[Ed: Freddy Vachha originally posted this text as comment under the article “Appeasers and Cowards”. It was far too long, so we asked him if we could post it as article because of its importance for the debate we must have in UKIP. Freddy agreed and detailed his arguments further. His reply is published below. It comes in two parts, Part II to republished tomorrow.]

For the avoidance of doubt – and, for the many who know me, there shouldn’t have been any – it isn’t as if I am opposed to everything, or even most things, in this article on UKIP Daily

I’m not. There is a lot of common sense there. But there’s a “but”.

I think that approach is a step or more too far. Fairness aside – for one thing, the public are not ready, and this won’t ready them. Enemies will have us promptly branded as BNP-Lite, or similar, within whole swathes of the media, including some who were beginning to gradually lean towards us, or at least stopping to throw the usual tired epithets at us which no longer are as effective as they used to be (“definition of a Racist = Someone who’s just won an argument against a libtard”). If we go down the route that article subliminally suggests, there’s liable to be a vote shift to the Tories (if only as virtue-signalling), and we will face electoral oblivion.

Then, who will there be to fight our corner? Arron Banks – but where are his troops on the ground? They don’t exist. Reality check: keyboard lobbyists and air campaigns don’t win elections without an army of door-knockers and leaflet-pushers; Labour will attack, with or without justification, any party of his as being the result of an attempt to buy one’s way to power. It won’t win us J***S*** up in the Midlands and North, and could lose our cause everything. Liberty GB? You must be kidding!  No numbers there – it’s seen as a single issue micro-movement with one charismatic proponent who sometimes goes too far.

Our party has, in general, got the balance right. We are shifting from being an “EU” focus to a “local issues” one. Membership numbers are back up to where they were when Paul took over. And Paul is sounding more and more decisive and insistent, appearing more and more in the news. Nigel’s was a tough act to follow – give the bloke a chance! He’s aware of mistakes made.  He’s fixing them.

Tragic recent murders (committed by a vile Islamist nutcase, operating, like in all 28 preceding premeditated terror attacks in Europe, during the eight “non-sacred” months of the Islamic calendar – the odds are worse than 100,000:1 that this could be just chance) notwithstanding:

Hysteria = OFF

If – I repeat, if – UKIP gets to be seen as BNP-Lite by the great unwashed, we are on a path with no turning back. I will assume that fear is common ground for almost all of us. How do we shift the debate so as to bring a matter of enormous concern (a permanent, irreversible change for the worse to our country) out into the open, without falling into that trap, is my exclusive focus below.

I am an agnostic/atheist – and if it matters to anyone, I have no Muslim ancestry at all. I wouldn’t be surprised if I knew as much, if not more, of the history of Islam than any other reader here, because I have studied it (and several other religions/cults) on and off since I was a kid, and from the errors I’ve read, especially among Reader’s Comments, it is evident most here haven’t.

Anyone who thinks I’m an apologist for the excesses of (say) Islam would be very mistaken; about half of my distant ancestors, perhaps guilty of being too trusting or naive due to their happy, friendly, millennium-length-duration coexistence with Jews (who were the guests, and my ancestors the hosts), and a shorter one with Christians etc., came into very direct conflict with Islam back when Islam was the brand new kid on the block.

They came off pretty badly, soon achieving Dhimmihood in the worst ways conceivable (hopefully, much of what happened is beyond your ability to imagine) and losing everything except their lives. If they hadn’t fled their homeland forever, they’d probably have lost their lives too, as did most of their brethren. I won’t dwell on this further – it’s all in the history books and contemporaneously recorded works.

Does this bias me at all against Muslims today? Absolutely not. That would be ridiculous and blatantly unjust. The persecution and elimination occurred between thirteen and eleven centuries ago. If we look back far enough in history and bear grudges, no one profits, and an eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind. But it also doesn’t prevent me from learning from history, either, and carefully assessing how much (or how little?) things have changed.

My mum’s dad died, unnecessarily young, just a few days before V-E day because he denied he had acute pneumonia and insisted hospitals were only “for our lads” (i.e., our troops).  The family lived through the Blitz – my mum, evacuated, had returned home during the “phoney” war, only to be greeted by some of the first of Hitler’s love-packets delivered to London. Another relative, a merchant seaman, has a watery grave at the bottom of the Arctic – he perished on one of the convoys, not PQ17, supplying the Soviets via Murmansk. On the other side of my family – one of my dad’s older sisters was a cryptographer in WW2; another drove a truck for the Army.  My dad’s dad was honoured with a C.I.E., the equivalent of a C.B.E., and more.  So, like many of you, perhaps I don’t need too many lectures on patriotism, thanks all the same, or on the imperative need to combat evil, using all means available. I like to think that had I been born half a century earlier and in Germany, I’d have recognised, as Churchill and a few others did, from his book and his works, early on the appalling danger to the world that Hitler presented, and used all my meagre wits, skills and guile to to assassinate the blighter, who had the Devil’s own luck. This, whatever the personal cost.

Recently, a committed Christian sincerely and adversarially wrote to me:

“… your comment that we are talking about a minority of people in Islam is not true. The Quran is to be taken literally… every single word. Any good Muslim will be waiting for the right time to strike down the unbeliever because in Britain they live in the House of War (a non-Muslim country that has not yet been subjugated) and they should be in a perpetual state of Jihad.” (See here.)

There is no reference to “House of War”, i.e. Dar-al-Harb/Gharb, AKA Dar-al-Kufr (region of heathens) in either the Q’ran or hadith, so this is not binding upon Muslims in any way.

That is not to say that many rogue (often Salafist/Wahhabi) preachers don’t claim it is, but their agenda is clear. Paul Nuttall has rightly attacked Saudi funding of UK mosques, and so do I.

These evil or misled people are at the heart of the problem. We need the Police, CPS and Judiciary to start applying laws that already exist, without fear or favour, instead of being cowardly and politically correct.

While helping a fellow UKIP PPC start their election campaign in a part of London where there are plenty of Muslims, mainly from Bangladesh, by luck I struck up a conversation with an elderly Muslim we encountered on the street and who happened to be the head of  a mosque committee. The gent was a history graduate from India, and (while not unsympathetic to UKIP, or so he said – I tended to believe him, partly because his companion was a Hindu who had been his best friend for 20 years) a Labour supporter.  When we asked him what was the biggest problem he faced running his mosque, he said “Young jihadi-recruiters coming from Walthamstow to join our mosque and then mislead our young people”.

Indeed, the “House of War” thinking had main relevance in the 8th century when the Battle of Tours thwarted the Islamic invasion of Europe, and began the reversal which culminated in their expulsion from Spain. Till then, Islamic conquests had appeared unstoppable. The term isn’t in mainstream Islam any more… most Muslims don’t think this way.

It follows that it is incorrect to claim that “Any good Muslim will be waiting for the right time to strike down the unbeliever … in Britain”, as what is in neither the Q’ran nor hadith cannot be considered to be prescriptive for a “good” Muslim.

Christian fundies too are also not unknown, friends, but they don’t go round murdering innocents in the name of religion. Unjust wars (post-WW2) waged by “Christian” countries were not for religious ends – while I’m hugely opposed to the insane 2003 war on Iraq by Bush/Bliar, who I think should face War Crimes trials, it wasn’t fought to spread Christianity.

Disturbing, apparently prescriptive, verses of the Old Testament (OT) are, to the overwhelming majority of Christians, set aside (superseded) by the NT teachings of Jesus. Doctrines like that of Everlasting Torment (Hell), introduced in the NT, leave all punishment to God, not to man. That’s a very significant difference between the NT and the Q’ran.

I don’t subscribe to cultural, moral or religious “equivalence” either, which is just woolly thinking.  If I was forced to adopt a religion, heaven (!) forbid, it wouldn’t be Islam.

However, for the sake of clarity, let’s look at the other major Abrahamic faith (i.e., faiths which profess a belief that Abraham was a prophet, and claim lineage from him), Judaism. Jewish scriptures contain more than a few disturbing, permissive (even if not prescriptive) verses, with no Messiah to later set them aside.

This said, I wouldn’t for a moment think that “Any good Jew will be waiting for the right time to “do whatever unpleasant things are permitted”. That would be absurd and I’d get rightly accused of anti-semitism (unless, heaven forbid, I was in the Labour Party, wherein I’d be promoted).

It’s simple – “Good” people try not to do wicked things. The broad agreement across religions and cultures as to what is “wicked” is better than many imagine. Most are born with this ability to distinguish.

So, IMO, it isn’t fair, wise or correct to say “any good Muslim will “do unpleasant things at the first chance”.  Such assertions simply alienate tens, hundreds or thousands of millions, including many reasonable, reasoning non-Muslims.

A much more significant debate, one where right and logic are very clearly on our side, relates to the Shariafication of Britain.

[Ed: to be continued tomorrow in Part II. Freddy also asked us to post this video showing him ‘in action’ , adding that ‘Freddy was very tired at that time, having been educating LibLabCon Remoaners all day. We’re happy to do so.]

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email