Can I move to the UK and ignore their laws as long as I can say my religious freedoms are being violated when they unduly harass me about these minor rules of theirs? Or do I have to threaten to kill someone or set fire to something in order to properly protest their "intolerance"?

Posted by: Catawhumpus at January 7, 2007 6:12 PM

What's that saying about scales falling from the eyes?

Posted by: venividivici at January 7, 2007 6:25 PM

You see? Muslims have no recourse to our western laws. They use the koran to justify their unlawful actions... terrorism, rapes, honor killings! See how this cancer is spreading?

Posted by: JohnnyPissoff at January 7, 2007 6:29 PM

But here are some of Blair's chickens coming home to roost

And said chickens, if they were not merely part of a figure of speech, would meet their end halal-style and be served in schools...

Posted by: MarisolJW at January 7, 2007 6:37 PM

Imams and Sheiks and Muftis, oh my.

They're preaching true Islam, what a shock.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 7, 2007 6:37 PM

They are just doing what clerics do. I would expect nothing less from them. Is this not the plan all along...Immigrate, multiply and take over. Yep...the pattern is always the same. Islam spreads like a cancer taking over healthy tissue as it progresses.
Possibly the UK can send Blair to 'reason' with them. "Oh please obey our laws, please dont hurt us..." If he cant do it send Nancy Pelosi.

Posted by: duh_swami at January 7, 2007 6:40 PM

They can spend all day telling their blind followers to hate and hit and kill, but the day they feel brave enough to actually go out on the street and follow these orders is the day that the British public will demand action from our government. And if our government is unable or unwilling, we will vote in one that can and will.

In the meantime if anybody slaps a member of my family for not being Islamic enough, I will be horrible to him in new and amazing ways. It is as simple as that.

These aren’t brave fighters; they are predominantly cowards who attack from afar. No charge of the Light Brigade for these dickheads.

I saw a Muslim on white disturbance in my town and it involved car loads of young Muslim men arrive outside a pub to fight one lad. The Muslim he had upset ran away to call out his troops, so he wouldn’t have to fight on his own. That is typical.

Posted by: Mert at January 7, 2007 6:45 PM

Really ... where would we be without CH4 ?
The only solution to this is to vote for the BNP
and watch the deportations begin.

Posted by: aladdinsane57 at January 7, 2007 6:55 PM

So you can go to court and face a guy with a wig or just ignore the law and do what you want? This is a no brainier. I might turn into a multiculturalist (sarcasm off) Why do the Brits think their muslim’s are any different from the others? Why are they surprised by this report?

Posted by: Ronin at January 7, 2007 6:56 PM

Mert wrote, "And if our government is unable or unwilling, we will vote in one that can and will."

What I think might happen in the US, at least where I live, they will say, "To hell with the government; let's take care of the problem ourselves." I know these people.

Keep you eyes on Katy, Texas, USA.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 7, 2007 6:59 PM

Can you imagine such an article appearing in the London Daily telegraph or the London Times or the Australian?
No, and neither can I.
it's not the fact that the guardian is still in the stone age and is only "now" awakened by facts that have been common knowledge to anyone with an enquiring mind.
it is the arrogance that the Guardian displays when it announces this as if it were a "scoop" .
But how will the Guardian readers who have been fed the "islam is the ROP" pill for years, cope with this extreme Cognitive dissonance?
Simple- they will blame Tony Blair for this state of affairs in British mosques.
You know the line : "The Alienation of British muslims has brought about this state of affairs in our mosques".
want to bet that this will be the follow up article?

Posted by: chevalier de st george at January 7, 2007 7:18 PM

Well I guess this might open a few more eyes. For a few minutes, at least until Celebrity Big Brother comes on... zzzzzz...

Posted by: Null at January 7, 2007 7:29 PM

I'm not sure how fully I trust "The Guardian", and find it odd that the "secret footage" is not made available.

Posted by: Occupant at January 7, 2007 7:30 PM

"[P]reachers in some of Britain's most moderate mosques are urging followers to reject British laws in favour of those of Islam.

"Leaders of the mosques have expressed concern at the preachers' activities, saying they were unaware such views were being disseminated."

Yeah, right. Of course these "leaders" were "unaware" of what was going on inside their mosques. They would hardly say anything else, would they?

Robert: The Guardian did not send any undercover reporters in: it is only reporting what the Dispatches programme has uncovered.

Indeed, that once-fine newspaper has frequently allocated plenty of space to Islamist supremacists in its Comment section (as well as assorted dhimmwits like Livingstone, Andrew Murray et al).

Posted by: A Nonny Nonny at January 7, 2007 7:32 PM

And this is from The Guardian, which doesn't hesitate to allow itself to be used as a platform by dupes, dhimmis and fellow travelers like Karen Armstrong and Brian Whitaker.

I can not believe that the Guardian would print this. It's like a Communist suddenly saying he values Adam Smith...or a Nazi adopting the Ten Commandments(i.e.extreme Cognitive dissonance).

If the bastion of the PC,liberal,multicultural agenda is printing articles like this then it must be Open Season against Jihad.

Posted by: raz at January 7, 2007 7:52 PM

Why can't people in the West realize that these Imans and Mullahs can''t preach anything other than the Hate they have for our culture and way of life, and disloyalty to our democratic governments and institutions?

It is in their holy book, It is the eternal and irrevokable word of God. If that word teaches hate and contempt for out Western values and institutions, what else can they do? They must folow the dictates of God, or be forever consigned to hell fire when they die.

Only when Westwrn peoples understand this simple fact will they be prepared to discard the fiction that Islam can be integrated into our secular, Democratic society, or that there is such thing as a 'Moderate muslim. And only then will they see clearly enough to take the steps necessay to defend themselves against the Islamic enemy within and without.

Posted by: rational at January 7, 2007 8:02 PM

Imagine how easy it is for westerners to go undercover in mosques all over the west. All they have to do is pose as western converts. They don't even have to change their looks. Even better, the burkha provides the perfect cover for concealing all kinds of recording equipment. There are all sorts of possibilities here for those who crave excitement - not the kind of superficial excitement of taking on an Arabic name and converting to a new and seemingly exotic religion - but rather the real excitement of being a bona fide spy and playing a heroic role in saving western civilization to boot. I wonder what it would do to Muslim morale if while they were working so hard on their da'wa, at the same time they were being constantly infiltrated from within and simply didn't know whom to trust anymore. Now just add deportation to the mix for anyone found to be preaching sedition against their host country (with solid evidence from concealed tape recorders or cell phones etc. to back it up). How demoralizing would that be?

Posted by: Caroline at January 7, 2007 8:36 PM

We need to send in spies to infiltrate and determine the Real intentions and teachings of the Imams & Mosques throughout our lands. This threat is far older and far more Insidious than Communism ever was and there was not the least bit of aprehension about Infiltrating Communist Groups and spying on them to determine what the threat really was. The only way to REALLY know to what extent their loyalties or treachery goes is to not be a Kafir or an infidel. you can only know so much from the outside looking in.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at January 7, 2007 8:57 PM

One is surprised that the Guardian doesn't end by swearing loyalty to England and the West on the Koran.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at January 7, 2007 8:59 PM

"We have to rule ourselves and we have to rule the others."

You gotta love it. And in the Guardian!

In spite of the amazing stupidity of the British, who eat multicultural slop and call it health food ... maybe there will be an England.

Posted by: StillBreathing at January 7, 2007 9:08 PM

"Imagine how easy it is for westerners to go undercover in mosques all over the west. All they have to do is pose as western converts. They don't even have to change their looks. Even better, the burkha provides the perfect cover for concealing all kinds of recording equipment. There are all sorts of possibilities here for those who crave excitement - not the kind of superficial excitement of taking on an Arabic name and converting to a new and seemingly exotic religion - but rather the real excitement of being a bona fide spy and playing a heroic role in saving western civilization to boot. I wonder what it would do to Muslim morale if while they were working so hard on their da'wa, at the same time they were being constantly infiltrated from within and simply didn't know whom to trust anymore. Now just add deportation to the mix for anyone found to be preaching sedition against their host country (with solid evidence from concealed tape recorders or cell phones etc. to back it up). How demoralizing would that be?"

We have a volunteer!

Seriously, Caroline, such an operation would require huge coordination with the powers that be and is, hopefully, already in the works. Please understand that no one wishes to discourage you from independent investigation, but please have an exit plan and some big, burly (armed, if possible) back-up.

You're no good to us dead and we are dealing with very bad people.

Posted by: USBeast at January 7, 2007 9:09 PM

Caroline, I would have to agree with USBeast. Unless you were willing to maintain the character 24/7 your chances of getting caught are too great. Lets hope we have enough trained professional's to watch them. If not there are other ways to help without as much risk. Blogging, letters to editors, countering the feel good about Islam articles in local papers, even giving classes to groups like local Churches. We need to stick with education and let others handle the investigation.

Posted by: Ronin at January 7, 2007 9:17 PM

"Many of the preachers are linked to the Wahhabi strain of Islam practised in Saudi Arabia, which funds a number of Britain's leading Islamic institutions."

The Shiites are in a category by themselves, but what brand of Islam OTHER than "the Wahhabi strain" is practiced by Sunni Muslims and where?

Reporters act like this is still a minor sect, when it's been around for a couple of centuries. Saudi oil money has spread it to all corners of the globe. What "moderate" form of Sunni Islam is still out there? What percentage of British Muslims are NOT Wahhabist?

Posted by: PMK at January 7, 2007 9:22 PM

WAKE UP FOLKS! War is deceit and jihad duplicity abounds in western masjids :

January 2005 provided The FREEDOM HOUSE REPORT, "Saudi publications on Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques,"

Video "I, A Muslim" a documentary which aired on Czech public television last fall showing undercover video footage of mosque-goers praising suicide bombers and supporting the imposition of sharia law

Laura Mansfield discussed her experience as an Arabic-speaking intelligence analyst who visited an American mosque. She exposed the duplicity of Muslim leaders who advocate violent jihad against "infidels" while speaking their native tongue, but preach compassion and tolerance, in English, to a Western audience.

Posted by: justamomof4 at January 7, 2007 9:26 PM

Good questions PMK, I would also ask what branch of Islam doesn’t believe in Jihad? I don’t think there really is a “moderate sect” but some are more violent than others.

Posted by: Ronin at January 7, 2007 9:27 PM

Why not put them in the pen with Abu Hamza?

Here lies the whole nutshell-the silent Jiahd lead by Wahabi idealogy and Islamic supremicist
dogma.

Dust off the treason and sedition laws in Engalnd.

Do not think this isn't going on in the US but is being covered up by denial and blame on US foreign policy by so called Muslim leaders.

Posted by: Briars at January 7, 2007 9:32 PM

So here’s the story you haven’t heard …

Bush and Blair have a deal (at least they think they do) working with certain so-called moderate muslims who will finger the militant muslims in their countries.

Every once in awhile, a minion will be sacrificed for the cause of Islam. But usually that minion will have enough time to flee the country or the case against the minion is so weak that it won’t translate into much jail time.

For their part, Bush and Blair have to preach that islam is a ROP and enforce anti-islam policies, keeping the masses in ignorance.

What a deal!

Our worst enemies now have more influence over these two leaders than do their own people.

The game is up in ’07. The people are awakening.

Posted by: LoneRanger at January 7, 2007 9:32 PM

Well, this is it. The muslims in Britain have now officially hurled down the gauntlet to the British government. They have openly stated that they will not obey British law and, in fact, intend to destroy the British government. The credibility of England's constitutional government and their justice system are now at stake. Now it all comes down to the will of the British government and people to assert themselves. If they do not, it means that they will have given in and the British government is now just another contending party in a civil war for power (and probably the losing party). They must not give in at all costs. They must arrest those making these statements and publically declare, using the very words of these Imans as evidence, Islam incompatible with democratic rule. I sincerely hope that, just one more time, we see the British Lion of old..............

Posted by: A.I. Steamroller at January 7, 2007 9:33 PM

US Beast: "Seriously, Caroline, such an operation would require huge coordination with the powers that be "

US Beast - why would it require "huge" coordination? It strikes me as something that any adventurous individual could do - like whoever took that cell phone tape of Michael Richard's (aka Kramer) rant. All that is needed to make such an effort worthwhile is some credible consequences - like deportation - for those found to be preaching sedition, just so that no one is actually wasting their time in doing this sort of thing. But I fail to see what sort of "coordination" is entailed. Muslims are in the west now and they are actively recruiting natives in their host countries to join Islam. That fact would seem to me to put THEM at the disadvantage in terms of infiltration. It's much harder to attempt to pose as one of them in order to infiltrate their mosques in their own countries. Doing so in our own countries would seem to be something that any ambitious, excitement-junky could quite realistically pull off. Hell, people line up in the US all day long to take part in one reality-TV challenge after another. Consider this the ultimate challenge for wannabe reality-TV aspirants. Maybe all that TV junk will turn out in the end to have had a real and valuable purpose after all in conditioning a certain mentality among ordinary westerners to take on the ultimate challenge!

Posted by: Caroline at January 7, 2007 9:33 PM

Ronin: "Unless you were willing to maintain the character 24/7 your chances of getting caught are too great."

Well this is certainly an interesting issue. Why would one have to maintain the character 24/7? Couldn't I put on a burkha today and wander into a mosque without them knowing who I am? Does one need to provide identification? Does one need several people to vouch for one's identity to enter a mosque? Do they question you at the door? This isn't something I've ever attempted so I'm not clear on the protocol but is the suggestion that western mosques are already "screening" people at the door to bar their entry in one way or another, much as they complain that we are screening them at airports? What exactly is required to walk into a mosque anyway?

Posted by: Caroline at January 7, 2007 9:42 PM

Methinks that the Guardian ought to hand over this tape to the MI-5. Let the deportations begin..

Posted by: MeanieMo at January 7, 2007 9:48 PM

Al Guardian runs such a story? Truly amazing!

What's not surprising is that after years and years of deliberate dhimmitude, years of misplaced tolerance towards the Omar Bakri's, Abu Hamza's, the knighting of 'Sir' Iqbal Sacranie, the hiring of Tariq Ramadan and the Bunglawalla ding dong as 'advisors' to the British government, the tables are now finally turning.

Don't expect the Blair government to wear sackcloth and ashes yet, don't expect it from Al Guardian either. They will sweep it under the carpet once again, but for how much longer?

One thing you can rely on is that there will be more 7/7's, buses, trains, airplanes, subways will be attacked again. But maybe, maybe there will be something called 'backlash' this time.

'Backlash'- I like that word. Think I'm going to write another song about it.

http://sheikyermami.com/2006/12/20/tolerance/

http://sheikyermami.com/2006/12/20/the-imam/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at January 7, 2007 10:02 PM

Caroline,
Anyone can enter a Mosque, they love “guests” it helps them slowly set the hook. Most Muslim women do not wear Burka’s, those are uncommon nor do all women wear full facial veils. Women can uncover their face in the Mosque if they are in a woman’s area. You also have the issue of voice, walk, posture, even completely covered they could recognize you. If they followed you home (they do home visits just like any western religion) or saw you about town, you would have to act Muslim. Another potential problem is the mosque you pick might have someone undercover in it. Now they are also watching you and conducting checks etc, basically following a false trail (unless you plan to turn radical) it wastes time and resources.

Posted by: Ronin at January 7, 2007 10:08 PM

The real problem:

1.In a statement to Channel 4, Lord Ahmed, the convener of the government's Preventing Extremism taskforce, said he was worried about the programme's consequences: 'While I appreciate that exaggerated opinions make good TV, they do not make for good community relations.'

The government's Preventing Extremism taskforce would rather have 'good community relations'.

2.A spokesman for Green Lane mosque said Islam does not denigrate women and that the instruction to hit a child was merely a smack. He accused C4 of intensifying the 'witch-hunt' against Muslims.

It's not the crime, it's the ongoing denials and coverups.

The enablers.

Posted by: PRCS at January 7, 2007 10:27 PM

Even Tony Blair can understand this:

British Law + Muslim treason = Gallows

Posted by: Lame Cherry at January 7, 2007 10:39 PM

What I think might happen in the US, at least where I live, they will say, "To hell with the government; let's take care of the problem ourselves." I know these people.

Keep you eyes on Katy, Texas, USA.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 7, 2007 06:59 PM

Video of the first pig race
http://civoc.com/society/?p=123

Posted by: Arnie at January 7, 2007 11:34 PM

Mother Ecclesiastica -May I surmise that you were also a Nancy Drew fan in your youth?:-)

Posted by: Caroline at January 7, 2007 11:36 PM

American law + muslim treason = ?

http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/

I like General Sherman.

Posted by: Emerson Twain at January 7, 2007 11:43 PM

"Don't expect the Blair government to wear sackcloth and ashes yet, don't expect it from Al Guardian either. They will sweep it under the carpet once again, but for how much longer?"

Quoted.

I think we should embrace any person who returns to sanity and to the defence of Western values; free markets, free speech, freedom of religion, freedom from religion, as soon as they have returned.

We need each other. Those who would have us throw our Enlightenment in the trash, our Adam Smith with our Jefferson, are organized and love each other.

We need to (forgive the reference) be easy on one another and hard on those who would force the Sharia on us.

Posted by: tokyobk at January 7, 2007 11:44 PM

hi all, am new here. there is one thing that strike me its that in any country, you're bound to find some clash with muslims. I've lived in england and seen how some muslims can integrate, or better say peacefully coexist. It was a shock coming from France.. I can tell you. I dunno what's wrong with them in our country, maybe a special kebab diet? They're just that much more angrier and sneakier. My dad was born a colon in north africa, they had a saying there, which is now popularly used in France: give an arab a hand, he'll take the arm. Literally, this is true.

Also, I'm obviously prepared for a backlash including the obvious word "bigot" but please note that right now I'm living in China and it just makes me all the more prone to excesses of anger and violence. Really... I guess it just has nothing to do with it, and comparatively, the arabs are a bit more reffined than most chinese peasants, like, their food is great for example (*anything else?).... Before I came over here I was all "free palestine" and more bullcrap. But with time I have realised that just as the cultural divide present in china between them (chinese) and us (foreigners laowai) makes me feel like on another planet full of aliens I wanna get rid of my way, the muslims/arabs are just one of the bunch of people that have nothing to do with us.

England chose the multicultural approach to emigration: i.e. "let them come and stay but they will not become true brits" and the French chose the integration way i.e. "they can come only if they choose to BE French". Obviously, either way doesnt really work well... bombs in the tube and cars burning in Paris.

as someone really dumb that I can't stand on TV (supposedly from Kazhakstan) would say ironically: "I LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIKE!!!"

Posted by: the geez at January 7, 2007 11:58 PM

The problem with integration is that nobody can do it for them. They are seperating themselves. Still most governments believe they can. I say its impossible.
Their religion forbids to integrate and instead, by muslim law, force every muslim to spoil any place they may go and not before sucking on our social systems until there's nothing anymore.

Posted by: Arnie at January 8, 2007 12:07 AM

in France: give an arab a hand, he'll take the arm. Literally, this is true.

Posted by: the geez

I like that saying , i'm going to remember that one

and Welcome!

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at January 8, 2007 12:15 AM

MUSLIms obviously doen't care about laws in Belgium when they slaughter 30,000 sheep for Eid --->>>

Which brings us back to the streets of Brussels. Ann De Greef, a Belgian animal-rights activist, does not enjoy the annual Eid massacre. "It's not normal to have thousands of sheep slaughtered like this in the middle of a major European city," she complained.

Au contraire, it is. And, given Islam's demographic advantage, it's going to get ever more normal. Muslims pay Belgian farmers about 250 bucks to acquire a sheep for the ritual sacrifice, which suggests they're pretty serious about it. Indeed, given Islam's political muscle, it's more likely that the remaining restrictions on ritual sacrifice will be rescinded. Tired of standing in line at crowded slaughterhouses, many Brussels Muslims sacrifice the sheep at home -- which is illegal under Belgian law but which the state already turns a blind eye to.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/200050,CST-EDT-STEYN07.article

Posted by: dennisw at January 8, 2007 12:34 AM

"We have to rule ourselves and we have to rule the others." - Sieg Heil!

Posted by: Marvin at January 8, 2007 12:37 AM

Slightly OT

How's this for ridiculous?

http://www.localnewsleader.com/brocktown/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=40483

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at January 8, 2007 12:42 AM

"If the bastion of the PC,liberal,multicultural agenda is printing articles like this then it must be Open Season against Jihad."

"You gotta love it. And in the Guardian!"

- comments above

Well, if my theory that Islam has been deliberately and maliciously introduced to the West by communism is correct then we will likely see more of this "exposing" of Islam as Islam approaches critical mass in countries such as Britain.

What a ploy if true.
- Promote in the West the concepts of political correctness and multiculturalism, while surreptitiously organizing massive Islamic immigration into the West.
- Nurture and protect that Islamic community until it reaches critical mass.
- Expose that Islamic community as a threat and do everything to promote fear of Islam in the host communities.
- Watch the fun.

Posted by: Mike_W at January 8, 2007 1:17 AM

"In a statement to Channel 4, Lord Ahmed, the convener of the government's Preventing Extremism taskforce, said he was worried about the programme's consequences: 'While I appreciate that exaggerated opinions make good TV, they do not make for good community relations.'"

Bien sûr, then according to this Mr 'Lord?!' Ahmed, "community relations" are more important than exposing the truth about Islamic extremism. But then given that he is Muslim, it is his obvious duty in the form of taquiya, to ensure that as many UK Dhimmis as possible are duped.

So, he has been tasked by the UK government to 'prevent extremism' and yet when this 'extremism' is exposed, he condemns the expose, as contrary to the public good.

Dear, oh dear. Are UK politicians that stupid that they would entrust someone like this Mr 'Lord?!' Ahmed to prevent extremism in the country? If this is the case, then the country is well and truly lost.

Posted by: GreekFrenchInfidel at January 8, 2007 1:43 AM

Don't worry folks our MPs's in Britain are on the ball.
As this laughable article from the Sunday Times shows.
They know best.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2534980,00.html

Posted by: apostate_islam at January 8, 2007 3:14 AM

Don't worry folks our MP's in Britain are on the ball.
We can trust them.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2534980,00.html

Posted by: apostate_islam at January 8, 2007 3:15 AM

well thanks for the welcome. very much appreciated. As a matter of fact I did actually post again, but it involved some words descripting people wearing little towels on their heads and unfortunately, has been censored.

I was also trying to make the point that arabs come to France, use our schooling system (which is "laique' as we say in frogland, meaning devoid of any religious aspect)and want to wear their (little towels?).

I also involved abdul mahmoud and other names of various unpleasantness.

I won't do it again, I promise!

Posted by: the geez at January 8, 2007 4:00 AM

Lord Ahmed seems untrustworthy himself.
Here is what was written in 'The Times' on April 7th 2005:
----------------

On February 23 [2005?], Lord Ahmed hosted a book launch in the House of Lords for a man going by the name of Israel Shamir. “Israel Shamir” is, in fact, a Swedish-domiciled anti-Semite also known as Jöran Jermas.

The gist of Shamir/Jermas’s speech at the meeting can be gleaned from its title, “Jews and the Empire”. It included observations such as: “All the [political] parties are Zionist-infiltrated.” “Your newspapers belong to Zionists . . . Jews indeed own, control and edit a big share of mass media, this mainstay of Imperial thinking.” “In the Middle East we have just one reason for wars, terror and trouble — and that is Jewish supremacy drive . . . in Iraq, the US and its British dependency continue the same old fight for ensuring Jewish supremacy in the Middle East.” “The Jews like an Empire . . . This love of Empire explains the easiness Jews change their allegiance . . . Simple minds call it ‘treacherous behaviour’, but it is actually love of Empire per se.” “Now, there is a large and thriving Muslim community in England . . . they are now on the side of freedom, against the Empire, and they are not afraid of enforcers of Judaic values, Jewish or Gentile. This community is very important in order to turn the tide.”

Why would Lord Ahmed have hosted such a man in the Lords? It is, of course, possible that Lord Ahmed had no idea that Shamir/Jermas was a rabid anti-Semite. Yet it takes only a quick Google to discover his views and background. He has worked for Zavtra, Russia’s most anti-Semitic publication, and is allied with the Vanguard News Network, set up by an American, Alex Linder — a man so extreme that he was even ostracised by the US neo-Nazi National Alliance.

Indeed, Shamir/Jermas’s own website proudly reprints his views: “Jews asked God to kill, destroy, humiliate, exterminate, defame, starve, impale Christians, to usher in Divine Vengeance and to cover God’s mantle with blood of goyim . . . ” “The Ashkenazi Jews believed that spilled Jewish blood has a magic effect of calling down Divine Vengeance on the heads of the Gentiles . . . The picture of Jews slaughtering children for cultic reasons exerted huge impact on the Christian peoples of Europe.” On and on it goes.

Other figures at the forefront of campaigns against Israel are wise to Shamir/Jermas’s toxic anti-Semitism; Ali Abunimah, for example, who writes for the Electronic Intifada website and Hussein Ibish, press spokesman of the American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee, gave warning in 2001 that Shamir/Jermas was not anti-Israeli but anti-Semitic. It is surely not unreasonable to expect Lord Ahmed to have exercised a cursory check on his guest.

If, however, Lord Ahmed does feel that he made a mistake in inviting him, he has yet to demonstrate it. Shamir/Jermas’s speech was made nearly two months ago. On learning of its contents, I wrote to Lord Ahmed, asking him two questions. Did he consider the invitation to have been a mistake? Did he condemn the remarks? He did not reply.

Yesterday, I phoned him. When I told him that I planned to write a piece drawing attention to his actions in hosting Shamir/Jermas and that I wanted to give him every opportunity to respond, he replied: “I am not even going to speak with you.” He then put the phone down.

Lord Ahmed’s refusal to condemn the remarks seems to indicate that he sees nothing wrong with inviting such a man to speak, or with the words Shamir/Jermas used.

There is an instructive parallel. Howard Flight was stripped of the Conservative whip for expressing a mild opinion about spending cuts. Lord Ahmed invited a known anti-Semite to speak in the House of Lords, has not uttered a word of criticism since and remains a Labour peer. Before hearing from Lord Ahmed, I also wrote to Lord Grocott, the Labour Chief Whip in the Lords. I asked him if, given Lord Ahmed’s apparent lack of contrition, Lord Grocott considered it appropriate that Lord Ahmed should still hold the Labour whip? No reply.

All Lord Ahmed need do to destroy the notion that he supports Shamir/Jermas’s views is to admit that he made a mistake in inviting him, and to condemn his words.

---------------
There have been other cases of so-called 'moderates' whom the government have been trusting to weed out extremists.

Posted by: Elephant at January 8, 2007 4:02 AM

who is lord ahmed anyway?

Posted by: the geez at January 8, 2007 4:05 AM

Here's Lord Ahmed again, this time inviting terror suspects inside parliament:
-------------------------
A TERROR suspect allegedly linked to al Qaeda has visited the Houses of Parliament — as the guest of a Labour peer.

Former detainee Mahmoud Suliman Ahmed Abu Rideh even sat in the Commons public gallery for a debate.

He was invited to Westminster on Tuesday by Lord Ahmed, who met him at Regent’s Park mosque three weeks ago.

The father of five — suspected of being a money man for terror groups — was given a SECURITY sticker for his Parliamentary visit.

And he boasted yesterday of sitting in the Commons gallery, adding: “It was very interesting.”

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis last night said Abu Rideh had been able to “walk around one of the UK’s biggest terror targets”.

Lord Ahmed confirmed he invited Abu Rideh, 34, to see him — and said he QUIZZED him over the suspected al Qaeda link.

He said: “I gave an appointment to see him this week. He came to see me as a Parliamentarian. It was my duty to hear what he had to say.

“He came through the peers’ entrance. He went through the security check and I met him at security. He did not leave me for one second.

“I did not take him into any public gallery".

----------------
This article appeared in 'The Sun'.

Posted by: Elephant at January 8, 2007 4:24 AM

Geez,

Lord Ahmed is a Labour peer. In Britain the government can ask the queen to give certain individuals a title, which enables them to sit in our second chamber, the House of Lords.

Posted by: Elephant at January 8, 2007 4:27 AM

This evidence bears out everything said on Jihadwatch. The plan is clear: immigration, segregation, multiplication, domination. It is just like cancer. What these so-called extremists are stating clearly is simply what Islam is ultimately about. Anything else is just wishful thinking.

Note how Lord Ahmed (the oh so respectable face of british muslims) immediately goes for the 'threat to community relations' tactic.

I don't want good community relations with people who want to take over my country and subject it to islamic totalitariansism. Did we want good community relations with the Nazis? No we didn't because it was impossible and we don't want good community relations with you bloody muslims. We just want to you to piss off to your nearest islamic paradise and enjoy the squalor that you seem to create wherever you go.

Posted by: Malta_1565 at January 8, 2007 4:30 AM

"In a statement to Channel 4, Lord Ahmed, the convener of the government's Preventing Extremism taskforce, said he was worried about the programme's consequences: 'While I appreciate that exaggerated opinions make good TV, they do not make for good community relations."

The Lord Ahmeds of the West are what make us so vunerable to Islamic terrorism. They're more interested in the "consequences" on "good community relations" than on telling the truth.
When Hitler ranted that he was going to eliminate the "Jewish problem", many Jewish leaders ignored his rantings as "exagerated opinions". Millions of Jews paid with their lives for ignoring Hitler's exagerated opinions.
Are you suggesting, Lord Ahmeds, that we go down that same road, ignoring the obvious, in the interest of promoting some fictional world where Muslims and Infidels live in mutual respect and harmony with one another?
You had better get real, sir. If they say they don't like you, your government, your values, your culture, chances are they mean it.
The Guardian article didn't report that the audiences that these hate mongers were preaching to got up and left in protest, or stood up and contridicted what was being preached. Could it be they agreed with these "exagerated opinions?.
If we continue to put our trust in people like you for protection against our enemies, we'll pay a very dear price for our stupidity someday.

Posted by: rational at January 8, 2007 5:11 AM

This is a story in the Observer (ie the Sunday paper), not the weekday Guardian. They're both part of the Guardian media group, but the Observer has been more aware of Islam's underlying nature in the past.

Posted by: Edward Pellew at January 8, 2007 5:53 AM

yep, 99% of Muslims are moderate... hmmm where are they....
if islam is against these terror then why dont they stop the Extremist groups active inside UK universities, preaching to young adults in more than 30 institutions - including some of the most high-profile universities in the country. They dont stop it because it is part of the second part of the Quran and what Mohammad himself did. I have been told that in the Quran there are only 114 verses on love peace, kindness etc.

British universities where extremist or terror groups have been detected:

Birmingham (Islamist); Brunel (BNP, Islamist); Cambridge (BNP); City (Islamist); Coventry (Islamist); Cranford Community College (Islamist); Derby (Islamist); Dundee (Islamist); Durham (Islamist); Greenwich (BNP); Imperial College (Islamist); Kingston (Islamist); Leeds (BNP, Islamist); Leicester (Islamist); LSE (Islamist); Luton (Islamist); Manchester (BNP, Islamist); Manchester Metropolitan (BNP); Newcastle (Islamist); Nottingham (Islamist); Oxford (Animal rights extremists); Reading (Islamist); Salford (BNP); South Bank (Islamist); SOAS (Islamist); Sussex (BNP); Sunderland (BNP, Islamist); Swansea (Islamist); Wolverhampton (Islamist); York (BNP)

Posted by: Gaye at January 8, 2007 6:33 AM

Re: "Secret video footage reveals Muslim preachers exhorting followers to prepare for jihad, to hit girls for not wearing the hijab, and to create a 'state within a state'".

It is interesting that these are the same tactics the Nazis used in Germany. Hitler sought to create a "state within a state", including a military (the SA Stormtroopers) that numbered in the hundreds of thousands. It was done deceptively (sports clubs, etc.). The "state within a state" method was attempted in the UK and in the US by the various Nazi Bunds (many funded by Nazi Germany) and was briefly effective, though more effective in creating "a state within a state" in Austria and the Sudetenland.

The "state within a state" approach and the harassment of opposing voices by threats and intimidation were an important component of the methods that brought the Nazis to power in Germany. There are many methods that Muslims are currently using in host countries that are quite similar to the methods that Hitler employed in Germany. I wonder if some of these clergy aren't reading Nazi history. Hitler consciously built a "state within a state" and it was long up-and-running when the Nazis took control of Germany in 1933.

Posted by: Frank at January 8, 2007 6:42 AM

The Daily Times, 14th October 2004.
Britons warned to avoid worship places in Pakistan.
HMMM this doesnt add up, go to worship at a mosque and pagans watch out for the violence from Muslims as they come out.

LONDON: Britain updated its travel advice for Pakistan on Wednsday to recommend visitors take extra care at religious sites. A Foreign Office spokesman said there was no change in the overall level of advice, but the government was now recommending that places of worship be avoided at prayer times, "There is a high threat from terrorism throughout Pakistan. British nationals of Western origin are more likely to be targeted including for Kidnap, but everyone is at risk from indiscriminate attacks," the advice on the Foreighn Office's website reads. "There has been an upsurge in sectarian violence throughout Pakistan, therefore we recommend you avoid places of worship at busy prayer times."
............................................................................

One would think that if their religion was a religion of peace that non Muslims would have nothing to worry about when Muslims leave their Mosques after their worship time???

When will our governments wake up..i fear it will be tooo late when they do thanks to our dooo goooders...while they discriminate and hate us we are not allowed to warn of this as we are showing hatred and discrimination, doesnt add up eh..

Posted by: Gaye at January 8, 2007 6:42 AM

"In spite of the amazing stupidity of the British, who eat multicultural slop and call it health food ... maybe there will be an England."

You will find that true patriots now call themselves English, not "British". You can be a "British Muslim" but you can't be an English Muslim -- unless you're one of those idiots who have voluntarily converted, of whom Hugh has said many wise words.

Posted by: JFGR at January 8, 2007 7:14 AM

Hate is not the only subject being taught in the mosques. Try espionage,surveillance,ambush tactics, escape techniques, torture techniques,explosives training, and more.

Undercover recordings of such items of interest have been produced. These recordings were recorded in mosques in Britain, France, and in the US. The recordings show Islams true intent.

You can download Al-Qaedas field manuals which give great detail in the operational instruction for the terrorists in the field. It tells tell what to say if questioned, what to say if arrested, and what to say in court. It gives detailed instruction on how to select targets and how to carry out attacks.

And every one of the people arrested and jailed for terrorist activities have followed these instructions to the letter. They first deny everything, secondly claim know nothing of others, and they claim mistreatment in jail. When you read their statements you will realize the statements are virtually identical..

Civil disobedience is not all that is being taught by the Islamic clerics.

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 8, 2007 7:51 AM

There can only be ONE driver of a car. There can only be ONE majority. There can only be ONE direction for a country.

Who shall lead? Who shall drive? Who will be the majority?

Which direction shall the country take? West? Or East?

US OR THEM.

Posted by: Borg at January 8, 2007 11:03 AM

Tired of standing in line at crowded slaughterhouses, many Brussels Muslims sacrifice the sheep at home -- which is illegal under Belgian law but which the state already turns a blind eye to.
-dennisw

If the governement would enforce the law the word would get out quickly and immigration would slow down and emmigration would start. At least if the money benefits would also be stopped.

Posted by: Borg at January 8, 2007 12:13 PM

you will find that true patriots now call themselves English, not "British".
Posted by: JFGR

being of mixed English and Scottish blood, with a bit of Welsh and, probably, Irish, i have always thought of myself as British.
i don't mean 'British but', i mean British as something to be proud of.
English seems to be too narrow a definition of what i feel myself to be.
the Islamists hate successful nation states, and seek to undermine them, and attacking national identity is part of that process.
i think we need to be very careful before we let the British ideal slip away from us.
divided, we may fall sooner.

Posted by: M Al-Content at January 8, 2007 5:45 PM

"State within a state."

This same phrase is used to describe the KGB in the Soviet Union for this book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0374527385/

Posted by: Beauty is manifest at January 12, 2007 12:38 AM

It should be obvious to all that we are waging war against the wrong countries at the moment.

We are attacking Iraq and Afganistan and perhaps,after reading all the posts on this site,we should regroup,and ask ourselves this, who is providing the funding and Insurgency manpower that is confronting us all?

The answers should read something on the lines of,the funding is being provided by Saudi Arabia.and,because of this funding being supplied by them,Pakistani Insurgents are killing at will throughout the World.

The $1.00 an hour Taliban can be removed from the loop only if the real enemy is confronted,the real enemy is Saudi Arabia and its $1.00 an hour slaves are from Pakistan.

Like I said,we are at war with the wrong countries.

Posted by: The Gitmo Kid. at January 13, 2007 3:24 PM