‘Pure’ or ‘Extreme’? McDonalds or Mosque?


One for the diary…this Wednesday the BBC shows:

Israel: Facing The Future

John Ware journeys to Israel for a fresh look at how it has responded to the changes sweeping the region in the wake of the Arab Spring. He meets Israelis from all walks of life to go beyond the news clichés and analyse what is next for the world’s only Jewish state as both the religious and the secular battle over its future.　


Before that you might want to watch ‘Frank Gardner’s Return to Saudi Arabia.’

In Britain we are force fed multi-culturalism and it is frowned upon if you do not display the appropriate level of appreciation for the imported cultures and values. The BBC naturally celebrates mass immigration and the diversity it brings along with the cosmopolitan delights of London, and Salford.

Curious that in other circumstances, in other countries, the BBC is less than enthusiastic about importing foreign cultures, especially ‘Western‘ culture, or at least is willing to examine the consequences and question the supposed benefits.　

In a programme about Qatar (not available anymore) the BBC’s Razia Iqbal questioned the wisdom of importing Western values, such as democracy, and culture such as ‘philharmonic orchestras’….suggesting they dilute and ‘pollute’ Qatari society.


In a more recent programme (as above) BBC security correspondent, Frank Gardner, revisits Saudi Arabia where he had been shot and his colleague killed in 2004.

The programme concentrated on reforms and cultural adaptations to modern life within Saudi Arabia measuring the impact of the Arab Spring, modern expectations of the youth, many of whom are unemployed, whilst also coping with the demands of a strict, religious society…it isn’t particularly enlightening, all of it having been aired many times before but a few things were of note…not things about Saudi Arabia itself but the contrast in what the BBC will report on home turf and when playing away. Away from home they seem to throw caution to the wind and PC considerations get cast aside. Gardner reveals a far more realistic image of Islam and the effects of immigration upon a resident population.

The first thing Gardner says that is of note is his description of Wahhabism….the Saudi strain of Islam.

He says it is ‘A very pure version of Islam’.

Why is that important? There can be only one version of Islam. No other ‘interpretations’, no sects, no cults, no splitters, and definitely no reforms.

Wahhabism must be the closest form of Islam to that adhered to by Muhammed…it must be the ‘Fundamental’ Religion. If so you cannot be considered a Muslim unless you follow it….no sects or cults being allowed in Islam.

Wahhabism is an extreme ideology judged by modern secular values. It is to coin a phrase ‘Medieval’ in concept and therefore the import of such a culture to secular or Christian societies must raise some very serious questions.

It’s not just me that says that, the government say it in its own  ‘Prevent Strategy’ programme:

“…at the root of this Prevent strategy is the basic assertion that extremism breeds terrorism; and that extremism is the vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.”

There is a great deal in the Koran that is ‘ opposed to fundamental British values’.

Raises a few questions doesn’t it? Not for the likes of the BBC which refuses steadfastly to scrutinize Islam in the same rigorous way it does Christianity…..which is odd….as Christianity is the ’native’ religion that has gone through its own ’Medieval’ phase and adapted and learnt to coexist in harmony with a modern, democratic, Parliamentary society….gay marriage and women bishops aside perhaps.　

So that is one interesting comment from this programme…the very pure strain of Islam is the fundamentalist, ‘extreme’ version.


We also learn that Shia Muslims are not considered Muslims by Sunni Muslims…well we don’t learn that here…Gardner doesn’t mention that important fact for some reason.

But we do learn that there is conflict between Shia communities already in Saudi Arabia and incoming Sunnis from Yemen.　

Shia’s in Najran are concerned about the influx of Sunni foreigners….they threaten the local society socially, culturally and politically and raise security concerns locally as the Sunnis ‘dilute’ the Shia population.

Saudi Arabia is a Sunni country and it is believed the ruling regime is ‘importing’ these Sunnis from Yemen to deliberately undermine the Shia majority in that particular area.

Saudi Arabia wants to eliminate areas of the country where populations with minority culture and differing religion can grow into a local majority society with opposing values to that of the mainstream culture. They do that by ‘engineering’ the population mix, importing ‘desirable’ people to counterbalance any likely opposition.

Sound familiar? In Britain the Labour Party carried out a similar programme intended to ”dilute’ the hideous whiteness of Britain…..a programme that was ignored and hidden by the BBC…. but in Saudi Arabia they are asking questions.


Gardner says there is a troubling aspect to the tribalism in Saudi Arabia where the Regime is Sunni and is keen on unity and wary of regional fractures, but sectarian tensions are rising.

There is a latent fear that if the glue (of society) comes unstuck the whole place will disintegrate into warring tribes.

The Saudis fear a destabilising alliance between the Shia population and Iran…along with restless reformers, angry conservatives and frustrated minorities, all competing forces being juggled by the House of Saud and which threaten uncomfortable periods ahead.　

Read all that again and it would be easy to fit that description to Britain today….replace Iran with Saudi Arabia and its deployment of its vast wealth  in order to further the advance and influence of Islam in this country and the picture becomes clearer.

So are we also ‘threatened by uncomfortable periods ahead’ as Gardner predicts for Saudi Arabia?

The same people that would fight to the death the appearance of a McDonalds or  a Tesco Express on their street would look on with approval and pleasure at the opening of a Mosque.

They oppose American corporate ‘imperialism’ but the advance of a ‘medieval’ ideology presents them with no problems.

Funny old world.

Perhaps the BBC could ask the same questions about the effects of mass immigration here and consequent importation of alien values and cultures along with the subversive influence of the Saudis, amongst others…with the same realism and honest vision that reveals the harsh facts about a ‘tribal’ Saudi Arabia…a tribalism that is becoming ever more apparent in Britain as we build more and more ethnic ghettoes shut off from the rest of society.

Right or wrong, good or bad….the consequences should be discussed and people allowed to have their say without being shouted down as racist or islamophobic.



Update: An unfortunate coincidence as the land that gave us McDonalds comes under attack with a bomb/bombs at the Boston marathon with 12 dead and 50 injured…the New York Times says there is a suspect in custody….but there is no confirmation yet….he is a Saudi national…but of course no one should jump to conclusions.






Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to ‘Pure’ or ‘Extreme’? McDonalds or Mosque?

  1. stuart says:

    you have all heard of stockholm syndrome,well, thats where the victim ends up loving his tormentor, i am afriad that frank gardner is suffering from a very severe form stockholm syndrome in my opinion.


    • Ian Hills says:

      Perhaps the Boston bombing suspect misinterpreted Frank Gardner’s “very pure version of Islam” through listening to those imported symphony orchestras so hated by Razia Iqbal….


    • The Highland Rebel says:

      No word about Islam from Al Beeb but plenty about ‘white supremist’ Timothy McVeigh.


  2. k920 says:

    islam is a very peaceful religion dont forget,the killing of one man is like killing the whole of humanity,how many times have you heard that garbage huh


  3. George R says:


    -Don’t mention Islam-jihad-Saudi Arabia-Boston.

    For the historical record –

    ‘A Second Look at the Saudis’

    [Opening extract of part 1]:-

    “Of the nineteen hijackers who attacked this nation on September 11, 2001, fifteen were Saudi Arabian. Moreover, each and every one of the nineteen hijackers was personally chosen and provided with training and financing by yet another Saudi native – Osama bin Laden. Yet from that day to this, in spite of these disturbing and incontrovertible facts, members of the Bush administration have glibly and incessantly insisted that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of our closest friends and allies in the War on Terror. Fifteen Saudis murdered nearly 3,000 Americans on live TV, all at the behest of one of the Kingdom’s prodigal sons. How can these basic facts about 9/11 possibly be mere trivia?

    “In fact, they are just the tip of the iceberg. In the years since September 11, a growing body of evidence has emerged illuminating the central role Saudi nationals have played in the rise of Al Qaeda and its terrorist attacks against the United States.”


    Part 1: ‘Jumping the Tracks.’
    Click Here to View PDF Document.

    Part 2: ‘Cause and Effect.’
    Click Here to View PDF Document.

    Part 3: ‘A Global Agenda.’
    Click Here to View PDF Document.

    Part 4: ‘The Tangled Web.’
    Click Here to View PDF Document.


  4. The Highland Rebel says:

    Slightly off topic but I’ve been hearing and seeing continuous drivel from Al Beebeezera both on the box and on the radio about how Buddhists have been brutalizing poor Muslims in Burma….but never any mention about this or the hundreds of atrocities carried out by the worshipers of the Moon God against Buddhists or anyone else who doesn’t believe in their cult.