Pat Condell has a few words for the people who got YouTube to ban his last video, and a bit of a clarification on his views about the religious apartheid kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Good grief. Now the British nanny state is actually warning nursery school teachers to be on the lookout for racist babies.
Toddlers who turn their noses up at spicy food from overseas could be branded racists by a Government-sponsored agency.
The National Children’s Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.
This could include a child of as young as three who says “yuk” in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food.
The guidance by the NCB is designed to draw attention to potentially-racist attitudes in youngsters from a young age. It alerts playgroup leaders that even babies can not be ignored in the drive to root out prejudice as they can “recognise different people in their lives”.
The 366-page guide for staff in charge of pre-school children, called Young Children and Racial Justice, warns: “Racist incidents among children in early years settings tend to be around name-calling, casual thoughtless comments and peer group relationships.”
It advises nursery teachers to be on the alert for childish abuse such as: “blackie”, “Pakis”, “those people” or “they smell”. The guide goes on to warn that children might also “react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying ‘yuk’”.
Staff are told: “No racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist incident, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action.”
A disturbingly high percentage of the Islamic preachers in mosques and Islamic centers across Germany are uneducated Dark Ages fanatics. What could go wrong?
A study on Islamic preachers in Germany has found that most imams are unable to help Muslim immigrants integrate into mainstream German society because they are insufficiently prepared for their stay in Germany.
According to the study “Imams in Germany,” up to 20 percent of preachers belong to the more conservative, fundamentalist strand of Islam. The study also discovered that only one fifth of imam’s possess academic qualifications.
I was going to write “unbelievable,” but unfortunately this sort of British governmental absurdity has become all too believable; so tied up in political correctness and delusional multiculturalism that they coddle their own mortal enemies: Abu Qatada: Radical cleric to be released ‘in next 24 hours’.
Radical cleric Abu Qatada, described as “Osama bin Laden’s right hand man in Europe,” is to be released in the next 24 hours.
Qatada, who is accused of giving advice and support to terrorists including the leader of the September 11 hijackers, has been described in official documents as a “truly dangerous individual” who was “heavily involved, indeed at the centre of terrorist activities associated with al-Qa’eda.”
He has been convicted twice in Jordan in his absence for conspiracy to carry out bomb attacks on two hotels in Amman in 1998, and providing finance and advice for a series of bomb attacks in Jordan planned to coincide with the Millennium.
It was those convictions which allowed him to argue in the Appeal Court he would not get a fair treatment in his home country.
With the prospect of extradition removed, the Ministry of Justice has been forced to release him by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission.
The bail order was signed this afternoon and he is expected to be released from Long Lartin jail in Worcestershire tomorrow.
Here’s an interesting piece by Theodore Dalrymple at City Journal, on Britain’s struggle to assimilate immigrants: A Confusion of Tongues.
London is now the most ethnically diverse city in the world—more so, according to United Nations reports, even than New York. And this is not just a matter of a sprinkling of a few people of every race and nation, or of the fructifying cultural effect of foreigners (a culture closed to outsiders is dead, though perhaps that is not the only way for a culture to die). Walk down certain streets in London and one encounters a Babel of languages. If a blind person had only the speech of passersby to help him get his bearings, he would be lost; though perhaps the very lack of a predominant language might give him a clue. (This promiscuity is not to say that monocultural ghettos of foreigners do not also exist in today’s Britain.)
A third of London’s residents were born outside Britain, a higher percentage of newcomers than in any other city in the world except Miami, and the percentage continues to rise. Likewise, migration figures for the country as a whole—emigration and immigration—suggest that its population is undergoing swift replacement. Many of the newcomers are from Pakistan, India, and Africa; others are from Eastern Europe and China. If present trends continue, experts predict, in 20 years’ time, between a quarter and a third of the British population will have been born outside it, and at least a fifth of the native population will have emigrated. Britain has always had immigrants—from the French Huguenots after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes to Germans fleeing Prussian repression, from Jews escaping czarist oppression to Italian prisoners of war who stayed on after World War II—and absorbed them. But never so many, or so quickly.
To the anxiety about these unprecedented demographic changes—a substantial majority of the public, when asked, says that it wants a dramatic reduction in immigration—one can add a reticence in openly expressing it. Inducing this hesitancy are intellectuals of the self-hating variety, who welcome the destruction of the national identity and who argue—in part, correctly—that every person’s identity is multiple; that identity can and ought to change over time; and that too strong an emphasis on national identity has in the past led to barbarism. By reiteration, they have insinuated a sense of guilt into everyone’s mind, so that even to doubt the wisdom or viability of a society consisting of myriad ethnic and religious groups with no mutual sympathy (and often with mutual antagonisms) is to suspect oneself of sliding toward extreme nationalism or fascism; so that even to doubt the wisdom or viability of a society in which everyone feels himself part of an oppressed minority puts one in the same category as Jean-Marie Le Pen, or worse. This anxiety inhibits discussion of the cultural question. In view of Europe’s twentieth century, the inhibition is understandable. One consequence, however, is that little attempt has been made to question what attachment Britain’s immigrants have to the traditions and institutions of their new home.
The Islamist known as “Osama bin Laden’s right hand man,” Abu Qatada, is now set for life on British benefits.
One of the world’s most dangerous terror suspects was last night preparing for a life on benefits in Britain after judges ruled that his deportation would breach human rights law.
Abu Qatada, dubbed Osama Bin Laden’s “truly dangerous” ambassador in Europe, could be released from jail within months following the Court of Appeal verdict.
Yesterday’s decision has left Britain’s anti-terror laws in tatters. It means the Jordanian father of five - who has been linked to a string of global terror conspiracies and is held in a high security prison under immigration powers - can expect to receive £1,000 a month in handouts.
The taxpayer also faces a bill of tens of thousand of pounds to keep the hate-filled cleric under 24-hour surveillance by security services under a control order unless a last-ditch Home Office appeal is granted by the House of Lords. Even if it is, Qatada could appeal again, to the European Court of Human Rights.
Yesterday the Court of Appeal said Qatada could stay because evidence used against him in any prosecution in his native Jordan may have been obtained by torture - a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.
At the same time, 12 Libyan fanatics were cleared to remain in Britain for the rest of their lives by a second human rights ruling. They include an asylum seeker considered a “real and direct threat” to security who had a map marked with the flightpath to Birmingham Airport.
The rulings mean that - despite Tony Blair’s promise in the immediate aftermath of the 7/7 attacks that the “rules of the game have changed” - not a single international terrorist has been forcibly removed from this country.
Almost three years on, the only Islamic fanatics to depart are eight Algerians who went voluntarily.
A senior member of Britain’s General Synod of the Church of England is just begging for a fatwa.
A senior Church of England member called yesterday for the building of mosques to be banned.
Alison Ruoff said more construction would lead to Islamic no go areas dominated by exclusively Muslim populations living under sharia law.
Mrs Ruoff, a member of the General Synod, the Church’s parliament, added: “If we don’t watch out we will become an Islamic state. It’s that serious.”