| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
One would think that after their experiences with Abu Hamza and Omar Bakri, the British would know that someone like this can do a great deal of damage. But look on the bright side! It could be worse. He could be heading to Britain at British taxpayer expense. "Islamist hardliner heads for Britain," from the TimesOnline, with thanks to all who sent this in:
A HARDLINE Islamist cleric who government advisers wanted banned from Britain is scheduled to fly to London this weekend to attend events alongside Muslim community leaders.The Home Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office considered excluding Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, an MP in Bangladesh who preaches violent hatred against the West and is accused of war crimes, last year. But despite a series of e-mail exchanges in September, his visa was never revoked and the Home Office issued no exclusion order.
The Foreign Office’s Islamic issues adviser accused Mr Sayeedi’s detractors of being politically biased and said that his exclusion could jeopardise support from mainstream Muslims for the Government’s anti-terrorism agenda.
Mr Sayeedi was last in Britain weeks after the July 7 bombings. Tomorrow he is scheduled to visit a housing fair at the London Muslim Centre, part of the East London Mosque. The mosque’s chairman, Muhammad Abdul Bari, is the newly elected leader of the Muslim Council of Britain. Mr Sayeedi is then due to attend a rally in a nearby park alongside the MP George Galloway....
Internal messages between advisers discussed the threat that he allegedly posed, and one attached a report from a Bangladeshi human rights organisation. The report quotes Mr Sayeedi as saying that Britain and the US “deserve all that is coming to them” for overturning the Taleban in Afghanistan.
The e-mail from one adviser, Eric Taylor, continues: “He [Mr Sayeedi] has made a particularly offensive comment about Bangladeshi Hindus, comparing them to excrement. He also appears to defend attacks against the Ahmadiya (Islamist) community.
“. . . Previous visits to the UK have been reportedly marred by violence caused by his supporters. In 2000, during one of his talks in Oldham, his supporters reportedly attacked and beat up five Bengali elders.
“A rally in Banglatown was also attacked and three people, including a 65-year-old, were injured. A Bangladeshi community group wrote to the Prince of Wales in June 2004 appealing for Sayeedi to be banned from the UK.”
However, Mr Sayeedi’s case was defended by Mockbul Ali, the Foreign Office’s Islamic issues adviser, who voiced “extreme concern” about the political bias of sources being used to criticise the MP.
Mr Ali wrote: “Websites of groups with a clear agenda/bias is not the way to prove exclusion [if a case does indeed exist].”
Despite admitting that Mr Sayeedi was ultra-orthodox and held views “we would not endorse in any way”, Mr Ali then added: “He is someone who has a very big following in the mainstream British Bangladeshi Muslim community and is viewed as a mainstream Muslim figure.
So are we to understand that he is "mainstream," but "extremist"? That therefore perhaps "extremism" is mainstream?
“Any steps taken on his exclusion from the UK must take that into account, especially at a time when we require increasing support on the Prevent/Counter Terrorism agenda from British Muslims.”Mr Taylor responded that the file against Mr Sayeedi was “thoroughly referenced” and disputed whether the exclusion of an extremist cleric would endanger support from mainstream Muslims.
He added: “In the Prime Minister’s words, the rules of the game have changed. What may have been tolerated pre-7/7 is no longer the case.”
Looks as if you're wrong about that, Mr. Taylor.
Posted by Robert at July 14, 2006 7:20 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Diane West mentions JihadWatch in todays column:
Noting the ensuing security upsurge in American cities, Islamic expert Robert Spencer wrote the following at his must-read Web site, JihadWatch.org:
"This is the effect of terror, and this is just what the terrorists want that effect to be. It ties up their enemies' time and money, and it strikes fear in their hearts, in accordance with the Qur'an:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DianaWest/2006/07/14/connecting_the_dots_on_islam
Posted by: jrdroll![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 14, 2006 7:47 AM
“He [Mr Sayeedi] has made a particularly offensive comment about Bangladeshi Hindus, comparing them to excrement. He also appears to defend attacks against the Ahmadiya (Islamist) community" from the Times online article.
The f/o takes its lead from Blair, who is not so much a dhimmi as a complete idiot, as far as Islam is concerned. He just seems to admire religiosity, in whatever shape or form. I wonder what the reaction would have been if Sayeedi had been a Hindu who had compared Muslims to excrement. Britain's Hindu community are not happy at being lumped in with the Mohammedans as Asians - a noisy protest from them about his visit would help differentate them in the public mind. Even Naseem wouldn't be safe from this guy.
Posted by: wallyUK at July 14, 2006 7:56 AM
that his exclusion could jeopardise support from mainstream Muslims for the Government’s anti-terrorism agenda..........
.
So what he's saying is the mainstream muslims would turn to terrorism if this guy's not allowed into the country? They're all potential terrorists anyway.
Maybe he's just going to be in town for the muslim "fun" days at Alton Towers.
at July 14, 2006 7:59 AM
only slightly OT
A story from the Canada Globe and Mail about the mole who uncovered the 17 recently. Apparently he is pushing for sharia in Canada and was only working for the anti-terrorists so that people will accept islam and sharia quicker.
July 14 2006
http://www.westernresistance.com/
Perhaps, as he had such a strong reputation as a "hardline" proponent of sharia, Mubin Shaikh was the ideal person to gain the trust of the suspects.
In August 2004, he appeared on a program for the BBC, where he said: "What is equality? There are many definitions of it. I think the main issue is that the Western, secular version of equality is not what you will find with Islam."
Posted by: Borg at July 14, 2006 9:01 AM
Why are such people referred to as "clerics"? Woudn't it be more appropriate to use terms such as "cult leader"or "jihadist official" ?
Posted by: FreeSpeech at July 14, 2006 9:26 AM
The Foreign Office’s Islamic issues adviser accused Mr Sayeedi’s detractors of being politically biased and said that his exclusion could jeopardise support from mainstream Muslims for the Government’s anti-terrorism agenda.
Anyone who accuses another person or party of being biased is claiming that he himself is unbiased, which is a fairly bold statement.
Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at July 14, 2006 9:30 AM
To my mind there are two further points that should be considered here. The first is that the UK would have a very hard time excluding an MP from another Commonwealth country. Traditionally MPs from all Commonwealth countries are allowed to travel reasonably freely within the Commonwealth. Secondly, the presence of hardliners openly here and appearing in public helps the security services to identify more of their supporters and contacts in this country. Make no mistake, this man is certain to be kept under surveillance all the time he is in the country and much will be learned from doing so.
Dominic.
Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at July 14, 2006 10:03 AM
I must agree with Dominic - let him in, keep him under constant watch, video/audio tape all his meetings, note with whom he confers and where.
I am, however, reminded of a hilarious line from an American movie, Zorro The Gay Blade, in which the evil alcalde when scolded by the heroine for not letting someone speak tells his goons to let her talk, adding: "Arrest anyone who listens".
Attempt at humor aside, the pretty obvious threat from the F.O.'s "expert" tells one all one needs to know about his position and the incompatibility of islam with Civilization.
Posted by: duvaldoxy at July 14, 2006 10:41 AM
Our Islamophilia as usual. If our govt. can in effect snub an Indian minister for his alleged complicity in anti-muslim Gujarat riots then why is this guy given a red-carpet treatment?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1058718.cms
Posted by: Vikrant_Camberleykar at July 14, 2006 10:45 AM
Ok, so we're used to our government allowing these Islamists to spew their hate, and doing it at the British taxpayers expense is hardly rare these days. But what's the next step in the road of grovelling dhimmitude? providing them with a few Jews or homosexuals to kill?
Why not? Mo enjoyed his Einzatzgruppen murderfest after the siege of Medina with all those Jews and Iran recently made a public spectacle of their state sanctioned murder of those 2 gay lads.
Posted by: Celsius at July 14, 2006 1:00 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)