| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
It was a "mistake," not a jihad. Cut Babul Islam some slack. After all, I mistakenly beat someone up just the other day. Mistakes will be made. "Youth walks free after gang attack on priest," by Suzy Austin in Metro.co.uk, June 24 (thanks to Shirley):
A drunken teenager who beat up a priest walked free yesterday after the judge accepted the attack was a 'one-off mistake'.Babul Islam was one of three Asian youths who attacked Canon Michael Ainsworth in his churchyard.
The 19-year-old punched the vicar in the head while others kicked him ' one allegedly shouting 'f*****g priest' ' only stopping when passers-by intervened....
The shop assistant admitted being extremely drunk during the attack but denied it was religiously-motivated ' a claim upheld by Judge Glenn Brasse.
Islam and the two other assailants set upon Mr Ainsworth in March, leaving him with cuts and bruises....
Islam, of nearby Limehouse, deserved a prison term for his crimes, Judge Brasse told him at Snaresbrook Crown Court. But he was told 'under the circumstances' a four-month suspended sentence, paying his victim £1,000 and 100 hours of unpaid work would suffice.
In the days following the attack, the Rev Alan Green, Dean of Tower Hamlets, said there were 'faith hate' incidents in the area every month.
But they're not religiously motivated, doncha know. Now, if an Anglican attacked an imam -- that would be religiously motivated. But not this.
Posted by Robert at June 25, 2008 8:14 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
What a disgrace! The dhimmi judge must be either scared spitless or following orders from some superior dhimmi.
Yep, they're shouting "F***ing priest".....but the attack wasn't religiously motivated at all.
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 25, 2008 8:32 AM
A law must either be upheld to the letter, or it becomes unenforceable, and thereby meaningless. Legal education taking a nosedive in the UK as we see more and more of these kind of rulings each week. If an Anglican had attacked an imam, there would be a media lynching and calls for prosecution under hate crimes legislation. The sentence was ridiculous.
Posted by: OolongChung at June 25, 2008 8:36 AM
A law must either be upheld to the letter, or it becomes unenforceable, and thereby meaningless. Legal education is taking a nosedive in the UK as we see more and more of these kind of rulings each week. If an Anglican had attacked an imam, there would be a media lynching and calls for prosecution under hate crimes legislation. The sentence was ridiculous.
Posted by: OolongChung at June 25, 2008 8:36 AM
The dude was drunk, clearly not a 'good' muslim.
Therefore not religiously motivated.
The UK is screwed. I sincerely hope that the good people of the UK take the streets back soon.
at June 25, 2008 9:04 AM
These big, bad-ass Muslims; so ready to use brute force to punish unbelievers a/o to rape and kill their daughters, sisters and mothers ~ and yet unwilling to stand before us and educate us as to how exactly their religion, and their choices based on their beliefs, are superior to ours in any way.
I can't find words this morning to express the depth of loathesome disgust, cumulative, that I have for the ummah... and the dhimmi that enable it.
Posted by: undaunted at June 25, 2008 9:13 AM
Alright you moslems out there, what is his punishment for being drunk? 100 lashes? Hanging?
He clearly didn't follow the islamic rule book.
at June 25, 2008 11:21 AM
He did follow the Islamic rule book, interestingconundrum.
Everything, including drinking, is forgivable (even assault, murder etc.) provided it is done to the greater glory of Mohammed and the furtherance of Islam.
Posted by: LondonBorn&Bred at June 25, 2008 1:07 PM
Compare this with the sentence a white non-muslim youth received when he was turned in to the police by his father who found a gun under his bed.
The youth received a 3 year custodial sentence.
Yes, he shouldn't have had a gun, but at that point he had not used it in any criminal activity.
This muslim thug beats up a priest and walks away.
Posted by: Celsius at June 25, 2008 2:18 PM
When the state can or will not protect you, you must protect yourself. If the state does not provide justice.... I am beginning to understand the attraction of political parties like the BNP.
Posted by: MP at June 25, 2008 2:45 PM
Given all that anti-White racism, the Brits should vote en masse for the BNP next elections, or else prepare to recite the Shehada and transfer the capital of the UK from London to Jeddah.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 25, 2008 3:34 PM
Even if they were all the same religion and the priest was in mufti, how could they let those punks walk free?
Posted by: Dumbo at June 25, 2008 3:40 PM
Leave the old cross down. As the patient is discharged, and in full view of her relatives, have a catholic priest re-sactify the room with holy water, and hang a new, golden cross.
Posted by: skevin at June 25, 2008 7:05 PM
Whoops~ posted that to the wrong thread. Sorry.
Posted by: skevin at June 25, 2008 7:09 PM
Note that this little jihad raid occurred IN THE CHURCHYARD.
Not on the street. It occurred ON CHURCH TERRITORY.
Hmm - the attacker is supposed to carry out 100 hours unpaid work.
I propose 100 hours cleaning kafir toilets; I'm sure the London municipal toilet cleaners could find some really nasty ones. What a pity there are no earth closets left, nor cess pits to shovel out.
Hmmm. Thinks. The London sewerage authority could, perhaps, find a use for this punk for 100 hours.
Alternatively, he could be attached to a garbage route with the job of emptying bins.
Or set him to 100 hours patrolling the public parks with a pooper-scooper picking up the doggie doo, under supervision.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at June 26, 2008 12:15 AM
Perspective please! He was a teenie , probably first offence , and he was drunk , and he showed remorse , the vicar was not bably hurt and as someone else observed his drunkeness at least points to the motivation be something other than Islamic radicalism... perhaps he had an experience when young at a Church youth camp or something. Probation is probably a good fit.
at June 26, 2008 2:29 AM
Deportation for life.. anything else is ridiculous.
Posted by: Ummah Gummah at June 26, 2008 3:53 AM
They beat up an old man wearing a collar in a church yard. What did they mistakenly think he was? A burglar? A rabbi?
Posted by: tkap at June 26, 2008 4:21 PM
A drunken teenager who beat up a priest walked free yesterday after the judge accepted the attack was a 'one-off mistake'.
So, if I get drunk, and beat the snot out of an Imam, it's ok?
Yet another difference between the Muslim Mafia and Christians: a Christian would never get drunk and go beat up an imam. On the contrary, the Christian is commanded by Jesus to "love your enemies".
Satan (I mean "allah"), on the other hand, commands his followers to get drunk and to beat up a defenseless priest.
Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at June 26, 2008 6:57 PM
What's right is wrong and what is wrong is right...seems to be what is going on nowadays leaving many of us who think with our brains scratching our heads saying wth?
Posted by: diaphanous at June 27, 2008 5:18 AM
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.)