Yes, yes, when it comes to “climate change”, Prince Charles is a complete boob, and a major hypocrite. That in no way means that he isn’t correct on other subjects. He’s a big supporter of the U.K. military, and apparently not a big fan of Muslims being radicalized. Of course, his words are considered “controversial” in the modern P.C., multiculturalist, “tolerant”, diversity world
(UK Daily Mail) Prince Charles risked provoking a new political and religious storm yesterday when he said Muslims living in the UK should follow British values.
In a staunch defence of Britain’s ‘Christian standpoint,’ he denounced the radicalisation of young Britons by Islamic fanatics and said they should show more respect to ‘the values we hold dear’.
People who had ‘come here, were born here or go to school here’ should ‘abide by our values,’ he said. His comments were made as he started a six-day tour of the Middle East, seen as another stage in assuming more of the Queen’s international duties.
The Prince’s intervention comes hard on the heels of a new book which claims the Queen is worried that her heir plans to be an ‘activist king’. The Prince’s comments on Islam and Christianity are broadcast in an interview with BBC Radio 2’s The Sunday Hour this morning, suggesting he plans to be very active.
‘The radicalisation of people in Britain is a great worry, and the extent to which this is happening is alarming, particularly in a country like ours where we hold values dear,’ he says. ‘You would think the people who have come here, or are born here, and go to school here, would abide by those values and outlooks.’
It was ‘frightening’ that young British Muslims were radicalised by ‘crazy stuff on the internet’.
Charles will reinforce his tough stance on Islamic extremism by telling the new Saudi king to show clemency to Saudi blogger Badawi (who was sentenced to receive 1000 lashes, and has already received quite a few).
Britain is perhaps the worst European country for Islamic radicalism, having been tolerant for decades. This goes directly to the Progressive worldview about tolerance, diversity, and multiculturalism, along with a notion that no society is better than any other. There’s also a notion that criticizing radical Islam could set oneself up for a violent attack, possibly leading to death. The Religion Of Peace is very unhappy when anyone dares criticize it, and may make threats, and follow through with them. The other half of the time the RoP will engage in a campaign to negatively brand an opponent as an “Islamophobe”, and Progressive wankers will happily fall in line and do the same, rather than addressing the danger within their midst.
It’s one thing to bring in compatible values and integrate them. Here in the United States, can you imagine the nation without Italians and the Irish, coming in large waves post Revolution? The Brits and Scots were already the primary residents. Other big influxes have provided heavily and positively to the nation. Many Chinese who came over in the late 1800’s. So many of the southern Asians, such as the Vietnamese, have integrated well. Even those who were provided amnesty in the 1980’s provided value, because they wanted to be part of the Great Melting Pot, rather attempting to force the U.S. to adapt to them, like today’s illegals.
It’s not just radical Islam of which Britain has been tolerant
- More than 60 languages are spoken at Britain’s biggest primary school
- Only 10 per cent of pupils have English as their first language
- More than a third of new arrivals at Gascoigne Primary speak no English
- One 10-year-old from Bulgaria could not say how old he is, show revealed
How does a society, a nation, operate and survive in these conditions? Of course, you get these types of twits
Some parents speak warmly of the school and maintain the language barriers present no problems for their children’s education.
Sarah Mallia, who is British-born but married to an Albanian, says her daughter Melissa, five, speaks English and Albanian.
‘When they have had children arriving who don’t speak any English, I know Melissa has taken them under her wing and helped them settle in,’ she says.
These same types of people declare that it is raaaaacist (bigoted, mean, etc) to force these kids (and adults) to learn to speak English. They should learn the language prior to being placed in class, which would remove the disruptions and slow to low learning that occurs because of the language barriers.
The radical Islamists bring their culture, their values, and their social mores, which are incompatible with Western society, and expect the Brits (and Americans, Canadians, French, Spanish, Swedes, etc) to provide accommodation. And, somehow, we tolerate it. Things like stoning adulterers, hanging gays, honor killings, women forced to wear full body covers, women forced to submit to men, and all the other things that radical Islam stands for. Including the violence.
Anyhow, kudos to Prince Charles for taking a stand.
Let the Liberal strawmen, equivocations, and deflections begin.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
I agree with Prince Charles.
In the US we have a Constitution and a series of laws that negotiate that boundary between civil rights and religious freedom. We give a wide berth to religions and legally we are agnostic toward religions – not favoring one over another.
We have an extensive secular public school system that serves to homogenize our society. We should work with immigrants to ease the transition, welcoming them into the promise that is America, but clearly American English is our dominant language and will be required for full involvement as a citizen.
That said, discriminating against individuals based on color, religion, nation of origin or native language is un-American, and makes assimilation more difficult, not easier. We’re not perfect but we do the best job of absorbing and assimilating immigrants. The European nations should have looked to us.
We do have literal and figurative communities that feel disenfranchised: poor urban Blacks, fundamentalist Christians, “Sovereign” citizens, Latin American undocumented and documented immigrants, Muslims, working classes. When groups feel “left behind” the probability of protest and violence increases, e.g., Tea Party, Occupy, Black Lives Matter, Sovereign citizen shootings of police, abortion clinic violence, anti-government plots, Islamic extremist plots.
“When groups feel “left behind†the probability of protest and violence increases, e.g., Tea Party, Occupy, Black Lives Matter, Sovereign citizen shootings of police, abortion clinic violence, anti-government plots, Islamic extremist plots.”
another far left fantasy … occupy was violent, black lives is violent and criminal, islamics are violent … otherwise lumping non reality into reality is in itself divorced from reality
The problem is, Jeff, that quite a few of these immigrants, both legal and illegal, do not want to transition. They want to live in here and take advantage of America without even bothering to be a part of America. That might be acceptable if they just wanted to be left along, such as the Amish (though, the Amish do participate in society to a degree), but these immigrants are demanding that we accommodate them.
Actually, no, the history of mankind, heck, life on earth, is one of discrimination. If you have a population that is bringing violence, crime, drugs, other problems, is refusing to assimilate, and wants everyone else to accomodate them, yeah, no problem discriminating. If someone comes to your house, Jeff, and demands you change everything about your house and lifestyle, is that OK?
Strange that you would include the Tea Party, because they are the only ones who are not violent in that group. And, being “left behind” because you’ve staked a position is not an excuse for violence.
All this said, people have a choice, and if you are welcomed to a nation, community, etc, you should try and assimilate, not force others to accommodate you.