ORLANDO
'A developed society, politically stable with a prosperous economy, can afford to tolerate alternative lifestyles, atypical activities, and dissent. This does not alter the fact that society did not progress and will not progress by people living in a hippy commune, for example. There needs to be a critical mass of those who are committed to patriotism and the advancement of civilization. No matter how disgruntled some might be at the imperfections of society, they should be on their guard against being used by others to promote dissent; and they should be alert to the consequences of a revolution that might transform Western democracy into, for example, a Sharia state or simply anarchy. Members of a minority should not acquiesce to pressure groups of zealots, corrupted by the receipt of public monies, to agitate endlessly on their behalf. The development of civilization is in the interests of all those who seek a better life.'
The Genesis of Political
Correctness: The Basis of a False Morality, by Michael William,
- available
from Amazon, Kindle or direct from CreateSpace
The
recent mass murder in Orlando has, regrettably, once again seen
a triumph for the ideology of political correctness. A great deal of
effort by the media, politicians and pressure groups has been
expended trying to blur the fact that this was an act of terrorism
or, if it was an act of terrorism, then it was also a 'hate crime'.
Much
of the reporting in Britain on Monday was taken up with a snooty
denunciation of Donald Trump. Allegedly, The Donald had responded to
the murders in
a manner that was not befitting a president; the
tone of his response was wrong. In
reference to a Donald Trump comment, Ed Miliband, a failed
ex-Labour leader, wrote 'Can there be a more heinous, self-serving,
disqualifying statement about the murder of 50 people?' A
quick answer to the question is to cite the question itself.
In
fact, Donald Trump has been proved correct in his determination to
confront radical Islam and in his willingness to restrict
immigration. This is a common-sense approach rather than a
politically correct one. It is also one likely to attract voter
support.
On
Newsnight, a certain Pedro Julio Serrano (a
gay activist from Puerto Rico and a 'senior advisor' at New York City
Council)
was interviewed. He
regarded the mass murder as a hate crime, was hostile towards Donald
Trump who he lumped in
with those he regarded as perpetuating hate and hence in
some way responsible
for the hate crime. He pointedly rejected the idea that Donald Trump
was right to advocate the restriction of Muslim immigration.
In
Britain, one activist terminated a review of the newspapers on
Sky and
walked out in
anger at the murders
not being described as homophobic attacks. Another
prominent activist has had pictures of him posted on the internet
holding a placard proclaiming solidarity with Muslims against the
English Defence League (which was formed in response to a
demonstration of Muslim extremists as troops paraded after returning
home from active
service).
Do these gay
activists
actually consider what they are doing?
It
is now reported that the killer,
who was from a wealthy family, had once
been
on an FBI watch list due to suspected extremism. The killer's
father fancies himself as being the president of Afghanistan (from
where he originates) and has released extremist videos on YouTube
('Our warrior brothers in [the] Taliban movement and national Afghan
Taliban are rising up' and, just after the murders, 'God will punish
those involved in homosexuality'). The killer rang the police three
times
just
before and
during
the murder spree claiming
allegiance with Islamic State and al-Nusra extremists, and was
'laughing
frantically'
as he murdered.
The
killer is further
alleged
to
have been using gay dating websites, and
to
have frequented the homosexual club involved
where
he
had been trying to pick up gay men. In
which case, the killer was not only a Muslim extremist but also an
aspiring if not active
homosexual – despite
being married.
The
evidence points towards the murders being either another act of
radical Muslim terrorism, or else an extreme gay-on-gay act of
violence, with the perpetrator being of dubious mental stability. It
was not a homophobic attack by society in general on an oppressed gay
community.
The
attempts to impose a politically correct interpretation of what
happened is wrong and must be resisted. It is the same reflex
to impose dogma that led to the authorities, including the police,
tolerating mass paedophilia in Rotherham; that has led to judges
corrupting
human rights legislation to facilitate people smuggling, despite the
people smugglers including organized criminals and terrorists
(including ISIS); that has led to mass immigration despite the deaths
of immigrants trying to invade the West and despite the known
hostility of many of those immigrants to certain groups in
particular, such as Jews and homosexuals, and the West in general.
The politically correct treat these consequences as being nothing
more than collateral damage. For
the communists, the revolution is all that matters.
Those
gay activists who support other minorities in a hoped-for common
cause against the host society, and hence support mass immigration of
those who openly mean them harm, should take the trouble to rethink
their political correctness. Those they claim to represent are being
very poorly served. It is time that state funding for gay pressure
groups was ended.
Political
correctness does not legislate tolerance. It is the organization of
hatred. The funding of organized crime and terrorist people
smugglers, the deaths of immigrants trying to invade the West, the
paedophilia, and the killing of Jews and homosexuals are not
collateral damage. They are the true face of political correctness.
The
fight between patriotism and political correctness is the fight
between good and evil. It is as clear cut as that.
<< Home