Saturday, June 23, 2007

Muslims called to ‘hold the Queen accountable’

The Labour peer Lord Ahmed of Rotherham has accused the Prime Minister of hypocrisy for bestowing a knighthood on Salman Rushdie, and he asks: ‘What would one say if the Saudi or Afghan governments honoured the martyrs of the September 11 attacks on the United States?’ Although not quite a ‘martyr’ (yet), Pakistan’s Ulema Council has bestowed a top honour on Osama bin Laden in response to the British accolade. He is now Osama Bin Laden Saifullah (Sword of Allah).

But to compare Sir Salman Rushdie to the September 11th hijackers is not only outrageous; it is a highly provocative statement, if not incitement. This Peer of the Realm lends his support to those who bring curses upon Her Majesty, and also to those who insist that if Mr Blair is to become a Middle East envoy, he should be sent back ‘in a bag’. Lord Ahmed lends weight from the heart of Parliament to the demands of the Pakistani religious affairs minister Ijaz ul-Haq, who said the move to honour Mr Rushdie justified suicide bombings.

Leaflets were handed out from the Regent’s Park mosque saying: ‘The British Government's decision to honour Salman Rushdie is a public demonstration of their hatred and contempt towards Islam.’ Apparently, they now ‘have a responsibility to hold the Queen accountable for standing with the people who insult Islam’.

What does this mean? How do they intend to ‘hold the Queen accountable’?

It is significant that a Pakistani group of traders has offered a reward of 10 million rupees for anyone who beheads Sir Salman. This appears to have support from Pakistan’s National Assembly, which is not only demanding that the British government revoke the knighthood and ‘apologise to the Islamic world’, but one MP has also called for Sir Salman to be murdered, declaring: ‘Whosoever kills him will be the hero of Muslims’. Is this what they mean by holding to account?

But it is not only apostates and Christian infidels who are in danger: Britain’s first Muslim MP, Mohammed Sarwar, has announced that he is to step down from the House of Commons at the next general election after he and his family received repeated death threats from other Muslims. Mr Sarwar was pivotal in securing the extradition from Pakistan of three Muslims for kidnapping, torturing and murdering the white schoolboy Kriss Donald in 2004. By helping to convict them, by ensuring justice was done, Mr Sarwar has been found guilty of betraying the ummah – the brotherhood of Islam – and so deserves to die…as do his children…and grandchildren.

Mohammed Sarwar MP can be proud that he not only made history, he has pursued justice. Lord Ahmed should be ashamed, and his peerage should be withdrawn forthwith.


Anonymous The Clarendon Code said...

Nazir Ahmed is a Labour Party hack rewarded in 1998 for his services in delivering the Bloc Vote from his fellow Mirpuris.

He is a semi-educated individual who wants to play rabble-rouser but should end up reaping what he is busy sowing.

So far people in Britain have been remarkably tolerant of the antics of incendiaries like Nazir Ahmed and his attempts to make a name for himself, but faith in institutions in this country is so brittle and so corroded that he may one day find his straw broke the camel's back.

It is remarkable how more and more this country resembles the England into which Charles I made his clumsy entry, and it might well e that Charles III will be the point at which the witches' brew boils over

23 June 2007 at 10:38  
Blogger dizzyfatplonka said...

What realy gets my back up on this whole issue is the millions, or together with the USA lets say billions being paid to Pakistan by our governments jointly.
Given that Pakistan has awarded Bin Laden the Sword of Islam, Bush and Blair are as good as funding the Taliban to kill our troops in Afghanistan.
If Iraq was not a war crime that certainly should be.

23 June 2007 at 11:14  
Anonymous worried said...

Let us not also forget that Nazir Ahmed is touted amongst the "cognoscenti" as a "moderate", an example for all Mohammedans to follow.

23 June 2007 at 11:19  
Blogger istanbultory said...

AS Clarendon has accurately pointed out, Labour is beholden to the Muslim bloc vote up and down the country. Or at least, the Party is cognisant of its significant loss of support among the Muslim community post-Iraq. Thus, the Labour Party will be loathe to take on His Lordship and pour oil on troubled waters at the present time. Lord Ahmed is, of course, a serial offender in causing uproar. He has offended the Jewish community in the past and provoked squabbling and dissension within his own party.
See here: there's another "interesting" specimen of Islamic labourite....

23 June 2007 at 13:10  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

It is time that some in high places admitted that what is wrong with Islam is the religion itself, and that ultimately, if faithfully practised, it is intolerable in a free society.

23 June 2007 at 13:12  
Blogger Man in a shed said...

You can probably argue that anyone who isn't a muslim insults islam. Hence they are claiming the right to the conquest of all of humanity by force.

23 June 2007 at 13:40  
Anonymous CCTV said...

some in high places admitted that what is wrong with Islam is the religion itself,

Oil is a Lubricant......don't ever forget Politics palms are always lubricated....

23 June 2007 at 15:08  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Little black sambo,
'couldn't agree more. And here's why:

23 June 2007 at 16:11  
Anonymous Moomintroll said...

Lord Ahmed, as a peer of the realm, will have taken an oath of loyalty to Her Majesty. To issue a threat against her is an act of treason, and he is no longer fit to be a peer of the realm (if indeed he ever was). The only acceptable response to this is a bill of attainder to strip him of his peerage. Of course, this government will be too frightened of loosing the Muslim vote to do so, and will not be moved by minor considerations such as legality and patriotism.

23 June 2007 at 22:06  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...

That picture you posted - Chaudary. He's in joint first place in my mental Litte Black Book.

When I'm appointed Commisioner for Islamic Affairs (with plenipotentiary powers regarding all things Islam), his life is going to get very interesting very quickly, along with that of Trevor Brookes, in joint first place. There will be no protection from Europe.

Now I suppose I'd better go up and read the other comments. I usually do before making any comment myself, but seeing Chaudary's face glazes my eyes over with a red mist.

23 June 2007 at 23:57  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

Little Black Sambo, there are regular debates about what is said and not said in the Quran and I thank Istanbultory for the website. But I am sure that Mohammed Sarwar would say he is a faithful follower of his religion and is also free. Would you both then argue that he (or any other Muslim who thinks he is free) is lacking self-awareness?

24 June 2007 at 00:09  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...

Here's a cross-post of a comment I made earlier on Up Pompeii:

Sir HM wrote:
I crossed swords wit Achmed on Radio 5 once. I made my comment, he responded. I utterly destroyed his response. He wasn't heard from again.

First: [my comment about Islam]

Then Lord Achmed: "I think there must be a racist component to what he said"

Then: [My furious response to that accusation, detailing a little of my personal family history re wife and daughter]

Presenter: "What have you to say about that Lord Achmed? Lord Achmed? Are you still there Lord Achmed? Oh dear, it seems Lord Achmed is no longer with us."

The details I gave concerned my near quarter-century marriage to a South Asian woman, and the fact that my one and only child in this world is herself half Asian. I cannot afford to be racist. What concerns me isn't the colour of the skin wrapped around the outside of someone's skull, or the features adorning the front of it: it's the ideology and beliefs that are bouncing around inside it.

And neither did my father hate Germans: he wanted to put an end to Naziism.

24 June 2007 at 00:10  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...


Why not read what a Muslim has to say on that very topic:


24 June 2007 at 00:20  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh dear, it seems Lord Achmed is no longer with us." it true ?

24 June 2007 at 02:47  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

Sir Henry Morgan
Thank you for the site. While I understand that some Muslims - like the one writing your suggested site or indeed the ones His Grace writes about in this blogpost - are extremely critical of moderate Muslims and say that they are not true Muslims, I am not sure it adds weight to the argument that it is impossible to be both Muslim and free.

If we reject everything that extreme Muslims have to say, with much righteous cause I might add, then it is perhaps foolhardy to accept one strand of their beliefs (that moderate Muslims are not true Muslims) simply because they, as Muslims, say so.

I am not saying that Black Sambo is wrong necessarily. Perhaps it is indeed impossible to be both Muslim and free. But neither you, nor he has demonstrated an argument sturdy enough to prove the point. But thank you nevertheless for the site - it did make for interesting reading.

24 June 2007 at 11:04  
Anonymous CCTV said...

I am not sure it adds weight to the argument that it is impossible to be both Muslim and free.

Islam is a politico-religion based upon group control and fear - it has all the hallmarks of a cult. Very few cults permit individual freedom.

24 June 2007 at 12:59  
Anonymous Sir HM said...


I would have thought that the defining characteristic of being free is that you can walk away with no penalty.

Islam does not permit this for its adherents. They are not free, under penalty of death for apostasy, to walk away from Islam.

I walked away from Christianity (not the philosophy of Jesus, or at least not all of it, but the God stuff)at no penalty. Had I been a Muslim in a Muslim part of the world I would not have been free to do that.

24 June 2007 at 15:09  
Anonymous billy said...

"Britain’s first Muslim MP, Mohammed Sarwar, has announced that he is to step down from the House of Commons at the next general election.."

Your Grace,
Is this the muslim Mp whose deserved election was marred by allegations of voting fraud and whose innocent son was recently found guilty in some trumped up fraud case?
If it is the same person I don't suppose that these embarassments have anything to do with their downstepping. I do hope not because there is so much we can learn form our British Asian cousins about propriety; although Mr Blair seems to be well ahead in lesson learning.

24 June 2007 at 17:51  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older