Whitey's racist

... as Mr Aki Nawaz ably demonstrates over at CiF. This is one of the most unpleasant, ill-considered and offensive diatribes that I have ever read and I've read me! I haven't done a good fisking for some time: perhaps it is time for me to get back in practice...

Just as multiculturalism failed and died, so will the concepts of integration and diversity.

So what will be in its place? Segregation or homogenisation? And which group will be driving this move? Will it be the third of British Muslims who hope that Britain will one day become an Islamic state? Are you one of these, Mr Nawaz?

Ruth Kelly's new commission is, frankly, absurd.

Well, it's run by Ruth Kelly who not only believes in an imaginary friend (as do you, Aki, although yours has a different name) and she believes in a particularly loony offshoot of that cult, so of course it will be absurd. Plus, of course, she is a politician. I'll concede your point there.

In these desperate times, it registers zero on the priority list of important steps needed to create understanding. Bigger steps need to be taken towards acknowledging that the government and its mismanaged Muslim representatives are living far away from the reality of emotion of the communities.

Really. Well, I assume that you will simply vote these leaders out of their posts and elect people who better represent you. Or can't you do that under your system?

Firstly, for me to make such accusation and rejection requires explanation. Ruth Kelly spoke of "honesty", but only within conditions and parameters set by those who are avoiding the real issues.

And who is that? What are the real issues?

Consider the "extremism debate" that Kelly seems so keen on. It is very simple: if you want to stop "suicide bombers and terrorism" then deal with your foreign policy.

Oh, puhleese. Is this what you would tell the commuters of Mumbai, the schoolchildren of Indonesia, or the people of Sudan and Chad, or the thousands of other victims of the 5,711 deadly Muslim attacks since 9/11 (at the time of writing) in tens of countries across the world?

It does not mean you are giving in to the "terrorists"...

Actually, that is precisely what it means, you fucking fool.

... but actually giving up on your own "state and public sponsored terrorism".

Erm... Sorry, I'm not following you; what is this "state and public sponsored terrorism" that we are indulging in? Are you referring to Afghanistan and Iraq perchance? And there was me thinking that they were declared wars fought between sovereign states with the invading powers attempting to put in a system of democracy to replace a bunch of mass-murdering tyrants. Go on, Aki, start waxing lyrical about how good, clean and wonderful Saddam and the Taliban were.

Yes, I can see how the people of Afghanistan would be angry at us for removing a bunch of religious nutters who chopped off limbs and hanged gays and, most pertinently, wouldn't allow women to drive or be educated; but then that'll be because the men are all hung like fucking mice and feel a bit inadequate when women have rights too.

And, yes, we all saw how angry the people of Iraq were when Saddam was toppled by the way in which they... er... toppled his statues. We saw their simmering resentment at the invasion when over 70% walked miles and miles in order to vote in those first elections. And now we watch in amazement as Muslims kill other Muslims every day, apparently not realising that if they just stopped the fucking bombing, Britain and the US would be out of there in a fucking flash.

Plus, we didn't hear the Muslim community whining when we were bombing the shit out of Belgrade in an (illegal) attempt to stop the Serbs wiping out the Bosnian Muslims, you two-faced, hypocritical cunt. Actually, hang on a sec.: who the fuck are you anyway? Did someone elect you to speak for the British Muslim community? What a little cunt.

Next, let's talk about "integration". Well, firstly I would accuse the indigenous population of Britain of being far more guilty than the Muslim communities of resisting it. It is them that have the problem.

Possibly, although I would still say that, in general, we are pretty tolerant.

We just bear the brunt of bad schooling, unemployment, prejudice and demonisation.

Do you now? And how is that done, exactly? Since there are only five Muslim faith schools in the country, it would seem to me that there must be quite a few white people bearing the brunt of these things too. As for demonisation, you do that for yourselves when you parade in the streets with banners saying things like, "the real Holocaust is coming" and when you answer polls saying that a significant proportion of Muslims believe that blowing up innocent women and children is justified.

We are a constant target for the pathetic and repulsive racism that is inherent in this society.

Blah, blah. Attacking Muslims is not racist, as many of us have argued before. Islam is a chosen belief system; you cannot choose the colour of your skin; there is a fundamental difference.

Throughout history, people of similar backgrounds have cohered around areas where they have common interests, just like western expats in Pakistan or South America. It's only a problem if you make it one. And that's what this "society" has done every day I have been here, for the past 40 years. The taunts are arrogant, relentless and unintelligent.

Unfortunately, many of our population are arrogant and unintelligent but, to be honest, I think that you will find that in most countries. Why don't you try living in a few other places (you'd go down a treat in Germany, for instance: just tell them that you are a Turk and see what you get) before you pick Britain out as being particularly bad. Attitudes do not change overnight, but most people are making the effort.

Apart from whiney cunts like you, of course.

And the comedy is that we continue to discuss issues that have been debated throughout my parents' time.

It's good that we are allowed to debate them though, eh? After all, you are allowed to write this article: that is a good thing. The chances are that you will not be imprisoned or executed for doing so: that also is a good thing.

It's a complete and utter joke - and only gets fuelled by those craven "ethnic" leaders who ceaselessly wail that their community accuses them of selling out. It's not an accusation, it's a fact.

Yeah, well, you are hardly alone in that. If you got out of your self-imposed ghetto a bit more, you might find that many white (or, indeed, black or yellow) British people aren't very enamoured of their leaders either.

Most of the Muslim MPs would sell their mothers to the lowest bidder if they felt it would help their careers blossom.

Yes, yes; but it's not just Muslim MPs, you idiot. See my comment above about getting out more.

Some of them even go as far as urging us to "go home if you do not like it". That in itself is a racist comment.

No it is not; let me explain why it is not. That article is by Muslim Labour MP, Shahid Malik and what he is saying is not, "go home darkie!"

When Lord Ahmed, the Muslim Labour peer, heard my comments—I said essentially that if Muslims wanted sharia they should go and live somewhere where they have it—he accused me of doing the BNP’s work. He is entitled to his opinion. However, a little honesty, like mine, in this whole debate might just restore trust in politicians and ease the population’s anxieties.
...

But what I want to say to my fellow British Muslims is that in this country we enjoy freedoms, rights and privileges of which Muslims elsewhere can only dream.

Read the whole thing: it is a beautifully written and well-balanced article: when angry people ask, "where are all the moderate Muslims?" then you could do worse than to point them to Mr Malik.

As for this being a racist comment, once again I have to correct you, Mr Nawaz. As I said before, Islam is not a "race"; it is a religion, a belief structure. Therefore, aiming attacks at Muslims—who, though mostly Asian, can be any colour of skin that humans come in—is not racist. The abuse aimed at you as a Muslim is because you have chosen to follow the cult of Islam, not because you have brown skin (and silly hair).

They would not dream of saying it to a white person who airs similar views, as is the case with the white media when they interview a Muslim or people of colour.

Well, they might say something like, "why don't you piss off back to Poland." Or Lithuania. Or Czechoslovakia. The current immigration worries are as firmly targeted at Eastern Europeans as they are at Muslims or "people of colour". Besides, Mr Malik did not say "go home": he said that if you wish to live under sharia, then you should go and live somewhere that has it (which, incidentally, has always been my argument).

This is a really basic distinction and if you cannot see the distinction then you are stupider than I thought. And believe me, you are already at cockroach level, as far as I am concerned.

Even contemplating, considering or imposing the idea of "Britishness" is downright stupid.

Really?

No one to this day - even those people such as Sir Andrew Green of Migrationwatch - has been able to define what it is to be British. When asked, they mumble about "cups of tea with the neighbours".

I don't think that Britishness can be easily summed up but...

People have the right to be what they choose, and the right to resist any identity that is imposed.

... that sentence might well define Britishness; we at least try to let people be what they want to be. Personally, i would define the British as generally very concerned with outward appearance—politeness, being seen to play the game—with a ruthless determination to succeed at that game (giving us a unique talent for dissenblance and hypocrisy); howver, I suspect that, these days, my definition is, for many people, out of date (the determination has been sapped).

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter, Aki; if you had made any attempt to integrate with our society then you should, after 40 years, have been able to grasp at least the barest idea of Britishness. And that, you see, is what we are complaining about.

In Ruth Kelly's speech, she did not once mention the decades of racist political activity that has caused conflict and insecurity for us people of colour.

Er, what racist political activity exactly? Would you care to give examples since you are flinging accusations around willy-nilly?

Why has this element continued to grow? It took a white man, Sir William Macpherson, to say that institutions were racist after minority communities had been saying it for years.

Are we talking about stop-and-search and racial-profiling here? I suspect that we are. Look, Sunny Jim, if the police see that a great many more violent street crimes are committed by blacks than whites then they are quite entitled to search more black people for weapons than white people. It's called efficient policing. I'm sorry if your communities feel that this is unfair but we taxpayers want the most "bang for our buck", I'm afraid.

If, however, the police truly were being racist, at least we honkeys recognised that and thought that it was important that this should change. You wouldn't get such a declaration by the Saudi or Iranian police, you know.

What does that say to you and me? People of colour have been murdered in their hundreds yet justice evades them, and they are asked to tolerate, be peaceful and accepting of such realities.

Look, I'm sorry, fuckface; you are confusing me. Are you still talking about Iraq or are you talking about murders within our country. If you are, then I'm afraid that the problem when "people of colour" are murdered is that the people in the ghettos tend not to be terribly helpful towards the "fucking pigs". And since the vast majority of murders of "people of colour" is by other "people of colour" this makes it rather difficult to solve those murders. You want those murderers brought to justice? Fine, you encourage your community to help in any way they can.

What kind of society accepts such casualties? Only one that has its roots in racism.

What? You are just being deliberately offensive now. There are hundreds of murders of white folks that go unsolved every year as well, you know. The fact is that sometimes there really is no evidence to follow.

You make me sick, I fucking loathe you. And it's not because of the colour of your skin; it's because your soul is eaten up by jealousy, bitterness and evil. Fuck you.

It is a fact that communities that want to integrate into the British way of life (whatever that means) have done so, and will continue to do so. But it is also interesting that there is a larger part of that population who - other than going to work and contributing their taxes - have no desire to integrate. And why should they? Many of the youth cannot get with the culture of "Thank God it's Friday", and choose other avenues. Most white people have never extended their hands out to the communities and they shouldn't be forced to. We are fine with that.

You want to choose other avenues, as long as those activities are within the law (so no honour killings, forced marriages, etc.) then that's fine. In Britain, you are allowed to do that. Again, you will not get a similar offer in Iran or some other strict Islamic nation. So why don't you go and do what you want to do and stop moaning?

All the bridges, which have had to be built a million times, have been repeatedly burnt down and now it's white Britain that has to go on its knees and beg for forgiveness.

What bridges? You have just said that there are those who do not wish to integrate, so what bridges have they built exactly? And how, precisely, have they been burned down?

We are tired of the hypocrisy and naïve ignorance we have to endure day in and day out.

So am I, actually. Does that surprise you, Aki? Perhaps you are unaware of the prejudice that many feel against the public-school educated (you could find quite a number of examples in the comments on this blog: feel free to look). However, I tend not to whine about it: I get on with proving the bigots wrong in their assumptions.

If women in our communities wish to liberate themselves through the mini-skirt, then they are free to do so.

Well, as long as their families do not feel that they are bringing "dishonour" upon their house, yes.

Surprisingly the reverse has been the truth of the matter as they re-identify themselves with more modesty, and even find liberation by wearing the hijab. That was their choice.

Yes, Aki, as long as it was their choice. A little while ago, I wrote the following:

One of the real problems that many in the West have with Islam is the lack of freedom that it accords women. Were there to exist ghettos living under Muslim norms, those norms would be applied and defined by only 50% of the population; there is a high chance that those who had the misfortune to be born with a cunt would have little or no voice or choice.

A commenter known as georgia then responded:

Thank you for this. I've searched in vain for comments by male Western commentators (of any political colour) lamenting Islam's treatment of women and other minorities.

Worse still, I've even come across Western women pleading for toleration of these mainstream Muslim ideas, which must be among the worst hypocrisies of all the hypocrytical pronouncements I've ever read on 'toleration' - rather like those who expect lower standards from people simply because they're working class.

I don't know if she is a Muslim woman or not; it is not particularly relevent. What is relevent is that Islam's attitude to women is not the most enlightened and is ingrained into the culture of strict Muslims. If wearing the hijab is truly the woman's choice then that's fine: my concern is that, in many cases, it is not. I find this intolerable; I find it as intolerable as a husband (of any colour) beating his wife up; a further concern is that—if you believe the Yazzmonster—the forced wearing of the hijab and the beating of women are not entirely unconnected.

We have cultures which are far richer and to some extent hard to live with.

Really? Our culture is informed by the multiple countries that make up the British Isles and the assorted countries of Europe; it combines elements of the Germanic, Romance and Scandinavian cultures. Our culture has embraced the Enlightened and toleration (which is why you are allowed to practise your religion in our country: the same does not apply to Christains in many Muslim countries).

Yours is made up of various interpretations of The Koran and assorted hadiths. Your culture is renowned for amputations, hangings, homophobia, misogyny, gang rape as punishment, the murder of innocents over cartoons and an almost comical lack of tolerance; most of all for those who do not subscribe to your beliefs and traditions.

Nevertheless, the spiritual value is greater than being British.

Perhaps so. However, many British Christians, for instance, live a spiritual life. You Muslims are not the only ones who believe in an imaginary friend, you know.

British society is living in the cold and has a great absence of any philosophical yearning. It is bankrupt morally and politically...

Although—despite the best efforts of the Gobblin King—not economically.

... dry on ideas of culture and all-embracing enlightenment.

You may have a point there; although I might point out that perhaps you should try to talk to some people a little higher up the social scale. I would be happy to debate philosophy with you, although you will find that your arguments will have to be comnsiderably less woolly than the ones that you have put forward here.

This country is in a state of democratic tyranny, and every step it takes, irrespective of the technological gains, it stands naked in its repulsive arrogance and backward mentality.

And now, ladies and gentlemen, it's time to wheel out the really massive generalisations. As it happens, I do think that much of our society has lost its way, yes. However, I believe that this is because the Welfare State and the relatively recent economic upheavals have robbed people of their dignity. This can be overcome with the right political will.

Do we wish to integrate into those mindsets? Your "way of life" is just not attractive to us so we "reject it".

As I said before, that's fair enough. We allow you to do so. What, then, is your fucking problem, you twat?

We reject your foreign policy as an outdated colonial racist policy. If you wish to stop the madness in the world deal with the real issues rather than creating a diversion by trying to integrate us into your demonic complex of imperialism.

Right, so we should have allowed the massacre of the Bosnian Muslims should we? You are happy for us to allow the continued killing in Darfur, are you? We should not have got involved in any way in the Israel/Lebanon scuffle? And you call youself spiritual? You call us hypocritical?

As for imperialism, don't make me fucking laugh. You might have noticed that Islam had a pretty large empire at one time: it was known as the Caliphate. It only ended in 1924, not so long before the British Empire. Some Muslim clerics and organisations (notably Hizb ut-Tahrir have publically called for the restoration of the Caliphate under Islamic rule, so don't you go preaching at us about imperial ambitions, you ignorant cunt.

The world has moved on and if you sow the seeds of resentment in other places the roots will grow here and ensnare you.

Ah, yes; the not so veiled threats that spokesmen for Islam seem so keen on indulging in these days. I might have known that that would pop up. The old "do what we want or we'll kill you attitude". It's slightly pathetic and, frankly, backward (to use your own word). We have developed onto this thing called democracy; you know, it involves voting and peaceful protest.

But, whatever, if that is indeed what you mean then, as soon as you break the law, then we will arrest you and put you through a fair trial and, if you are guilty, incarcerate you. You and any that follow. You see, we do not respond to threats, nor to terrorism. It's part of that tedious British stubbornness.

You need to interact, listen and not have to bring back Sir William Macpherson to tell you what the situation is. For a bag of chips, a bottle of pop and some time to talk we can get answers and inevitably it saves the taxpayer's money.

What, sit down with you? But you have "rejected" our culture, so what is there to talk about exactly? It will be a question of you demanding that I submit to your will and me replying that I'd rather not thanks, but you carry on, old boy. What's the fucking point of that?

It also gets rid of those Muslim MPs who are only interesting in filling their pockets by being nodding worthies before their ex-colonial masters.

Since Mr Malik's article is one of the most eloquent and reasonable that I have read in a long time and yours is one of the most spiteful and badly argued, I know who I would rather have the dialogue with. Tell you what, why don't you fuck off to Spain and see if their MPs won't nod worthily at you, their ex-colonial master?

They should just make sure the bins are collected in their constituencies every week. We shouldn't have to continue watching them sauntering into No 10 for another toga party.

It is local councils that deal with bin collections, old chum. MPs make law in this country.

As I said, if you took your head out of your arse and then actually made some effort to engage with the British system then that would be great. But don't go writing articles about it when you patently don't even know how the British political system is structured. It just makes you look like some shit-for-brains bigot with a chip on his shoulder. Which, of course, you are.

Let us finish with some words from Mr Malik MP, shall we?

But my message is: whether you are white, Asian, black, Muslim, Christian or Jew, if you don’t like where you’re living you have two choices: either you live elsewhere, or you engage in the political process, attempt to create change and ultimately respect the will of the majority.

Thank you.

UPDATE: So runs Mr Nawaz's Profile on CiF:

Aki Nawaz is the arch-provocateur from the music group Fun Da Mental and a director of Nation records.

Aki's latest album "All Is War" (the benefits of g-had) has caused a global media frenzy. He remains steadfast and outspoken in his views against the establishment without fear.

Hmmm, I assume that Mr Nawaz means that he remains without fear, not that the establishment remains without fear? Perhaps Aki would like some help with the English language?

By the way, you may wish to click on the link to Fun Da Mental and then the link to know more about the album. You will find out a lot more than you wanted to know about Mr Nawaz's rather paranoid views. This one, for instance, is a real gem:

SREBRENICA MASSACRE

Was it Christianity that strangled the life out of defenseless Muslims or was it nationalism that committed another holocaust? In front of the eyes of their so called defenders they were herded and massacred wholesale, the barracks of the Dutch UN peacekeepers displayed their contempt of the Muslims with graffiti on the walls for all to see. On the doorstep of the Europe it committed yet another crime; foolishly we waited for rescue whilst barbaric genocide took place. We hold our heads in shame and so should the Muslim Governments across the world as they displayed their incompetence and impotence to take the correct steps to stop massacre of Muslims across Yugoslavia. Milosevic died a dog’s death but the wounds of deliberate genocide echo and rebound. Murderers remain at large whilst the West busies itself attempting to remove the last vestiges of Islam from the noble and pious Bosnian people...

Delightful, wouldn't you say? Aki! Time for your lithium, you fucking loon...