Brewster's Millions (1985)starring Richard Pryor is about a man who has to spend $30m in 30 days in order to get an inheritance of $300m, he spends most of his money on an election campaign where his slogan is 'vote for none of the above'. This endears him to the public and he's on route to win until he drops out because of the money he will make as mayor.
Twenty five years later or a hundred and eight years after the first book was published i can see a modern day adaptation in Mr Nick Clegg. Nick is currently waving a ride of Cleggamania as his appearance in the first television debate has seduced him to would be voters with his main and only argument that he is none of the above. The best reference i have seen given to him is that he is the British version of Obama and basically another Tim Henman which summed him up perfectly. If you would have had Abu Hamza in that debate along with the other 2 candidates he would have won the popularity contest too. For the next debate David Cameron will try even harder to act like he's the prime minister and Gordon Brown will be even more self deprecating.
David Cameron didn't bring up his ideas for a bigger society or broken society. He's all for us governing over schools and police departments but doesn't want us to have the power to kick out shit MP's too. It was either him or the equally rich and posh Clegg who blamed druggies for most of crime but surprisingly they didnt blame materialism or the Zionist, chairman of the Conservative friend of Israel organisation, Belizean tax dodger for the current economic crisis. Nick promised to pardon the prison sentence for offenders given 6 month jail sentences and said prison was just a university for criminals, which makes a change from all the recent news article talking about the radicilisation and reversion of Muslims in prison. Maybe they should get have inmates watching election debates and house of common debates to get a better idea of how to live in a more civil way.
Which brings me to the recent poll with the results that about 40 percent of Asians say they will vote in the elections with just 26 percent off those taking part basing their results on religion. Which makes the recent and predictable campaign by imams to encourage Muslims to vote a bit strange as is the usual bullshit that its fundamentalists who are stopping Muslims from voting. The poll suggests most people just cba and the running of a campaign which insinuates its the 'nasty mullahs' who are at fault again shows the usual dirty political tricks.
Wednesday 21 April 2010
Saturday 10 April 2010
Respect
All the current bullshit about National Insurance increases and the talk about where cuts will be made in government spending brought back memories of writing text messages back in the day. After going over the one text limit and faced with the gloom of having to pay for two text messages i would spend the next 30 minutes finding letters to cut out and words to shorten to cut down the text message into one text message.
With the main parties having consensus on all important issues like foreign policy and nuclear weapons (where most of the money goes) and even global warming (for the tree huggers) or banking and state bailouts and electorate reform. (for those actually interested in democracy) None of these topics are going to be discussed in the enlightening debates that await us. Instead as the parties all try to suck up to potential voters with free pens and lollipops in the only topic they have slight disagreements on i.e. the economy, the result being pretty much the same. If they give you a few pennies here they'll add on a few pounds over there, whether its National Insurance, VAT or increase in fuel prices. We'll be treated to popularity contests and asked to choose the lesser of all the idiots while the parties spend millions on pointless election campaigns while funded by people who don't pay taxes.
Then there's the Liberal Democrats who are not anti war anymore and whose name i read in a leaflet posted through the front door today with Vince Cables name endorsing them and surprisingly not the actual leader Whatshisname Clegg. The Liberal Democrats remind me of an ugly gold digger being chased by 2 poor old men.
Muslims will probably be praying for a Labour victory, what with Labour being a cash cow for us highlighted by a recent article in the Daily Telegraph of Labour giving us £140m a year. The saying that must come into mind for the minority of Muslims involved in the kind of projects the government likes to engage in within the Muslim community as they continuously meddle and preach their version of Islam to Muslims is probably the one not to look a gift horse in the mouth regardless of their foreign or even domestic policies. If you're going to vote, vote for the Respect party who might not be able to give you £1500 for a talk on prophetic medicine but who are anti war and anti trident and anti bankers.
There's a few possible outcomes in the election with pointed reference to other recent elections around the world.
1) The Conservative party win but the whole of Europe ignores it and refuse to deal with them in any way or even recognise them and instead only talk with Jack Straw, the new Labour leader.
2) The Labour party win by 2 seats and an angry Davind Cameron goes to the streets with his EDL mob, Gordon Brown sending out his UAF to confront them.
3. David Cameron wins the election and then dies when waving to the crowd in his baby Bentley and hitting his head against the sunroof. Sam Cameron takes over.
4) Liberal Democrats win but decide to send even more troops into Afghanistan.
With the main parties having consensus on all important issues like foreign policy and nuclear weapons (where most of the money goes) and even global warming (for the tree huggers) or banking and state bailouts and electorate reform. (for those actually interested in democracy) None of these topics are going to be discussed in the enlightening debates that await us. Instead as the parties all try to suck up to potential voters with free pens and lollipops in the only topic they have slight disagreements on i.e. the economy, the result being pretty much the same. If they give you a few pennies here they'll add on a few pounds over there, whether its National Insurance, VAT or increase in fuel prices. We'll be treated to popularity contests and asked to choose the lesser of all the idiots while the parties spend millions on pointless election campaigns while funded by people who don't pay taxes.
Then there's the Liberal Democrats who are not anti war anymore and whose name i read in a leaflet posted through the front door today with Vince Cables name endorsing them and surprisingly not the actual leader Whatshisname Clegg. The Liberal Democrats remind me of an ugly gold digger being chased by 2 poor old men.
Muslims will probably be praying for a Labour victory, what with Labour being a cash cow for us highlighted by a recent article in the Daily Telegraph of Labour giving us £140m a year. The saying that must come into mind for the minority of Muslims involved in the kind of projects the government likes to engage in within the Muslim community as they continuously meddle and preach their version of Islam to Muslims is probably the one not to look a gift horse in the mouth regardless of their foreign or even domestic policies. If you're going to vote, vote for the Respect party who might not be able to give you £1500 for a talk on prophetic medicine but who are anti war and anti trident and anti bankers.
There's a few possible outcomes in the election with pointed reference to other recent elections around the world.
1) The Conservative party win but the whole of Europe ignores it and refuse to deal with them in any way or even recognise them and instead only talk with Jack Straw, the new Labour leader.
2) The Labour party win by 2 seats and an angry Davind Cameron goes to the streets with his EDL mob, Gordon Brown sending out his UAF to confront them.
3. David Cameron wins the election and then dies when waving to the crowd in his baby Bentley and hitting his head against the sunroof. Sam Cameron takes over.
4) Liberal Democrats win but decide to send even more troops into Afghanistan.
Friday 2 April 2010
Broken Britain?
''The line of human progress goes upward from animal desires toward higher values. To control the animal desires, a progressive society lays down the foundation of a family system in which human desires find satisfaction, as well as providing for the future generation to be brought up in such a manner that it will continue the human civilisation, in which human characteristics flower to their full bloom.
Obviously a society which intends to control the animal characteristics, while providing full opportunities for the development and perfection of human characteristics, requires strong safeguards for the peace and stability of the family, so that it may perform its basic task free from the influences of impulsive passions. On the other hand, if in a society immoral teachings and poisonous suggestions are rampant, and sexual activity is considered outside the sphere of morality, then in that society the humanity of man can hardly find a place to develop.''
One of the slogans for the election comes from the Conservative party and their whole 'broken Britain' babble. What i understand by it is they are saying that Britain is broken because families are broken and children aren't growing up in stable environment or having their potentials fully nurtured. The thing is though family problems are just as prevalent in upper and middle class England as they are in lower class England but this message is specifically aimed at those not as privileged.
Crime is down, unemployment is down and so are teenage pregnancies, the 'plague' amongst British teenagers. Knife crime is probably up but that means gun crime would be down. So what exactly seems to be troubling David Cameron.
The whole thing stinks of patronising snobbery. You wouldn't ask a doctor for a estimate on a new boiler and you wouldn't ask an Eton toff on how to bring up children in council estates. To tell young people that they are unemployed because they were raised without a father and all they need is a hug from a pampered twit is insulting as well as condescending. Drug dealers have authority on the streets, so do local imams and the pub landlords but not the local mp.
Education is another area where some people don't have a clue. University funding is up for sciences but dropped for all other subjects. there's an increasing number of people working as interns for free and apprenticeships are down to a small number. There has to become a common consensus that education is failing a lot of people. Kids play truant in school not because they don't have a father to scold them or because there is no cane to whip them but because they are bored fuckless. Not everyone excels in academia or is talented in such a narrow area of expertise. More scope should be given to business and manual trades in schools to keep kids from wasting their time as well as others.
The youth are taught that drugs are bad but alcohol is fine, mainly because everyone enjoys a nice glass of wine before bed. They are taught that violence is bad but going to war with people over fictional WMD's is all good too. They are told that political rap and violent rap is bad but that rap promoting promiscuity and the subjugation of women to mere sex tools is fine.
So the problem is not that Britain is broken or that the youth are any worse then the teddy boys or cowboys of the past but of the hypocrisy and confusing morals that are presented and in most cases indoctrinated into them from a young age.
Obviously a society which intends to control the animal characteristics, while providing full opportunities for the development and perfection of human characteristics, requires strong safeguards for the peace and stability of the family, so that it may perform its basic task free from the influences of impulsive passions. On the other hand, if in a society immoral teachings and poisonous suggestions are rampant, and sexual activity is considered outside the sphere of morality, then in that society the humanity of man can hardly find a place to develop.''
One of the slogans for the election comes from the Conservative party and their whole 'broken Britain' babble. What i understand by it is they are saying that Britain is broken because families are broken and children aren't growing up in stable environment or having their potentials fully nurtured. The thing is though family problems are just as prevalent in upper and middle class England as they are in lower class England but this message is specifically aimed at those not as privileged.
Crime is down, unemployment is down and so are teenage pregnancies, the 'plague' amongst British teenagers. Knife crime is probably up but that means gun crime would be down. So what exactly seems to be troubling David Cameron.
The whole thing stinks of patronising snobbery. You wouldn't ask a doctor for a estimate on a new boiler and you wouldn't ask an Eton toff on how to bring up children in council estates. To tell young people that they are unemployed because they were raised without a father and all they need is a hug from a pampered twit is insulting as well as condescending. Drug dealers have authority on the streets, so do local imams and the pub landlords but not the local mp.
Education is another area where some people don't have a clue. University funding is up for sciences but dropped for all other subjects. there's an increasing number of people working as interns for free and apprenticeships are down to a small number. There has to become a common consensus that education is failing a lot of people. Kids play truant in school not because they don't have a father to scold them or because there is no cane to whip them but because they are bored fuckless. Not everyone excels in academia or is talented in such a narrow area of expertise. More scope should be given to business and manual trades in schools to keep kids from wasting their time as well as others.
The youth are taught that drugs are bad but alcohol is fine, mainly because everyone enjoys a nice glass of wine before bed. They are taught that violence is bad but going to war with people over fictional WMD's is all good too. They are told that political rap and violent rap is bad but that rap promoting promiscuity and the subjugation of women to mere sex tools is fine.
So the problem is not that Britain is broken or that the youth are any worse then the teddy boys or cowboys of the past but of the hypocrisy and confusing morals that are presented and in most cases indoctrinated into them from a young age.
Monday 29 March 2010
State controlled terror
Britain is still in a state of emergency over the threat of terrorist attacks 5 years after the tube bombings. There must be some credible threat to the nation to allow the constant scaremongering and draconian legislations which have been introduced. You could say Britain has set up a big brother state with more CCTV cameras then the rest of Europe put together and the Olympics a perfect excuse to continue the trend.
Muslim coincidentally seem to be the target of most the legislations and the paranoia built up by the scaremongering. Recent figures suggest 99 percent of terror attacks in Europe in the last 3 years have been carried out by non Muslims. This is with the background of Iraq, Afghanistan wars, the profiling of Muslims and the torture of Muslim prisoners.
The idea of 'Islamism' has been reduced to one bore out of anger resulting in the spontaneous murder of innocent victims. The political side of it has been ignored. An 'Islamist' movement starts from the grassroots levels and is instrumental at both social and political level. Examples of this include the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Jamaat-e-Islami, Hizb Ut Tahrir and to a greater or lesser extent, the Taliban.
In the UK the government has taken over and now basically controls the religion. Much is said of state and religion being completely separate in secular societies but much of British mosques, societies, education and literature available to Muslim youth is government approved and is mostly concentrated on theology, the one thing Muslims can discuss in mosques and at university in peace. As for any other topic of discussion or any other ideologies- they are suppressed and rejected by 'mainstream' Muslims. Leading to Muslims especially the youth even more disenchanted and ' radicalized '
Muslim coincidentally seem to be the target of most the legislations and the paranoia built up by the scaremongering. Recent figures suggest 99 percent of terror attacks in Europe in the last 3 years have been carried out by non Muslims. This is with the background of Iraq, Afghanistan wars, the profiling of Muslims and the torture of Muslim prisoners.
The idea of 'Islamism' has been reduced to one bore out of anger resulting in the spontaneous murder of innocent victims. The political side of it has been ignored. An 'Islamist' movement starts from the grassroots levels and is instrumental at both social and political level. Examples of this include the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Jamaat-e-Islami, Hizb Ut Tahrir and to a greater or lesser extent, the Taliban.
In the UK the government has taken over and now basically controls the religion. Much is said of state and religion being completely separate in secular societies but much of British mosques, societies, education and literature available to Muslim youth is government approved and is mostly concentrated on theology, the one thing Muslims can discuss in mosques and at university in peace. As for any other topic of discussion or any other ideologies- they are suppressed and rejected by 'mainstream' Muslims. Leading to Muslims especially the youth even more disenchanted and ' radicalized '
Thursday 25 March 2010
Voting
The general election is 6 weeks away and Westminster went into pantomime season overdrive this week with Sam Cam about to become fat Sam Cam, Conservatives comparing Mr Ashcroft with Charlie Whelan and Gordon Brown getting his revenge on the rebels.
This brings about the inevitable debate about voting in Islam and whether Muslims should vote or not. With the Muslim population around 2m in the UK their vote could prove to be crucial especially in places with high Muslim population. The Muslim vote might have helped George Galloway get a seat but doesn't explain why Jack Straw is still MP of Blackburn. The argument for voting is based around the idea that to change the system and to benefit Muslims, Muslims must be involved in the system and by voting for one ideology over another you could be voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
The first argument was demonstrated in the Dispatches programme showing the Tower Hamlets council and the influence Muslims were meant to have on non Muslim workers and on the borough. While i thought the programme was provocative and nonsensical it didn't really delve into the benefits of getting involved in the political systems for Muslims and just focused on the usual 'they didn't let me eat during Ramadhan or they took time off for Friday prayers'. The second argument only works when voting against the BNP, sure the Liberal Democrats are anti war but they have as much chance of calling off the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as Obama has of stopping Israel from building new settlements and you're not just voting to stop the war but also for pro gay and pro abortion.
The argument against voting and the opinion i follow is derived from one of the fundamental beliefs in Islam- one that we testify to at least 5 times a day when we bear witness that their is no god but Allah. Sovereignty is Gods alone and to be involved in a process which puts man made laws above and before Gods law you are associating partners with the Almighty.
This brings about the inevitable debate about voting in Islam and whether Muslims should vote or not. With the Muslim population around 2m in the UK their vote could prove to be crucial especially in places with high Muslim population. The Muslim vote might have helped George Galloway get a seat but doesn't explain why Jack Straw is still MP of Blackburn. The argument for voting is based around the idea that to change the system and to benefit Muslims, Muslims must be involved in the system and by voting for one ideology over another you could be voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
The first argument was demonstrated in the Dispatches programme showing the Tower Hamlets council and the influence Muslims were meant to have on non Muslim workers and on the borough. While i thought the programme was provocative and nonsensical it didn't really delve into the benefits of getting involved in the political systems for Muslims and just focused on the usual 'they didn't let me eat during Ramadhan or they took time off for Friday prayers'. The second argument only works when voting against the BNP, sure the Liberal Democrats are anti war but they have as much chance of calling off the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as Obama has of stopping Israel from building new settlements and you're not just voting to stop the war but also for pro gay and pro abortion.
The argument against voting and the opinion i follow is derived from one of the fundamental beliefs in Islam- one that we testify to at least 5 times a day when we bear witness that their is no god but Allah. Sovereignty is Gods alone and to be involved in a process which puts man made laws above and before Gods law you are associating partners with the Almighty.
Wednesday 24 March 2010
Current issues
Israel- America and Britain have either woken up recently to the reality that Israel is a law onto itself and are no longer blinded by Jewish lobbyists in the government, media and in business or they have decided to put on a good show on for Muslims around the world. In pretty much the same fashion Obama was elected because he had a muslim middle name and he was great for personality politics and for endearing america again to a world who hated George Bush.
I fail to see how Britain was angry with Israel over the death of a Hamas member when they refuse to deal with the democratically elected party themselves.
The only solution would be to let the Jewish population move to Uganda as was the original plan before the holocaust left the Europeans feeling guilty and leave the Christian and Muslim residents to live in peace.
A more feasible option would be to let the growing number Jewish voices who are against the actions of Israel to have a bigger voice and make more films, write more articles condemning the actions of the Zionists who claim to act in the name of Judaism.
Mephedrone- banning plant food won't solve the problem. There's a million and 1 drugs out there to replace it. The real issue is that more and more people are looking for highs to escape reality. As depression becomes commercialised and more and more teenagers are convinced that they are not happy this is an inevitable consequence. Spirituality in religion has been replaced with spirituality from gaining wealth or for teenagers in getting high and getting laid.
I fail to see how Britain was angry with Israel over the death of a Hamas member when they refuse to deal with the democratically elected party themselves.
The only solution would be to let the Jewish population move to Uganda as was the original plan before the holocaust left the Europeans feeling guilty and leave the Christian and Muslim residents to live in peace.
A more feasible option would be to let the growing number Jewish voices who are against the actions of Israel to have a bigger voice and make more films, write more articles condemning the actions of the Zionists who claim to act in the name of Judaism.
Mephedrone- banning plant food won't solve the problem. There's a million and 1 drugs out there to replace it. The real issue is that more and more people are looking for highs to escape reality. As depression becomes commercialised and more and more teenagers are convinced that they are not happy this is an inevitable consequence. Spirituality in religion has been replaced with spirituality from gaining wealth or for teenagers in getting high and getting laid.
Asalamalikum wr wb
Islam cannot fulfill its role except by taking concrete form in a society, rather, in a nation; for man does not listen, especially in this age, to an abstract theory which is not seen materialized in a living society. From this point of view, we can say that the Muslim community has been extinct for a few centuries, for this Muslim community does not denote the name of a land in which Islam resides, nor is it a people whose forefathers lived under the Islamic system at some earlier time. It is the name of a group of people whose manners, ideas and concepts, rules and regulations, values and criteria, are all derived from the Islamic source. The Muslim community with these characteristics vanished at the moment the laws of God became suspended on earth.
If Islam is again to play the role of the leader of man- kind, then it is necessary that the Muslim community be restored to its original form.
It is necessary to revive that Muslim community which is buried under the debris of the man-made traditions of several generations, and which is crushed under the weight of those false laws and customs which are not even remotely related to the Islamic teachings, and which, in spite of all this, calls itself the 'world of Islam.'
I am aware that between the attempt at 'revival' and the attainment of 'leadership' there is a great distance, as the Muslim community has long ago vanished from existence and from observation, and the leadership of mankind has long since passed to other ideologies and other nations, other concepts and other systems. This was the era during which Europe's genius created its marvellous works in science, culture, law and material production, due to which mankind has progressed to great heights of creativity and material comfort. It is not easy to find fault with the inventors of such marvellous things, especially since what we call the 'world of Islam' is completely devoid of all this beauty.
But in spite of all this, it is necessary to revive Islam. The distance between the revival of Islam and the attainment of world leadership may be vast, and there may be great difficulties on the way; but the first step must be taken for the revival of Islam.
If we are to perform our task with insight and wisdom, we must first know clearly the nature of those qualities on the basis of which the Muslim community can fulfill its obligation as the leader of the world. This is essential so that we may not commit any blunders at the very first stage of its reconstruction and revival.
The Muslim community today is neither capable of nor required to present before mankind great genius in material inventions, which will make the world bow its head before its supremacy and thus re-establish once more its world leadership. Europe's creative mind is far ahead in this area, and at least for a few centuries to come we cannot expect to compete with Europe and attain supremacy over it in these fields.
Hence we must have some other quality, that quality which modern civilization does not possess.
But this does not mean that we should neglect material progress. We should also give our full attention and effort in this direction, not because at this stage it is an essential requirement for attaining the leadership of mankind, but because it is an essential condition for our very existence; and Islam itself, which elevates man to the position of representative of God on earth, and which, under certain conditions, considers the responsibilities of this representative as the worship of God and the purpose of man's creation, makes material progress obligatory for us.
To attain the leadership of mankind, we must have something to offer besides material progress, and this other quality can only be a faith and a way of life which on the one hand conserves the benefits of modern science and technology, and on the other fulfills the basic human needs on the same level of excellence as technology has fulfilled them in the sphere of material comfort. And then this faith and way of life must take concrete form in a human society - in other words, In a Muslim society.
(syed qutb)
If Islam is again to play the role of the leader of man- kind, then it is necessary that the Muslim community be restored to its original form.
It is necessary to revive that Muslim community which is buried under the debris of the man-made traditions of several generations, and which is crushed under the weight of those false laws and customs which are not even remotely related to the Islamic teachings, and which, in spite of all this, calls itself the 'world of Islam.'
I am aware that between the attempt at 'revival' and the attainment of 'leadership' there is a great distance, as the Muslim community has long ago vanished from existence and from observation, and the leadership of mankind has long since passed to other ideologies and other nations, other concepts and other systems. This was the era during which Europe's genius created its marvellous works in science, culture, law and material production, due to which mankind has progressed to great heights of creativity and material comfort. It is not easy to find fault with the inventors of such marvellous things, especially since what we call the 'world of Islam' is completely devoid of all this beauty.
But in spite of all this, it is necessary to revive Islam. The distance between the revival of Islam and the attainment of world leadership may be vast, and there may be great difficulties on the way; but the first step must be taken for the revival of Islam.
If we are to perform our task with insight and wisdom, we must first know clearly the nature of those qualities on the basis of which the Muslim community can fulfill its obligation as the leader of the world. This is essential so that we may not commit any blunders at the very first stage of its reconstruction and revival.
The Muslim community today is neither capable of nor required to present before mankind great genius in material inventions, which will make the world bow its head before its supremacy and thus re-establish once more its world leadership. Europe's creative mind is far ahead in this area, and at least for a few centuries to come we cannot expect to compete with Europe and attain supremacy over it in these fields.
Hence we must have some other quality, that quality which modern civilization does not possess.
But this does not mean that we should neglect material progress. We should also give our full attention and effort in this direction, not because at this stage it is an essential requirement for attaining the leadership of mankind, but because it is an essential condition for our very existence; and Islam itself, which elevates man to the position of representative of God on earth, and which, under certain conditions, considers the responsibilities of this representative as the worship of God and the purpose of man's creation, makes material progress obligatory for us.
To attain the leadership of mankind, we must have something to offer besides material progress, and this other quality can only be a faith and a way of life which on the one hand conserves the benefits of modern science and technology, and on the other fulfills the basic human needs on the same level of excellence as technology has fulfilled them in the sphere of material comfort. And then this faith and way of life must take concrete form in a human society - in other words, In a Muslim society.
(syed qutb)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
