In Defence of Paul Nuttall
I think Paul Nuttall has come in for quite a bit of stick when it comes to the raft of policies announced as part of UKIP’s ‘Integration Agenda’. James Carver quit, calling the policies ‘misguided and illiberal’ , Bill Etheridge joined in but said he wouldn’t quit and somewhat puzzlingly Arron Banks fulminated against an alleged ‘war against the Muslim religion.’
Is this the same Bill Etheridge who only a year ago had this to say?
“We are in a severe security situation, and if you are in a public place that is security sensitive, I’m afraid you have got to show your face. That means any face covering.
This is precisely, word-for-word, what Mr Nuttall has said in defence of this policy. Mr Etheridge has, to his credit, told me he still supports this position – however, what is mystifying is how he can maintain this position and not seek action on the abomination of female genital mutilation not on security grounds but on the grounds of common decency and humanity. I am sure he shares everyone’s horror at this practice but I would say that the current position of Mr Nuttall sends a clear signal that this will no longer be tolerated and this is as it should be – we have for far too long tolerated the intolerable – and it deals with the difficulties around the conspiracy of silence surrounding this abomination. We can debate the best way to do this but the general principle of opposition to this barbarism is the correct one.
Similarly, I am puzzled by the comments of Mr Banks, his Westmonster website having vocally supported the Dutch PVP, led, of course, by Greet Wilders who is famous for his attacks on Islam and most recently Marine Le Pen, whose comments that France is ‘at war with radical Islam’ received headline treatment on Mr Bank’s website. Indeed, Westmonster regularly runs stories highlighting the problem of Islamic extremism – so, when UKIP comes forward with policies precisely aimed at addressing issues around this, why has Mr Banks had such a sudden change of heart?
Sadly, one possibility is that this is part of an elaborate coup plot. UKIP’s share of the vote at the upcoming General Election is almost certain to decline but not because of Mr Nuttall’s policies in this area. Rather it is due to tactical voting on the part of UKIP supporters lending Theresa May their vote to, as they see it, defend Brexit. However, putting ‘clear purple water’ between a group of the malcontented and the leadership now would open the door of future blame being heaped on the leadership.
I support the policy of the leadership in this regard, the fact is that refusal to integrate has, like so many things, its roots in the Quran:
Quran (5:51) – “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”
Quran (5:80) – “You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide.” Those Muslims who befriend unbelievers will abide in hell.
UKIP is in a state of flux. It’s focus during this election campaign should be to try and secure a small number of MPs, something that would be a considerable advance for the Party in the current climate even if it was accompanied by a decline in the vote share. If Mr Nuttall’s detractors have something serious to contribute to what should be a serious debate then let them step forward and make their points in a reasoned and constructive way however, if there is a hidden agenda then at least let them have the decency to disclose that rather than drape their indignation in the false flag or principled objection.