Sayeeda Warsi embraces the OIC

The recent appointment of ‘Baroness’ Sayeeda Warsi to the post of Minister for Faith and Communities served as a reminder of one of the significant flaws in the current democratic system in the UK: an unelected and unaccountable House of Lords. The fact that Warsi is a member of the second chamber has enabled Cameron to bestow upon her ministerial responsibilities, and for Warsi to make policy without any democratic mandate. This represents the very worst sort of tokenism and ‘positive’ discrimination, yet it is not this in itself that prompts the writing of this piece today, but rather what Warsi has signed with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

The National Secular Society notes that Warsi has this week signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the UK and the OIC at the UN, which declares that the two will “work together on issues of peace, stability and religious freedom.” Those of you who are aware of the activities of the OIC, will know that this body of 57 Muslim states is attempting to introduce a global blasphemy law which would make it illegal to criticise or to satirise Islam in any country. Knowing of the penalties imposed by Islam for blasphemy, this is a chilling and deeply worrying prospect, as is the fact that this seemingly is not a matter of concern for Warsi. Moreover, as well as being Minister for Faith and Communities, Warsi has also been given an influential role as Senior Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office that makes her "the lead minister responsible for Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Central Asia, the UN, the International Criminal Court and the OIC". Given her domestic and foreign affairs briefs, she could perhaps be more appropriately dubbed the Minister for Internal and External Muslim Affairs, for this is, in effect, what she is.

Responding to Warsi’s signing of the MOU with the OIC, National Secular Society President Terry Sanderson stated:

We are all for co-operation between nations to try to foster peace and understanding, but the concept of 'religious freedom' is one that the OIC has distorted to mean restrictions on free expression.

We hope that by signing this document the UK will not in any way compromise its commitment to human rights – particularly the human right to free speech. The British Government has been steadfast in its opposition to the OIC's blasphemy proposals up until now. We hope that this document will not change that in any way.

Sanderson also noted how blasphemy laws were being used in some OIC states to “suppress Christianity and other religions in a brutal and merciless fashion” and singled out Pakistan for particular criticism on this score, whilst noting that in Egypt accusations of blasphemy were being employed to destroy political opponents.

As Warsi is a Pakistani Muslim who has made clear her distaste for secularism, should we not possess legitimate concerns about her warm embrace of the OIC? That she possesses political office of any sort is not only an indication that our democracy is in need of democratisation, but that if it is not reformed our basic freedoms and liberties could be imperilled through the actions of appointees such as Warsi who hold values clearly at variance with those that we have long held dear.  

Sayeeda Warsi: in favour of a global blasphemy law?

Eric’s in a pickle with the National Secular Society

An article by Eric Pickles in Wednesday’s Daily Telegraph afforded him the opportunity to revel in the canting sub-Dickensian persona that we have all come to know, but not necessarily to love. The object of his ire on this occasion, inexplicably (from a rational perspective) has not been, for example, the group of people who recently issued death threats against Tom Holland for his documentary ‘Islam: The Untold Story’, but the National Secular Society and the “aggressive secularism” that he claims it embodies. When did you last hear or read a news story about “aggressive” secularists threatening to kill or maim someone because they happened to disagree with their perspective, or to back up objections to an historical documentary with threats of violence? Secularists campaign both for freedom of religion and, even more importantly, the right to freedom from it; beyond that, their political beliefs are disparate.

Warsi and Pickles “do God” (or Allah in the case of the former), which is a great pity; for we would all benefit from rather less faith, and more scepticism. Pickles opens his piece with a specific appeal to what he perceives to be the merits of Christianity and its role in shaping “the heritage, morality and public life of Britain”, claiming that it is “the Christian ethos has made Britain so welcoming”. He echoed with approval David Cameron’s assertion that “we are a Christian nation – and should not be afraid to say so”; all very flattering, if you happen to be a Christian that is.

Elsewhere, Pickles asserts that there should be a greater involvement of Christian organisations in public life and the formulation of policy; he claims that “faith communities” stand for “integration” and “tolerance”, providing all with the same basic “moral compass” (one, it would seem, that almost always points East rather than North) and thus bind society together; he wishes to see religion challenge “moral relativism”, and for “aggressive secularism” and the “intolerant National Secular Society” to be confronted. He even manages to shoehorn a negative reference to the European Court of Human Rights into the article, thereby injecting a little cod nationalism into the tenor of his piece.

In essence, Pickles seeks to make a special case for Christianity in particular, and religion in general, to take an interfering role in policy; he seeks to portray Christianity in Britain as being somehow embattled and persecuted, whereas the facts are rather less lurid. As for him claiming that “faith communities” assist in the “integration” of different groups resident in this country, this flies in the face of reality, for these faith identities are by definition rigid and separating: they exist to differentiate believers from unbelievers, and the transgression of these boundaries is not looked upon with favour by ‘the faithful’, whatever their creed. The National Secular Society quite rightly states:

The idea that dwelling on the very issue that divides us most– religion – somehow brings communities together is the biggest lie peddled by these governments [i.e. those of Blair, Brown and Cameron].

With Pickles still in post as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, and Sayeeda Warsi recently appointed as Minister of State for Faith and Communities, we find ourselves in the unenviable position of having advocates of God and Allah pushing their unwelcome personal religious agendas in high office. These divisive posts need to be abolished, and religious belief or lack thereof, left to the conscience of the individual and divorced from matters of state. It should not be the business of government to nurture religious difference, or to offer special recognition to so-called “faith communities” and their associated pressure groups, for such a policy, which has allowed for the teaching of anti-science in a number of state-funded schools, is having a damaging impact upon both our intellectual life and general public culture, not to mention social cohesion.

Pickles is wrong, and it is time that he found himself another job. As the proverb goes: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”; and it would seem that the “good intentions” of the faithful in this case, are energetically propelling us down this road, albeit one that ends not in the spiritual hell of the religious imagination, but a temporal one here on Earth. 

Eric Pickles: which Dickensian character does he most resemble? 
Answers below please.

Sayeeda Warsi: no longer Chairman

It has been announced that Sayeeda Warsi has been relieved of her post as Chairman of the Conservative Party. The news comes as David Cameron embarks upon a cabinet reshuffle with Ken Clarke anticipated to leave his position as Justice Secretary.

Although Warsi's departure is to be welcomed, Cameron's reshuffle will not produce any change in focus or policy that will lead to any significant changes for the better in the country. This is not to say of course that Labour would offer anything better, for clearly, they would not.

What will Warsi do now? A hint was perhaps provided back in June when she took up the baton on behalf of championing chain-migration into the UK from outside of the EU, using the spurious pretext of familial reunion. This is no surprise, given her background as a specialist in the field of immigration law, and it was suggested here at the time that a return to practice in this sphere might well be her preferred option should her political career hit the buffers. Taking into consideration the current furore connected to the abuse of student status in the university sector as a backdoor route to immigration, defending the 'rights' of bogus students from overseas may exert a certain appeal for her.

Who will replace Warsi? Will it be yet another career politician who could quite as readily have sat upon the Labour benches as those of the Conservatives? Whoever it happens to be, the announcement of their appointment is unlikely to cause even a flicker of interest amongst most members of the public.

Postscript
Since writing the above this morning, it has been announced that Warsi has not been removed from a position of influence, but has instead been given two roles: Minister of State at the Foreign Office and Minister for Faith and Communities. Cameron, for whatever reason, evidently did not wish her to be lost to Tory frontline politics. Quite why however, must certainly be a puzzle to many Conservatives as well as to the electorate at large; after all, nobody has elected Warsi: she is a political appointee. As one commenter below has noted, this in itself signifies why reform of the House of Lords is not some empty ephemeral issue, but a matter that deserves to be addressed. There must be an end to the cronyism and political favouritism that has led to the likes of Warsi and Ahmed being given a mandate to influence legislation and government, without being accountable to the electorate. 

Her appointment as Minister for Faith and Communities is a particular worry. This position may have existed previously, but if so, it slipped under my radar. What is the point of such a post? If we strip away the euphemism, she is now effectively our Minister for Islam and Muslim Communities. Who wants such a position? Not me. Although the Monarch is the Head of the Church of England, we need a secular state that guarantees our freedom from religion, not a state that actively protects and promotes some of the most backward beliefs known to humanity. Religion and the state should be kept strictly separate.

The New Humanist blog notes that earlier this year Warsi:

used a visit to the Vatican to condemn secularism, likening its advocates to supporters of totalitarianism, having previously declared that the Coalition was a government that would "Do God"

She may play at being a "progressive Muslim", but her Vatican statement and general stance betray her intolerance for freedom of thought and freedom of conscience, employing her minority 'victim' status as a means of forwarding a deeply retrograde anti-Western anti-rationalism. Her presence in the current Government does no credit to the British political system, and is of an entirely negative nature; she has to go. The question is: when and how?

'Baroness' Warsi with 'Lord' Ahmed:

A Sudanese teddy named Mohammed sparks a life and death mission

EDL Dewsbury Demo 30 June 2012

Today the EDL will be holding a demo in Dewsbury, a town, which although of a modest size, seems to generate rather a lot of bad news, albeit news that is generally ignored by the national media. Two of its publicity-hungry residents – Sayeeda Warsi and Shahid Malik – are of course well-known to the public, and will certainly be unhappy about the EDL coming to town today. Given Dewsbury’s recent history (about which I shall be writing shortly in a separate piece), it comes as no surprise that it should have attracted the attention of the EDL which outlines the grounds for its decision to demonstrate in the following manner:

On June 30th The English Defence League will stage a peaceful protest in front of Dewsbury Town Hall.

We will be protesting about the problems that Dewsbury has with both militant Islam and with Muslim integration in general, as well as the continued failure of both local and national politicians to even acknowledge that there are these problems.

This is a fair statement, yet certain local MPs and opponents of free speech have called for the demo to be prohibited and the SWP has, as is its wont, formed a local front group in the town named ‘Dewsbury Unity’ to mount a counterdemonstration. Recently elected Respect MP George Galloway and Labour MP Mike Wood penned a joint letter to West Yorkshire Police Commissioner Sir Norman Bettison asking for the EDL to be banned from protesting in Dewsbury, but thankfully this request was not granted. The statement released by the SWP-directed ‘Dewsbury Unity’ is worth quoting to highlight the absurdities of their propaganda which is swallowed wholesale and regurgitated by the mainstream media:

The EDL is a racist group dedicated to attacking Asian people and Muslims. Islamophobia – bigotry against Muslims — is as unacceptable as any other form of racism. Its aim is to divide us by making scapegoats of one community, just as the Nazis did with the Jews in the 1930s.Today the EDL threaten Muslims. Tomorrow it could be Jewish people, Hindus, Sikhs, black people, lesbians and gay men, travellers or East Europeans. There is no place for Nazis, racists or the EDL in Dewsbury’s multiracial, multicultural and multi-faith community.

ITV's Calendar News proved to be dutifully 'on-message' in this respect, and in its report on the demo this morning gave a platform to Batley and Spen MP Mike Wood to state his opposition to the EDL whilst not allowing a right of reply to the EDL. The EDL were naturally described as 'far-right', whereas the undoubted far-left nature of the opposition controlled by the SWP was completely glossed over. As with the recent BBC coverage of the forthcoming EDL demo in Bristol, the cost of the policing operation in Dewsbury was emphasised, once again failing to note that one of the primary reasons for such heavy policing is the willingness of the EDL's opponents to unleash violence. In contrast to ITV, the BBC did not even bother to run a news item on the Dewsbury demo.

Readers will perhaps ‘appreciate’ the clip of Shahid Malik at the end of this article addressing a Muslim conference in which he states how he would like to see a Muslim Prime Minister (presumably himself) in the UK one day, as well as many other Muslims in leading positions in parliament. Updates relating to the progress of today’s demonstration will be posted below as news comes in. 

EDL March in Dewsbury: 30 June 2012

'Live' Updates:
The anti-EDL Hope not Hate blog noted in a post at 11:38 that Dewsbury seemed strangely quiet for a Saturday as EDL supporters began to arrive in the town. As of 12:25, the blog was claiming that the EDL had brought in about 200 demonstrators, rather than the 450 estimated by the West Yorkshire Police. The EDL Forum on the other hand was reporting a total of 1,000 EDL supporters. The actual figure is likely to lie between the two extremes, with what seems to be a relatively low turnout perhaps being partly attributable to the unappealing prospect of getting drenched in a thunderstorm. The EDL Forum asserted that only 30 UAF counter-protesters had turned out, although estimates from their opponents have not yet been forthcoming. If true, this would be a staggeringly low number considering the amount of resources, funding and media backing behind the anti-EDL effort. 

As of 13:17, it had been reported that the police had arrested one EDL protestor. Stephen Lennon/Tommy Robinson was said not to have been able to attend today's demonstration because of "domestic issues". Presumably, this is why the speeches came to an early close, with proceedings having been wrapped up by 14:05. The original finish time had been scheduled for 15:00.

Keen to make political capital out of the EDL's visit to Dewsbury, the Leader of Kirklees Council Mehboob Khan, currently under investigation according to The Huddersfield Daily Examiner for interfering with Freedom of Information requests from the public, has stated:

The cost of the EDL rally is the best part of £500,000 to the tax payer, outrageous and the EDL should be made to pay full cost. Thank you to decent local people for their unequivocal rejection of EDL propaganda. They are not welcome in Dewsbury.

Now, what may be the cost of Khan's alleged meddling with Freedom of Information requests to the democratic integrity and accountability of Kirklees Council? This is not the first time that Khan's integrity has been called into question, as in 2007 he ran up a bill of £2,000 for personal calls made to Uzbekistan using council phones. Somehow, on that occasion he managed to rough out the storm and go on to greater political success.

We never see council leaders asking for trades unions to cover the costs of policing demos, or indeed, holding the SWP front group UAF to account for necessitating such heavy policing at EDL protests. Quite clearly, Mehboob Khan has had a bad week politically, and is looking to appeal to his people's bloc vote to keep him in office. Evidently, he is also hoping that he can curry favour with the wider electorate, but if recent allegations prove to be substantiated, this could perhaps be the beginning of the end for this Labour politician's political career.

Five arrests and a small counterdemonstration
West Yorkshire Police issued a statement after this afternoon's protest, thanking the organisers of both the EDL demo and counterdemonstration for ensuring that both were "peaceful". It confirmed that the EDL protest was approximately 450 strong, whereas only circa 50 individuals turned up to the counterdemonstration. There were also "five arrests for minor incidents" although it was not clarified who had been arrested. Clearly, given the significant resources behind the SWP-organised and trades-union endorsed counterdemonstration which was provided with positive coverage by the mass media, the EDL can be adjudged to have emerged as the 'victor' in today's contest. Although the EDL demo was not large, the weakness of the 'Dewsbury Unity' effort was just as, if not more, telling.

Video footage from the demo can be accessed here.

EDL Supporters in Dewsbury

 

Mounted Police escort EDL in Dewsbury   

Sayeeda Warsi plays the Race Card

Why was Sayeeda Warsi created a life peer at the age of 36 in 2007? What has she done to merit the title of ‘Baroness’? A failed Conservative candidate, who specialised in immigration law who is said to have opportunistically selected the Conservative Party because it seemed to offer her the best chance of career progression, and who has spent time working for Pakistan’s ‘Ministry of Law’. How does that experience and background translate into the right to hold such an honour, or to take on the role of Chairman of our governing political party? The number of better-qualified candidates is legion, so why was she selected? What does she have to offer, that others could not? In what manner does she purport to defend and advance our national interests? How can she speak, with any authority, on behalf of the nation, or of the English?

I ask these questions today, as Warsi once again takes up the baton to fight on behalf of maintaining the right of chain-migration from outside of the EU, using the spurious pretext of familial reunion, which of course is only invoked when those in question wish to be reunited in our country rather than in their familial country of origin (remember the case of Rashida Chapti?). Warsi has knowingly chosen to play the race card, claiming that Theresa May’s proposed immigration reforms ‘could be considered racist’ because of the stated intent of preventing ‘UK citizens earning under £40,000 to bring in a foreign wife or husband,’ although this has subsequently been reduced to £18,600 with a £2,200 allowance for each child. Warsi claims that this will effectively be a ‘whites only’ policy.

Now, might this outburst from Warsi have something to do with the fact that she is currently under scrutiny for ‘possible breaches of the ministerial code’ and thus may be considering a forced return to her old field of legal practice, immigration law? What would she do if she couldn’t return to the profitable business of expediting Pakistani chain migration? Quite clearly, Warsi is not fit to hold a position of political influence in this country because she actively undermines the first principle of democracy – the right of a people to political self-determination – by seeking to change the human fabric of the body politic itself, thereby denying our right to national self-determination. It should be up to us, and to us alone, to determine who may live here and who may be granted the rights of citizenship. We should not be in a position, where decisions upon the allocation of such a status are within the gift of an individual possessed of a cleft identity, who in ethnic and religious terms clearly identifies more with her ancestral familial homeland and culture, than with the native people of her country of residence. Her stance and actions pave the way for national dissolution through mass immigration, as advocated recently by European-nation despising Peter Sutherland. 

How many conservatives with a small ‘c’ genuinely support what the Conservative Party has become? Do they really think that it seeks to represent them today, being as it is pro-EU, pro-mass immigration and pro-multiculturalism? Isn’t it time that they started looking around for other political options to support? 

EDL Luton Demo: First Reports and Tommy Robinson’s support for David Cameron’s Speech on Multiculturalism

Initial reports coming in from the EDL demo in Luton today indicate that circa 2,000 police have been deployed to keep public order and prevent UAF protesters from clashing with the EDL. The Hope Not Hate campaign claimed that by midday around 1,000 EDL supporters had arrived, whereas the EDL itself is hoping to bring 10,000 protesters to the streets. It has also been claimed that some coachloads of EDL protestors have been turned back because the passengers were drunk. German, Dutch and Swedish Defence League flags have been spotted, highlighting the international links that the EDL has developed over the years.

Nick Lowles of Hope Not Hate has written: 

EDL leader Stephen Lennon has said of Cameron's multicultural comments: "He's now saying what we're saying. He knows his base."

That just about sums up Cameron's ridiculous and badly timed intervention.

For all that Lowles says, although Cameron’s speech is billed as ‘rejecting multiculturalism’ in favour of a ‘muscular liberalism’, I can guarantee that this will be nothing more than an attempt to gain some favourable headlines in papers such as the Daily Mail and Telegraph. Given that press releases have referred to his wish to tackle ‘extremist ideologies’ (note the plural) I predict that subsequent policy will instead consist of a ‘muscular multiculturalism’ which will focus equally upon damning Islamism and British/English nationalism. You will recall Cameron’s injunction from a year or two ago for mainstream British society to learn from mainstream Muslim values. Witness also Sayeeda Warsi’s shrill prelude to the oncoming anti-nationalist witch-hunt with her admonition of members of the indigenous middle class for their so-called socially acceptable ‘Islamophobia’.

Cameron will focus as much upon attacking the EDL as he will upon Islamism. Tommy Robinson (Stephen Lennon) will thus be fooling himself if he thinks that ‘cast iron Dave’ will do anything to seriously tackle Islamisation in this country. For example, the Tories are already committed to overseeing an expansion in the network of faith schools and are now funding Muslim schools which will rear a generation of English-despising Muslims with a superiority complex coupled with the usual sense of Muslim resentment about the wider non-Islamic society within which they reside. This is the reality of Cameron’s ‘attack’ upon multiculturalism. Cameron’s seeming shift on this issue should be seen in the same light as his promise to hold a referendum on the EU and to limit mass immigration, both of which were worthless verbiage. The fact that Cameron chose to make his speech on the same day as the Luton demo suggests that he is attempting to undermine the base of support for the EDL. In that respect Tommy, Cameron indeed ‘knows his base’ (click here for a more in-depth consideration of Cameron's speech).

Press Reaction
Press reaction to the EDL’s Luton outing has been predictably hostile, using the usual panoply of National Union of Journalists (NUJ) pariah terms: the Daily Mail dubbed the EDL ‘far-right’, called its protest ‘inflammatory’ and dutifully and uncritically reported the UAF chant of ‘Nazi scum off our streets’ which made the paper complicit in this defamation of the movement. The Daily Mirror called it ‘far-right’, and even went so far as to regurgitate Labour MP Sadiq Khan’s ridiculous accusation that Cameron’s speech about multiculturalism was tantamount to 'writing propaganda for the EDL'. The Guardian predictably ran with an hysterical edition featuring numerous articles on the ‘far-right’ EDL, with its harridan Suzanne Moore describing the EDL as using the ‘language of fake inclusiveness’ and as being ‘the mirror image of Al-Mahajiroun’. She once again deployed that tired old canard linking economic bad times and the rise of the ‘far right’: ‘Far-right movements will, of course, thrive during a recession.’ Nick Lowles of ‘anti-fascist’ campaign group Hope Not Hate was also afforded the opportunity to write an opinion piece on the EDL. The movement must be doing something right to whip up this near-universal torrent of opprobrium.

Always remember that the tactics used by the mainstream media, politicians and leftist campaigns against patriotic movements and parties opposed to globalisation and Islamisation can be summarised by the following acronym: SID. This stands for stigmatise, isolate and destroy. Whenever you read reports about the EDL or patriotic parties here or across Europe, remember to read them taking this tactic into account. Robinson's speech to the EDL crowd in Luton's St George's Square can be viewed here:

EDL Protestors at Luton Station (courtesy of PI News)

EDL Protestors in Luton Town Centre

http://durotrigan.blogspot.com/2011/02/tommy-robinson-addresses-edl-in-lutons.html

Lord Ahmed defends predatory Muslim Paedophiles

The Mail has today run an extraordinary story in which Labour ‘Lord’ Ahmed (another fake peer in the mould of bogus ‘Baroness’ Warsi) has spoken up in defence of predatory Pakistani paedophiles. Instead of blaming these despicable men for their repellent crimes, he instead has the gall to blame white English society, our women in particular, for the perpetration of these misdeeds. The pro-paedophile peer was speaking in response to the recent reporting of the phenomenon of on-street underage grooming of young English girls which has been conducted almost exclusively by Muslims, predominantly Pakistanis.

It is obvious to anyone who knows about Islam that such behaviour is not only sanctioned by the religion, but openly encouraged by the example of its founder. How many times have you heard that Mohammed was the perfect man and should never under any circumstances be criticised? How often have you heard it said that Muslims should seek to emulate his life and example? Well, given that Mohammed himself was a violent predatory paedophile who deliberately targeted unbelievers for his murderous crimes, why ought we to be surprised when those who see this individual as the ‘perfect man’ hold our children in contempt and abuse them for their debased sexual gratification? They are doing nothing more than being ‘good’ Muslims in the mould of Mohammed. Thankfully of course, many Muslims owing to their innate human decency choose not to follow the example of this pariah prophet, and I am not in any way seeking to impugn their good characters.

The pro-paedophile peer justified the actions of the Muslim child rapists with reference to the fact that a number of them had been forced into unhappy first-cousin marriages, but then he adds:

‘But they are looking for fun in their sexual activities and seek out vulnerable girls.’

He said Asian men resort to abusing young white girls because they do not want meaningful relationships with adult white women.

‘An adult woman – if you are having an affair – would want your time, money and for you to break up your marriage,’ the peer added.

So Ahmed, are you implying that our women should simply allow themselves to be sexually available to service your emotionally damaged co-religionists? You are are effectively demanding that our women give themselves up as whores to be abused whenever the lusts of male members of your soi-disant ‘community’ move them to search out an object of gratification. Your attitude is self-serving and repellent.

I am sure that with Ahmed and Warsi sat in the House of Lords our women and girls will be feeling very ‘safe’, knowing that they are to blame for the rapes, pimping and drug addiction that are forced upon them by Pakistani Muslim gangs in so many of our towns and cities. Derby, Keighley, Rotherham, Rochdale: all have witnessed this pattern of abuse. In how many other locations is this sad story played out? Well Sayeeda, thanks for accusing us all of Islamophobia. Remember, a phobia is an irrational fear. What is irrational about fearing men who follow a creed that urges them to systematically sexually abuse those who do not follow their faith?

If you have daughters and live in an area near to a Muslim population, my advice to you would be to ensure that they know from an early age that they should as a precaution keep away from Muslim males, and that they are aware of the historical character and crimes of Mohammed. Protect your children from predation, because I can assure you that our educational system is filling their heads with a bowldlerised vision of Islam which leaves them naively vulnerable.

'Look North' looks East

Prompted, it seems, by the recent comments made by faux Baroness Sayeeda Warsi (if she’s a baroness I may as well call myself the Baron of Elmet or the Akond of Swat) “that Islamophobia has now crossed the threshold of middle-class respectability," the BBC’s Look North regional news programme has over the past week run a couple of evening reports seeking to ‘redress’ what the BBC controllers evidently think is a very real phenomenon in Yorkshire. First we had a glowing report about how one of Bradford’s new mosques had been voted as possessing the most beautiful minarets in Europe, and then earlier this week we were treated to the sight of two young fellows in the teatime slot talking about why Islam is luring a number of gullible (my word, not theirs) men into joining its ranks in the UK. For some reason, the fact that some 5,000 indigenous males were said to have converted elicited nothing more from the interviewers than the question “why?” The Muslim doctoral student researching this topic together with an English convert explained that it was because people were looking for certainties and values.

Well, empty vessels crave to be filled I suppose. Still, a surfeit of cream cakes or ale would be less harmful than this most dreadful doctrine to which this young man has given himself over. I feel sorry for his family and hope that some day he grows out of this fad and recognises it for the mistake that it was.

Unlike Warsi, rather than creating a public atmosphere of so-called ‘Islamophobia’, I would contend that our mainstream media (the BBC to an egregious extent) and politicians have fostered a situation in which sentiments critical of Islam may only be expressed without fear between friends within their own homes, irrespective of whether they be middle class or otherwise. The BBC and the trade union movement, together with many local councils, have been mounting an effort to ‘normalise’ the image of Islam and to stigmatise its critics. The deployment of the words ‘Islamophobia’, ‘Islamophobe’, ‘bigot’ and ‘racist’ and others of that ilk against critics of Islamic doctrine are quite deliberate.

These terms are designed specifically to cow dissident voices and to assign pariah status to people who dare to deviate from the official line that Islam is now an integral part of the British way of life and is a religion like any other. Thus, people who quite rightly note that conventional mainstream Islamic doctrine possesses rather unsavoury views on the rights (more accurately, complete absence thereof) of atheists, pagans, homosexuals and women (of course, Islamists claim that women have ‘rights’ within Islam, but the ‘rights’ that they talk of are the sort of rights that we assign to lab rats and not to fellow human beings, for their ‘rights’ are of a qualitatively different nature) find themselves the object of officially-directed opprobrium. To speak freely and to speak the truth in the UK today can land the speaker in serious hot water and can destroy your career. Mainstream media and political opinion dictates that a strong dislike of the promotion of the inhumane doctrine of Islam is reflexively identified as and conflated with ‘hatred’ of people who by an accident of birth happen to have been born into Muslim families. This of course, is completely false, but the truth of this statement is not relevant to the agenda of the enablers of Islam.

Now, given that Christa Ackroyd can at times irradiate a most unpleasant orange glow, gained presumably by spending an excessive amount of time in the local tanning salon, perhaps the viewer could be forgiven for occasionally thinking that her donning a burka/burqa (pick your spelling, it’s the same old ghost outfit) might be a good idea, but much as I might find her a little irritating at times, this truly would be an alarming prospect. Christa, much as your permatan makes my eyes ache, please stand up for your right to show your face in public and stop pandering to folk who’d like to see you speak from behind a wall of cloth if they’d deign to let you speak at all.

Could this be the BBC's new official logo?

Militant Islam in Dewsbury Part 2: Demography, Ideology and Insularity

Deobandi Islam came to Dewsbury in the 1950s with an influx of immigrants from Pakistan and India who came to work in the town’s woollen mills. They settled predominantly in Savile Town and Ravensthorpe [1]. This is a tale familiar to many of Britain’s northern towns and cities, and, as elsewhere, these exotic seeds later bloomed into so many fleurs du mal.

Dewsbury’s own deathly blooms included 7/7 bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan, who worshipped at the town’s Markazi mosque [2]; Waris Ali, a Ravensthorpe resident convicted at the age of 18 for planning to bomb BNP members [3], and Adnan Hussain, who threatened a woman by saying “he knew people who would “slit her throat”” simply because she refused to sell him cigarettes [4]. All products of the oft-termed “austere” interpretation of Islam favoured by the Deobandis and their religio-political offshoot: Tablighi Jamaat. Deobandi Islam is not on the fringes of Muslim life in the UK. Far from it. According to a Times report published in 2007, some 600 of Britain’s 1,350 mosques were run by followers of this branch of the faith [5].

Dewsbury's Markazi Mosque

Once they had founded their colonies, Dewsbury’s Muslim newcomers kept to themselves. Turning inwards, they cleaved to their ancestral Islamic beliefs and practices rather than assimilating to the host culture and population. Why assimilate to the latter, when they clearly believed that their own beliefs and ways were, in their perceptions, so self-evidently ‘superior’? Endogamy and chain migration maintained their biological cohesion; the mosque and the madrassah enforced their ideological unity; assaults and intimidation cowed the non-Muslim population and maintained their enclaves’ nascent territorial integrity. The enclaves expanded as the local English population sought to vacate properties in their immediate vicinity, thereby facilitating Muslim expansion. In this way did they build demographic, cultural and spiritual outposts of Gujarat and Pakistan. One instance amongst many. Heaton was once a pleasant place (so I’ve been told).

Tablighi Jamaat, which runs Dewsbury’s Markazi mosque, is the force behind plans to construct the London ‘mega-mosque’ and has been attributed as the radicalising influence which led Kaheel Ahmed (a doctor of Indian origin) to die in his attempted car bombing of Glasgow Airport in August 2007. Tablighi Jamaat’s European headquarters is found in Dewsbury, and its core beliefs go a long way to explaining the motivations underpinning the repeated attacks upon Dewsbury’s non-Muslim population. A Times article published in September 2007 stated:

“Tablighi Jamaat was founded in 1926, in India, by a Deobandi scholar, Muhammad Ilyas, who wanted to raise Islamic awareness among rural Muslims in south Asia. He promised them that by obeying Islamic laws and following the example of the Prophet Muhammad in their personal lives they would one day “dominate over non-believers” and become “masters of everything on this earth”.”

“Ishaq Patel, Tablighi Jamaat’s first amir (leader) in Britain, is said to have been on pilgrimage in Mecca when Ilyas’s successor gave him a long-term mission to win “the whole of Britain to Islam”.” [6]

Members of Dewsbury’s Muslim colony thus take in such views with their mothers’ milk, and they are reinforced day after day, week after week, year after year in the local mosques and the Markazi adjunct known as the Institute of Islamic Education. Tightly bound by these ideological ties which cultivate an attitude of supremacy and hatred towards the non-Muslims who live around them, is it any wonder that we see them attack the innocent? Those who would have you believe that these Deobandis are victims of racist discrimination, poverty and relative deprivation are either deliberately lying or deeply ignorant and self-deceiving. The violence at the heart of Dewsbury is cultivated and legitimated by Deobandi Islam, and it cannot be stopped by ploughing money and resources into these so-called ‘communities’ (i.e. colonies). Take away Islam and you remove the source of the violence.

Dewsbury is of course the constituency of disgraced Labour ex-Minister Shahid Malik (who has called for a Muslim PM in the UK (see video below)) and home to his Conservative parliamentary rival in the 2005 General Election ‘Baroness’ [sic] Sayeeda “I would fail the cricket test” Warsi. Hopefully, the voters will punish Malik at next year’s General Election. For want of a better means of expressing dissatisfaction it would be satisfying if the BNP vote were to rise, and martyr Malik will lose his seat.



The BNP have polled well in Dewsbury where they have stood in a succession of elections, taking a new high of 5,066 votes - 13.1% of those cast - in 2005 [7]. How any non-Muslim voters could cast their ballot for Malik again, I do not know. Such voters would do well to voice their dissatisfaction with the unwillingness of the local authorities and West Yorkshire Police to recognise, let alone confront the town’s Islamist problem, by delivering, for want of a better choice, a strong vote to the BNP in 2010. The Deobandi bullies will not be beaten unless someone stands up for their victims: the non-Muslim people of Dewsbury.

References:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewsbury
[2] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2419524.ece
[3] http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Terror-trial-pupil-39approved-of.4568349.jp
[4] http://www.thepressnews.co.uk/NewsDetails.asp?id=3913
[5] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2419524.ece
[6] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2419524.ece
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party_election_results