“Peace†is apparently the word on the lips of British politicians whenever the omens point, in stiff armed salute, to catastrophe. In 1938, Neville Chamberlain gave his now infamous speech, ‘Peace in our Time,’ in which he announced that Germany would be allowed to annex Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. This, the so-called Munich agreement, was meant of course to placate the Third Reich, but instead it is now seen as the first step to the occupation of Poland and to the onset of the Second World War. With utter lack of foresight Chamberlain had announced, “They [the various governments in the dispute] rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.†The British people, “were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy […] their intense desire for peace.â€
There was a certain unintended dimension to junior Labour minister David Cairns’ recent statement, that Gordon Brown is the most unpopular British prime minister, “since Neville Chamberlain after Hitler invaded Norway,†as the same sort of language and mentality of appeasement that facilitated the rise of Nazi Germany is routinely employed by Brown and his government in regard to radical Islam. Its most literal outpouring came in July, when Brown spoke to the Knesset, and urged that Israel should share Jerusalem with the Palestinians. Like Chamberlain, Brown spoke of his belief that, “[…] this historic, hard-won and lasting peace is within your [Israel’s] reach, I urge you to take it by the hand.†(snip)
The government, authorities, and some sections of the media, believe they are supportive of Muslims. They are not. They are supportive of the most radical Islamists imaginable. Consider, for example, the West Midland schoolteachers told to dress as Muslims to celebrate Eid. The passport application for a five year old girl rejected because of fears that her passport photograph, in which her shoulders were bare, might upset Muslims. The Christian political Party banned from saying that “moderate Muslims†opposed the building of London’s super-Mosque, as this implied the organization behind the mosque is not moderate (which it is not). This list goes on.
Read the whole thing.
And then you have the person who might make that happen in America, from David Dening
When Obama refers to “my Muslim faith,” the verbal gaffe resonates as a Freudian slip because of Obama’s thinly veiled hatred for this country’s unique culture and institutions. Obama sat for 20 years in a church where the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr preached “goddamn America.” He only resigned from the congregation when it became politically expedient to do so. When earlier this year, Michelle Obama said “for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country,” can we conclude that her husband disagrees? Is it not remarkable that Michelle Obama can be so small-minded as to find nothing in the history of the United States that merits her admiration but the personal success of her husband?
What is Barack Obama for? His campaign motto is “change.” But even a 6-year-old child understands that “change” can be either good or bad. Lacking specifics, the invocation of “change” as policy is completely empty. As we witness Obama’s minions mindlessly endorse the meaningless maxim of “change,” it only can call to mind the barnyard animals in George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” chanting “four legs good, two legs bad!”
Confederate Yankee has a good discussion on the article.
