"Three Islamic suspects appear in London court," from AFP, with thanks to Twostellas and RB:
LONDON (AFP) - Three people suspected of financing "terrorism" were charged in court here with providing illegal support to an Islamic fundamentalist group leading a rebellion in Indian Kashmir.Mohammed Ajmal Khan, 30, Palvinder Singh, 29, and Frzana Khan, the last a woman aged 41, were charged with two offenses of conspiracy to provide funds and weapons to the Kashmiri organization Lashkar-e-Taiba (Army of the Just)....
How much evidence, and of how many different kinds, from different places, with Saudis in Bosnia, and Yemenis in Indonesia, and muhajiroun running around all over Europe, will it take to get people to pay careful attention to, assemble in their own minds, and comprehend, what is going on, and why? Simply ask: what does Islam teach? (this is not the same thing as what taqiyya-and-kitman or filial-piety Muslims necessarily tell you). Is there reason to think that Islam is not quite like other religions, that possibly it is also a geopolitical ideology, and that its tenets -- Jihad above all -- are actually taken quite seriously by a great number (and not a "tiny handful") of its Believers, and that those few who are not fully aware of its bloodier teachings, when they discover them, are more likely to accept than to reject them? And does the theory of Islam accord with the practice -- and how shall we find out, if not by studying what went on in 1350 years of the history of Jihad-conquest and the subjugation of non-Muslims? How else can we possibly judge?
One more bit of evidence: Muslims in London pay for violent Jihad against India, a country devastated by Islamic conquest. See K. S. Lal, see Sarkar, see Srivastava, see Elliott and Dowson's anthology. These happen to have been people from the subcontinent. But they could have been Saudis. Or Kuwaitis. Or Yemenis. All they had to be, to support attacks on India in Kashmir, were to be Muslim.
Actually, Hugh -- Singh is a Sikh name, isn't it? Do we have someone here who is playing "my enemy's enemy is my friend".
The best way to stop a problem form coming back is to tackle it at source, ie in London, Birmingham or Manchester. If we allow our cities to be used for organising a holy war abroad how long before that holy war comes here?
It already is starting in some areas of the UK, Holland and the US.
I am a member of the United British Alliance, a group of people who organise marches to challenge the jihadists and the people who use the system to keep them free. We are not interested in race or ethnicity, just stopping people who aim to kill others with truck bombs or beheadings, we need to unmask the Jihadists who live among us.
http://s9.invisionfree.com/UBA_Forum/index.php
We need people who are willing to take a hands on approach to making Britain a safer place. We need people who know what is wrong and who are prepared to do something about it.
Though Singh -- as in the name of the celebrated journalist Kushwant Singh, whose bookplate appears in a copy of Guru Nanak that I bought a few years ago -- would ordinarily indicate a Sikh, perhaps the father of Palvinder Singh was originally a Sikh. In order to marry a Muslim woman, he would of course have been pressured to "revert" to Islam and foreswear being a Sikh. While I could not conceive of marrying someone wedded to the ideology of Islam, apparently not all Infidels agree.
And like that terrorist known as Al-Hindi who as someone linked to Hinduism had to prove himself, or the half-Jewish Adam Gadahn still being sought around the country, Palvinder Singh may have wanted to add some extra as the poet Larkin says, Islam -- just for Mum, and possibly Dad. With the results we see.