Dear British Parliament

Yesterday the British Parliament “debated” whether to “ban” Donald Trump from the UK for “hate speech”.

I have a couple of minor points to make on that PC attitude.

1) His supposed “hate speech” was to state that the USA ought to stop letting Muslims flood in until such time as we can figure out ~”what the hell is going on”; based on the simple observation that there is a Global Jihad against the USA, Christianity, and Western Values in general; and that ISIL has stated the intent to pack the “refugees” with inflitrators bent on death and destruction in the west, in particular. Now to many of us, that seems like THE most basic of common sense. There’s a large pool of “good Muslims”, contaminated by a very significant pool of “bad muslims” with murderous intent. Do you just “drink the cool-aid” to find out which ones want to kill you? Or do you say “Don’t Drink That!” until we can filter out the poison?

As the UK is presently in the middle of committing cultural suicide via making a Very Bad Choice on this question, I’m not inclined to listen to your pontifications on the subject. Tell you what, take a load of Bibles into, oh, Birmingham, and stand on a street corner handing them out and preaching God’s Mercy and see how long you last.

Bear in mind that in the UK “Asian” or “Asia” can often be talking about Muslims from Pakistan or folks from India.

2005 Birmingham riots
The Birmingham riots of 2005 occurred on two consecutive nights on Saturday 22 October and Sunday 23 October 2005 in the Lozells and Handsworth area of Birmingham, England. The riots were derived from ethnic tensions between the Caribbean and British Asian communities, with the spark for the riot bein…
Show MoreMore at Wikipedia

Related Topics
1981 Handsworth riots – The 1981 Handsworth riots were three days of rioting that took place in the Handsworth area of Birmingham, England in July 1981. The major outbreak of violence took place on the night of Friday 10/11 July, with smaller disturbances on the following two nights.

1985 Handsworth riots – The second Handsworth riots took place in the Handsworth district of Birmingham, West Midlands, from 9 to 11 September 1985. The riots were reportedly sparked by the arrest of a man near the Acapulco Cafe, Lozells and a police raid on the Villa Cross public house in the same area.

1991 Handsworth riots – The third Handsworth riot occurred on 2 September 1991 in Handsworth, an inner-city area of Birmingham, when a power cut plunged the area into darkness and sparked a looting spree in local shops. 200 police officers in riot gear were called in to bring the unrest under control.
Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Race riots in England
British Pakistani history
Black British history
Murder in England
History of Birmingham, West Midlands

2005 Birmingham riots – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Birmingham riots of 2005 occurred on two consecutive nights on Saturday 22 October and Sunday 23 October 2005 in the Lozells and Handsworth area of Birmingham …
Search domain

Muslims ‘shown in positive light’ after Birmingham riots …
After conducting surveys with Birmingham Muslims about the riots Dr Allen said some Muslims felt the world now had a better understanding of them.
Search domain

Birmingham Riots 2011 | How it all began… – YouTube
FILM: Just days after the London riots in Tottenham, violent rioting and disturbances take place in Birmingham city centre following tensions created by …
Search domain

UK riots: Birmingham’s Muslims and Sikhs … – The Guardian
Emotions run high at candlelit vigil for three men killed in riots as Asian communities weigh up how to react When the prime minister, David Cameron, said on …
Search domain…

Birmingham Riots 8th August 2009 – “Unite Against Fascism …
UAF and Muslim extremists causing riots and havoc in the city of Birmingham. Of course the media will blame the EDL (And in hence blame the BNP for …
Search domain

Birmingham riots: Crowds mourn riot death ‘martyrs’ – BBC News
Image caption Haroon Jahan, Shazad Ali and Abdul Musavir were hit by a car in Winson Green during a night of riots “As a Muslim we are not …
Search domain

Birmingham riots | Stand Up 4 Islam
What caused the riot? Well thankfully, it was not something down to Muslims. The riots started from an incident where the police shot down a man, Mark Duggan, at …
Search domain

So you would have us emulate Birmingham, eh? So how’s that workin’ out for you?

2) The Donald just happens to be leading in the polls at the moment. He has a high probability of being the Republican Candidate for President.

Think ( I know it’s hard, and you are waaaay out of practice, but please do give it a go…) for just a moment: You are with significant potential directly insulting the future president of the USA.

In a match up between The Donald and our Head Liar Hillary, there are a huge number of ABC voters. “Anyone But Clinton”. I’m one of them. The alternative is Chief Socialist Bernie Sanders. Do you really think the USA would choose a socialist? Maybe you’ve never been here before, but “socialist” is slightly less complementary here than “drug dealer” or “used car salesman”. (No, not hyperbole. Take a look at the stats and you find Politicians ranked lowest…)

How do you think President Trump will handle things like, oh, spending on defense related to the UK, or support for ‘free trade’ agreements with the UK, or even “visa waivers” for the UK? Then again, given your present demographic trends, maybe that’s a good thing.

(Oh, BTW, Mum was from England… so about 1/2 my family are in the UK… Please consider that when thinking me perhaps biased against the UK or Brits. I just finished ‘morning tea’ and I’m pining for Mum’s scones, rest her soul. The ancestral name meant roughly “summoner to the Crown” (i.e. Royal Bounty Hunters… to paraphrase) so it isn’t like we were not happy supporting the British Government either…)

3) Trump is (depending on the particular poll) running about 30% at the moment with LOTS of other choices. Cut that in half (since Republicans are not the total population and what he loses in Democrats he picks up in Independents) and you have about 15% already firm Trump supporters. The USA has about 325 Million population. So that’s about 30 Million Trump Supporters (allowing some for ‘too young to vote’). So how does it feel to Royally Piss Off 30 Million potential tourists and folks who might buy your products?

Then again, the UK exports nearly nothing to the USA these days, so maybe it doesn’t matter. And Australia has some of the same cultural echos, while having MUCH better beaches. ( I’ve been to both places ). So maybe you don’t really need to worry about it all. Besides, you can get LOTS of visitors from Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, etc. etc. instead. I’m sure they will bring just as much $Tourist Money and cultural appreciation to your shores.

Still, when next you have need for a little “military bailout” as in the last few of your ‘dust-ups’, think having 30 Million USA Voters with a bitter feeling toward you will help that appropriation? Eh?

In Conclusion

You might just want to have a bit of a think about things before you royally screw it up.

While 1/2 my ancestry comes directly from the UK shores, the other half is Iowa USA. I can tell you with some certainty that The Midwest is not going to be very fond of your pissing in our political soup. YOU may be hard core PC wussies, but we are not (despite all the best efforts of the Democrats, Socialists, Globalists, et aliae ad nausium).

For now, at least, the backbone of America is still in place, and we know that “Free Speech” must exist for speech you despise, or it will exist for no one (as someone will despise your speech).

Worse, the polite person will be oppressed by the obnoxious person as the polite person will not complain about significant insults while the obnoxious person will complain about imaginary insults “for effect”. We see that today in Islam being very vocal about trivialities while “turn the other cheek” Christians get roundly smacked up and say nothing.

Just because WE can see that, and act on it, doesn’t mean you have a clue nor that you can have any “value added” at all by criticizing our awareness in the midst of your blindness. Frankly, it just makes you look the fool. (Then again, you’ve had lots of practice at that since Mum left. She once complained that “All the good ones had left Britain”, I’m beginning to think she had a point… Post Churchill you’ve lost something of great importance. I think it was your self reliance, or maybe your self respect…)

You will be happy to know that I’ll not be visiting the UK any time soon. The spouse wants to go, but I think there are other places where I’ll be more comfortable. Jamaica was nice (and they knew how to make a good cup ‘a tea). Decisions, decisions… Then there are all the family who moved to Australia and Canada. Maybe a visit with them would be better. Then again, I just found out that some of Mom’s clan (from her Uncle IIRC) are now in South Carolina. It’s a very nice place to visit too. In short: I don’t need you any more. I’ve “gotten over it” about the British heritage. MY British Heritage was based on the UK of 100 years ago. That UK is now, clearly, gone. 1/2 Century of steep decline has erased it and now the UK is a nice PC Police Nanny Welfare State with a Toy Monarch for show-and-tell (picture time on schedule).

Lucky for you, not too many folks have figured that out. Yet. But keep shoving in our faces that you despise our freedoms, our liberties, our rough and tumble freedom of speech, and frankly, our self reliance and acceptance of others like Donald Trump (even when we don’t agree with what he says) and eventually even the more dim folks will find you an inhospitable place to tour. Folks don’t really like being “on stage” (or on camera…) 100% of the time on a vacation (or a business trip, or a…) and certainly don’t like the idea that they must ‘walk on egg shells’ to avoid stepping on some emotional landmine from fragile egos of the wussy class.

I’ll close with one little point:

Texas just reinstated “open carry”. That means you can strap on a side arm (i.e. handgun) and walk down the street with it.

Now realize there was a bit of a dust up in Texas where two muslim jihadii wanna-bees were going to kill a bunch of folks because some of them drew a picture of Mohammed that they didn’t like. (Seems they don’t like any of them).

Forgetting that in the USA we do still have freedom of speech and that includes political pictures and satire. ( Heck, we even let the Piss Christ ‘art’ go by…) These two ‘wanna-bees’ jumped out of a car armed to the teeth. There were two local police who met them. One was ‘only’ a school cop so was forbidden (then) to carry a gun. So it was one armed officer against 2 jihad-johnies with AK-47 style + more. The result? 2 dead “perps” and one celebrated cop. Oh, and no “Asian” or “Muslim” riot… Oh, and no innocent cartoonists hurt either.

So now, in Texas, it doesn’t have to be a cop who does that, nor one of the millions of folks with a ‘concealed carry’ permit. It can be any old person who wants to strap on a six-gun and ‘take care of herself’. (There’s nothing quite as ‘hot’ as a lady packing a sidearm… oh, and be advised that they have faster reflexes and better precise motor skill – called ‘aim’ here – than big ol’ guys. Don’t you ever mess with a Lady From Texas…)

Yes, Texas is a bit unique. In Florida, for example, they prefer concealed carry, but there the permit also allows for other weapons, like knives, clubs, whatever. They think that’s a bit more polite. Some States like “open carry” as you can see what’s being packed, others like concealed as that is less likely to upset the more timid.

I know all this will seem very alien to you. But look back at the pre-1950s era and you find old B&W movies of folks with pocket guns, even in the UK. (I’m not sure exactly how far pre-1950 you must go there, but here it was common up until 1963 when Kennedy was assassinated and folks decided to ‘never let a disaster go to waste’ and passed a load of gun laws on the theory that preventing a little old lady from having a purse gun would stop political assassins from plying their trade…)

The UK Culture has decayed a great deal from the time of the Great British Empire. Don’t know what to call it now. The Modest British EU Satrapy? But just because things look a bit strange when viewed from your knees doesn’t mean we don’t see a bit further and from a better point of view standing tall. And it is the person standing tall who can accept freedom of speech in others. It is the person who is confident and comfortable that they can protect themselves who can accept some insults from others and not take offense. And it is the person who has true freedom that feels no need to put others in a cage for ‘wrong think’.

I’d say “please forgive my blunt speech”, were I operating in “Mom mode”, but I’m not. Today is “Dad mode”, so today you get the straight up USA Old School directness. Don’t like it? NOT my problem. I said my piece, and you can accept it, or not, or say what you want… oh, wait, no you can’t, you are in the PC UK that might collapse if you offend someone… Sorry about that… Well, maybe you can visit over here and THEN say what you want in reply. I’ll open a tab at the bar in Houston. Don’t forget to bring your six-shooter… Oh, wait, you can’t own one… Sorry about that… Well, at least you can watch TV for free… Oh, wait, not in the UK. Sorry about that… Well, dang it all, guess that’s why y’all sit around nit-picking what each other says. You’ve got nothing else left you can do that isn’t regulated into oblivion.

But do realize that we take it personal when you insult our politicians. We don’t like other folks taking-dirt about them, throwing spit-balls at them, insulting their low intelligence or calling them names or saying they are evil despicable lying bastards with no heart. That’s our job…

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

68 Responses to Dear British Parliament

  1. philjourdan says:

    I am a Cruz man. But given this, I would have no problems pulling the lever for The Donald. If the UK wants the 3rd war, it is on their heads.

    Instead of banning Donald Trump, perhaps they should be making room for all the muslims that want to come here but will go there instead.

  2. philjourdan says:

    BTW: There are a lot more than 30 million as another 20-25% would vote for him just because some foreign tin pot banned him. Americans are a very nasty people when insulted.

  3. p.g.sharrow says:

    American politicians effect the lives of everyone in the world. Small wonder that they want to have their say in our selection. 30% of the Muslims in the world want to destroy the U.S. and the rest want the Americans to protect them from that 30%.
    35% of England’s Muslims think that violent Jehaid against others is justified. PEW poll results.
    Small wonder that they can successfully petition Parliament to debate the Donald’s call for a temporary halt in Muslim entry into the U.S.. Parliament HAD to debate Trump’s demands. They did not have to act against Trump. A great to do about nothing. The warlike attitude of young Muslims against Others is a BIG DEAL…pg

  4. p.g.sharrow says:

    If Donald Trump gets the nomination I fear it will lead to his election. This will be as bad for the world as Obama was. It will ruin the RNC just as the DNC has been ruined by Obama/Clinton. Trump is just another RINO that will push a far right version of their push for Imperial power. A Bloomburg version Republican, not something that I would want to see.
    After 150 years of their efforts of destroying Constitutionally limited Federal Government we are are reduced to depending on Republicans to reverse that trend. WE know that Donald is no friend of limited government. For him government is just one more tool for him to use for his advantage, that has been his hallmark over his entire life. So far Cruz has been a defender of the validity of the Constitution as a contract that must be followed by the Federal Government…pg

  5. Larry Ledwick says:

    Americans think politics should stop at the sea shore. Perhaps the best way to increase the influence of an American politician is for some other countries elite to denounce them. Our political process is in the midst of a major upheaval, lots of average Americans who would just as soon worry about other things, are finally trying to take back their political future from the schemers and con men/women who have been running around trying to create their own vision of the perfect world, instead of letting the average guy in the street just get on with his life as best he can. Middle America is pretty much an advocate of the “Lead, Follow or get the Hell out of the Way” school of politics.” They don’t tolerate fools for long and eventually with a long sigh set down the news paper and get up to slap some sense into the kids.
    This is why all the political pundits are so confused about what is going on right now. They confused quiet with not relevant, and confuse income or college degrees with knowledge and common sense. Our major political parties (both of them) are in deep trouble and running around with their hair on fire trying to get things back on their preferred track. We are just one or two trigger events away from the major political parties getting tossed out with the garbage and the spontaneous emergence of a whole new organizational structure of our politics. Foreign meddling in this process is a really bad idea, since Americans tend to keep book on that sort of thing for a long time, especially when those doing the meddling have through their inaction and wishful thinking cost us lots of blood and treasure.

    This item has a good commentary in it about the complexity of the political shift going on right now and how the folks who think they are the elite have totally missed the plot.

  6. EM – that sure rattled your cage…. I’m the opposite, being English with family and friends in the States.

    On the first point, with jihadists being infiltrated into the stream of refugees fleeing the jihadists, and that we simply can’t tell the difference, it makes sense to be at the least more picky about which ones you accept. The US has always restricted immigration, and a bit more restriction at this time should be expected. The Paris attackers largely came into France via this stream and it doesn’t take many to make a big mess.

    There’s a mechanism where if enough people sign a petition then Parliament must debate it. As far as I’ve seen so far the PC people didn’t win it, and The Donald remains free to visit and to run his businesses in the UK.

    I may not like all Trump’s views on things, but he does seem to actually say what he thinks. This was also the attraction of Farrage (UKIP party) in the UK, though as he gained popularity and saw the possibility of actually winning some seats rather than just being a thorn in the side of the ruling classes he’s become more mealy-mouthed. This is also the attraction of the extremely-left Jeremy Corbyn, in that he’s saying what he believes to be right. His policies would be disastrous, but he believes they’ll be good. A bit of back-pedalling appears to be happening there, too…. It looks like Trump is secure enough in his self-esteem and his fortune to continue the way he is. There’s also the evidence that he’s more often right than wrong, since otherwise he’d be broke. He’s arrogant, yes, but maybe he’s earned the right to be.

    It’s up to the US as to whether they elect The Donald, and I don’t know what would be the optimum for the US or for the world. At least you wouldn’t be uncertain where he was heading, and that’s a positive. For most politicians I don’t know if what they say is actually what they think is true or whether a committee decided that that was the optimum thing to say to pacify the electorate. You can’t buy Trump, though I’m not certain of who he’s bought….

  7. Ian W says:

    Some disconnected but related thoughts….
    The most common boy’s name in the UK last year was Mohammed, this is due to the enhanced birth rate when allowed to have multiple wives. This freedom to avoid bigamy laws spread to many others in ‘Multi-culturalism’. This approach to immigrants was that they should not assimilate and adopt the host nation values and culture, instead the formation of ghettos was praised as allowing people to retain their own cultures.
    In UK multiculturalism has led to a PC unwillingness to address problems due to clashes of culture. What do you do with a group that consider any female not of their ‘culture’ of zero value and available to rape at will. Indeed if a female in their culture is raped they will stone them to death for adultery. Search for: Rotherham Rape . You will find many hits detailing how hundreds if not more prepubescent and young teenage girls were treated much the way Yazidi girls are treated in Syria by ISIL. Yet the UK police, social services and councils turned a blind eye to it as they did not want to offend the multicultural minority. Not only Rotherham but many other towns and cities had/have precisely the same laissez faire attitude to these foreign ‘cultures’.
    In Brick Lane East London, once the domain of the Jewish community and now Islamic, and in other areas in Birmingham and Leicester there are young Muslims running ‘Sharia Patrols’ and trying to stop women walking alone with veils, stop music, stop any open drinking. It was only when the hard ‘right wing’ groups started ‘Christian Patrols’ that the police stepped in – against the Christian patrols of course; at least initially.

    The Labour party introduced an idea (to show how answerable to the people they were {cough}}) that petitions could be raised on the Internet site for the Government and if 100K ‘signatories’ were reached then the Commons Speaker _would_ hold a debate on the issue. There are ~3million Muslims in the UK of which around 1 million support violent ‘Jihad’ (a colloquial misuse of the term but we can use it). Then there are thousands of rosy glassed limousine liberals/champagne socialists who will support multiculturalism and hate Trump and what they think he stands for. I am surprised that only ~300K signatures were obtained. The House of Commons has a population of MPs that are desperate for what they believe are popular measures – and believing like the GOP that Trump is a buffoon and not a chance of election all piled on trying to out PC each other (none of them managing to do better than Merkel inviting 1 million migrants in but they would have if they could to show just how right on PC they were.) These are people who would rather be PC than arrest ‘Asians’ who were repeatedly gang raping hundreds of young white school girls. Do you really think that upsetting a US presidential hopeful would worry them? Foresight is not one of their qualities.

    On Trump, I think that he has in the past been apolitical as that was the way to survive and get what he wanted out of whoever was the current politician with their snout in the trough. I don’t think that Trump or any lobbyist for that matter respects politicians that can be bought so easily. I think he has ‘bought’ both Republicans and Democrats. The ‘establishment’ Republicans appear to be happier to be in opposition where there is less work and just as much trough for them. If there is a chance of breaking their cartel behavior then it should be taken. They have done more to destroy the image of the Republicans than Trump ever could. They have totally lost sight of Republican values – or perhaps someone can quote one of the establishment Republicans who has pushed for small government and the reimposition of the Enumerated Powers. I have not seen any attempt to do that.
    We live in interesting times – what Trump has done is upset the cozy apple cart where the Republicans would have been happy to ‘not-quite-beat’ Hillary then settle down for a peaceful few years in opposition, snouts back in the trough, and sod the country.

    This will be an interesting 9 months – and I think it will become more chaotic not less.

  8. andysaurus says:

    I consider myself of English heritage (not British), even though it’s only 25%. The other 25% on Mum’s side was German, and Dad was an Austrian Jew converted to Catholic born in Hungary. If you think that’s good, you should meet my niece and nephew – my brother married a Thai Chinese Indian in Malaysia! Anyway, I think Donald Trump is great – he tells the truth. I don’t like his protectionist attitude to trade because THAT is stupid, but I’m happy to overlook that for all his other benefits. BTW, I moved to Australia in 1980. Happy to buy you a good beer if you come over here E.M.
    If Trump misses, then Cruz, the best with regards to climate IMHO.

  9. Paul, Somerset says:

    Blimey! Are you sure such a rant is necessary?

    The Conservative Prime Minister does not want to ban him, the socialist leader of the Opposition has explicitly invited him to the UK to discuss the matter, and now that the parliamentary debate is over, and everyone’s opinion has been heard, he’s still free to come over and offer his own.

    A triumph for free speech at the end of the day imo.

    Some of your specific points:

    Rioting in general has been a tradition in England as far back as you care to go in history. Certainly rioting in Handsworth predates any significant Muslim presence in that part of Birmingham by a long, long way. It’s that kind of area. You probably find such areas in the States too. “Handsworth Revolution”, Steel Pulse’s reggae anthem, is nearly 40 years old now. Thankfully none of the disturbances have involved firearms … Life really is different here.

    UK exports to the US in Nov 2015 (latest month for which there are statistics): £3.5 billion; UK imports from the US: £3.0 billion. The US is that rarity: a nation which buys more from us than we buy from them. So in one sense you’re right, there’s no economic incentive to piss you off; but on the other hand please acknowledge that we do sell you at least something.

    World War Two: I’d always thought of the UK and the US as two nations among many who fought a common enemy both in Asia and in Europe. But if you want to think of it in terms of the UK somehow “owing” the US, then the UK did finally pay off its war debt to the US on 31 Dec. 2006, which was never straightforward for a nation utterly bankrupt as early as 1940.

    I really hope you’ll reflect on some of the things you’ve written and perhaps consider the Trump petition and debate more the sort of comedy moment that brightens up British public life than a cause for irrevocable falling out.

  10. Oliver Manuel says:

    I share many of p.g.sharrow’s opinions.

    We face a utopian form of totalitarianism, i.e., communism that promises to end injustice and delivers even greater injustice and slavery.

    I even voted for Obama the first time to try to heal racial tension.

  11. gallopingcamel says:

    I am a Brit who dreads every visit to the UK because my country continues its relentless fall.

    When Obama showed contempt for a stalwart ally by returning the Churchill bust the reaction was disappointing.

    Donald Trump might have asked the UK to return the statuette as a gesture of friendship but who could blame him for ignoring the UK when he becomes president.

    I regarded Donald Trump as a blowhard narcissist so I read his book “Crippled America” expecting to be underwhelmed. Instead Donald got me on page xiii of the preface where he proposes to return control of K-12 education to the local community.

    Starting on page 50 Donald goes into the details which include closing the US Department of Education as Ronald Reagan would have done absent Terrell Bell and his “Nation at Risk”:

  12. gallopingcamel says:

    “If Donald Trump gets the nomination I fear it will lead to his election. This will be as bad for the world as Obama was. ”

    I doubt you assessment. Much more likely Trump will try to run the country for profit which involves fiscal responsibility and an end to increasing our crippling debts.

    If you find that prospect scary you represent a tiny minority.

  13. E.M.Smith says:


    My family is almost as mixed in the kids generation. I was at a meeting of siblings and their kids this weekend and we got to talking ethnic mixes. Nephew is 1/8 American Indian, plus some other odd bits. Two niece’s kids are part hispanic and something like 1/4 Italian. (Her dad brings in some kind of Scandinavian Redheads ). My grandson is 1/4 Puerto Rican Mix Hispanic and 1/4 Dutch. All this in the context of my folks mix of English, Irish, German (Amish) and a bit of French. Oh, and one niece is married to a Jewish guy.

    I think we’ve covered just about all of Western Europe and North American Natives, plus some of the Levant; with some potential of a bit of Africa in the Caribbean Mix, but nobody is sure (or cares enough to figure it out). Still missing a bit of Asia and the Slavic group, but the grandkids need something to work on ;-)

    BTW, several on Mum’s side went to Australia and New Zealand, including her dad’s brother (a sailor who liked what he saw) and her maiden name is fairly common there, so likely some polynesian and other mixes in that part of the tree. My sister is working out the family tree and did some show and tell on her progress. Mum’s sister did marry a Russian Jew (from New Jersey), so if you go up one from me, you do get a partly Slavic mix.

    Mum was one of 9, Dad one of thirteen (both near the youngest). I once figured out given reasonable estimates from what was known, that between Aunts, Uncles, cousins and just 2nd cousins there were likely about 440 of them. Scattered over at least 4 continents that I know of… but likely including all of them. Add one more generation level (by backing up one older, or watching one newer) and it gets into the thousands and related to every tribe…

    And that isn’t even considering the two generations back of sailors in HM Merchant Marine wandering the planet… or the earlier Viking roots and their spread over Eurasia and later under other tribal names to the Americas.

    We’re essentially now the typical All American Mutt.

    @Paul, Somerset:

    Yes, it is needed. I’m still hoping to wake up my UK family and thier neighbors to their heritage of real liberty and point them to the way back to liberty.

    The UK has regularly lost way too many soldiers for folly, often from having too little armament, and needed us to bail them out. I’m ok with that (as I’d not be here otherwise… Mum was a war bride…); but especially now with the loss of empire, any hope of survival in the next war will require much from others. WWII had a LOT of lend lease going on. And I don’t give a fig about the cost. I’m not talking debt reparations but rather our costs getting sucked into Yet Another European War, mostly in lives.

    BUT, my point is more that most Americans now have a lot less connection to the UK than last time, and getting them PO’ed at the UK will have a whole lot more of them not giving a damn. Will my 1/8 Cherokee 1/4 English nephew identify more with the UK? What about his 1/8 English kids? (I think their major % is now German, but I’m not sure). By that point, most of us have lost the plot of our “ethnicity” and opt to skip the math and self identify as American.

    Will those Americans choose to die to help a mostly muslim UK in 20 to 40 years? I’ll not encourage my gandkids to do so. But that’s your problem, not mine. Europe is committing ethnic suicide, with the UK and Germany in the lead. I’ll raise a toast at the wake… and sing Auld Lang Syne… but not send the kids to defend it anymore.

    Remember that many here came to escape the wars and stupidity of Europe. There has always bern a strong isolationist current here. You see it resurfacing in Obama now, in Rand Paul as a wanna be, and more. Spend time insulting “my fellow Americans” and that gets worse. A whole lot of us are very tired of the crap in Iraq / Iran / ISIL / ickystan /whatever and would only cry a few tears is we woke up one day to find everything from Morroco to Indonesia glowed in the dark. At least then we could stay home and enjoy life in peace…

    So is anything irrevocable? It isn’t about ME, or MY expression. It is about YOU and your awareness and future. I’ll be fine, America will be fine, freedom, liberty, and self reliance will be fine. Here. I’ll still have Earl Grey in the morning (even if from Sri Lanka and with French and Russian labels on it) and I’ll still celebrate Guy Fawkes Day. But why go to the UK on vacation to visit a place unrelated to my heritage (as that UK is dated 100 years ago… and now significantly gone)? I’d rather visit Puerto Rico or Italy for my “foreign culture” immersion and learn about the grandkids and niece’s kids heritage… besides, its warmer and they don’t want to toss our next president to the curb…

    If I’d ever want a load of PC Crap and “multiculturalism” shoved down my throat, I can alway just visit San Francisco, Hollywood, or a college campus … a lot cheaper and I can escape faster too…

    Oh, and I do know the mechanics of the petition to debate. But I see that as just the mechanism by which the PC Police pull the chain. True Freedom of Speech also excludes “you MUST talk about”… Like being forced into “sensitivity training”, forced participation is a wasteful lie that creates resentment. Force me to discuss or debate a Progressive Hot Button, and you create an adversary relationship from the start. It does not improve with time in the forum…

    So why do I want to go somewhere that forces people into resentment and adversarial relationships? I’d rather go to Jamaica, have wonderful rum drinks on the beach, and watch the local scenery without being called racist, sexist, insensitive, or bigoted. (I was last there 40 years ago and the memories are wonderful…. hope that magic is still there…). Or Brazil for similar reasons ( though I’ve not been there, only taught English to a class of Brazillians, but that was the sense I got from them).

    In short: “Life is too short to drink bad wine,” and the UK is looking ever more like a land of sour grapes. (The USA too, but running about 50 years behind you in enough places to still find comfort and liberty…)

  14. John F. Hultquist says:

    Smith wrote “That’s our job… ”
    Ledwick wrote “Americans think politics should stop at the sea shore. ”

    One might think the English would know this. Recall what Country Music fans thought of Natalie Maines & the Dixie Chicks when Maines, in London, said from the stage “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.

    Had she said that to him in Texas no one would have given a s—.
    That’s the American Way.

  15. Sandy McClintock says:

    Revoking a visa to visit a country, on the grounds that you don’t like their point of view, is the ultimate example of ‘state sponsored meddling in free speech’.
    Whatever happened to the idea of ‘defending, to the death, the right of someone to express a view with which you do not agree’.
    I see a rise in this sort of despicable activity in both Australia and the UK.

  16. Chuckles says:

    E.M. Well said, my thoughts exactly. Could I suggest that you omitted, ‘And
    a.) What the hell makes you think you have any say in the discussions or decisions we make in our country
    b.) What the hell makes you think we care what you think?
    c.) I don’t like your horse either.’

    The chattering class metrosexual set in the UK have this prim, smug and patronising certainty that they have the right and the moral requirement to comment on and correct the behaviour of all the ex colonies around the world. Some of the most unpleasant people one could hope to meet

  17. Graeme No.3 says:

    It is obvious that your English inheritance is dwindling. Earl Grey tea is for drinking in the afternoon. I would suggest something from Darjeeling or Ceylon for breakfast.

  18. Paul, Somerset says:

    As it happens, there is no ban on Trump entering the UK. But Trump wishes to ban the elected representatives of hundreds of thousands of UK voters from entering the US. There are many Muslim Members of parliament, and here is the view of one of them, Naz Shah, MP for Bradford West:

    “Ms Shah said she wouldn’t be calling for a ban but did want to challenge his rhetoric of ‘badness’ by inviting him to West Yorkshire in a gesture of goodwill.

    “She said: “I stand here as a proud British Muslim woman…Donald Trump would like me banned from America, I wouldn’t get my visa.'”

    If British troops continue to fight alongside those from the US, as they are doing now, and Trump becomes their Commander-In-Chief, it seems rather insulting that the Commander-In-chief will ban a number of their elected representatives from travelling to meet him.

    I gather you favour a doctrine of isolationism, but events have a habit of overtaking doctrine. Back in1940 the efforts of Joe Kennedy, US Ambassador to Britain, to portray Britain as a defeated nation not worth fighting for all came to nought when Hitler declared war on the US anyway.

    With our two nations seemingly stuck with each other for the last century-plus, I really wish you could understand why some on this side of the Pond took offence at Trump’s comments, and I hope you can appreciate that once the dust has settled, the fact is that he’s still welcome to come over here, if he wishes. If he doesn’t, well, never mind…

  19. p.g.sharrow says:

    Why is it that western Muslims are running around screaming and yelling as if their hair was on fire about Trumps comment that the U.S. should TEMPORARILY restrict movement of war zone Muslims into America until they could be adequately vetted? Do these people want violent Jihadies slipped into the U.S.? Maybe these people should close their mouths long enough for their ears to work.

    “Support for Suicide Bombing
    An average of 14% of Muslims surveyed believes suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets in defense of Islam can be often justified or sometimes justified. This is Based on actual population sizes (i.e., the sum of the Muslim populations of each country surveyed by Pew multiplied by the average for that particular country), the number is 136 million.”

    “Among young, Western Muslims aged 18-29, the percentages who believe that suicide bombings against civilians can be justified are as follows:
    42% of French Muslims
    35% of British Muslims
    and 26% of American Muslims.”

    There is a fundamental problem here that must be addressed. We don’t really need to import more trouble. Britain and Europe are sitting on a time bomb with a short fuse. A solution MUST be found and “convert or die” is not acceptable to me…pg

  20. J Martin says:

    I’m a Brit and I don’t think Trump said anything wrong. Trump said he wanted to TEMPORARILY halt Muslim entry until the USAs messed up systems could be sorted out. If those presumably computer systems were designed by the same company that tried and spectacularly failed to computerise the NHS then there would be no hope of ever sorting it out.

    In the UK Political Correctness is alive and thriving. Multiculturalism is dead and has been replaced by “Diversity”. One must now be grateful for Diversity, one must embrace Diversity, and so on. Liberals and left wingers now rush to hind behind the word Diversity whenever one tries to discuss the creeping introduction of sharia law into the UK, or discuss how to filter terrorists from immigrants.

    Ostrich’s with their heads in the sand.

  21. Larry Ledwick says:

    My take is Trump is a mercenary and I mean that in a good way, (think hired gun). I see him as the sort that gives total loyalty to what ever cause he is pursuing, if it is profit for one of his hotels, he will do what ever he can do to promote the hotel and maximize its cash flow. The question is what would he see as his fiduciary and loyalty responsibility as President. If he would see it as an unabashed champion for America and the benefit of our citizens he could be a good thing, if instead that is a secondary objective to personal goals of power and influence it could be a bad thing. If he has some ideological objective like Obama has had, depending on what that goal is it could be very good or very bad.

    Since he seems to judge things in win or lose terms and hates to lose, I think he would be most inclined to try to see that the U.S. “wins” in all encounters with others, that like most coins also has two sides. If he wants to win at all costs bad, if wants to win without damaging our allies could be good.

    I think at this point the real question is what are his true deep goals and “mission”. I have not decided, but his take no prisoner style if properly channeled could be the only constructive solution to the current climate of political corruption, or the worst enabler of it you could imagine. I would like to know more about his back story both good and bad deeds without the PR spin and hype. Is he the kind of rich and powerful guy who quietly does good things for small people, or is he a total social path capitalist who does what ever he can get away with.

    I take it as a good sign that on both sides of the aisle the “establishment” is freaked out by him, that tends to make me think in the long term he could be a good thing as sometimes your best clue of a persons true behavior is who supports them and who is afraid of them.

    Unfortunately with the choices currently available, I think regardless he would be the least worst choice of any pairing of final choices, as I think both Hilary and Sanders would be catastrophically bad choices for the country.

  22. u.k(us) says:

    “That’s our job…”
    Funny as heck !!
    And we’ll get around to that sometime soon.
    As soon as we’ve tried everything else.
    Just ask Churchill, he knew the score.
    I think he wrote the score.

  23. David A says:

    Paul, Islam has real problems. PGtouched on some of them. Shari law and Jihad is incompatible with the US constitution. Big period!
    Most every ME poll for decades show large support for Sharia law.

    Islamic social tratment of women is anhoramt. Mass molestation and rape override some Islamic politician’s senstivity to feeling insulted. In fact this victim cry is insulting and for her to not apolgise for Islamic jihad three to four Paris homicides a month means she is likely a sharia supporter herself.

  24. p.g.sharrow says:

    I have paid attention to Donald Trump since he was managing a part of Mr.Trumps’ real estate empire.
    Typical spoiled rich boy that became even more wealthy by manipulating others. His behavior reminds me of the bully that runs up behind and slugs you, then brags to everyone about how tough and smart he is because he can get away with it. Just a loud mouth braggart that is nowhere as good and smart as he thinks and claims he is. This is not someone that I would want to be associated with…pg

  25. philjourdan says:

    Simon, Thanks for the perspective from across the pond. And it does make things clearer. However, there is one stumbling block in your analysis. And that is Cameron. While Parliament had to debate the issue – he did not have to come out and be stupid about it. I have no idea what his position is. But to Americans it is clear. He is anti-America. He is welcome to his position. And we are just as free to tell the Brits where to put it.

  26. philjourdan says:

    Paul – Re: WWII debt. The “debt” is not about money. It is about bailing out the UK twice in 40 years. While many Commonwealth lives were lost, so were a lot of US lives for what? Britain’s folly of Chamberlain and allowing Hitler to fester and grow. And 40 years earlier, the stupidity of blind alliances.

    The world may have been slightly different if Mr. Wilson had not committed the US to the first war. But not much. But the big debt was keeping the islands afloat when Hitler kicked everyone off the continent – not with men at first, but with supplies. And in turn, the Commonwealth supplied huge amounts of intelligence and land for the fight against the Japanese which allowed the US to turn the tide over there. A shotgun marriage where both partners gained. But how often do you see the US debating an English leader? Even one who is campaigning for the position? For the most part, Americans ignore that which occurs across the pond. And even when they do not, they do not get outraged at it.

    Why? Because they do feel a bond with the UK after a century of wars together as allies. But just as that was a 20th century phenomenon, the 19th showed a vastly different arrangement – and that was due to the arrogance of the UK. That arrogance seems to be returning. And just as happened in the 19th century, the US is not going to abide it very long.

  27. philjourdan says:

    @Sandy – Re: Free Speech

    It is an illusion – everywhere except the US. While other countries pay lip service to it, none practice it. The US is not pristine as we are saddled with PC – but at least we can still say it even if the hoi-polloi then try to shame us into silence.

    The UK has never had free speech. And probably never will. What they call free speech is regulated speech. Same with Canada.

  28. philjourdan says:

    @Paul – just one question – why would an elected representative of people in the UK WANT to immigrate to the US? Your comment was totally stupid! Trump is not talking about “visitors” – he was specifically talking about “Immigrants”. And I thought English was the native language of the UK!

  29. Steve R says:

    I’m speaking from the UK and agree it’s pathetic and indeed embarrassing that a number of folks wanted to ban Trump for making a common sense statement.
    Until and unless you can weed out the poison from the good, then shutting the door at least temporarily is the only sane option.
    Much of this influx madness comes back to adherence to EU policies and interestingly the mood around EU exit is swinging significantly towards “leave”. The recent light bulb moment for many has been driven primarily by the outrageous behaviour being demonstrated in Europe by new “cultural enrichment arrivals”.
    There is a silent majority that hate PC stuff, hate the invasion going on and relish the chance to have their say at the ballot box. ( Unfortunately we have postal vote rigging fraud too – guess which political persuasion that always supports!).

    All is not lost – Yet.

  30. Julian Jones says:

    Seems there are other agendas in play here that politicians on both sides of Atlantic fail to explain fully, eg :
    “EU should ‘undermine national homogeneity’ says UN migration chief” –

  31. Larry Ledwick says:

    Ref your comment:

    But the big debt was keeping the islands afloat when Hitler kicked everyone off the continent – not with men at first, but with supplies.

    Part of that cost of supplying Britain poorly recognized is the shipping losses just getting supplies to the UK.
    We lost 1614 ships in the merchant fleet during convoy operations, resulting in approx 10,000 KIA or died later due to wounds after rescue, plus approx of 2200 armed guards on these ships.

    Some 712 were captured as POW’s during the war. About 243 died prior to Pearl Harbor and formal declaration of war by the U.S.

    This sort of accounting is of course applicable in both directions, as the UK has gotten sucked into some of our adventures as well. (Korea, Vietnam, Gulf war, etc.) point being having allies has both costs and benefits. Likewise we helped Britain during the Falklands campaign even though officially we were neutral.

    During WWII Britain shipped key technology to the U.S. for safe keeping and continued R&D when it was questionable if they could hold out (cavity magnetron and the Tizard mission)

    Our relationship is much like a family which occasionally has internal quarrels but has each others back when it hits the fan. Americans get their hackles up when they are treated like “the colonies” by Europeans, and that is also why many Americans find Obama’s behavior over seas so offensive when he gratuitously apologizes for American interests with a condescending attitude and diminishing his country in public.

    It is one thing to apologize in private to some foreign leader for some issue but like the Snoden affair allowing Europe to get all huffy about US intelligence operations monitoring allies when they do exactly the same thing to us (and have since we were colonies) rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Politicians / statesmen used to handle these issues behind closed doors instead of trolling each other in public for cheap points.

  32. Philjourdan – I don’t think any of us know what David Cameron’s real views are. He’s very good at forgetting what he’s promised and instead doing what is currently more convenient. This is however maybe preferable to having a politician who sticks with a failing policy for a dogmatic reason. The considered opinion of the UK electorate was that he was the least-worst choice as PM, and I’d agree with that. There is however a pretty big gap between what he says and what he does, and if the US requires his help he will provide what he can, as the UK has done for a long time. There are far too many ties across the Atlantic to do anything else.

    There are most likely a lot of deals between world leaders that never see the light of day but are real. We hear about the ones that are fit for public consumption. Occasionally we’ll get an Edward Snowden to remind us that there’s a lot of things happening we wouldn’t like if we knew.

    On Free Speech, it’s accepted that you can’t say absolutely anything you want to. Shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theatre is not a good idea, and neither is exhorting people to kill their neighbours for a religious or other reason. We expect people to use self-control and to act ethically, and that if you want to do something immoral you’ll do it in private so as not to upset others. You’ll find the same applies in the States, especially if you travel the Deep South with an anti-Christian message. If this mutual agreement to both try to not give offence and to not take offence breaks down, then society will also break down.

    That mutual agreement is important here. Our society and strict Muslim rules are mutually exclusive. They will find our freedoms (especially sexual freedoms) offensive, and we’ll find their repressions offensive. A large number of the immigrants will adjust over time and cause no problems, but it doesn’t take many firebrands to make a big mess of our society and knock it back a few centuries. Although their culture is fit for purpose in the countries it has developed in, it is antithetic to our Western technological society.

    Despite the overtones of racial discrimination, I still feel it is better to not have a mass immigration of Islamic culture into the West. I don’t however have a solution for the Islamic immigrants fleeing the strict application of their religion, except for the elimination of those people who are causing the atrocities in the first place. That’s effectively genocide – is there a word for choosing who to kill on a religious divide?

    Normal human values (as well as Christian ones) dictate that we should help the immigrants. If we do, then our society will predictably suffer badly in the coming years. What’s the best choice?

  33. pochas94 says:

    Trump refuses to take money from the establishment, who would then expect favors. The reaction of said establishment reveals the dread they feel as they contemplate the loss of their political power, a prospect which excites many American voters, rebels at heart. Don’t worry, Brits, this won’t affect you.

  34. gareth says:

    Hi EM, and greetings from Blighty.
    The reason they debated this in parliament was that anyone who can get 100k supporters for an on-line petition gets that petition debated in parliament. Unfortunately we have more than 100k “outraged” lefties with access to computers. And enough prattish, virtue signalling, politicos to make a debate like we got.
    Personally, I’m not at all sure that the Islamic tradition is compatible with the tradition of western liberal (small L) democracy. I’m 110% sure that saying “Come All” and welcoming large numbers of mainly young, mainly male, “refugees” from “Muslim Countries” is a Very Bad Idea ™ – as Germany, Sweden, etc. are finding out. This is what Merkel will be remembered for, her “Legacy”.
    Personal opinion on Trump (not that your elections are any of my business): Trump seems a bit of a fat boy bully, but he’s the best hope as Rand Paul wont make it. And Obama – words fail me…
    Can’t you get Sarah back???

  35. philjourdan says:

    @Simon – no, you will not find the same in the US. I can call you @(&$&*^!Q@ and there is not a thing you can do – even in respect to slander – it would not matter. Since I did not state it as fact, there is nothing you can do. Not so in GB.

    And the fire in the theater crap is just that. That decision was overturned over 40 years ago and even admitted to be very bad jurisprudence by the owner of the declaration. Holmes himself –

    No, GB does not have free speech, nor do any other countries (and it is being infringed in this one).

    As for Cameron, I would say he is a bigger a$$ than Trump as he just said the stupidest thing he could – regardless of whether he believes it or not. The adage of stones and glass houses comes to mind in his case. And sadly, while he may be the best the UK has to offer today, the quality of PMs in the UK has severely deteriorated since Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher.

  36. p.g.sharrow says:

    If you emigrate into a country you should try to assimilate into the local customs and language, If not, you should expect to always remain second class citizens. It has always been that way. The only exception is if the emigrants gain the upper hand and force the natives into second class position.

    My fathers French family settled the Great Lakes area. Due to political changes, they were a century as second class citizens in their own country. Then the American-Canadian border was established and they were on the American side. Great-Great Grandpa came home and announced that they were now Americans! They would no longer speak French, British or German. They would only speak American from that day forth, They would no longer be second class citizens in their own country. Wise old man. You live in the Ghetto of your own making.

    If Muslims want to emigrate to America they MUST become Americans. Learn the language, adopt our legal system and customs of treatment of others. Customs that they demand we treat them with but then demand special treatment for their customs that we must adapt to. Special treatment for some is not American and not the way to a pluralistic society…pg

  37. Phil – although the legal right to free speech remains in the States, in practice you may find it unsafe to do so. Around a couple of years ago the Top Gear guys took a road-trip in the Southern states, and they thought it would be funny to decorate their cars with various slogans such as “man-love” and other similar ones. On stopping to fill the tanks, the intention to cause offense became very unfunny and they were chased away by armed civilians. I’m sure much the same would happen in the UK if you were offensive enough and there were no police around to enforce the law, but instead of guns it would be two-by-fours or pitchforks depending on what was handy.

    My point was however not about the legal restraints but about the self-control required to not unnecessarily give or take offence. This is part of the old British culture, after all. Maybe getting diluted somewhat by now, but it’s still there in the country. We are heading towards a culture that is quick to take offence against people who are not politically correct enough, and where far more weight is attached to the occasional slips in PC think that everyone is subject to. What used to be regarded as a bit of harmless eccentricity is now a reason for intense Press harassment. Trial by social media doesn’t have the same rules, yet can have bad consequences.

    In the UK, few people have guns. Some police, some criminals, and the farmers and hunters. There hasn’t been the need for them, basically. I’m hearing, however, that in Cologne the shops selling pepper-spray have sold out and there’s more on order, and I’m expecting that the same will happen in the UK too. Culture-clashes can get pretty violent, and you can’t change that with laws.

    My favourite quote from Churchill was when he was travelling on a train somewhat the worse for wear. A lady opposite said to him “Sir, you are drunk!”. Churchill replied “Madame, you are ugly. But I shall be sober in the morning!”. These days, he’d be castigated for misogyny and be kicked out of office.

  38. tom0mason says:

    Why should America worry that a once great nation that has been cut down to a European backwater provincial Kingdom — a grubby little island Ruritania. Currently it is also intent on committing financial and political suicide by deindustrializing and much more, and now threatens to prevent a possible future president from going there? So what, I think any future US president could survive such a diplomatically childish slight.
    Britain has rapidly become an irrelevance as a world power, so don’t worry about it.

  39. philjourdan says:

    @p.g. – Some of my ancestors also lived in Canada – Arcadia. But they were on the wrong side of the border when it was established, so they moved to New Orleans.

  40. philjourdan says:

    @Simon – you really have no clue what “Free Speech” is all about do you? Free speech does not mean some idiot is not going to punch you in the mouth (indeed real free speech usually incites such behavior). It means that you are breaking no laws and cannot be prosecuted for it – either criminally or civilly. While we have a PC term called “hate speech” in this country, it is not codified in any laws. And indeed what some would call “hate speech” others call common sense. It depends upon the individual. And that is the key. I can call you a Nazi all day long (I would not as I hate invoking Godwin’s law), and as long as I do not swear to it in an affidavit, I can continue to do so. Just as the idiots here can continue to call Christians that very term because their religion teaches homosexuality is a sin. But yes if you go around with confrontational slogans plastered on your forehead, do not expect everyone to have the temperament of Gandhi.

    On the good side, if they do take a swing at you, they, not you, are guilty of a crime.

    As for the English trait of civility, it is world renowned. And yes, unfortunately, even here, Churchill would be run out of town on a rail. But not by the government (and I believe in that case the same as in England), but by the people. What the spoiled brats of the Millennial generation have never learned is that true free speech is allowing things you do not like to be said. And Muslims have never known free speech so they have no clue.

  41. philjourdan says:

    @Tom0mason – Tojo found out about the real sleeping giant 70+ years ago. And we saw a flash of that in 2001. The same can be said for the UK. While the UK has deteriorated from its hey day, it still has enough of that spirit in them. I would not want to make an enemy of them, but I do not have to abide stupidity from their highest official, so I can ignore them.

  42. Phil – reading the comments on the link you gave, free speech is not well-defined anyway and different people have different ideas as to the extent of it. It looks like we agree that what is legally allowed is not necessarily practically a safe thing to do. Ghandis are pretty thin on the ground.

    I also agree that Muslim society comes nowhere near free speech, and trying to do so in an area with Sharia law will get you severely punished if not killed. A few days ago a boy in Pakistan was accused by his mullah of disrepect for the Prophet, and he was so upset that he used a grass-chopping machine to cut off the right hand that he’d lifted in response to a mis-heard question. Where we’d think it was a minor misdemeanor of daydreaming during religious instruction, his later action (self-mutilation) has been locally applauded. I think I really don’t understand the culture where such devotion is expected and the punishments so permanent.

    Where this started was in the proposal to limit The Donald’s free speech. This should have been laughed out of Parliament in the first place, after having spent a decade trying to find a legal way to deport a radical Muslim preacher who really was against all the UK stands for and was claiming welfare for himself and his wives whilst preaching how to destroy the country. Political Correctness taken to the extreme. Trump was just pointing out an obvious problem others have been trying to ignore.

    I think everyone recognises that a sudden large influx of immigrants will put stress on a society, and that beyond around 1% per year you will have problems. That’s assuming the immigrants take up local customs like pg’s forebears. If they don’t, then even 1% is too much, and you get ghettoes that last a while. Add to that the data provided by EM a while back that for Muslims it’s a religious duty to take over and install Sharia law just as soon as there’s enough of them, I think we need another solution than settling the emigrants in our countries.

  43. Adam Gallon says:

    The US didn’t enter the war, until a few Japanese attacked you & Germany declared war against you.
    The Parliamentary debate was attended by virtually one man & his dog.

  44. For those who want to check on the actual “debate” which was held by 50 MPs out of 650 possible, there’s a report at which shows what happened. Some wanted The Donald banned, others defended Free Speech on the basis that it should apply also to speeches you don’t agree with. Free Speech won as I see it, and in any case there wasn’t a vote. Somewhat of a storm in a tea-cup (with Earl Grey tea, of course).

    My personal experience with Muslims has been good. This is probably because the people I’ve met accept that in living in a Western country they need to live by Western customs. In the same way as friends of mine who are Jewish, Hindu, Sikh etc. they also have their own culture which adds some variations. This may not apply to people who are forced to flee their country to escape Da’esh, and of course Da’esh have also infiltrated their operatives into the immigrant stream. Even if it’s only 1 in 1000 people, that’s not going to have a good outcome. For the other 999, we’ll probably see an increase in “honour killings” where the kids see the Western freedoms (especially sexual freedoms) and want to join in. We do see some of that already.

    Taking in a large number of people of a different culture will change the local culture. The question is whether you like the direction that culture will tend. If that’s towards repression of women and strict religious observance on pain of death, personally I don’t want that. For the same reason, by the way, I would also not want an influx of Mormons, KKK or other fundamentalist Christian refugees. (That’s just insulted a few more people….)

  45. David A says:

    I do not think Mormon culture and it ability to integrate into the ideals of liberty as articulated by the founding principles of the US, can be remotely compared to Islam, and it fundamental incompatibility with those same values and individual liberties.

  46. p.g.sharrow says:

    Mormonism is an American Christian cult created in Yew York State in the early 1800s.
    I lived many years midst Mormons, They are about as American as you can get. They do get a lot of very slanted, bad press. Specially from other christian cults…pg

  47. p.g.
    I have read the “St. James Bible”, the “Book of Mormon” and the “Quran” which share many common themes. The Quran contains most of the stories from the “Old Testament”. Probably the same stories are in the Talmud as well but I have not read it.

    Today I judge these books by the way their adherents behave. Israelis operate the only functional democracy in the middle east. They show immense restraint in spite of unrelenting violence from Palestinians.

    While Mormon scripture is implausible I have never met a Mormon I could not respect. Even if the scripture makes no sense the behavior of Mormons is impressive.

    When I set up an organization to create charter schools with three other individuals it bothered me that our religious backgrounds were so different. A Cherokee, a Mormon, a Baptist and an Episcopalian. In the end our similarities outweighed our differences and I don’t have an easy explanation for why that was so:

  48. philjourdan says:

    @Simon – Free speech is not hard to define. At least not in real life. Just pick the most objectionable statement you have ever heard. Then defend the person’s right to say it. The argument about fire in the theater deals with incitement. The defense of idiots to march down the street in SS uniforms is the key. If you agree with the speech, you are not defending free speech, you are echoing the speaker. If you disagree with the speech, but defending the speaker’s right to say it, that is free speech.

  49. philjourdan says:

    @Adam – Re: WWII – That was not in question. Nor germane to my statements. Prior to the US Entry, FDR had already picked sides. He was not doing a “lend-lease” with Germany, Italy or Japan. And that “Lend Lease” did cause the death of many US Merchant Sailors. The US was under no obligation to carry out that program. And the Axis did see it as overt support of the Allies, but had the sense not to drag the US into the full blown conflagration. Until Tojo rejected the advice of his senior staff and tried to take out the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor.

  50. Phil – thanks for the clear definition. In the pure form you are defining, I’ve never seen it operating. In practice, there have always been limits, for example the laws on treason which AFAIK supersede those of Free Speech.

    We hear of various terror-plots that have been foiled by the government agencies. They do that by observing what is said in emails, texts, talk or other communications. What is said is evidence of what they intended to do, even if they haven’t yet done it.

    Despite your clear definition, I still find the practical application somewhat murky. Drawing the line between what is acceptable Free Speech and what is culpable incitement to violence is something I’d find tricky – I’m not a lawyer. Idealism is a fine thing, but if someone was talking about killing me, family or friends (those SS uniforms) I’d be tempted to silence them permanently if I could. I’d also consider that response a reasonable one.

  51. Larry Ledwick says:

    On the other hand if you shut them up with draconian free speech limits you would have no idea what they were plotting. I WANT the whackos to speak freely, I want them to stand in the street and tell the world what they have in mind. I don’t want them locked up in a basement talking only to their cohorts about what bothers them.

    You are right at the very edge of acceptability it gets a bit murky but that edge needs to be as close to direct incitement as possible in a free society or you shut down the very basis of a free society. If you can’t talk openly about the governments abuses you are a serf not a free man.

  52. Larry – that’s useful in giving a better sense of where the edges are. The discussion caused me to think quite a bit about how our freedoms are different from others. As noted I’m English so civility is in my culture – technically Free Speech but try to avoid giving offence (so there are cultural limitations on what is reasonable to say).

    You can have true freedom if you live alone on an island, but to live in a civilisation it seems to me that there will be limits on what is acceptable conduct. I’m free to do what I want except where it affects your freedoms to do the same, and the balance is where a reasonable person doesn’t see a problem. The problem with that definition, though, is that different cultures have different standards of what is reasonable.

    In Islam, it’s considered reasonable to kill people who insult your religion, even if they themselves are Islamic but of a different sect. I consider that unreasonable. If we don’t give that offence then could co-exist and would not have problems – probably why I’ve had no problems personally. We would however need to remain aware that that line of conversation is off-limits. We’d also need to be aware of the ideas of male supremacy and polygamy and not mention those (where the Mormon reference came in, though I’m sure that apart from that the Mormons would be good people to live amongst as pg says).

    As I see it after all this is that the questions hangs on what is considered reasonable in the culture. We’ve spent a lot of time and blood achieving the freedoms we have in the West, and I do see the new crime of “hate speech” as being an attack on that. There are also a lot of other attacks on freedom – it takes a lot longer to go through an airport these days as everyone is examined for weapons, so although technically we are still free to move it’s not as easy. Basic freedoms are being encroached on (for our own safety of course) since there may be some idiot terrorist with a gun who wants to make a bloody statement.

    A while back EM was talking about giving and taking offence, and pointed out that these days there is a lot of PC thinking around and people are far faster and more vocal at finding offence. It seems to me that this is also effectively limiting Free Speech – going against it tends to be bad for your career and social standing.

    Coming back to where we started, it’s those PC elements that wanted to muzzle Trump and pretend that if you wish hard enough then reality will be as you wish. Trump seems to be saying things as he sees them, though, which isn’t the way they’d like it to be. Ignoring a problem doesn’t make it go away, though, and the first stage in solving a problem is to admit it exists in the first place. That’s the real error in trying to stop Free Speech, in that unless a problem is talked about it will not get fixed and will get worse.

  53. PhilJourdan says:


    You can have true freedom if you live alone on an island, but to live in a civilisation it seems to me that there will be limits on what is acceptable conduct.

    Untrue. You can have true freedom wherever it is cherished and defended. What you cannot have except on an isolated island is UNLIMITED freedom. The latter is simply anything you do cannot interfere with the freedom of others. The former means your freedom stops at my nose.

    Once you allow someone – anyone – to define speech – you have ceded control of your rights to that person (who changes over time). Today, it is illegal in France to call someone a Nazi (regardless of whether they are or are not). Tomorrow it may be Conservative. Or Royal. Or freeman. It depends upon who is setting the rules.

  54. p.g.sharrow says:

    Thus demonstrates the problem of Political Correct laws. Anyone in the favored class that finds offense can use the government to limit opposition to their POV. What really is needed is insensitivity training, not more sensitivity training and laws. PC is the route to tyranny. People that expect no offense are spoiled children that need to grow up. That said, Adults do not deliberately create offense to hurt others.
    This is mind over matter. If you don’t mind then it don’t matter…pg

  55. DirkH says:

    As to banning Trump just being UK comedy: They did ban Pamela Geller, obviously for fear of their own Muslim occupation force that they increase daily. UK govt is entirely subservient to Islam, London a majority islamic city already? At least majority non-white. Some Muslims are white. The Muslim proportion of Londoners is probably a state secret in the EUSSR.

    As to BBC et al calling Muslims “Asians” : This goes back to EU Kommissar Ferrero-Waldner who commanded censorship in 2006. Since that time all EU media call Muslims riots “Youth Riots” and don’t name perpetrators as islamic (and in some cases even rename them with Christian names – basically they blame Europeans for the crimes of foreigners every day; that’s why all EU media need to be destroyed – they have deserved it a million times over and add to the tally every day.)

    Ferrero-Waldner’s command to lie was in reaction to violent riots in Muslim countries due to the Muhammad cartoons. As long as the EU is not destroyed there is no free speech in Europe.

    (Source for Ferrero-Waldner’s command:

    For 10 years the EU officials have believed their own censored media and became incapable of realizing the ever-rising amount of Muslim crime (deluding themselves by believing the propaganda they themselves demanded). They are now helpless; indistinguishable from traitors; and must be brought to justice.

    It is Omitted Variable Bias or rather Omitted Variable Fraud as it was demanded. It made them incapable of figuring out the real causalities. (This is of course the general reason for the decline of all lying regimes – though, this one happened fast, as empires go – 10 years is fast.)

  56. tom0mason says:

    Yet in America some Muslims proclaim that they are not the problem and that free speech is a worthy idea. And very eloquently too —

    Note the link to the Trump story at the bottom of the page.

  57. Larry Ledwick says:

    It is also important to note that he is an Ahmadiyya Muslim which is a very small (modern) sect of Islam which as a matter of doctrine rejects violence and asserts that they can promote Islam through peaceful means. As such his view is the exception that proves the rule that traditional Islam Sunni and Shia do not accept that view of Islam which harks back to the very early days of Islam when they were too weak to be violent and had to use tolerance and peaceful co-existence to survive.

  58. Graeme No.3 says:

    What happens if Trump announces a ban on the British Parliament?
    It’s a minority decision.
    It probably won’t get much support.
    It will have no effect.
    It is stupid.

    Oh, sorry. That’s the ‘benefits’ of the debate in Parliament.
    Incidentally, it used to be a parliament of crows, now it is a parliament of bird brains.

  59. beththeserf says:

    Agree with PGS re Trump as braggart. Yes he recognizes problems in
    allowing entry to immigrants hostile to yr national interest, but he’s a
    wild card re respect fer his country’s constitution – and history demonstrates
    the problems of hubristic leadership. The tradition of trial and error re Magna
    Carta and US Constitution checks and balances on big government seem the
    way to go, at least to this serf,not populist leadership. Seems to me Reagan
    was a different Republican to Trump -hmph.

  60. Terry Jay says:

    See Sean Trende today At Real Clear Politics with a 3 part series on Trump, why now.

    This is part 3, but with links to Parts 1 and 2. Part 3 discusses the difference between cosmopolitan and traditional values. You could use other terms, but read it for the context.

    It may not be the ultimate explanation, but it is getting close, and has application in Europe as well as the US.

  61. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Terry; I read the realclear article and found an cultural cosmopolitanism Elitist point of view. Small wonder he just doesn’t understand the popular draw of Trump. I first encountered these people in 1958 while I was in Jr high school. A newly minted teacher informed me that my more traditional values were a mark of an inability for rational thought and to continue it, I would be prevented from any advancement to higher education. A point of view I encountered several times later in my schooling. One teacher in high school even tried to prevent me from graduating because he didn’t like my attitude.
    Trump is NOT a conservative. He is a cultural cosmopolitanism Elitist Bully that is spouting a populist message to stick a finger in his peer’s eyes. As to the concept that only a dying few poorly educated white Americans are the base of this ground swell against the Democrats, that is a BIG mistake. The Democrat voting base is shrinking around these cultural cosmopolitanism believers. Regardless of registration, It is the independents that hold the actual power. They will no longer be slavishly herded by Elitist cultural cosmopolitanism believers. The Republican cultural cosmopolitans best get the message as well…….. WE DON”T NEED THEM ETHER!
    To disparage those with traditional values as being simple minded is the mark of a Elitist Bigot…pg

  62. Terry Jay says:

    pg, just found it interesting that a political analyst is beginning to see the divide between Them and Us, whichever side one falls on. Trump’s appeal is in cutting thru the BS and calling it what a lot of the people see it as. When a noted analyst starts to see it and discuss it, then perhaps all is not lost.

  63. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Terry; yes, I too found it interesting. These talking heads with their “New York” values have spent all their lives living in the bubble of their friends so that they have no idea what the real world thinks. They think that they are the opinion makers as they are paid for their drivel so it must be valuable. Real people generally avoid organized politics as it is a filthy business. I have stepped into that realm several times, I’d rather wrestle with pigs as at least that kind of mud can be washed off.
    Cultural cosmopolitans are the cream of the crop of Liberal Progressive education and thinking regardless of the D or R after their names. They fully believe that they, only, are entitled to speak for the rest of us as we are not enlightened enough to understand how the world should work. Mean while we fight the wars, build the country and make things work, often in-spite of their best efforts. :-)…pg

  64. Wayne Job says:

    A good test of islamic immigrants is to check the females young and old for genital mutilation, if they are do not let them in to your country, they will continue the practice. Total evil.

  65. M Simon says:

    p.g.sharrow says: 19 January 2016 at 6:00 pm

    p.g – There IS going to be an imperial power. Who would you prefer?

    The last Imperial transition was quite difficult (all kinds of nasties attempting to fill the power vacuum – WW2 and the Cold War). Do we want to do that again any time soon?

    We did pick up some bad habits from the Brits. Political and economic control through Drug Prohibition. Read: C.A. Fitts “Narco Dollars”. But we have also been quite good – ally with us and get rich. None of that mercantilism stuff (well not too much).

  66. p.g.sharrow says:

    @M Simon, A PAX from strength as existed for most of the last 60 years in much different then an Imperium as existed during the time of the Caesars. The Romans looted their world, the Americans just wanted peaceful commerce. Crony Capitalists or Oligarchs want to have world wide government enforced toll gates, that is Imperial power. America should break their backs, not enable them…pg

  67. Steve R says:

    It must be said that a whole bunch of crackpot UK lefties contrived to force a debate on Donald Trump (who’d get my vote if I had one in the USA) by getting enough signatures on an E-petition.
    To satisfy that, the “debate” was held in a side room in Parliament with no vote at the end. Most UK citizens did not support this “debate” at all. Nobody should anyway. Donald Trump is a breath of fresh air after many years of the Autocrat Obama the socialist. Don’t fall into the trap of considering that we Brits (half my family are US citizens btw) want to interfere in any shape or form with the rather magnificent US Presidential Election procedures . ABC for me too :)

Comments are closed.