I am glad this is finally coming to light. But will that make it change? "Focus: How liberal Britain let hate flourish: A clash of civilisations or a failure of moderates to stand firm?" From the TimesOnline, with thanks to Caratacus:
WHEN Rachid Salama, a young Algerian, found himself homeless in London, salvation lay in a large mosque dominating a street corner in north London.“The mosque was huge, clean and warm. Apart from the heavies on the door glaring and flashing their Afghanistan scars, everybody was extremely friendly and welcoming,” he said last week.
“Then I discovered how my brothers passed the day. Many were on benefits or living off charity so they could hang about discussing jihad all day. Whenever we were not praying, we were taken to watch TV. There were endless videos of mujaheddin activity around the globe.“Jihadist nasheeds (songs) were played in the background, with medieval-style voice harmonies and deeply stirring lyrics about how brave mujhads are suffering for Allah and dying in order to defend Muslim lands. They sometimes climaxed with a question — are you going to stand by and watch Muslim civilians killed? “The atmosphere was intense. Any slight dissent was stamped on so quickly and aggressively that I realised that the best thing to do was nod and say ‘Inshallah’ with the rest of my brothers.”
Salama had found sanctuary in the Finsbury Park mosque under the regime imposed by Abu Hamza, the one-eyed, hook-handed Egyptian who had seized control of the building from moderates and turned it into a centre for incitement to murder.
The Algerian was never gulled by the talk of jihad and left the mosque to find work. But he, like other moderates, had failed to counter the extremism.
When Hamza was convicted of inciting his followers to murder non-Muslims last week, it became clear that the British authorities had also failed to counter the extremism — although they were only too well aware of what was going on....
Read it all. There is a great deal of important and revealing information here.
From the article:
“We are at a crossroads of something very deep,” said Professor Tariq Ramadan, a visiting Islamic scholar at Oxford University. “On both sides there are fractures.”
Once again the press hasn't figured out that the real danger is not Abu Hamza but the infinately more sinister Tarik Ramadan, quoted above and Sir Iqbal Sacranie, referred to in the article as a moderate.
Don't the journalists have access to Google?
Maybe reporting has been totally outsourced to Red China nowdays.
A senior Metropolitan police source said: "We are looking into complaints that were made about the offensive placards and submitting a file to the CPS. But it would be far fetched to expect anyone to take it seriously if someone has a placard saying cut off the head of the cartoonist."
This gem is from the Independent.
I wonder howe many 7/7's there have to be, and how many Theo Van Gogh's have to be murdered before the British police do take the situation seriously.
They ignored evidence against Abu Hamza for years relying on the "covenant of security" to protect the UK. When will they wake up and read the Koran?
“We are at a crossroads of something very deep,” said Professor Tariq Ramadan, a visiting Islamic scholar at Oxford University. “On both sides there are fractures.”
Crossroads is right but what cheek to suggest that the fractures are on both sides. There is no fracture in the islamic world, the fracture is in the West, as we still do realise that multiculteralism is death to a nation state.
The reason that this has come to pass is the belief that multiculteralism is good for the nation. Yet we forget that the very concept of a nation is based on people founding a community/nation of shared language and culture. It is for this reason that we have several European nations. Though we have the same culture, the languages are different.
And now we have imported a large group of people who do not even share the culture that they have come to. Moderate or radical islamists are not the issue. Muslims by the very fact that are muslims, cannot be part of the culture of a Western nation. As such they become an irritant growth in the host body. I write this in no disrespect of muslims or their culture. It is simply a fact.
I can see no way that muslims will let us live in peace in our nations in the West. The "peaceful" demonstration in London yesterday is simply a holding operation as the muslim population, which by the way is more then 5 million in the UK rather then 1.6 million as oft quoted, grows till they are able to enforce islamic values in society.
After so much pain, we in the West had finally found a way to live in peace with each other. Was it really necessary to import muslims and disturb the peace?
FRONT PAGE - TIMES LONDON
THE BRITISH PRESS ARE WAKING UP!!
British imam praises London Tube bombers
A LEADING imam in the mosque where the July 7 bombers worshipped has hailed their terrorist attack on London as a “good” act in a secretly taped conversation with an undercover reporter.
Hamid Ali, spiritual leader of the mosque in West Yorkshire, said it had forced people to take notice when peaceful meetings and conferences had no impact.
He also praised the bombers as the “children” of Abdullah al-Faisal, a firebrand Muslim cleric, who was convicted of inciting murder and racial hatred in 2003.
Ali revealed that the leader of the London suicide bombers had attended sermons in Yorkshire by al-Faisal and tapes of al-Faisal’s teachings were still circulating within his mosque.
Al-Faisal, who has branded non-Muslims as “cockroaches” ripe for extermination, is serving a seven-year prison sentence but is eligible for early release next week.
Evidence of continuing extremism and terrorist sympathisers in the bombers’ community has been exposed by a six-week investigation by The Sunday Times. It contrasts with the public statements of condemnation by community leaders — including Ali — in the immediate aftermath of the July 7 attacks.
The disclosures come as a Sunday Times-YouGov poll today shows that people are gloomy about the prospects of living in peaceful coexistence with Britain’s Muslim community. Nearly two-thirds, 63%, think that tensions will rise and only 17% are optimistic about the outlook. By 10 to one, 52% to 5%, people say that recent events have made them less tolerant of other religions.
How the July 7 bombers came to be radicalised has proved to be one of the biggest mysteries surrounding their involvement. Even the intelligence services are understood to be in the dark.
In an attempt to shed light on this, an undercover reporter of Bangladeshi origin, posing as a student, lived among the Muslim community in Beeston, Leeds, where three of the bombers — Mohammad Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer and Hasib Mir Hussain — had grown up.
The community had closed ranks in the aftermath of the London attacks which killed 56 people, including the bombers. Besieged by the world’s media and fearing reprisals from far-right extremists, many people had refused to talk about the bombers.
However, among those now willing to condone the bombers was Ali, spiritual leader of the Al-Madina Masjid mosque in Tunstall Road, Beeston, where the bombers had worshipped.
A week after the attack he had told newspapers that the perpetrators ought to be punished. But in a secretly taped conversation, he said: “What they [the bombers] did was good. They have warned that we are here, we Muslims. People have taken notice that we are here. They died so that people would take notice . . . big meetings and conferences make no change at all. With this, at least people’s ears have pricked up.”
Describing the bombers as the “children” of “Sheikh” al-Faisal and part of his group of followers, the imam disclosed that al-Faisal had visited the Beeston mosque at least three times to give “lectures”.
The imam described al-Faisal as a good Islamic scholar who was also “fiery”. He said Khan had many of his audio tapes: “He had lots of them. He definitely used to listen to al-Faisal tapes. I borrowed some from him.”
He recalled Khan asking al-Faisal many questions during one of these lectures. Khan, a primary school teaching assistant, is believed to have received training at terrorist camps in Pakistan after al-Faisal was jailed.
The cleric’s visits to Beeston have been confirmed by Afzal Choudhary, a race equality worker in Leeds. He said: “Sheikh al-Faisal came at least twice to Beeston. I should know because I was one of the people opposed to his coming.”
Al-Faisal, a 42-year-old Jamaican-born convert, toured the country for almost a decade making inflammatory speeches which were recorded on video and audio and were then sold to his followers.
In one he singles out Mother Teresa and the royal family, saying they would burn in hell. In another he rants: “The only way forward is for you, the Muslims, to kill the kufrs (non-believers).”
This weekend it emerged that he could soon be freed from prison after becoming eligible for early release. His nine-year sentence had already been cut to seven years on appeal. According to a Home Office source, Charles Clarke, the home secretary, must decide within the next two weeks whether to let him go free after the judge at his trial recommended that he be deported after his time in jail.
If Clarke decides to deport him, al-Faisal will be able to appeal and live freely in Britain on bail while his case runs its course. The Home Office declined to comment on the specifics of the case yesterday.
Al-Faisal was born William Forest to a Salvation Army family in Jamaica and studied religion in Saudi Arabia before coming to Britain in the early 1990s. He lived in Stratford, east London, with his wife and five children before his arrest.
Through his “study circle” tours of Britain he came into contact with other prominent extremists. He is a close ally of the radical cleric Abu Hamza, who was jailed for seven years on Tuesday for soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred. Hamza was called to testify as a defence witness in al-Faisal’s trial and has shared a speaking platform with him.
He is alleged to have been close to Earnest James Ujaama, who was jailed in America for two years after confessing his role in setting up an Al-Qaeda training camp, allegedly with Hamza, in Oregon. Like Khan, Ujaama asked questions at al-Faisal’s lectures in Britain.
The cleric also preached in Tipton in the West Midlands. It is claimed that he may have helped to radicalise the so-called “Tipton terrorist” Munir Ali who travelled to Afghanistan and has subsequently disappeared.
Al-Faisal preached as well at a mosque in Brixton, south London, that was once attended by Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, and Zacarias Moussaoui, who is on trial in America facing allegations that he was the “20th hijacker” in the September 11 attacks.
Last week al-Faisal’s videos were still being circulated in Islamic communities, including Beeston. Anhar Gani, a community youth worker who knew the bombers and said he hoped they were “in heaven”, offered to lend some tapes to our undercover reporter.
Many of them have recently been reproduced as DVDs by Amar Iqbal, a Muslim activist from Ashton-under-Lyne, near Manchester. On Friday he said he only sold copies of al-Faisal sermons that were legal.
The Sunday Times was able to buy several from Rolex Books, a specialist Islamic bookshop in Rusholme, Manchester. Atif Darr, the shop’s joint owner, said there were plans to take over distribution of the DVDs when al-Faisal is released from prison.
The DVDs bought this week have covers with images such as atomic explosions and smoke rising from the White House. In one entitled Ideological Warfare, al-Faisal claims “unbelievers have tried to wipe Muslims off the face of the world” and tells the audience: “Christians and Jews will never accept you until you follow their evil and corrupted way of life.”
In another entitled Signs Before the Day of Judgment, he proclaims that British law was “put together by the henchmen of Satan, people who are gays and devil worshippers”.
The Sunday Times undercover operation in Beeston found that radical views had not subsided in the months after the London bombings. Many Muslims, particularly younger men, expressed admiration for the bombers’ “martyrdom”.
Confronted by The Sunday Times yesterday, Ali denied praising the bombers. When asked whether he believed that their actions were good, he said: “I don’t know what they died for, that’s what I said . . . According to our faith, everything depends on what their intention is. I don’t know what their intention is.”
From a Nigerian blogger living in London
More of this.
http://foreigndispatches.typepad.com/dispatches/2006/02/how_to_validate.html
The nation state as presently defined in the West cannot be at peace with a large community whose culture is not just different but is opposed to the host body.
BRITISH PUBLIC ARE NO FOOLS/DHIMMI
Public anger at Muslim protesters
David Smith
Poll reveals fear of future clashes
PEOPLE in Britain take a hard line against Muslims protesting violently against supposed insults to their religion, and are gloomy about future relations between Muslims and the rest of the population.
Muslims protested peacefully in Trafalgar Square yesterday. But a Sunday Times-YouGov poll of more than 1,600 people shows widespread public anger about protests earlier this month in Britain and the worldwide uprising in response to Danish cartoons picturing the prophet Muhammad.
The poll shows that 86% of people think the protests were “a gross overreaction”. By 56% to 29% respondents said it was right to publish the cartoons in Denmark and republish them elsewhere.
Earlier this month Muslim protesters in Britain carried placards urging violence and death against those who insult Islam, and celebrating last year’s July 7 London bombings. Asked about those protests, 58% said it made them angry and 76% said the police should have arrested those carrying offensive or provocative banners.
The police and politicians are criticised more generally for not confronting Islamic extremism, with 80% of respondents saying the authorities show too much tolerance of Muslims who urge extreme acts. Two-thirds, 67%, think this is because senior policemen such as Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, are too “politically correct”.
Such views have been brought to a head by last week’s conviction of Abu Hamza, the Muslim cleric, for inciting religious violence and racial hatred. After reports that his activities had been known to the police for many years, 67% believe he should have been arrested much sooner, and 69% believe he should have been given a “significantly longer” sentence than seven years.
The support for a tough line extends to the anti-terrorism bill, which returns to the Commons next week. Tony Blair backed down on a proposal for terrorist suspects to be held for up to 90 days without charge, but 44% of people back the extension to 90 days, against 42% who say 28 days is an acceptable compromise.
Where foreigners stir up racial and religious hatred, 81% of people think they should be sent back to their own countries, even if to do so would endanger their lives.
There is widespread gloom about the future, with 87% expecting further attacks in Britain by Islamic groups on the scale of the July 7 bombings; and only 17% seeing a future in which there is peaceful coexistence between Muslims and others in Britain, while 67% think there will be a worsening of tensions. This is also true internationally. While 34% say western nations can coexist peacefully with mainly Muslim countries, 45% disagree.
The nation state as presently defined in the West cannot be at peace with a large community whose culture is not just different but is opposed to the host body. It is not a matter of race but one of culture. We either accept multiculturalism or the nation state, a mixure is not a recipe for a society at peace with itself but at war. This is what is in the offing in the near future - civil wars within all Western and non-muslim nations - what I have defined as the first global civil war, as this war is quite different from WW 1 and 2.
regarding truth4u's post above on british attitudes, the link is here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2036533,00.html
The oft quoted figure of 1.6 million mulsims in the UK is an outdated figure arising from the 2001 census.
Just over three-quarters of the UK population reported having a religion. More than seven out of ten people said that their religion was Christian (72 per cent). After Christianity, Islam was the most common faith with nearly 3 per cent describing their religion as Muslim (1.6 million).
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=293
The true figure is in the vicinity of 5 million or more. It is for this reason that the jihad in Britain has started - 10% critical mass. It will only get worse. Arresting and even deporting a few imams is not sufficient anymore. It may have sufficed 10 years ago but now is too late and too little.
Islam is not compatible with western style secular democracy. It is obvious that this is the case from recent events. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. Something could be done now before its too late. They are a 5th column amongst our midst and is carrying out a planned step by step take over of the institutions in the west. They are like slow growing cancer at the right time it will kill its host.
One needs to look at history, what happened to countries such as Turkey. Persia, Afghanistan, Indonesia, the Balkans and so forth. . People who forget to learn lessons from history are due to repeat them. Last Saturdays march by the so called moderates was a cover up to allay the fears of the Britishers. In any case why march in UK, the cartoons were not published in any UK paper? This was a very good cover up for last Fridays march which was true Islam in action. The fact remains that Muslims cannot be part of the culture of any Western nation. They are like a cancerous cyst growing in the hosts body till it is large enough to destroy the host. This is the truth. They will never be 100% loyal to the country they live in. Its best to do something now before its too late
Let's see:
Hamza comes to the U.K. in 1979 and takes advantage of the freedom there to create a life for himself. He marries an English woman and has a son. When she calls him on his wandering eye and she threatens to leave, he promises to change and then disappears with the son and the wife has no idea where they went for 16 years. Then he comes back, bullies the keeper of the mosque and takes it over, preaches death and destruction of Western people and values , doesn't pay his taxes and threatens the auditors when they show up to do something about it. The authorities don't do anything about his subversive behavior until very late because of fear.
Yep, Islam as usual.
Australian media especially television is generally pretty critical of muslims and Islam.
ON TV this week, a story about a romance between a muslim man and a christian woman, and how the muslim mans' father has threatened to kill his son if he marries the christian woman.
I do not believe in the five-million figure, but I know for a fact that the statistics of the 2001 census are unreliable and untrustworthy. I worked as a census taker, and I can report that the conditions in which we were expected to work - which in practice amounted to expecting us to work 48 hours a day - made it impossible to gather data correctly. I worked hard, and I still had several areas left uncovered or unchecked when my time of employment came to an end. The census was done cheeseparingly, in the classic penny-wise, pound-foolish British manner, and I would not stake a pickled herring on its data.
DP111-
Multiculturalism is as moronic as multi-bicycle-seat-ism.
You never never never know where you ass is going.
Comments by ADOLPH H. MOHAMMED:
(Letter from das FuhrerBunker in Hell)
GEHEIM - SECRET
Heil Islam !
Liebe Islamic Nazi Volk,
My Dear Sweet Muslim Fascist Grandchildren, I only have a moment to speak because the Devil will be back and he will stick a hot poker in places you don't want to know.
I am here mit Obergruppenfuhrer Amin Al-Husayni ( أمين الحسيني) but he can't speak because the fire-ants are eating out his eyes.
Here is mein Political Philosophy in all its splendor:
Volume 1) Mein Kampf - This is my pride and joy, a gift to the World. In it I advocate many things that I tried to do. Some I succeeded with, and some I did not. The center of this philosophy was spelled out simply as
"Die Juden sind unser ungluck"
But those stupid gangster Amerikaner came and screwed up my plan when I was only half-way done. What a stupid country of gangsters that only cares about commercialism und the stupid dollar !!!!
Volume 2) Das Koran - This is the joy of my soul in this scheiss-hole that I am now in. My spirit is with my grandchildren and great-grandchildren now.
Heil Obergruppenfuhrer Osama Bin Laden !
Heil Obergruppenfuhrer Ahmedinejab !
Heil Islam !
(uh-oh, the Devil is coming back ...)
Your Adolph
GEHEIMSTAATSPOLIZEI - GEHEIM - SECRET
11. February 2006, 09:10 CET
OT, a brillaint analysis from www.barnabasfund.org:
13 February 2006
FOR CHURCH OF ENGLAND NEWSPAPER, 7 FEB 2006
Sir Iqbal Sacranie, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain,
has
said that he wishes to see Muhammad protected from insult or
disrespect.
Interestingly, he did not make this remark in the context of the
current
furore over the Danish cartoons of Muhammad. He said it much earlier,
in a
debate on BBC Radio 4’s The Moral Maze on the subject of legislation to
ban
incitement to religious hatred. Sacranie’s hope was that the new law
once
passed would be used to protect Muhammad from any negative criticism.
Sacranie was greatly disappointed with the form in which the religious
hatred bill was eventually passed on 31st January, and complained of
injustice and impediments to the promotion of a cohesive and harmonious
society in Britain. However, he may soon find his hopes for the
protection
of Muhammad are fulfilled in the wake of the international response to
the
Danish cartoons of the Islamic prophet, a response which appears to
have
been not only orchestrated but deliberately aggravated.
The worldwide responses to the cartoons have raised two questions. (1)
Why
are Muslims, even “moderate” Muslims, so passionate in the defence of
Muhammad from any kind of slight? (2) Why do British politicians and
church leaders feel the need to tread so delicately around Muslim
sensibilities?
The answer to the first question lies in the veneration of Muhammad.
This
is a paradoxical aspect of Islam, which in theory affirms the
believer’s
direct access to God without the need for any intercessor.
Accordingly,
Muhammad should be viewed by Muslims as simply a human channel for
God’s
revelation. In practice, however, Muhammad’s figure towers over Islam
not
just as its founder, but as the “perfect man” who was divinely inspired
not
only in his Qur’anic revelations, but in all his sayings and deeds. He
is
considered infallible, free from sin, and serves as the supreme example
which all Muslims are obliged to emulate in every small detail.
Muhammad is
also seen as the intercessor with God who can change the divine decrees
and
admit those he intercedes for into paradise. Love for Muhammad (and
his
family) is deeply inculcated into most Muslim children. Many Muslims,
especially in the Indian subcontinent, hold that Muhammad was created
from
an eternal heavenly substance (Muhammadan light) that pre-existed with
God.
He is a logos-like figure similar to Christ – a sinless saviour,
mediator
and intercessor.
A main concern of Muslims is the person of Muhammad who must be
protected
from any criticism or slight. Protecting his honour is an obligation on
all. Any suspected denigration of Muhammad immediately creates
disturbances and riots in many Muslim countries and communities, more
so
than blasphemy against Allah himself.
The antipathy towards pictures of Muhammad stems from several of his
own
comments, as recorded in traditions which Muslims call hadith. An
example
is his statement that “angels do not enter a house in which there is a
dog
or a picture” (Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 5.338). However, this has not
been
taken as an absolute prohibition in all kinds of Islam at all times, as
witness the numerous examples of Muslim paintings of Muhammad in
earlier
centuries.
Many Muslims have vocalised their outrage that the Danish cartoons
could be
interpreted as suggesting that Muhammad was a “terrorist”. Here too is
a
paradox. For these Muslims seek to portray Muhammad as a Jesus-figure,
a
peace-maker and channel of God’s mercy, motivated by a profound love
for
humanity, who treated his enemies with forbearance, even kindness.
They
say that Muhammad (himself) never killed anyone. Yet Muhammad was a
general who led his army in wars of conquest against non-Muslims, and
under
whom brutalities were committed against some of his opponents. His
words
and example are cited by the most militant of Muslims today as the
justification for their violence which others would call terrorism.
The second question concerns the reason for the special treatment of
Muslims, in contrast to that of other groups. Ask a British politician
or
church leader why they feel Muslim feelings should be protected and
their
reply will probably include words like “respect”, “sensitivity”,
“courtesy”
etc. But is this the real reason? It can be tested by comparing the
treatment of Muslim sensibilities with the treatment of another faith’s
sensibilities, say, Christians. Do the same voices protest against the
numerous shows, artworks and writings which Christians find offensive
and
blasphemous? Do they call for Christian feelings to be protected? The
answer is no. The reason for this double standard appears to be not
“sensitivity” but “fear”. Non-Muslim society – including the Church -
is
afraid of angering Muslims because of what they might do in
retaliation.
And what some of them might do was clearly seen in the placards carried
by
Muslim marchers in Britain last weekend with slogans such as “Massacre
those who insult Islam” or “Whoever insults a prophet kill him.”
The motive of fear also explains the double standards of the
Metropolitan
Police during the demonstrations in London against the cartoons. None
of
those carrying placards calling for murder or beheading was arrested.
Scotland Yard explained that the decision not to arrest was taken
because
they feared a riot would have ensued. They did, however, arrest two
other
protestors, who were carrying cartoons of Muhammad. Police said they
were
detained to “prevent a breach of the peace”. Evidently they did not
fear
a non-Muslim riot, only a Muslim riot.
The police have also shown double standards in their treatment of
Christian
evangelists, especially in Muslim areas of the UK. There have been
several
incidents where police have intervened to prevent such evangelism, but
Islam is strangely untouched.
Fear could also explain the strangely arrogant attitude of the
government
whereby they expect the public to formulate an opinion on the matter of
the
cartoons without having actually seen them. Unless fear is invoked as
a
motive, this would seem to imply an astonishing lack of respect for the
British people, treating them like children.
As a result of this fear we are on the verge of creating a no-go area
in
society which would allow Muslims to dictate the terms on which they
will
relate to the rest of the population and ban the discussion of certain
subjects. The suggestion is that there are religious taboos linked to
“core identity” which should be off-limits to others.
At first sight this seems a very generous and compassionate response to
a
minority in our midst. Yet it could prove to be the thin end of the
wedge.
It could soon be followed by Muslim requests to have the voluntary
self-censorship enshrined in law, by means of new blasphemy legislation
to
protect Muhammad from criticism. The thick end of this particular
wedge
might be laws like those in Pakistan where since 1991 there has been a
mandatory death penalty for “defiling the name of” Muhammad (Section
295-C
of the Pakistan Penal Code). Furthermore, Muslims might seek a
news/debate
black-out on other issues connected with their “core identity” such as
the
treatment of women in Islam, honour killings, or the death penalty for
Muslims who convert to another faith. Then these important human
rights
issues could no longer be discussed in the UK.
The uneven playing field is a characteristic of Islam. While Muslims
rampage in fury about cartoons of Muhammad, no mention is made of the
highly offensive anti-Christian and anti-Jewish cartoons produced by
some
Muslims, including blasphemous depictions of Christ. Contrary to what
Jack
Straw has said, there is an open season to vilify Christianity.
A compliant press, an insipid Church and a pusillanimous government –
all
three erring on the side of pragmatism – are effectively allowing the
playing field to be tilted in favour of Islam. If ordinary British
non-Muslims perceive this tilt, i.e. that non-Muslim society has in
effect
submitted to Muslims, a submission borne of fear, how will they react?
Is
it possible that the British National Party will be the beneficiaries,
being viewed as the only true protector of British values and Britain’s
Christian heritage?
Has the time come for Christians to be more assertive and demand their
rights, that is, the freedom to proclaim the Gospel without
intimidation
even in Muslim areas of Britain and the withdrawal of material from the
public domain which blasphemes against Christ? Should not the Church
speak
out to affirm the continuing importance of Britain’s Judaeo-Christian
heritage? And should we not all remember our history? Appeasement
does
not ultimately bring peace.
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo
7 February 2006
BARNABAS FUND E-MAIL NEWS SERVICE
Barnabas Fund’s e-mail news service provides the media and our
supporters
with urgent news briefs concerning suffering Christians around the
world.
If you would like to receive news briefs from the Barnabas Fund please
contact us with your name, postal and e-mail addresses.
Further details, quotes and photos on this and other stories may be
available
for news editors on request.
Barnabas Fund works to support Christian communities around the world
where
they are facing poverty and persecution.
the UK public still behave like spineless. Where is the angry march of loyal Britishers,when these Pakistani Bombers mercilessly killed 60 innocent british souls in the Sub-way bombing?
Where is the angry protest march of thousands of British citizens,in front of the islamic Exhibition conducted to apease ,and justify Islamic anger ,which led to those bombing?
Where is the angry protest of British Christians,when so many churches in Pakistan,Egypt,and in Indinesia were raised to the ground and Christians there are persecuted?
Where was the outcry of million 'real'Britishers,when these Islamic protesters marched with plea-cards like' behead the cartoonists','Kill those who defile our prophet',etc?
Where is a million people march in front of Parliament house shouting"No MORE MUSLIM IMMIGRATION INTO BRITAIN"?
The loyal East European immigrants are waiting- The are hard=working,all Chlristians,and you can rely on them and they will not kill your own people,after eating your bread.Boycot Islamists businesses,and send them home.