Blogs

The Pineapple of Hate

5 October 2012

5 October 2012

We have had the dreaded cartoons, films, teddy-bear and more. But I bet that until now nobody imagined we would ever see a (cue dreaded music) ‘Pineapple of Hate’.  Yet despite the now familiar feeling that this is all some terrible spoof, the fruit has joined the growing list of household items which can be legitimately regarded as ‘blasphemous’.

As Student Rights reports, the crime-scene was the recent freshers’ fair at the University of Reading. For it was there that the Atheist, Humanist and Secular Society stall included a pineapple with the word ‘Mohammed’ on it. I always doubted that the Danish or French cartoons looked much like the prophet of Islam. But if there is one thing that can be said with absolute certainty, it is that if Mohammed existed he never looked even remotely like a pineapple.

Subscribe from £1 per week


For its part, the Atheist Society said that its sign was intended ‘to celebrate the fact that we live in a country in which free speech is protected, and where it is lawful to call a pineapple by whatever name one chooses.’ Noble sentiment though this is, the students were soon shown to be wrong. Some Muslim students as well as Student Union staff expressed themselves offended by the fruity name-tag.

As a result the Atheist Society was threatened with removal from the freshers’ fair.  Among other things this was done with the imperishable, indeed unimprovable, line:

‘Either the pineapple goes, or you do’.

But the pineapple could not go, so the atheist society did. In a statement the Reading University Student Union explains:

Our freshers’ fair is an inclusive event for all students. As the society’s actions were causing upset and distress to a number of individual students and other societies attending we took the decision to ask them to leave.’

I wonder if any other student societies have ever caused ‘upset’ or ‘distress’ yet been allowed to stay on at such an occasion?  It makes me wonder. As will the possibilities available on all future visits to the Tesco fruit-counter.


More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us.

Show comments
  • rndtechnologies786

    Nice blog.

  • Jinn Tonic

    President of the society behind the “offensive pineapple” will be a guest panelist on The Jinn And Tonic Show http://www.blogtv.com/people/TheJinnAndTonicShow this Saturday at 9PM UK time (8PM GMT), don’t miss it!

  • History Harry

    Actually, the pineapple has long been a symbol of welcome and hospitality, so the Muslims should have been grateful and thanked the atheist society. Maybe next time they’ll call something less pleasant Mohammed – a bowl of rotting fruit, perhaps?

  • Daniel Maris

    More appropriate fruit:

    Prickly pear.

    Blood orange.

    Other suggestions welcome…

  • Baron

    These are students, right? Barons reckons it was a frivolity, a practical joke, abit of levity, that’s what students do, if they wanted to test the limits of free expression seriously, find out how comfortably it sits with the many diverse segments of our rainbow society, they should have done what T Botham suggests – have a banana called ‘Dawkins’, a bowl of gooseberries named ‘the offspring of Jesus’, a water mellon as ‘ecochondriac’ and stuff. The reaction of those mocked would have told us who has a sense of humour, who’s without it.

    Those who asked for the pineapple to be removed are obviously vacuous of any sense of humour, and that’s just for starters. But then, why is it so shocking?
    and what Nicholas says.

  • OfficialView

    “But if there is one thing that can be said with absolute certainty, it is that if Mohammed existed he never looked even remotely like a pineapple”. But he might have looked like General Noriega. And then he would have looked – at least remotely – like a pineapple.

    • crosscop

      I always picture Mohammad as looking like Charles Manson. Long haired, bearded lunatic with a band of fanatical murderous followers.

  • Austin Barry

    Is there anything as absurd or moronic as the endless wailing of muslim cultural affront. Everytime it happens we should all respond, without compunction, without hesitation, with the great dismissive phrase of our culture: Fuck Off.

    • WoodstockWastrel

      Yes, fuck off muslims, you’re a pain in the neck

  • T. Botham

    If the Atheists had put up – right next to the pineapple called Mohammed – a potato called Jesus, a banana called Jehovah, a watermelon called Buddha and a lemon called Gaia, their (laudable) intention to offend those who believe in whoppers would have been obvious. They should have offered them for sale. But why be limited to produce? Whoopee cushions called Thor, matches called Vesta, more matches called Lucifer, light bulbs called Mazda…How d’you like them Mohammeds?

    • WoodstockWastrel

      What about a coconut called Haile Selassie?

  • Trofim

    “the Atheist Society said that its sign was intended ‘to celebrate the
    fact that we live in a country in which free speech is protected”.
    They seem to be a bit out of touch with reality if they think Britain is such a place.
    Muslims are rarely offended – they choose to make out that they are offended with the aim of controlling the behaviour of others. In psychiatry this behaviour has a name – it is called manipulation, and it is a characteristic of people with personality disorders, that is psychopaths. Toddlers can easily manipulate their parents, if their parents allow them to, as well. Successful manipulators, are expert at detecting people’s weak points, which they can work on. But manipulation only achieves its goals if the target is willing or weak enough to co-operate in the manouevre by caving in to the manipulator. It is astonishing how Muslims get away with it so easily and so frequently. But then these manipulators are not working on their own. They have huge support from the left, and are able to utilise a special weapon provided by the left – the ability to shout “Islamophobia”, in addition to “racism”, of course.

  • MikeF

    I wonder what would have happened if the pineapple had been called Jesus.

  • Daniel Maris

    Wouldn’t it be easier if we just assumed that the pro-Sharia community are offended all the time – then they can tell us if by some strange fluke at any particular time they are not being offended by something.

    That way we don’t have to fill the papers with their tantrums all the time. We can just take it as read that somewhere an embassy, church or school is burning brightly.

  • Eddie

    How much more pandering to the feelings of devout (ie fanatical, literalist, backwards) Muslims can there be?
    We have already had the authorities turning a blind eye to gangs of Muslim men raping 12 year old girls, plus all the forced marriage and honour killings.
    Now we have the persecution of atheists because some religious people are ‘offended’.
    The only honourable and just response in any such situation is to tell the complaining Muslims (and their lickspittle white liberal lackey appeasers of Islamism) that no-one has the right NOT to be offended, and that in fact – if we’re comparing offence – Christians, Jews and atheists – and all non-Muslims – come in for FAR more offence and abuse and murderous threats of course from Muslims than the other way round.
    The problem is that now Muslims are SO used to being pandered and kowtowed to, so used to getting their own way because so many people (who act in the name of ‘equality and diversity’ with their misplaced muddle multiculturalism) think that is what tolerance means (tolerating the intolerable) that they actually think they have a right to behave like this.
    What we need is for everyone to stop pandering to Muslims, to stop appeasing these fascist thugs and kowtowing to these kaffir-hating loudmouths, and to make a stand against them. But what chance of all the worshippers of the cult of diversity and political correctness – the BBCm schools, universities, councils – doing that?
    And so our hard-won Enlightenment values are betrayed and British people defending them threatened and bullied with thick-headed hypocrite PC gestapo like these Student Union wallies.
    Would these appeasers and cowards have bent over backwards not to offend other religions or belief systems? Would they tolerate and promote another fascistic creed if its followers were mostly white and non-religious.
    Thanks for letting us all know about this story: I have emailed a link around the world. Hopefully, many kinds of fruit will now be called Mohammed (though come to think of it, and bearing in mind the prediliction for pederasty in many Muslim countries, I think many men called Mohammed already are…)

  • Eddie

    How much more pandering to the feelings of devout (ie fanatical, literalist, backwards) Muslims can there be?
    We have already had the authorities turning a blind eye to gangs of Muslim men raping 12 year old girls, plus all the forced marriage and honour killings.
    Now we have the persecution of atheists because some religious people are ‘offended’.
    The only honourable and just response in any such situation is to tell the complaining Muslims (and their lickspittle white liberal lackey appeasers of Islamism) that no-one has the right NOT to be offended, and that in fact – if we’re comparing offence – Christians, Jews and atheists – and all non-Muslims – come in for FAR more offence and abuse and murderous threats of course from Muslims than the other way round.
    The problem is that now Muslims are SO used to being pandered and kowtowed to, so used to getting their own way because so many people (who act in the name of ‘equality and diversity’ with their misplaced muddle multiculturalism) think that is what tolerance means (tolerating the intolerable) that they actually think they have a right to behave like this.
    What we need is for everyone to stop pandering to Muslims, to stop appeasing these fascist thugs and kowtowing to these kaffir-hating loudmouths, and to make a stand against them. But what chance of all the worshippers of the cult of diversity and political correctness – the BBCm schools, universities, councils – doing that?
    And so our hard-won Enlightenment values are betrayed and British people defending them threatened and bullied with thick-headed hypocrite PC gestapo like these Student Union wallies.
    Would these appeasers and cowards have bent over backwards not to offend other religions or belief systems? Would they tolerate and promote another fascistic creed if its followers were mostly white and non-religious.
    Thanks for letting us all know about this story: I have emailed a link around the world. Hopefully, many kinds of fruit will now be called Mohammed (though come to think of it, and bearing in mind the prediliction for pederasty in many Muslim countries, I think many men called Mohammed already are…)

    • Geoff

      Gasp!

    • Ibsen123

      I am very sorry that as a Hindu I cannot symapthise with the British plight in regard to Muslims. It is a case of a force you promoted with all your malicious might finally biting you. In India the British steadily sided with the Muslims against the Hindus. No Hindu complaint about Muslim intolerance was accepted by the British. They are splendid fellows if a bit tough, we were heartily told. The British fomented Islamism with all means at their command against India and later Russia.
      Now it hits you. Tough.

      • Eddie

        NONSENSE. The British took over from Muslim dictators in the country they then created and called India.
        All that is utterly irrelevant to Islamic extremism today: you are blaming the victim for being attacked, as all apologists do – like the Nazis and Commies. It is NOT our fault that terrorists act against us – and we can and should crush them, more than we do.
        Perhaps one day we shall realise the error of our ways and introduce new laws to chuck foreigners out of Britain – similar to the racist laws India uses and used to chuck white people out of India (and it now stops non-Indians buying property there too).
        You really are so primitive with your caste system and backward ways – Muslims and Hindus both: you’ll all bloody savages and the only real modern civilisation you have was imported from Britain. No wonder you are so insecure that you hate us: we Brits created everything good in India.
        The British did not foment Islamism at all: it simply defended its civilised culture which made everyone equal in the eyes of a manmade law (whereas Hindu extremists like you wanted to put all Muslims in death camps).
        The West (the USA actually) funded the Taliban etc against the Russians in Afganistan: that was something called the Cold War. No doubt your library will have a copy. Good job really that the British introduced libraries, universities, technology, rule of law, the English language, tea-drinking, many foods (chillies, tomoatoes, potatoes) to India, or you wouldn’t have much really would you – except for Poverty, Typhus and Diarrhoea.
        All we in the West to do is to stop being so damn oversensitive to anti-British liars like you: we need to offend people more, not less, and defend the Enlightenment values we in Europe created together with the modern world, and not give a shit what Aficans and Asians – Hindu or Muslims – think.
        And actually, it is you as a Hindu who should worry: the Muslim attacks in India are far worse than here, and most injured people die too because of your Third World standards.

        • BlitheSpirit

          “The West (the USA actually) funded the Taliban etc against the Russians in Afganistan”

          No, they did not. The CIA funded the Mujahideen. The Taliban came along much later (after the Soviets had left) and took on the Massoud’s Northern Alliance who were Afghanistan’s best hope for a peaceful and prosperous future without outside interference. Either the Taliban or Al Qaeda (their new guests) assassinated Massoud in a suicide attack thus ending that hope and paving the way for the Taliban to win the civil war.

          You make some good points otherwise.

          • Eddie

            OK, accepted, yes – I couldn’t remember the name Mujahidden so said The Taliban!
            But the CIA (ie the US government) did fund and support anyone who was fighting the Soviets, which included all Islamists really, whatever their name.
            Ibsen123 would seem to support anyone who is against white people and/or Western countries in the same ‘my enemies enemy is my friend’ way too.
            Funny to think though that one day the Muslims in Pakistan will drop nuclear bombs on India and fry his hypocritical little arse like an onion bhaji, eh? But then, that’ll all be his fault for being a Hindu and then it will hit him. Tough. As tough as the little scrawny bit of singed gristle that he’ll be after the bomb explodes.
            And doesn’t the UK still give billions in international aid to India, where 300 million live in dire poverty in a country with more billionaires than we have and which poaches our business and jobs?
            Mad world.

        • AY

          you forget sati killings of women, playing polo with enemy heads, and making human sacrifices to Kali.

          caste system is form of genocide, resulting in particular, in genetic degradation of untouchables.
          the same form of abuse is practiced in egypt by muslims against coptic christians – allowing them garbage collection work only, de-facto making human cattle of them.

          with that legacy of tribalism, slavery, and genocide, all this public arrives to the West. and then, when not seeing appreciation of their savage ways, they declare Westerners intolerant, imperialist bloodsuckers and enemies. how convenient – according to their ethos, enemy is someone whom you can kill, rape, rob and enslave with impunity.

          this menagerie should be seen for what it is.

        • WoodstockWastrel

          Steady on Eddie, sit down with a cup of tea and watch Charlie Wilsons War on DVD

          • Eddie

            I prefer to watch Four Lions and read novels such as Boris’s own ’72 Virgins’ or ‘Crump’ which dare to address the issue of Islamic extremism in the UK.
            But really, if a writer or film-maker put this pineapple story in his novel or film, people would complain that it wasn’r realistic enough and was descending into farce.
            We the people are descending into farce if we tolerate this bullying by Muslims and the appeasers of Islam (in this case, the bimbo twerps for the SU)

      • WoodstockWastrel

        Thats not quite true, as well you know.

      • WoodstockWastrel

        not true

      • Daniel Maris

        Sadly, much truth in what you say.

  • Mike Paterson

    Good for the Reading Uni Atheists. Most political atheists (one of the more political religions, pope: Prof R Dawkins) tend to attack Christianity as a soft target because they don’t have the balls to say boo to Islam.

  • Mike Paterson

    Good for the Reading Uni Atheists. Most political atheists (one of the more political religions, pope: Prof R Dawkins) tend to attack Christianity as a soft target because they don’t have the balls to say boo to Islam.

    • Eddie

      Oh I dunno – there are plenty of atheists who are prepared to say all religion is bollocks and there is not evidence for God and thus it’s as silly to believe in him/her/it/them as anything else without evidence.
      You’re confusing the word ‘atheist’ with the words ‘smug santinonious political correct self-appointed liberal moral guardian or our diverse and multicultural society’ – THEY are the pompous twerps who never dare to say anything negative about Islam: the BBC is full ot em, as are our dumbed down PC universities and pretend universities (polytechnics and colleges), as are local councils, and also all political parties these days.
      Do not assume that all atheists are leftwing or that all believe in political correctness. Not true at all.
      And ironic too that whenever atheists DO attack Islam and Muslims for unreasonable demands, who pipes up to come to the defence of their brothers and sisters in the quest to make the spiritual important again: Christians.
      Usually, it is atheists versus a sort of Muslim-Christian alliance. Like the Bosnian war, but more complicated…
      It really would be nice for the millions of tolerant and well-integrated Muslims who we are always told exist out there spoke up against this sort of extremist Islam – but whenever Muslims are concerned, silence is the stern reply to any insane and violent Muslim behaviour in the world: that sort of makes a lot of people think that those silent Muslims sort of agree with what the violent fanatical Muslims are doing. Why don’t the Muslims who share our values march in London as they did when we were about to got to war with Iraq? (It seems that Muslims will always support Muslims in any war, no matter how monstrous and vile they are – and this truly makes them the enemy within).

      • Buccaneer

        i did not know that there were still a lot of brits with ball, you all need to make your voices heard, to rattle most british gentry. The Australian prime minister once said “Australia is a christian country if you don like it, you are free to leave” i think the British should wake up, and define who they are in time before it is denied for them by Pakistan.

      • Buccaneer

        i did not know that there were still a lot of brits with ball, you all need to make your voices heard, to rattle most british gentry. The Australian prime minister once said “Australia is a christian country if you don like it, you are free to leave” i think the British should wake up, and define who they are in time before it is denied for them by Pakistan.

  • Matthew Whitehouse

    I think people CHOOSE to be offended – because they can get a result. They know others will pander to their whim. Thats what it is, a Whim. People know they can have a thousand words to say about that if they were offended, but if not offended – there’s not much to say!

  • Matthew Whitehouse

    I think people CHOOSE to be offended – because they can get a result. They know others will pander to their whim. Thats what it is, a Whim. People know they can have a thousand words to say about that if they were offended, but if not offended – there’s not much to say!

    • Nicholas

      The issue is that causing offence is being increasingly criminalised and without a requirement for mens rea (guilty intent) but only the subjective test of the party claiming to be offended. This encourages malicious complaints and the use of complaints as a political weapon to silence or undermine dissent. Even if prosecution does not follow or the accused is acquitted the disruption of police responding by automatic arrest is often enough to create a “chilling” effect. We should all be worried by this. As usual the cards are invariably held by those on the left who wish to control and coerce others to conformity with their ideology.

  • Simon Morgan

    Actually, I think I remember roughly when all this horse manure began. It was back in the ‘dark old days’ when people still had something called COMMON-SENSE!!!!!!@.

    I’m sure the turning point came in the 1970’s or early 80’s when supermarkets were suddenly required to remove the golly wog emblem from all the jams. I think it was an EU initiative (who else?).

    I remember scoffing at the notion at the time. Little did we realize then what was coming our way. If only we could turn the clock back and get hold of these knuckle heads. Have a quiet word, as it were, and make them see the error of their ways.

    If only…

    BTW – I know where I’d like to stick the next pineapple I get my hands on….

    • http://twitter.com/dangroveruk Dan Grover

      It may well have been the EU (though I don’t even know if they were forced to remove the Gollywogs – they may have done it voluntarily) but it wasn’t that early, it was much more recently. I remember Gollywogs still being on Marmalade when I was a young’un and I was born in the late 80’s.

      • WoodstockWastrel

        Just print up your own Gollywog labels and stick them on your marmalade jars like I do- its a good way to teach the kids how to use the computer.

    • Eddie

      No, not the EU.
      It was the political correctness from the USA, which was spawned by the rise of identity politics (obsession with race, gender, religious identity) that did it.
      Worth noting that the French have been far more willing to defend Enlightenment values than the diversity-worshipping politically correct ethnophiliacs in Britain: France has banned burkas in public places, keeps religion out of schools and universities completely (and the workplace), and does not surrender to the demands of Islamic loudmouths who seek offence wherever they can find it so as to play the porr wickle victim of Western horrible-ness all the flipping time.
      We in Britain should be a bit more French/European and a bit less Amercan on this – especially as we do not have the total freedom of speech they do in the US (which counterbalances their insane race-obsessed political correctness).
      It really is time for the BBC and our TV channels, and newspapers and magazines, and schools, universities, councils and the police to realise that they are betraying this country’s values in pandering to Muslims and others.
      NO-ONE HAS THE RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED!
      Personally, the morons who hero-worship Mohammed are an insult to human intelligence, so offend me, together with creationists and other religious nuts, who don;t seem to think THEY have to avoid offending others with their abusive comments about other religions, atheists, gay people etc.
      I am also offended that Mohammed is always referred to as ‘The Prophet Mohammed’ on the BBC and elsewhere, as though that’s a fact. It is not – it is an opinion, that of Muslims, less than 5% of the population. For me, Mohammed was as history tells us a violent murderous warlord with 14 wives (one 9 years old) who put to death poets who criticised him in his lifetime, and cobbled together Islam from Judaism and other religions so as to increase his power and wealth.
      Mohammed was and is not a prophet to me and most British people. So why does the BBC tell me he is a prophet? Answer: fear and cowardice and worship of a form of diversity and misplaced multiculturalism that means anyone with a dark skin and a religions seems to have carte blanche to blackmail any institution in this country to be obedient to their demands.

      • John Steadman

        Pretty damned good, Eddie, even by your standards.

        • Eddie

          Thanking you.
          I always find it ironic that it is in fact Muslims who are most guilty of hating, abusing, attacking and killing other Muslims: the ones that do not follow the exact same version of Islam as them. Same now as in the past, when the graves of Mohammed and others were trashed in the name of ‘purist’ ascetic Islam.
          Ditto with all religions: the religious hurt, abuse and kill the religious far more than any atheist ever did.
          Who is it that calls for the deaths of other Muslims, who flings abuse at them, who wants to inflict violence on them? Other Muslims, usually. Not Jews, Christians or atheists.
          I wonder if it is ONLY the name Mohammed that we British now have to worship like a god. Would a Pineapple called Jesus or Jehovah or The Buddha or Vishnu have been similarly banned?
          Perhaps the Reading atheist society should have had a whole fruit bowl with a variety of fruit called after religious characters? Then they could have sold raffle tickets and maybe, ahem, made a prophet…
          My conclusion to all this: Reading university is one to avoid – but probably just pandering to Muslims and other ethnic/religious students because it;’s worried about losing the cash cow foreign students (you know, the ones who can hardly speak English and have fake high school qualifications) who’re worth £15.000 each per year to this countries branches of ‘Degrees R Us’. Why don’t they just sell the pieces of paper for £5k each? Then the students wouldn’t have to bother coming here at all and we could call our fruit Pineapple or Hitler or Nignog if we wanted?
          As for the Student Union. Well, they always were tossers. Many MPs started as loudmouth self-righteous twerps on SU campaigns. Nuff said, really…

      • AY

        yepp. wherever if I meet capital p Prophet, I stop reading.
        saves time.

        • Eddie

          A couple of years ago I complained to the BBC regarding their constant use of ‘The Prophet Mohammed’ – I was (and am) offended at their stating that as though it were a fact, and would object too if they said ‘Jesus, son of God’ or ‘God, Creator of the Earth’, or ‘Vishnu, the best god ever’ or ‘Buddha, the Enlightened One.’
          It should be this:
          ‘Mohammed, the Muslim prophet’.
          For the BBC to say ‘The Prophet Mohammed’ is wrong and offensive. If I were a Muslim, I’d bomb them or chop someone’s head off; as I am a civilised person, I just use satire to expose their stupidity, ignorance and hypocrisy. But sadly, no-one in broadcasting or government seems to challange these Berkley Hunts.
          Of course, the BBC banged on about ‘reflecting the diversity of modern Britain’ and ‘being sensitive to our multicultural listeners and viewers’. But hey – if that’s the case, then why are they not sensitive to the feelings of all those who are offended by pandering to and appeasing Muslims? And why don’t they want to reflect the diversity of those people they don’t like – BNP members, for example?’
          I am SICK of the BBC these days – it has way too many Muslims working for it, and is obsessed with followingi its politically correct agenda and promoting the diversity cult using OUR money to do so: hence all the 4th rate women presenters and ethnic faces on TV these days, the way drama has been ruined by the box-tickers who have orders to portray all Muslim characters as poor qickle victims (only one or two bad apples are the bad Muslim characters).

          • DavidMHart

            Just remember, it’s ‘The prophet Mohammad’ in the same sense as it’s ‘The wizard Harry Potter’. I.e. both are fictional or fictionalized, and it’s a convenient shorthand.

            Of course, you also have to make sure that everyone else remembers that it’s just a convenient shorthand:-)

      • WoodstockWastrel

        Mohammed and Jimmy Saville had quite a lot in common then?

        • Leedeeloo

          Yeah they were both from Leeds.

    • Eddie

      No, not the EU.
      It was the political correctness from the USA, which was spawned by the rise of identity politics (obsession with race, gender, religious identity) that did it.
      Worth noting that the French have been far more willing to defend Enlightenment values than the diversity-worshipping politically correct ethnophiliacs in Britain: France has banned burkas in public places, keeps religion out of schools and universities completely (and the workplace), and does not surrender to the demands of Islamic loudmouths who seek offence wherever they can find it so as to play the porr wickle victim of Western horrible-ness all the flipping time.
      We in Britain should be a bit more French/European and a bit less Amercan on this – especially as we do not have the total freedom of speech they do in the US (which counterbalances their insane race-obsessed political correctness).
      It really is time for the BBC and our TV channels, and newspapers and magazines, and schools, universities, councils and the police to realise that they are betraying this country’s values in pandering to Muslims and others.
      NO-ONE HAS THE RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED!
      Personally, the morons who hero-worship Mohammed are an insult to human intelligence, so offend me, together with creationists and other religious nuts, who don;t seem to think THEY have to avoid offending others with their abusive comments about other religions, atheists, gay people etc.
      I am also offended that Mohammed is always referred to as ‘The Prophet Mohammed’ on the BBC and elsewhere, as though that’s a fact. It is not – it is an opinion, that of Muslims, less than 5% of the population. For me, Mohammed was as history tells us a violent murderous warlord with 14 wives (one 9 years old) who put to death poets who criticised him in his lifetime, and cobbled together Islam from Judaism and other religions so as to increase his power and wealth.
      Mohammed was and is not a prophet to me and most British people. So why does the BBC tell me he is a prophet? Answer: fear and cowardice and worship of a form of diversity and misplaced multiculturalism that means anyone with a dark skin and a religions seems to have carte blanche to blackmail any institution in this country to be obedient to their demands.

    • AY

      I won’t be surprised if pineapples will start appearing on the streets, – named “doggy”, “I am ham ad”, “sexy head”, “vodka butt”, “three little pigs” etc.

      • Eddie

        Oh yes, and what about tins of pineapple chunks? Would they count as circumcised pineapples maybe, and if so, are they Islamic?
        Still, there were already plenty of fruits and vegetables around called Mohammed long before this Reading University fiasco. A lot of the latter are members of University Islamic societies too – societies whose members express views that would, if they were expressed by white non-religious persons, be called fascistic, intolerant, bigoted, homophobic, anti-Semitic views which incite violence.
        But as they’re brown-faced Muslims, we have to tolerate them and celebrate their diversity, even if they are a bunch of Islamofascist twats. Such is the hypocritical madness of diversity worship and the traitors to our values who appease these Fatwah Fascists.

  • Laurence

    Ah, ‘the religion of peace™’ and its growing number of earnest supplicants, always keen to find new and interesting ways to remain perpetually offended. You know, were I to find myself in a society in which offence to my mediaeval mores was near perpetual, I would make it my solemn purpose to leave that place as quickly as possible and relocate to somewhere more congenial. For instance, I cannot see the problem with women exposing their faces or driving a car, I like consuming alcohol, I read more than one book, I enjoy music and art, I do not think homosexuality is a capital offence and I believe that Israel is a perfectly legitimate democratic country. To prevent being offended, these are, then, some of the many, many, many reasons why I wouldn’t set foot in a backward little place like, oh, say, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.

    • Eddie

      “For instance, I cannot see the problem with women exposing their faces or driving a car,”
      Funnily enough, last year I was driving along in the middle lane of a one way system, and the car in the left hand lane suddenly started pulling out, so suddenly that I had to brake to prevent an accident. I then noticed that it was a Driving School car, so knew why.
      But imagine my shock when I passed that car and, looking left out of my window to see who was driving, was confronted by the sight of a woman (I presume) in a full face-veil burka driving the flipping car!
      Why the F is this permitted? It is dangerous.
      Can I wear a mask when driving a car too? Or maybe we can all wear paper bags on our heads with little holes for eyes: that’d be just as ‘safe’…
      The traffic police are so strict if you go 34mph is a 30mph zone and fine you £60 – but you’re perfectly free to drive a car in this multiculti country while wearing what is in effect a one woman tent!

      • Eddie

        Interesting to see Jimmy Saville outed as a Muslim though. It all makes sense now: the taste for young girls, the gold lame jackets, the complete lack of good taste…
        And, as Muslims are always saying, ‘everyone is born a Muslim’, they just don’t know it yet – until they become ‘reverts’ like Saville and Gary Glitter. Or wat it ‘perverts’? I can’t remember…
        Which is a coincidence, because neither could all those girls Saville is supposed to have abused – until he was dead and unable to defend himself, and they see the carrot of cash and fame dangling in front of their eyes…

  • Andy Gill

    This would be slightly less worrying if Islamic hate preachers were excluded from university campuses in the UK. The fight to save our academic institutions from ever-increasing encroachment by intolerant Islamofascists needs to be stepped up. They are a vital battle-ground in the clash of civilizations.

  • Simon Morgan

    This is priceless! Nothing on this green earth could be half so daft.

    It just gets so silly that even Monty Python’s Flying Circus appears mundane and normal. But, Is there any end in sight? I mean, we can only be ridiculous for so long, surely?

    I give in.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here