"You are just a people of fish and chips and hot dogs."

Fish and chips, yeah. But hotdogs?

This man is an idiot. A dangerous idiot. I suppose his wife and six kids, including the sick one, are supported by the UK's over-generous social programs. Asshole.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at October 23, 2007 7:50 AM

"The cleric - accused of turning young British Muslims to al-Qaeda with hate-filled sermons - claims he must fly to London to see his sick 12-year-old daughter"

...how about they just fly the daughter to see him, with a note "you keep her"...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at October 23, 2007 7:54 AM

Still waiting for the 500 Muhammedan clerics that BLiar promised to deport.

In the meantime unsupecting Britsh taxpayers are feeding Omar Bakri's brood....

brrrrrrr.....

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 23, 2007 8:01 AM

He must not be allowed back, unless to face a firing squad, of which i will gladly participate!!

AND.......... Why the hell are his wife and kids, who will of course believe in him, allowed to stay in MY country???? I'm paying taxes to keep them as well i bet!!! Kick them out!!!

Posted by: Demvaril at October 23, 2007 8:03 AM

"Yes, I do want to see the black flag of Islam over 10 Downing Street”

And what makes this Bak-ri rodent any different than the dragon slain by St. George? Should he dare return: let the games begin!

Posted by: descendantofacrusader at October 23, 2007 8:13 AM

"the country which still shelters his wife and six children."
-- from the article above

Why?

Posted by: Hugh at October 23, 2007 8:29 AM

Lol, Bakri is just a cock. Nothing more.

Posted by: DaveMate at October 23, 2007 8:32 AM

Black flag?

Do these Jihadist purveyors of Islamic law so often have to appear like something right out of central casting for the evil hounds of hell? It's almost as if God were shouting at us:

Hey, you relativist-nihilist-Pontius Pilate-'what is truth' sleep-walkers! There is such a thing as evil!! What does the world have to do before you'll admit that? You've seen them chop off school girls' heads. You've seen them shoot school children in the back. You've seen them putting legions of women in jail for the "crime" of being raped. You've seen how frequently fathers and brothers from among them will murder their sisters and daughters for the sake of family 'honor.' You have learned from Islam's own texts how Muhammad had hundreds of heads cut off, how he ordered the murder of people merely because they criticized him, how he tortured people with fire in order to find out where their treasure was hidden, how he kept slaves and raped captives, how he ordered the death of Muslims who chose no longer to be Muslims. You've seen his followers murder thousands upon thousands of innocents around the globe since after 9/11 in order to establish Islamic law and thus reduce non-Muslims to second-class persons. Slavery comes not from Me, but from men like Muhammad, tyrants who try to make Me in their own evil image, rather than recognize My divine image of Freedom in humankind. I desire the freely given love of My creatures, not their slavish obedience out of terror. And while it is true that raising a black flag is not in itself any guarantee of evil, isn't it a peculiar emblem, a black flag? In any event, the sons of Muhammad could have three heads and drool acid and you'd still invite them over for tea, wouldn't you!

Posted by: traeh at October 23, 2007 8:38 AM

Exile such jihadist filth-deportation or jail simply don't work. Send his wonderful family of fellow parasites with him too.

A BLACK flag eh? How fitting a symbol for blackhearted maniacs.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 23, 2007 8:47 AM

Twelve? Isn't she married off and out of the house by now?

Posted by: Vee at October 23, 2007 8:48 AM

We are a welcoming nation - but our distinctive hospitality should not be abused.

Oh, just go ahead and speak plainly. You'd like all these hairy Imams to shut the hell up so as to let the British people, especially the English, sink quietly into the ever-expanding Sharia mmire with full decorum and a stiff upper lip.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 23, 2007 8:51 AM

My thoughts exactly, Traeh! Should the West ever see this beast for what it really is, instead of being stuck in a relativist, multi-culturist funk, the problem of the 'Black Flag' would cease to exist. Evil is evil is evil!

Posted by: descendantofacrusader at October 23, 2007 8:53 AM

i'm suprised that the far left and their media are not falling overthemselves denouncing the british government for denying bakri's "human rights".

where's Michael Ryan when you need him?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at October 23, 2007 9:10 AM

Some of you said it before I could--Send the daughter and the rest of his family back to him. Hell, look around and see if you can't find cousins, uncles, etc. and send them back too!

These Mohammedans are so arrogant. What part of "We are a sovereign nation, and we don't have to let you (back) in" does he not understand?

There are sick children all over the world. His daughter is getting some of the best medical care to be had, I'm sure. Can he not be content with that, and accept that he is out on his ass because of his behaviour? Can't he be grateful, for her sake, that she's getting good medical treatment?

Re the Black Flag-- I don't know how well the brand is known, but there is an insecticide line here in the US called Black Flag. Just for fun, they should put the shehada on the can, written in Arabic on the flag. They'd make a fortune.

Posted by: Abscedere at October 23, 2007 9:13 AM

When old Mohammed chose a black flag to fly over his, er, Religion of Peace field operations, little did he know that some 1,350 yrs later his brand would end up on the label of roach spray cans.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 23, 2007 9:22 AM

When old Mohammed chose a black flag to fly over his, er, Religion of Peace field operations, little did he know that some 1,350 yrs later his brand would end up on the label of roach spray cans.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 23, 2007 9:22 AM

Considering how tight Mr. Perfect was with Illah he probably did know what he was doing in picking the black flag. This probably qualified as one of the earliest practical jokes from the Destroyers.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 23, 2007 10:15 AM

Hmmm...now where have we heard that kind of talk before? (forget the fact it's a de facto declaration of war)
Oh, yeah...

"Today, Germany!
Tomorrow, the WORLD!!!
Sieg HEIL!!!"
(adolph hitler)

Just more proof Santayana's right.

Posted by: jcom972 at October 23, 2007 10:24 AM

traeh,
I expect the people who heard you would point to the gospel (I don't have chapter and verse) where Jesus is asked what to do when someone strikes your cheek. The people are expecting Him to say it's okay to fight back. Instead He said to turn your other cheek to the aggressor and let him slap that one as well.
Such is the belief of pacifists. Their only answer is to respond to hate with love. Love your enemies and eventually they'll see you're not a threat to them and they'll love you right back.
How do you get people who will never recognize evil to combat it? They'd rather die than get their hands dirty.

Posted by: PMK at October 23, 2007 10:30 AM

In my opinion Mr Bakri's bad tempered outburst are no doubt caused by all the worry that separation from his family and friends are causing him. I for one heartily hope that UK can do something about that by deporting the lot of them to join up with him in the Lebanese wonderland he should really love.

Posted by: Realist at October 23, 2007 10:38 AM

Islam = peace
Black = white

Get it?

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at October 23, 2007 10:52 AM

@ PMK

As a Christian I believe that Jesus told me to love MY enemies. And so I try to.

But Jesus did not tell me to love HIS enemies.

The enemy of Jesus (devil, anti-Christ) is my enemy.

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at October 23, 2007 10:54 AM

The linked video was script and I couldn't get out of the program. Running my anti-virus now.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at October 23, 2007 11:06 AM

Vee:

"Twelve? Isn't she married off and out of the house by now?"

LMFAO...

Hey, OT, but still relevant given the plight of our English friends (actually, this guy is Welsh).
A heartwarming and unbelievable display...

http://www.maniacworld.com/Phone-Salesman-Amazes-Crowd.html

Posted by: JohnAdams at October 23, 2007 12:25 PM

At the risk of deleation

May the Flag he speaks of fly only over his Grave.

Is it possible that the rest of the Family is glad Daddy Deariet is gone?

Posted by: flowerknife_us at October 23, 2007 1:16 PM

Ummm, PMK,
Ya raise a good point...pacifists DID make that up (read that as gross mistranslation)...

Once again, (said it may times before, but needs saying again)...

"Turn the other cheek" DOES NOT...REPEAT NOT, mean to take it on the chin again (which is what the pacifists imply)...

It simply means to try and see it from the other guys point of view if possible as you could be wrong in whatever matter is at hand (since we're not infallible, and do make mistakes since we're humans)...that's ALL.

Turning a cheek to, say, a Roman soldier back then as implied then (like pacifists imply) means "go ahead and kill me" (a defiant gesture), and believe me, the soldier WOULD as it implied to him a sign of contempt-guaranteed death penalty.

To simply allow one who's struck you already to do so again is masochism, and that was NOT what JC had in mind with said teaching, nor the suicidal act it would've invited to a Roman soldier, either...
...and suicide is a mental disorder, and considered unforgivable (in THAT context, there are exceptions, like Masada, but that's another story and context altogether).
ANY person would be a moron not to defend themselves against potentially deadly force-I dislike putting it that way, but no rational sane person should be expected to tolerate such a thing like sheeple. (blanket statement, not directed)

"Love your enemies" is another misunderstood teaching...it doesn't mean to love them no matter what...it's meant "Love the sinner, but not the sin".
Yes, Love your enemies-nothing wrong with that at all...BUT it doesn't mean ya gotta take their BS either.

Such misinterpretations have gotten many killed unnecessarily...and frankly, it was stupid.
That being said, once understood, it's quite easy to fight them, both in idea(l)s, as well as physically, should it ever be necessary, with clear conscience.

If attacked, I defend myself-to do less is suicide.
I have...and I've never lost a night's sleep over it either. No reason why anyone should feel bad about that.

Posted by: jcom972 at October 23, 2007 2:06 PM

Ynkedoodl2 ,

How do you recognize His enemies? Osama bin Laden is one of His creations. How do you know he isn't here to fulfill God's plan? Jesus wants you to fight His enemies within yourself and keep evil from taking root. You can't judge what is evil in someone else.

It's not that I'm a pacifist. The nuclear age that was ushered in by Hiroshima and Nagasaki has made us recoil from all war and solve whatever we can at the negotiating table. It worked with the Soviets but it won't work with Islam. The Islamists should be fought because they are trying to restrict our rights to live and worship freely and to love the Lord as we see fit. They would deprive us of our very lives. We have every right to fight back. More than that, we have a duty to resist. I don't see it as a crusade. It is merely us protecting our God-given gifts of life and free will.

Posted by: PMK at October 23, 2007 2:09 PM

Some of you are familiar with a Christian preacher named Charles Stanley. Well, I found an excellent narrative on the subject of loving your enemy during a time of war that was written by him; and I happen to agree with his insights on the subject.

Here's an excerpt from the link below:

"You may think, "Well, how do we reconcile that with what Jesus said about loving our enemies and turning the other cheek?" (Luke 6:27-30) In that passage, Jesus was speaking to us as individuals. If someone treats us badly, we should love him anyway. We can pray for our enemies, and do good to those who hate us. The way someone treats an individual is one thing; the way he treats an entire nation is a completely different issue. The Bible teaches that it is the responsibility of the government’s leaders to protect the nation against those who would destroy it."
-Charles Stanley

"What Does God Think About War / A Nation At War":
http://www.rapturealert.com/warfaq.html

Posted by: champ at October 23, 2007 3:08 PM

"It doesn't matter ... so long as we get rid of this man-made law. Man-made law is corrupted ... Man changes his mind. Sharia law is based on a message from God."
--- --- --- ---
Man-made law allows for change as we see what works. Sharia law is based on the rantings of a savage megalomaniac, and unfortunately Muslims have declared that Islam can never be changed. All that remains for the rest of us (the civilized nations of the world) is to enforce the total and complete extirpation of Islam from our lands. Remove all Muslims to the Middle East and isolate them. Forever. Period.

(Referring to an earlier post, Islam exploits Western countries as a parasite exploits its host: giving this insidious belief sustenance and room to grow is indeed like ignoring a parasite. There comes the point when it will kill you.)

Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at October 23, 2007 3:22 PM

A man, named Mohammad, claimed to speak The Law.

How is this any different from any other "made-made law"?

He was a man, not God.

He was fallible, not Perfect.

His "transmission" of the desires of the Deity, coming to him through the voice of Gibreel the angel of Allah (which he claimed his auditory experiences were), has inevitable human-all-too-human flaws, and thus can be nothing but more "man made laws".

Posing as "Divine".

The inability of these posturing cranks like Bakri to analyze their own premises will end up killing millions in the coming century until people in general are so sick of this brutal irrationality and militant unreason that they send this cult into the dustbin of History.

To lean against the obsolete "Tyrant God" Ideologies of Moloch and Quetzecoatl.

Posted by: profitsbeard at October 23, 2007 6:21 PM

PMK, here's a bit of diversion I wrote on the question of pacifism:

Speaker A:
I'm glad we've all collected here
In order to discuss
The gnarled and troubled countenance
The world contorts at us.

Against fanatic enemies
We spend young lives and treasure
While Left and Right verbosely fight
And lose all sense of measure.
Just what the best defense might be
Makes men so loudly disagree,
They court fanatic certainty,
That mad vice of our enemy.

Pacifist:
May I then start in with my case?
For though I know you yield slight place
To pacifism's soft approach,
Yet let me merely try to broach
Its virtues for you all to test
And see whether they aren't the best?

Speaker C:
You'd like to fire the day's first shot?
Why not, please do, please run us through
With sword-like speech so sharp and quick
We'll fall before we see wrist flick!

Speaker D:
Your martial word-play serves your wit
And tweaks this pacifist a bit,
For leaping first into the fray
Of argument, prepared to slay.

Pacifist:
I am, it's true, too loud at times
In arguing that wars are crimes
And fear I terrorize my friends
When I push peaceful means and ends.
A friend one time I all but strangled
And visualized him badly mangled
Because he would not see that war
Is always wrong, whatever for.

Speaker A:
Your honesty refreshes me.
As for the rest, I can't agree.
At times brute force can't be avoided
Though 'twould be sad if one enjoyed it.

Pacifist:
Non-violence is a mighty thing
As Gandhi said, and Dr. King.
They needed no brute force to bring
And end to British rule's persistence
And segregation's cruel existence.

Speaker D:
Could soft ways beat the Nazis too?
Could King defeat a terror crew?
Could a would-be Gandhi in Iraq
Resist Saddam or dare talk back?
Would not Saddam's police appear
To slice that Gandhi ear to ear?
And would the Reverend King endear
Harsh North Korea's Kim Jong Il
If King should try great marches there?
No, Jong would no doubt band a gong
And after cutting out King's tongue,
Command the righteous man be hung.

Speaker E (to the Pacifist):
I think you fail to realize
That King's non-violent path relies
On freedom of an active press
To help one seek some just redress
And only States of that variety
Such lands already partly free,
Permit a man like King to be.
Yet even here, he was gunned down
But not before King earned his crown
Through fearless love in deed and word,
The word the nation, awestruck, heard.

Pacifist:
I take my stand on love's demand to turn the other cheek
And I recall that blessings fall above all on the meek.

Others:
All well and good to turn the cheek when your own cheek is struck.
But standing by with gentle eye as innocents or children die
Is just to pass the buck.

Posted by: traeh at October 23, 2007 6:28 PM

PMK,

A Christian who dealt brilliantly with the "turn the other cheek" part of the Bible is the great Vladimir Solovyev. He created a brilliant fictional dialogue (War, Progress and the End of History) between one Christian character (who represented Solovyev's own viewpoint) and another character modeled on Tolstoy, who was an absolute Christian pacifist. Solovyev's main argument, very entertainingly displayed in the fictional setting, is basically the same as the one I make in the little verse below: it is immoral, for the sake of one's own supposed moral purity and pacifist sanctity, to always just stand by and do nothing forceful when evil attacks innocents.

All well and good to turn the cheek when your own cheek is struck.
But standing by with gentle eye as innocents or children die
Is just to pass the buck.

PMK, I don't believe for a second that by the "turn the other cheek" story JC meant for us to watch passively while our children or other innocents are abused, kidnapped, or murdered.

Posted by: traeh at October 23, 2007 6:53 PM

@JohnAdams OT

What a fine voice Mr Potts has! I was grinning and crying, at the same time.

Posted by: Abscedere at October 23, 2007 11:00 PM

It doesn't matter if not everyone is Muslim so long as we get rid of this man-made law.

There it is in a nutshell.

Pure unadulterated evil.

Pure unmitigated enmity toward the mind of man.

This piece of crap should have been shot, not deported. And he would have been in any sensible country.

As for his female associates (captives, accolytes?) they should have been given the choice to divorce, disavow and denounce this sub-human piece of crap or go home to whatever slave pen they came from.

They choose us, we win, he's humiliated.

The choose him, we win, we get rid of a couple more murder mongers.

================

Check this out, from a moral point of view ...

Remember, I'm an atheist, so I'm OK with abortion, at least first trimester abortion (a debate for another time).

But just think. We're living in cultures that allow the abortion of pregnancies, (or the murder of the unborn as you might prefer to state it), largely on the grounds that an embryo lacks an adult personality, a fully formed conceptual human consciousness.

And yet we hold back from even deporting beings who give no evidence of having a normal adult moral faculty, the single most important aspect of adult human consciousness.

This one, no consciousness, kill it -- that one, partial consciousness, special privileges beyond the rights of citizens.

It just doesn't add up.

But then so little does these days.

Posted by: joeblough at October 24, 2007 1:49 AM

@Phximan
Oh deary me, you seem to have got it the wrong way around when you suggest that dreadful genocidal thing in your post. It's the infidel that must be killed! Y'see it's in the Bumper Fun Book of Islam and therefore can be said openly, whereas your suggestion is certainly NOT 'PC' and could possibly get you in to serious trouble. Strange that but there y'go.

Posted by: Jihadtobejoking at October 24, 2007 10:06 AM