Classic tactics of earlier brownshirts known as the Sturmabteilung-Hitler's SA.

Too bad Faizi has to rely on government sponsored dial-a-prayer-hope-we-come for that stuff they call, erroneously, protection.

Posted by: jcom972 at April 20, 2007 3:50 AM

These things are done in a more civilised way in Britain.

One local paper (circulation 30,000) published two perfectly factual stories that caused offence to the Muslim community. The first concerned an “Asian” who was estimated to be getting around £13,000 ($20,000) a week from the taxpayer by cramming 400 Afghan refugees into 100 small filthy houses. The second story was about newly arrived Iraqi refugees settled on a housing estate stoning local girls and calling them whores.

When complaints from the local Muslims failed to budge the paper they called in the government funded Race Relations Board. A visit from these people left the papers editorial staff in a state of shock. They told them that if necessary they would organise a boycott of the paper by the towns Muslim newsagents that would certainly shut it down.

The line of these governments sponsored censors was “We can shut this paper down and if you ever publish stories like that again - we will!”

You see! Much more civilised, no physical violence and no negative publicity.

Posted by: Fred at April 20, 2007 4:48 AM

Here are people on the other side trying to bring decency into the dialogue.

And they are physically threatened.

What a shame.

islam is a curse. Ismael has a long way to go to get or be a blessing.

Until then, islam is a malignant virus.

If they are for decency, they might just have to come on over to our side. Not easy for them, but liberating.

Posted by: dgene at April 20, 2007 5:12 AM

Well I am not surprised. It amazes me that almost every Pakistani Muslim I talk to thinks there is nothing wrong with Pakistan, the deny there is any terrorist organization or any fanaticism of any kind in their country...as if everyone else is an idiot and going to believe them.

Then when you have a Pakistani who speaks the truth, he/she is immediately on the chopping block for blowing the whistle.

Could the journalist possibly be a non-muslim?

Posted by: Gorkhali at April 20, 2007 5:36 AM

...Muslims trying to control the press, remove free speech, stifle individual thought, eliminate capitalistic enterprise, deny opionated editorials from reaching the public....if that does not work then threaten with harrassment, physical violence, and ultimately death...

....People in Muslims have seen this senario time and time again....it is a proven track record for the Muslims....

....the Muslims will kill to prevent you from finding out about them....

....Muslims hate the truth...especially when the infidels know it....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 20, 2007 5:42 AM

...Muslims trying to control the press, remove free speech, stifle individual thought, eliminate capitalistic enterprise, deny opionated editorials from reaching the public....if that does not work then threaten with harrassment, physical violence, and ultimately death...

....People in Muslims have seen this senario time and time again....it is a proven track record for the Muslims....

....the Muslims will kill to prevent you from finding out about them....

....Muslims hate the truth...especially when the infidels know it....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 20, 2007 5:42 AM

No, his name is not Gavin King:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/04/19/islamists-attack-canadian-journalist/

But this is worse:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/04/20/good-night-europe/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at April 20, 2007 6:28 AM

Good, The west needs to see more raw Islam.

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at April 20, 2007 6:33 AM

so much for naseems soft sharia in the west. sharia results the same where ever it is applied. more has to known and printed about sharia abuses.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at April 20, 2007 6:45 AM

"It will take a nuke on a major European city,...

Posted by: Rougie"

......THe Muslims have nukes, unstable leaders, and an itchey trigger finger....

.....they will be the first to launch the nukes, /...it may not be in Europe...could be India,UK,Africa, or USA, or even another Muslim country...wherever, ...but it will be the Muslims who launch first.

....the leftists and dhimmicrats, of course, will scream, "lets negotiate!"...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 20, 2007 7:21 AM

Hmmm. Calling the ethnic Pakistani former editor of the Toronto Star newspaper -- the egregious Haroun Siddiqui, who is currently on a book tour, flogging the line that Muslims are under seige by non-Muslims.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at April 20, 2007 7:28 AM

Mississauga is a veritable hotbed of islamic activity - that's where the plots to blow up the Toronto Stock Exchange and behead our Prime Minister were hatched.
This incident doesn't surprise me.

My husband and I have been in beautiful Nova Scotia since December 2001, but will be returning to Ontario next month for my son's wedding. He lives about 30 minutes away from Mississauga. The whole area has apparently changed greatly in the time we have been away, becoming infested with muslims, mosques and madrassas.

I am not looking forward to seeing these changes.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at April 20, 2007 7:42 AM

Haroun Siddiqui, who is currently on a book tour, flogging the line that Muslims are under seige by non-Muslims.
l would love to contront him on a book tour..need to find out his book tour lol

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at April 20, 2007 7:53 AM

Fred,

Where did this incident take place?
What newspaper was involved?

Posted by: Odyessus at April 20, 2007 8:04 AM

Zena:

I heard about Haroun's book tour on Al-CBC radio one last weekend. he was down on the east coast then. I'm sure you can do a google-search and find out more via his publishers.

Years ago, the late Frank magazine carried a story about the Star spiking a story a journalist brought in about the hate speech being spewed at a local mosque. the journo allegedly wore a wire to prove his allegations.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at April 20, 2007 8:08 AM

"Good, The west needs to see more raw Islam."

KAOSKTRL,

You're right, but do you think the mainstream press will report this? I don't think so. It might give a wrong impression of Islam.

Posted by: rational at April 20, 2007 8:46 AM

Odyessus

It was in the north of England about five or six years ago when Afghans first started to arrive in any numbers. The story was confirmed when I employed a cleaning contractor who was offered the princely sum of £20 to clean each house by their “Asian” landlord when the story broke.

I did not discover the sequel involving the Race Relations Board until it cropped up in a conversation about two years later. There will be no records but my source was a personal friend as “close to the editorial staff” as it's possible to get. If I can recall his words they were “The editors went into the meeting confident they had printed nothing more than the truth, during the meeting they said absolutely nothing and they came out of the meeting in a state of shock!” That is about as much information as I am prepared to give.

I do not think anyone should be surprised at this treatment of a small provincial paper when you consider the general level censorship in Britain. Look up an article on the internet - “Britain is in danger of losing Britain” by Anthony Browne, European correspondent of the Times. It is about Islam and immigration generally but it specifically says censorship in Britain is such that sooner or later it must break. Shortly after it was printed no less a person than David Blunkett the former Home Secretary denounced the piece as “semi fascist”.

If you understand the way the British system works this is a very, very serious warning indeed. Coming from an ordinary MP it would have counted for nothing, while coming from a member of the government it would have been a threat to the freedom of the press. Coming from a former minister “close to the government” to describe a leading writer on a leading national paper as “semi fascist”, is governmentspeak for “Shut up - or else!”.

Posted by: Fred at April 20, 2007 9:46 AM

I first became alarmed at the squelching of free speech years ago, during the "Satanic Verses" controversy. After the fatwa ponounced against Salman Rushdie, no bookseller at the time was willing to display the book. It had to be requested from under the counter. That was then, when the Moslem population was much smaller than it is today. The situation can only be worse today.

Else how could the discussion of sharia-based marriage courts in Ontario have got so far? How could the oily Sheema Khan's op-ed pieces have been taken seriously by the Globe and Mail for so long? Why does the Toronto Star have an editorial policy that seems totally uninterested in a balanced debate concerning Islam and its relative merits in a Western society?

This incident was undoubtedly overshadowed by the horrible news from Virginia. But still one wonders what level of attention it would have received in other circumstances. Moreover, does this incident indicate that a parallel society is being inserted into the host society, that the insulation of the parallel society is to be enforced and policed by this kind of thuggery?

How widespread are threats and beatings of this kind anyway?

Posted by: Chatillon at April 20, 2007 10:42 AM

Anything that disagrees with Islam cannot be the truth.

It is "slandering Islam" or "harming the Ummah", which trumps "truth".

Turkey calls it "insulting the national identity".

Either way, the West must learn thast there can only be praise or silence when it comes to Islam.

Or Resistance.

Posted by: profitsbeard at April 20, 2007 10:45 AM

Fred,

Please explain how the British system works.
Are you saying that the Race Relations Board regularly visits members of the British Media and pressurises them, behind closed doors, not to publish anything critical about Muslims?

Posted by: Odyessus at April 20, 2007 10:46 AM

[quote]In Canada. How long before this sort of thing starts happening in the United States?[/quote]

Robert

Say, whatever happened to Tashbih Sayyed? Does he still publish his newspaper? I wonder if he has heard about what happened to this fellow Pakistani?

Posted by: wrathofasma at April 20, 2007 10:52 AM

Muslims living in Missassauga already call it 'Muslimssauaga'.

Many hateful Urdu news papers are published in this city.

Posted by: Crusader at April 20, 2007 11:20 AM

Makes me want to get a newspaper started! Go home go home!

Posted by: MZ at April 20, 2007 12:38 PM

Since Abdullah is taking Friday off and for some reason takes the Sabbath off too, we should add his spew in explaining this.

Abdullah says something like this:

Terrorist training is exercise, so this was not beating up a reporter but only discussing the issue with him in teaching him the way to speak.

something something about allah and a quote about George Bush is a swine and something something about stupid Americans when it is a Canadian story.

Oh I forgot to misspell some words for him.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at April 20, 2007 12:54 PM

"Islamic Fanatics Beat Journo in Canada,"

This is the problem. Westerners insist on viewing this behavior as out of the mainstream or "fanaticism" when it is not. It is ISLAM.

Of course Pakistanis don't see any fanaticism in their country. All they see is Islam. What these people do is not fanatical. It is ISLAM.

People who would never beat up a journalist or blow up a building cannot condemn those who do. That makes them no better than the attackers. They are the silent majority. If the attackers are fanatics then so are almost all Muslims. We in the West have got to face this truth and stop equating "Muslim fanatics" with Christian or Jewish "fanatics".

Posted by: PMK at April 20, 2007 2:00 PM

Odyessus

I can only say what happened in this particular case is that following publication the local “community leaders” complained to the paper. The editor politely informed them that the story was perfectly true and he had no intention of apologising for a factual report that he considered was in the public interest.

It was then that that the “community leaders” complained to the Race Relations Board in Birmingham. They sent a group of heavy men to “discuss the problem with the editorial staff” and they made the threats that scared the hell out of the pressmen. Nothing was written down and the threat could be denied but only a fool would ignore it.

This happens in ALL governments. You may recall that an idiot British “historian” offered £30,000 of his own money to anyone who could produce a document that proved Hitler authorised or knew about the Holocaust. It has never been claimed because as a German historian pointed out, Hitler was far too smart a politician to put anything like that in writing.

I do not think that the British system is much different from anyone else's it is just longer established and therefore more subtle. In all politics as far as possible nothing really contentious is written down or recorded (Richard Nixons mistake!), oral instructions are issued through a third party. These instructions are absolutely clear to the individual receiving them but the wording is always non-specific and because they go through a third party they can be presented as a misunderstanding if necessary.

This is what happened in the case of Anthony Browne. Because of his position there were no legal threats and no visits from the police. But everyone with a brain knows that a serious warning not to write anything like it again was issued – and from the top of government - and he would be very foolish to ignore it.

So in answer to

"Are you saying that the Race Relations Board regularly visits members of the British Media and pressurises them, behind closed doors, not to publish anything critical about Muslims?"

I would say not regularly as that is unnecessary, just when there is a complaint as by now everyone knows pretty well what is and is not allowed. And it is not not always the RRB, it might be the Police "Warning that an offence may have been committed" So just to say "Yes" is too simple.

Posted by: Fred at April 20, 2007 3:20 PM

Ishmael the unwanted son or unblessed carries it's curse, they still fight their half brother's the Jews they are unwanted when they arrive in free countries and they mock like Ishmael did. Either one is right or one is wrong but the warning was brought on by God long ago to preserve the story to be remembered. If the Bible is corrupt and the Koran is right then why take 2.6 thousand Biblical historical years to get it right from 700AD?

Posted by: jesusisthelamb at April 20, 2007 9:57 PM

Not only that, but the Koran is heavily derivative of "Christian" and Jewish sources, only MohoMad borrowed from the corrupt versions, the Gnostic gospels and not the true bible.

I've been reading Spencer's' The Truth About Muhammad, and I'd highly recommend it. It amazes me just how backwards and illogical the religion really is. Within the past two to three hundred years Christian apologists have had to defend the validity of the bible against critics, and all evidence they've come up with; archaeological, philosophical, logical, even the textual evidence, thousands of manuscripts dating back to 100 years after Christ. In effect it has been justified entirely. If %10 of Muslims were allowed to look at the Koran the same way, there would be apostates the world over. Anyone with a brain would see through the lies.

Posted by: forsockssakes at April 21, 2007 12:57 PM