From the He-Was-Such-A-Grand-Fellow-This-Is-Discrimination Department, a Saajid Badat update. "Dark Secrets of the Trainee Islamic Priest," from The Scotsman, with thanks to Nicolei, who comments: "Saajid Badat could have been a character out of Fox's '24.' His case should lessen optimism that Western schooling and exposure to Western culture can cultivate moderate Muslims. His 'piety,' along with the zeal of many other Muslim terrorists, shows that violence against infidels is not a contradiction of Islamic piety, but very much part of it. How many more Saajid Badats will it take to convince the West that there are thousands of 'sleeper' Muslim terrorists who can be awakened by calls to such piety, as they come to understand Islam more intimately?"
When devout Muslim Saajid Badat was arrested by anti-terrorism officers in November 2003, it came as a huge shock to his local community.
Astounding that any editor let this through as the lead paragraph. When was the last time a suspected terrorist was arrested and the news stories featured Muslims who knew him saying, "Yes, we knew all along he was a rotter"?
Badat, a bright, well-educated man from a deeply religious family, had been living quietly with his family and was described by neighbours as softly spoken and respectful.Those who knew him painted a picture of a sociable, football-loving man who “always spoke out if something was wrong”.
His former headteacher said he was a quiet teenager who took his religious beliefs seriously, while his classmates considered him friendly and popular.
He took his religious beliefs seriously, eh? That, er, couldn't be part of the problem, could it?
However, behind his outwardly quiet and often unassuming character, Badat had been hiding a dark secret. Today at the Old Bailey he admitted conspiring to blow up an aircraft.Born in Gloucester to a strict Muslim family who moved to England from Malawi, Badat was an active member of his community and had hopes of becoming a Islamic priest.
"Islamic priest"? This shows the depth of this reporter's knowledge of Islam.
At the time of his arrest, headteacher David Lamper said he was “shocked” by the news.He described Badat as a successful student who worked with “maturity and commitment”, adding that he was “punctual, cheerful and polite”.
And in a statement issued today, Mr Lamper said: “While here, he (Badat) was a popular and diligent pupil. The school’s thoughts are with Saajid’s family at what must be a very difficult time.”
After leaving school, Badat began studying the Koran.
He went on to study at the College of Islamic Knowledge and Guidance in Blackburn, Lancashire, where he lived as a boarder for two years.
A world map and two pictures of mosques adorned the walls of the room he shared with five others.
At the start of his training as an Islamic priest and scholar, Badat studied daily in the computer room and library which held hundreds of Islamic teaching books.
Amazing that he got them all wrong and so misunderstood the message of the Religion of Peace that he ended up helping out the shoe bomber. Memo to Ibrahim Hooper and Stephen Schwartz: why is the Qur'an so all-fired hard to understand? Why does a serious student of Islam like Saajid Badat get it so wrong? Or ... could it be that maybe he didn't really get it wrong at all? And if not, what are you guys doing about that? (If anything.)
Mass deportations for the lot of them, straight to the Arabian Peninsula. I can dream. Meanwhile, in the real world, Charlie Rangel sees no Islamic terrorism.
This article is unfortunately not up to the Scotsman's usual standards.
..By Neville Dean, PA Crime Correspondent
This is the result of letting "Crime Correspondents write articles on islamic terrorism!
Until reporters who report such stories gain a modicum of knowledge of the subject they will continue to not understand that these "crimes" do not fall into the same categories as for example burglary or bank holdups.
In defence of the "scotsman" , i would refer you to an excellent article in monday's edition called.
"a blinkered view of the Baghdad Hilton" by Kate Grant.
The obssesion of the MSM (especcially the BBC) to report only the bad news and horro stories.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=222062005
...You would never guess that from some British media reports, which are about as cheerful as coverage of a funeral. There is no difficulty telling the difference between the BBC’s Caroline Hawley and a ray of sunshine. You get the impression that most commentators are disappointed that the elections happened at all and, when they did, were secretly hoping for an outrage so dreadful it would turn 30 January into a day of wailing rather than cheering. .....
We have been here before.
In "Public Enemy Number One" James Cagney's mother describes her boy as a "a good boy" and this has become the greatest movie cliche since moon and June were first cinematically rhymed.
Frank Lindh [father of John Walker Lindh] described his son as a "good boy"; "not really much more than a boy";a "very sweet kid ..." about the Marin County brat.
At least a trillion dollars is spent each year in the Western world on advertising. Why? Because it works. If you are told something again and again, or if you read it, or if you hear it, it will sink in, and it will have its effect on your brain. End of story.
That is exactly what Islam does. What is said in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira about Infidels, about the proper role of Islam (which is "to dominate and not to be dominated"), about the perfidy of Jews and Christians who are not to be taken as friends, not to be shown anything but hostility (except that feigned friendship, in order to advance Islam, may sometimes be necessary), about the rightness of "deception" ("war is deception" said Muhammad), all of this repeated and repeated, has its effects.
It is the same as advertising. No difference. Constant repetition works, on and for a great many people. End of story.
"Bright" or "well-educated" [at a Muslim school, please not] or "sociable" or "football-loving" it makes no difference. He read the texts. He heard them. He re-read them. He discussed them. He was told to believe them, again and again.
That is all one needs to know.
He was educated at a grammar school - a wonderful institution all but killed off by the evil Socialists who want to level everybody down.
They say this kind of thing about serial killers, eg Nielsen - very fond of gardening apparently!
He was such a quite, nice boy is such a cliche, isn't every serial killer- mass murderer described that way. Like someone is going to hang a sign around their neck announcing his intentions and beliefs!
He was educated at a wholly British top-level State school, a so-called "Grammar School", and he got a quite extraordinary number of distinctions - ten A-levels and fourteen GCECs, if I remember right. This is the kind of leaving grade that means that top universities will compete for you. He could have walked into Oxford or Cambridge. Instead he went abroad where they placed him together with prison drop-out Richard Reed and used his brilliant mind to teach him to place explosives in his shoes. The only good thing about it is that he got cold feet, and perhaps now he is going to live long enough to see through this obscene waste.
But he is not the only one. The man who commanded the cell who murdered Daniel Pearl had also had excellent leaving grade from a British independent boarding school - no, NOT an Islamic school. National education seems to fail as well sometimes.
His case should lessen optimism that Western schooling and exposure to Western culture can cultivate moderate Muslims. His 'piety,' along with the zeal of many other Muslim terrorists, shows that violence against infidels is not a contradiction of Islamic piety, but very much part of it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!!! When will the dhimmi news media practice a bit of unbiased, ethical journalism? When will they base their news reports on carefully researched and documented material, beginning with a true and accurate portrayal of Islam? When will the arrogant media, who have joined the American judiciary in ceaseless efforts to shape and dictate how Americans will live, think, and react, try telling the unembellished truth for a change? When will political correctness be abandoned for honest reporting? Most importantly, when will the people who flood us with the "news" realize that no amount of obfuscation, apologetics, excuses, and bleeding-heart liberalism will change the facts? Don't the American people deserve to know the truth?!
How will the shameful, liberal media react to the next major terrorist attack in America, which will almost certainly be committed by "peaceful, patriotic, American muslims?"
I think I already know the answer to that question. They will say that we caused and deserved it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!!! When will the dhimmi news media practice a bit of unbiased, ethical journalism? ~ Susanp
Susan, that is Exactly why I post those links every morning. People on the right are making big errors, deliberate or otherwise, as well, but:
We Must keep the spotlight on everyone who would obfuscate (such as Rangel), distort history (such as Ward Churchill), and outright attack our troops fighting the War on Terror (such as Rather, Jennings, Eason et al).