1992 the party won 20% of the vote in the Millwall ward. At another by-election in Millwall in September 1993 the party obtained its first councillor, Derek Beackon, with a majority of seven votes. Although Beackon was able to achieve little on the council before the full council elections (in which he lost his seat, after anti-BNP campaigners flooded the area), the by-election win led to a great increase in publicity for the party.
Nick Griffin joined the BNP in 1995. In 1999 he replaced Tyndall as BNP leader after a leadership election. Once elected Griffin began a programme of modernising the BNP’s image, dropping the policy of the compulsory repatriation of non-whites and replacing it with a “firm encouragement” for “voluntary” repatriation.
In the 2002 local elections, the BNP gained 3 seats in Burnley and averaged 20% of the votes where it stood councillors. Events in the run up to the 2006 local elections seemed to show an increase in support for the BNP, with research showing that, in the parts of England where the BNP put most of their resources, one in four voters was considering voting BNP with the figure at one in five in parts of London . A government minister, Margaret Hodge, also highlighted the increase in support by saying that eight out of ten white working class people in her London constituency of Barking were “tempted” to vote for the BNP. The increase in support for the BNP was notably demonstrated by a poll released by YouGov, a British polling firm, that indicated that the BNP vote nationally had surged to 7% in the wake of media attention, a more than tenfold increase over the previous general election. A YouGov poll in April 2006 found that the majority of Britons agreed with many BNP policies, when unaware they were associated with the BNP. 59% supported the halting of all further immigration, and average support for the BNP propositions cited in the poll among those who did not know they belonged to the BNP was 55%.
On 5 May 2006, the results of the 2006 local elections were reported by the BBC and showed a dramatic increase for the BNP. The party presented about 350 candidates, of which 33 were initially declared to be winners and a further 70 were placed second: the second highest gain of any party in the elections. This more than doubled the number of seats then held by the BNP. Also noteworthy is the fact that the constituency of Barking and Dagenham became, according to many newspapers, the first council in the United Kingdom to have the BNP as the second-biggest party; that is – the official opposition. Think about that for a moment … However, the BNP had been, just briefly, the second largest party on Burnley Council in 2003. [Tyndall led for 17 years, and got only one councillor elected, and that only lasted a few months. Griffin has led for only eight years and we have over 50 concillors and a surging membership. And a change in the flavour of the party]
Since Griffin took over its leadership, the BNP has become more moderate, promoting similar policies to the Euronationalist approach adopted by a number of far-right European counterparts such as the Austrian Freedom Party set up by Jörg Haider. This is a pattern of emphasis and presentation of policies cited as a factor in such parties’ increased electoral successes of the 1990s and, arguably much more, the 2000s.
In General elections from 1983 to 2005, the BNP has gradually increased the average number of voters per candidate at every election. ”
1983 - 276 votes per candidate
1987 - 277 votes per candidate
1992 - 587 votes per candidate
1997 - 640 votes per candidate
2001 - 1428 votes per candidate
2005 - 1620 votes per candidate.
In my home town (equals one Parliamentary constituency), which has had a Labour Party council continuously since 1906 - 101 years - we put up council candidates in 8 out of a possible 25 wards in last month’s council elections. From those eight wards we drew 2572 votes. Compare that to the average 1620 at the last general election. Had the recent elections been a Parliamentary election we’d have had at least 2572 votes - and that’s not counting however many votes we’d have drawn from the other 17 wards. We’d have easily doubled the 2005 average.
Even the media has started taking us seriously, and the stories are getting a lot fairer; Griffin even had an hour on the BBC earlier this week, and he wasn’t treated like a pariah.
The party is slowly living down its less than savoury beginnings: the boot boys have left and gone back to the original NF, there is very strict party discipline on members - we must behave ourselves (I was recently up in front of a judge, but it was for events some time before I joined - otherwise I’d have been dismissed from the party - and I’ve been squeaky clean since).
Is the BNP a Nazi or Fascist party as the left claims? Personally I don’t think so, otherwise I wouldn’t have joined it. As for racism - well, I was married for nearly a quarter-century to a South Asian woman (Sri Lankan), and my only child is half-Asian, so I’d hardly be likely to join the BNP if I thought it was racist. Of course, there are some out-and-out racists in the party, as there are some out-and-out anti-Semites; But that is no different from any other party or organisation. The party, as any other party, is drawn from the general population, and as these kinds of people exist in the population then they’ll inevitably exist in any organisation drawn from that population. I have personally met 2 racists and 1 anti-Semite - but they generally have to keep their lips buttoned or they’re out. Like everyone else, they have to fall in with party discipline - anyone who doesn’t like that can always go elsewhere. There are probably more racists in the Conservative party, and more anti-Semites in both the Labour and Liberal-Democrat parties. It’s not so much anti-’the other’, as pro-’our own’, which I see as quite legitimate. After all, isn’t every party pro-their own? It’s just a matter of how you define ‘your own’.
Maybe in the BNP’s early days it deserved its negative press - I can’t really say; but the negative press it gets now is undeserved. Anyway, the negative press is moderating somewhat. They try, but they can’t really find anything and are beginning to realise it. And as for some controversial ideas that you don’t really agree with? Well, what political party anywhere doesn’t have some ideas you disagree with? Nobody who thinks for himself can possibly agree with every dot and comma of a party’s ideas - that would just be letting someone else do your thinking for you. Like all political party membership - or even just voting in favour of - you choose one ‘on balance’. That’s basically what I did with the BNP. The deciding factor for me was its stance on Islam. When you say there are some ideas you don’t agree with, are you arriving at your views from what the BNP has to say for itself, or what other people say that it says? It may appear to an American to be anti-American. It’s not - it’s just pro-British. If in the party’s opinion, it’s in overall British interests to support America, then the party will do so. It will always act in the perceived interests of the British people. And if ever it is to achieve government, then that is the way it will have to behave, just as all other governments in all other countries, including America, behave. That’s fair enough. On the whole, British and American interests tend to coincide, so America wouldn’t find a BNP government here to be particularly hostile. But not a walkover either. Islam would be finished here, and the EU would be thrown into chaos by British withdrawal; so many other European people are getting hacked off with the EU that it might set off a chain reaction. Islam would be finished in the rest of Europe too, then.
There are not only Jewish members in the BNP, there is at least one Jewish elected councillor. The BNP really doesn’t have a Jewish problem. It doesn’t have a Sikh, or Hindu, or Buddhist - or any other problem either (and we are particularly close with Sikhs - the Islam attitude did that; and if anyone understands how to deal with Islam, it’s Sikhs). It does have an Islam problem though. I told you I was recently up in front of a judge; well, when the police were interrogating me they asked me why I was in the BNP: I just said one word: Islam. Police never mentioned the subject again - they understood. At the lower levels the police do understand; it’s only as police get senior and start morphing into a political role that they lose that understanding. The BNP is also overtly pro-Christianity.
The average UK citizen is, more than anything else, disappointed. None of the major political parties are defending us or Britain. All their party memberships are shrinking - the BNP is growing. Ordinary folk understand Islam is a threat to us, and also understand that if they say too much about that they can find themselves prosecuted and jailed. You didn’t think this country had free speech did you? Take me for instance: I was once a member of the Labour party, and for many years. The BNP is riddled with people like me who were once members of the various major parties (can’t say I’ve come across any ex-Liberals though). I think our major parties have become sclerotic, lost their vitality. Mind you, I think that of the major parties in every Western country. They have all been there too long and feel a sense of entitlement. An exception to this may, in my view, be Russia - may; but whether you’d class that as a Western country I don’t know. I’m not even sure we can call it democratic. But is Britain democratic? The Labour party got the support of just 22.8% of the electorate at the last general election, but has 100% of the power … and is using that power to allow the whole world and its brother in to settle. It’s gotten so bad that people are moving to, well, the BNP in ever increasing numbers. There were so many applications to join end of last year beginning of this that the party had to revamp its membership administration, take on full-time staff - and at that it was taking three months to send out membership cards. When I joined a year or so ago, I got my card in a fortnight. My number is in the mid-20,000s.
People are feeling swamped. Slough, a major town here, now has a minority British native population; Leicester, another major town is expected to tip that way any time now; it’s reckoned that by the 2012 olympics London will be a British-minority city. A huge proportion of these incomers are Muslims; mainly Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Somalis - probably amongst the worst kinds of Muslims you can get. Ordinary people are seriously feeling it. The multiculti brigade has pushed too far too fast and started waking people up. If they’d just done it slowly and gradually they might have gotten away with it until it was too late to stop it. Also, the stupid Muslim hotheads just couldn’t contain themselves and launched their attacks starting with New York as their first spectacular. Every time they do something like this, that’s a few more Brits in the BNP, and a lot more votes for it. The major parties are getting less and less trusted, and even many people who distrust the BNP are holding their noses and voting for us.
I was really reluctant to join the BNP, and dithered about it for ages. Then I read this single essay:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/columnists/chairman2.php?ngId=30
The following day I phoned the local organiser (a retired medical doctor).
If you want my views on how we should handle Iraq, Afghanistan, the Palestinians, and the rest of the Muslim world, that’d be a subject for another essay. Needless to say, I think we should handle things differently - and, in its own sneaky way, nastier. I do think this 1350 yr-old assault has to be brought to a final end, otherwise they’ll just keep coming back at us - and they only have to be lucky once!
Here’s the BNP’s main site if you want to read what they think first-hand.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/
And here were what we stood behind at the last general election (generalities, not fine detail)
http://www.bnp.org.uk/candidates2005/man_menu.htm
Anyway, I think I’ve rambled on in this disorganised fashion for more than long enough - but I do think I’m typical of millions, and more by the day.
We’ll win. The only question is over how many casualties we’ll have to take.
Take care
Morgan