/

/

/

/

/

UK: MEDIA SPINS GOVERNMENT LINE ON GROUNDSWELL SUPPORT FOR HOUSING MUSLIM SETTLERS, POLLING SAYS DIFFERENTLY…….

Media activism Media malfeasance Media Skullduggery MUSLIM SETTLERS

UK: MEDIA SPINS GOVERNMENT LINE ON GROUNDSWELL SUPPORT FOR HOUSING MUSLIM SETTLERS, POLLING SAYS DIFFERENTLY…….

By KGS9 years ago1

The lying media, what else is new?

The iron triangle of the government, media and academy can always be counted on to diverge with the majority of public opinion.

POLLING: BRITISH PUBLIC REJECTS IDEA OF LETTING MORE MIGRANTS IN, CONTRASTS WITH MEDIA NARRATIVE

anti-migrant

MICHAL CIZEK/AFP/Getty Images

by RAHEEM KASSAM14 Sep 2015

Over the course of this weekend we have heard no end of left-wing politicians and media commentators taking to the airwaves to claim that the British public overwhelmingly support Britain accepting more migrants into the United Kingdom. But frankly, the polling just doesn’t reflect this. BBC anchors, Channel 4 hosts, Labour politicians and even foreign political commentators are claiming that Britons are amenable to the idea of more refugees.

Last Friday, Channel 4’s Krishnan Guru-Murthy asked me if “my side” of the debate was just being “nasty”, as lefties Caitlin Moran and Hella Pick enjoyed some glorious PR coverage for their campaign to open the borders to more migrants. The BBC’s Stephen Nolan harangued his guests for suggesting they weren’t in favour of the government plans.

This weekend, a Labour MP said Britain should take more migrants even if hospital waiting lists increased, taxes went up, cities overflowed, and school class sizes went through the roof. She said we should accept people until we are “saturated”.

And the Los Angeles Times columnist Christina Boyle wrote that “a solid majority of Britons appear to support Prime Minister David Cameron’s plan to resettle 20,000 more Syrian refugees by 2020”.

But the polling figures simply don’t reflect these points. The fact is the media, as well as our politicians, are lying to you.

“Quelle surprise, Raheem!” you say. But there is scant fair reporting from the other side of this debate, which is why I believe it is so important to make sure “my side” has the facts to hand, and shares them with everyone they know. Here they are. (And while Yvette Cooper’s numbers didn’t make sense, I’ve conservatively assumed the average size of a Syrian family to be 5 people).

More here. H/T: Our buddy Buck

Written by KGS

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

There’s No Common Cultural Legacy For The Alt-Right

Still, is there something to it? Is there a common heritage that will cover El Greco and Hume and Dostoyevsky? Is there one that can include the Jacobites and the Jacobins? There is, but it is not racial, and white supremacists reject it because it rejects them. The unifying heritage of Europe is religious and philosophical. It is Jerusalem and Athens, in one famous formulation. Christian religion and Greek philosophy, filtered through Roman law and culture, are the foundation of European culture. The tensions, agreements, developments and settlements between these have shaped the Western world, and these roots of Western civilization are not congenial to white supremacy.

Christianity is universal in its message and Jewish in its origins. For centuries after its founding, Christianity’s center was the Mediterranean world, including Asia Minor and North Africa. Christianity has never been defined by race, and locally-grown racist heresies are only sustainable among those ignorant of Christianity’s teachings, origins and history.

Greek philosophy is likewise ill-suited to serve as a basis for white identity. It is either too universal (addressing the human condition in general) or too local—none of us live as citizens of an ancient Greek polis. Later philosophical developments in Europe, such as the philosophies of the Enlightenment, likewise tend to be too universal for white supremacists seeking a tribal identity. As for the scientific revolution that developed within Western culture (albeit with much borrowed from outside Europe), math doesn’t care what color someone is.

War is being waged against Western culture from within which is in essence a war against Christianity and its moral origins in the Hebrew Bible. By attacking these Biblical foundations in the name of reason and human rights, the culture warriors of secularism are sawing off the branch on which they sit. The only way to defend Western civilisation is to reaffirm and restore its Biblical foundations. My argument is a development of ideas I first explored in my 2012 book The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth and Power.

We are living in an era which extols reason, science and human rights. These are said to be essential for progress, a civilised society and the betterment of humanity. Religion is said to be their antithesis, the source instead of superstitious mumbo-jumbo, oppression and backward-thinking.

Some of this hostility is being driven by the perceived threat from Islamic terrorism and the Islamisation of Western culture. However, this animus against religion has far deeper roots and can be traced back to what is considered the birthplace of Western reason, the 18th-century Enlightenment.

Actually, it goes back specifically to the French Enlightenment. In England and Scotland, the Enlightenment developed reason and political liberty within the framework of Biblical belief. In France, by contrast, anti-clericalism morphed into fundamental hostility to Christianity and to religion itself.

“Ecrasez l’infame,” said Voltaire (crush infamy) — the infamy to which he referred being not just the Church but Christianity, which he wanted to replace with the religion of reason, virtue and liberty, “drawn from the bosom of nature”.

Perfecting society

But this Enlightenment did not remove religion so much as pervert it. It took millenarian fantasies, the idea that the perfection of the world was at hand, and it secularised them. Instead of God producing heaven on earth, it would be mankind which would bring that about. Reason would create the perfect society and “progress” was the process by which utopia would be attained.

“I think that we should correct the vocabulary that we use, and call a spade a spade. It is all about Jihad, the Islamic effort to spread Islam globally”:

Terrorist attack – should be called Military Jihad.

Incitement – Media Jihad.

Al-Jazeera – Media Jihad Channel.

Imposing Sharia law – Judicial Jihad or Legislative Jihad.

Boycotting Israel (BDS) – Economic Jihad.

Emigration to EU and US – Emigration Jihad / Hijra Jihad.

Building mosques, Islamic education institutions – Cultural Jihad.

Halal food – Dietary Jihad.

Hijab or Niqab – Clothing Jihad.

Activity of MSA – Academic Jihad.

Activity of CAIR – Political Jihad / Public Jihad.

Collecting money for Islamic “charities” – Financial Jihad.

Political correctness – Submission to Jihad.

J Street, Peace Now, JVP and their likes – Jewish Useful Idiots who Serve Jihad.

Iran deal – Western Support for Nuclear Jihad.