Three things caught my attention yesterday, all to do with appeasement.

Firstly Brendan O’Neill:

Islam now enjoys the same kind of moral protection from blasphemy and ridicule that Christianity once (wrongly) enjoyed. All last week, for example, I received furious emails and messages in response to two articles I wrote about the Manchester attack, telling me I was wrong to defend the use of the phrase ‘Islamist extremism’. That term has an Islamophobic bent to it, we’re told. It demeans Islam and its adherents by suggesting they have something to do with terrorism. You should just say ‘extremism’, not ‘Islamist extremism’. Don’t ever name the extremism, don’t label it, because you might hurt people’s feelings.

This is incredibly dangerous. This censorious flattery of Islam is, in my view, a key contributor to the violence we have seen in recent years. Because when you constantly tell people that any mockery of their religion is tantamount to a crime, is vile and racist and unacceptable, you actively invite them, encourage them in fact, to become intolerant. You license their intolerance. You inflame their violent contempt for anyone who questions their dogmas. You provide a moral justification for their desire to punish those who insult their religion.

Next Theodore Dalrymple in the WSJ:

Instead, we have gone in for what a Dutch friend of mine calls “creative appeasement.” Authorities make concessions even before, one suspects, there have been any demands for them. Thus, a public library in Birmingham, one of the largest known to me, has installed women-only tables, a euphemism for Muslim women only. Whether there was ever a request or demand for sex-segregated seating from Muslims is probably undiscoverable; truth seldom emerges from a public authority. But the justification would almost certainly be that without such tables, Muslim women would not be able to use the library at all.

The Birmingham airport has set aside a room for wudu, the Muslim ablutions before prayer. No other religion is catered for in this fashion (nor should they be, in my opinion), so the impression is inevitably given that Islam is in some way favored or privileged. Again, it would be difficult to find out whether they received requests or demands for such a room or merely anticipated them; in either case, weakness is advertised.

This is not a local problem alone. Many European airports now set aside a room for “meditation.” The icon used to indicate it almost always carries more of an Islamic connotation than any other. A friend told me that when she went into one such room, she was told by a Muslim to remove her shoes, ecumenism being, of course, a one-way street.

Finally, the Cheshire Police (via Twitter):

Somebody please tell me what side our ruling class is on, because it sure as hell isn’t ours.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!

10 thoughts on “Appeasement

  1. We’re getting there … have come a long way since Satanic Verses and the Rushdie fatwa.

  2. They are on their side.

    Personally speaking I don’t take offense that easily, I get a bit toey when someone tries to rob me but otherwise I am fairly easy going.

    Long before the troubles I was working with Petronas and we were calling tenders for an offshore pipeline and we had to spec up the clients requirements. I had a price which included a Halal mini-kitchen dedicated for all four of our management team some of which may have been Muslim, they were having none of it and the whole kit and caboodle had to be Halal, we are talking hundreds of staff the price jump up to accommodate this was massive. The project didn’t fly. One of them had Mahathir at his wedding, the other one a devout religious man who preyed in our Australian office came on a business trip with me to Tokyo and he was pissed and smoking from the moment we got on the first-class flight (you could still smoke on Japan Air then) until we returned. He missed most of the meetings which didn’t matter, the other one had a strange request when he asked me how much it would cost for validation of the subsea pipeline, nudge nudge, but given all of this strange behaviour I was not offended.

    And as a Christian I am not offended that non-Muslims being the mayor of Paris recently allowed a gay wedding where the groom married a dead body in the mayor’s office because he championed LGBT right in the police force before he died.

    Takes a lot to offend me.

  3. Back when I was doing my bit of teaching some 7 years ago, there was a room set aside at my college-in-the-sticks, designated as a ‘faith room.’ The assumption was the room, perhaps more a broom cupboard than a fully fledged classroom (if it had been big enough, no doubt a class would be squeezed in there), existed to satisfy the muslim faith more than, say, the humanists.

    In any event no one used the room as far as I could tell, though the college didn’t appear to have many muslim students so perhaps not surprising. Still, the room existed and no doubt earned an appeasing footnote in the prospectus.

    Virtue signalling in print is always good.

  4. “The Birmingham airport has set aside a room for wudu, the Muslim ablutions before prayer.” Bull. The author is repeating gossip, not bothering to check facts.

  5. Popped over to the Cheshire Police Facebook page to take a squizzo at that nanny post of theirs.

    Comments underneath would seem to be….er… indicative that the Cheshire public don’t take too well to being told what write on Facebook.

    Comments are about 99% …er…. vehemently unsupportive (to put it mildly) of Cheshire Police’s social media advice.

  6. Comments underneath would seem to be….er… indicative that the Cheshire public don’t take too well to being told what write on Facebook.

    I saw that too. Good for them!

Comments are closed.