Neville Chamberlain redux

It is difficult being a middle of the road commentator, because one ends up being attacked by people on the right as well as those who are on the left. At the present time though, one has to wonder how it is that an editor of the New Statesman has the necessary foresight to warn Britain about her courtship with radical Islam. Martin Bright of the New Statesman has fronted a show on Channel 4 that warns of the inherent dangers of the attitude of the British Foreign office. You can read Martin Bright's comments regarding his surprise that it is the right wing who have come out in support of what he had to state about the behaviour of the British Foreign Office, here. The most important point that is being made is that perhaps we are seeing a return of the head in the sand attitude that was displayed by Neville Chamberlain and his government in the 1930s. During that period, the British government courted the Nazis and Hitler, and there were several Nazi sympathisers within the British government. The treaty made by Neville Chamberlain did not last very long. Hitler attacked Poland and set his sights on Britain. Chamberlain had not been able to see the dangers posed by Nazism and he was willing to sell the British people down the river with his appeasement attitude. The left wing pundits have, as usual, failed to see the dangers of radical Islam. However, Martin Bright, although an editor of the left-wing New Statesmen has managed to look past the idealism of the left wing and has, with clarity, pointed to the errors of Whitehall, as the civil servants continue to flirt with radical Islam without thinking about the long term consequences of their actions. It is Martin Bright who has pointed to the behaviour of Neville Chamberlain's government and the obvious parallels between the rise of Nazism and the rise of radical Islam. I do not see Martin Bright as an Islamophobic. I see his comments as coming from a man who is reasonably clear headed in that he can see beyond the rose coloured attitude of the British left wing as far as the Middle East conflict is concerned. Britain has been torn over participation in the invasion of Iraq. The left wing are torn because they see the situation in terms of the struggle of the oppressed. Personally, I think that the left wing within politics need to rethink their support for radical Islam. They have not understood the dangers posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and brother organizations. One of the biggest mistakes made in the viewpoint of the radical left-wing would have to be their support of the Hamas and Hezbollah in the Middle East. They have failed to grasp that Hezbollah is not an organization that is protecting an oppressed people, and they have failed to grasp that it is Hezbollah who wants to oppress the Lebanese people. This failure is due to the poor grasp of history that comes as a result of the work of historical revisionists. We hear far too often that history is written by the victors, and then the revisionists set to work to produce a history of events that is totally warped. A good example is the way in which the Islamist historians have been busy revising history so that Islam appears to be more ancient than something started in the 7th century A.D. Members of the left-wing have embraced the Islamic lies and refuse to believe that what they believe is based upon a lie. Their own ideology has interfered with their reason when it comes to the issue of the rise of Islam. The Blair government needs to reconsider its position on a number of issues, especially the embracing of radical Islamic organizations. The left wing within Britain need to examine more fully the issues that are facing them and they need to wake up to the threat of radical Islam that is on their doorstep. Appeasement does not work, and the courting of radical groups such as Muslim Brotherhood is not smart politics.