The Intolerable Lord Pearson

Right about now Tommy Robinson is appearing at a Q&A session in the Oxford Union, where he is legally enjoined not to mention JIM.

Lord Pearson (more fully, Malcolm Everard MacLaren Pearson, Baron Pearson of Rannoch), a former leader of UKIP, is not subject to any such constraints. He has just been taken to task for saying “Islamophobic” things in the House of Lords.

Green Infidel sends the following brief report on what happened.

According to the The Guardian:

[Lord Pearson] told peers: “My lords, are the government aware that Fusilier Rigby’s murderers quoted 22 verses of the Qur’an to justify their atrocity? Therefore, is the prime minister accurate or helpful when he describes it as a betrayal of Islam? Since the vast majority of Muslims are our peace-loving friends, should we not encourage them to address the violence in the Qur’an — and indeed in the life and the example of Muhammad?

Predictably, a “culturally enriched” lord took exception. But take a look at what he found the most “offensive”:

“I find it absolutely offensive that this guy is still able to say this. I will actually tomorrow make a complaint formally to the lords speaker on this issue. This is not tolerable and it should not be tolerated at all.”

That’s right — he wants the mere suggestion that the Quran and life of Muhammad consist of more than just peace, love and flowery words to be made illegal.

Am I allowed to be offended by this?

32 thoughts on “The Intolerable Lord Pearson

  1. If I understand parliamentary privilege correctly, Lord Pearson was entirely within his rights; parliamentarians cannot be sued for libel, and the principle should be the same.

    • Not quite true Mark. Parliamentary Privilege only generally applies to things said in the chambers of the Houses of Parliament. I think you mean slander not libel (written ,printed,broadcast, or recorded ) and he can be sued if he says anything defamatory outside the chambers of the House. But for what? A dead person and a book can’t sue. I doubt (hope) that the Speaker of the House will bat away the complaint. She was a crossbencher and a scientist so she may have the sense.

  2. What the fellow was “offended” by is what Muslims themselves crow about everywhere.

    Mohammad’s violence against his enemies and his military successes over infidels are their pride and joy.

    Islam is founded on them.

    Muslims are only offended when infidels ask Mohammedans to be ashamed of them.

  3. British politicians are all compromised. They get put in blackmailable positions with their child sex rings, and then they are owned by Muslims.

    Next time you hear a British politician talking about how “intolerable” so-called “Islamophobia” is, just know you’re listening to a man who is living in abject fear of being exposed.

  4. What disease has afflicted the western political mind? When, how did this disease start? The disease is that The Traitor Class cannot comprehend what truth is? They can’t follow it. They have no passion to seek it. And are offended and go crazy when you instill it in their perverted brains. It does not fit there.
    Perverted falsehoods fit their brains: Jihad does not mean war it means self-improvement. Islam is peaceful. Some bad apples exist in any religion, and Christian and Jewish bad apples exceed those of Islam. Islam can have four houris in this world, a few infidel concubines, and slaves because their religion allows it. We have to accommodate that in order to keep them flooding our countries. Muslims are easily offended, we all know that. so avoid anything that offends them. That easy. ETC .

    • When one cannot see the difference between truth and opinion one is probably in the thrall of ‘religion’, be it a theological religion or a political religion. Unfortunately, separation between State and ‘political religion’ is not recognised, so we get this kind of anomaly where the tenets of the religions of socialism (Nazism, Communism etc.) are deemed to be political truths rather than just religious supposition.

      So we are stuck with such intangible ‘truths’ such as PC/MC and climate change and that “Islam is a Religion of Peace” to which our beliefs we must be forcibly converted in spite of the evidence. Belive or we will send you to gaol for ‘mortgage fraud’.

      “and was Jerusalem, builded here, among those dark Satanic mills?” (which brought prosperity to the locality and the nation).

      Well errr, no, building in Jerusalem is also not permitted any more.

    • Please stop being silly. I studied Islam and Pearson is entitled to say as he does. We cannot have any ideology dictating to a Sovereign Parliament. It
      is actually an act of Treason to do so! Why should Islam be exempt? Just because you say you are offended? People are deeply offended by the acts pf jihadis in Syria and sharia does not apply in UK Parliement or anywhere else in UK. We are a Christian country despite what you and others may deny. Our laws are based upon Christian principles. And if what I say offends you please be offended.

      • But Blair neutered the Treason laws, precisely so that this sort of action would have no consequences and that the destruction of Britain could continue apace.

      • 100% correct. The longer the invasion is allowed to continue the greater the danger for us all. The sooner Britain leaves the European Union the better it will be able to control the levels of immigration and decide without EU pressure as to those people it considers not suitable to live within our civilised culture.

        • Most of the UK immigration is from outside the EU to the UK e.g. Pakistan and is exported to the EU from the UK.

          The immigration conspiracy maybe to close the European door and to open the third world commonwealth immigration door even wider.

      • Not sure what the reference to being silly was. I took it as sarcasm or parody, something of that ilk, to describe the inverted minds of the PC brigade.

  5. “Faith” is a matter of belief. It is not a “Truth” unless it can be proven by objective analysis- cause and effect. How can I as a Bishop “prove” God exists? I can’t because ro do so would prove He was not God, since God if He exists, must the the highest existence of which we cannot conceive, ergo, since He is indeed the highest thing we cannot conceive he exists.

    So I would ask why should anybody pay court to a god and his prophet when he clearly can be conceived of? Pray tell?

    • Aquinus came closest “God is an Actuality outside of space and time” that may on occasion intervene. Allah seems to do an awful lot of intervening. Indeed the Jewish and Christian Jaweh, seems to do very little and this is logically so because He already owns all the Universe, while “Allah” is daily active trying take what is already “his”. Bit of a contradiction perhaps?
      Can you bring yourself, while being offended because people don’t agree to your demands we submit to use the grey cells a bit and think on what one has said?

  6. @Murad
    Good assessment. If we can ignore our disgust for awhile and examine this, it is an interesting mass delusion going on, isnt it? Cowardice would also explain it. However, maybe delusion is the common state, the default, in man’s mentation. Maybe what we believe is more determined by emotions and genetics (or nutrition ) than by tight cognitive reasoning and logic. Or maybe we just immitate what our parents or teachers or leaders are thinking. Some geneticists believe that political affiliation is genetically determined. I would have never believed that the liberal mind would affiliate with Islam, but this may reflect the left’s intention to use Islam only temporarily for power seizure, and then cast it aside? Someone is in for a surprise.

    At any rate, I agree that an extraordinary number of politicians seem delusional, enough to enter this phenomenon into the DSM-5.

  7. The key to this outrage is the Pact of Umar, which enjoins amongst other things that the Kuffar may not learn about or discuss Islam except as the muslims drip feed them. And even then it shall only be praise.

    I hope that the Pact of Umar does not yet apply in Britain, but if the Religion of Piece acts as though it does, then surely it will be so. (What was all that tripe from Maslow (a member of the Frankfurt School if I remember correctly) about Self Actualisation?)

  8. Hazel Blears (Salford and Eccles) (Lab): The Prime Minister has said on a number of occasions in this House that we face a long-term generational struggle and the priority is to fight this poisonous ideology. Will he commit now to working with the mainstream, moderate Muslim community in this country—who see these atrocities carried out in the name of their religion and utterly reject them—and to having a practical programme to make that happen?

    The Prime Minister: I absolutely commit to doing that and we have to do it not just in Britain, but right around the world. We should be very clear that the cause of this problem is the poisonous narrative of Islamic extremism. Wherever there are broken states, conflict and civil wars, we see this problem arise, whether it is Boko Haram in Nigeria, al-Qaeda in Yemen or ISIL in Iraq and Syria. We need Muslims to reclaim their religion from these extremists.

    What exactly is this guy complaining about?

  9. ” This is not tolerable and it should not be tolerated at all.”

    Yeah, sounds like a native born English Lord to me / sarc

  10. In the meantime. 13 Somalians un Bristol UK (many with the mohammed coefficient) have today been gaoled for the sexual exploitation of underage girls. With total predictability the BBC fails to mention the M word.

  11. The incompatability of Islam/Muslims with the West is continually being exposed. Trouble on the near horizon.

  12. What to make of this?

    Heywood, Lancashire. An industrial town in the north of England. The opening days and weeks of World War II. The British government had declared war on Germany, and Germany was an ally of Italy.

    An Italian immigrant had moved to Heywood some years earlier, set up a family business staffed by his children and grandchildren, and had become a significant personage among members of the Roman Catholic community, itself a significant influence in the town.

    Having been born in Italy, he was subject to the government’s programme of deportation of foreign nationals who might present the risk of the formation of a ‘fifth column’, so he was bundled off to an internment camp in Canada, on the ill-fated ‘City of Benares’. It was torpedoed, and he did not survive. His successors, even today, carry with them a sadness and regret at the loss they suffered.

    I was raised in Heywood, and went to school with descendents of the old Italian deportee. I know some of them, personally.

    Heywood was ‘ground-zero’ in the recent ‘Rochdale paedophile gang’ outrage (Oh, if only someone, anyone, would demonstrate outrage!). Heywood was subsumed into Rochdale during the Local Government reorganisation which took place during the Heath administration. So when you see ‘Rochdale’, read ‘Heywood’.

    Did the people of Heywood react consistently in the face of this new threat? The old Italian’s deportation had been deemed regrettable, but necessary. Any threat he presented was highly unlikely to become actual, but, well, one cannot take chances, can one?

    So what did the people of Heywood do about the kiddy-fiddlers, caught red-handed, whom they had detected in their midst?

    Did they deport them?

    (Perhaps that cannot be done at the level of a local authority.)

    Well, did they even suggest that they be deported?

    Did they demand that the license to operate a business in the town by known associates of the fiddlers be withdrawn?

    Did they, in the recent by-election in which UKIP fielded a viable alternative, vote out the party (Labour) which had been in the forefront of bringing these kiddy-fiddlers into their community?

    They did none of the above.

    I hear the excuses. “This is a different world we live in.” “People in those days were different.”

    No. I have elderly relatives in that town who were living at the time, and knew full well about what was happening to the Italian patriarch, and who are fully cognisant of the kiddy-fiddler farrago.

    My question again – What to make of this?

    • Europeans are guilty of white privilege, the Brits have a symbiotic relationship with their third world commonwealth cousins.

    • what to make of this? Rochdale and Heywood are, I fear, finished, like many of the former mill towns in Northern England: the old ‘civic pride’ and white working class respectability (influenced by 19th century non-conformism and the desire for educational/social improvement) have all but disappeared. Local councils have been infiltrated by certain sections of ‘the community’ who are all too keen to award contracts, such as those involved in granting taxi licenses and take-aways, to their own. The local council was proud to announce a couple of years ago that they had installed new public toilets of a ‘hole in the ground’ type, to meet the cultural needs of a certain section of ‘the community’. This, whilst social services were ignoring industrial scale rape of young white girls.
      So the indigenous population keep their head down or else move out – there has definitely been a ‘white flight’ out of Rochdale. I know of whole extended families, who have lived there for generations, who have made the choice to leave.
      As an ex-Rochdalian, I am ashamed of my old home town.

    • @JR – that was moving. An excellent production given how brief it is; very sad. So many lives ground out in war… but ’twas ever so. “Peace” has been a fleeting thing for many eons.

      My mother always told me she and my father sailed on “the last boat from Liverpool” that was going to the US. My father had dual citizenship or perhaps solely American; my mother was an Irish citizen with a green card. This would have been in late 1939 or 1940.

      The things we don’t know enough to ask. There were many Jews on that boat, all of them in steerage as far as I know. Mother would’ve been a wealth of information if I’d been smart enough to ask.

  13. I once saw Lord Pearson on Sky News take that Ahmed character to task, you know the killer who ended up in gaol – he started talking about the principle of abrogation and Ahmed almost lost his mind & started shouting over the top of him etc – the usual performance Mohammedans put on whenever someone reveals the principles of their religion to the whole wide world. It was pretty awesome, although Lord Pearson, nice guy that he is, actually cut Ahmed a lot more slack than I would have.

    • Ummm…that’s an interesting thought, Sir Nick. I mean how *much* slack would yoo cut Ahmed and from which part of his anatomy would you excise it?

      Inquiring minds want to know…

  14. It was Facebook wot done it, and had “nothing to do with Islam.” The UK is so [damaged] the British state and mainstream media are pushing that islamophile meme, do the security services really believe it was Facebook wot done it?

Comments are closed.