This is another gem from Choudhary. Interestingly though in an example of naivety another blogger described Choudhary's group of Muslims who greeted British Soldiers with placards saying 'Anglians go to hell' as anti-war protesters. The poster went on to say that these individuals were right to protest as 'Between 601,027 and 1 million people have died since March 2003 as a result of the invasion of Iraq.' Leaving aside the fact that the statistics are incorrect, a better question would be 'who did most of the killing'? Here is the problem therefore with describing Choudhary's motley band of Jihadists as 'anti war'. They are not, they are in fact pro-war, pro-Jihad. Look at the article below for just one example of Choudhary's views. Also bear in mind that most of the killing in Iraq was done by Jihadists, the Al Qaeda movement and Shia militants aligned with and sponsored by Iran. It becomes clear that these protestors are far from linking their arms and singing 'we will overcome'. They are in fact supporters of extreme acts of violence which have killed many Iraqis. It was not American troops who ploughed suicide car bombs into Shia pilgrims in Iraq. Never mind of course Choudhary et al they have a right to peacefully protest in the UK, I just wish that Geert Wilders had a right to come into Britain for a peaceful debate as well. Full text of Choudhary’s latest below:
‘MAKE EVERY WOMAN WEAR A BURKHA’
Anjem Choudary
Saturday March 14,2009
By Martyn Brown
A MUSLIM hate preacher who demanded that all British women be forced to wear burkhas faced a storm of outrage last night.
Firebrand Anjem Choudary said he wanted every woman to be covered by a full-length cloak in his vision of Britain under Sharia law.The lawyer, who praised the Mumbai terror attacks, also said he wanted to see the “flag of Allah” flying over Downing Street, adulterers stoned to death and drunks whipped.Choudary, 41, sparked fury this week when he branded British soldiers “cowards” and was behind a sickening anti-war protest against troops who were arriving home from Iraq to a heroic welcome.Last night politicians and fellow Muslims condemned his comments while some called for him to leave the country.Choudary, the leader of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, a group set up following the banning of extremist sect al-Muhajiroun, led by now-exiled preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed, said he offered “a pure Islamic state with Sharia law in Britain”. He said: “Every woman, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, would have to wear a traditional burkha and covereverything apart from her face and hands in public.”“In matters to do with the judicial system and the penal code, one male witness is sufficient to counter the testimony of two females. People who commit adultery would be stoned to death.”Despite becoming possibly the most despised man in Britain with his fanatical views, he remained unrepentant.“That’s a badge I would wear with pride,” he said. “It’s inevitable that when you offer an alternative morality and way of life, many people will hate you for it.”
He said Britons “with their alcohol, gambling, prostitution and pornography” live “like animals in a jungle” and added that “anyone who becomes intoxicated by alcohol would be given 40 lashes in public”. He claimed last month on his website Islam4UK that alcohol was “the root of all evil”. Last night his comments were met with outrage. Conservative MP and ex-Army officer Patrick Mercer said: “If anyone thinks that those views are a step forward in society they are seriously deluded. They are repellent and repulsive. I strongly believe the Home Secretary should seriously think about this man’s right to live in Britain.”Tory MP Philip Davies said: “The man is an idiot who does more to incite racial tensions than anyone else. “If he wants Britain to live under Sharia law then why doesn’t he go to another country?” Choudary was also attacked by moderate Muslims. Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “Choudary and his tiny group of hooligans are about as representative of British Muslim opinion as the BNP is of ordinary British public opinion. “If their inflammatory remarks ever cross the boundary into actual incitement to violence then they should be prosecuted.”Iraqi war victim Ali Abbas, 18, who came to the UK after losing both arms and his family in the conflict, said: “Where was this Muslim preacher when I and countless others were lying in hospital beds not knowing if we were going to die?”
2 comments:
YA, thank you and happy Easter. Firstly lets look at the issue of Jewish migration from Iraq to Israel. You claimed that an Israeli Government inquiry blamed 'Zionist agents' for the bombings. However a cursory glance at sources states 'Israeli officials of the time and in particular Mordechai Ben Porat and Shlomo Hillel, prominent figures at the Iraqi Zionist underground, vehemently deny the charges. An internal investigation conducted in Israel in 1960 found no proof of an order to execute such an attack. More possible responsible parties have been suggested, such as the Iraqi CID and the Muslim Brotherhood.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naeim_Giladi#cite_note-Philip_Mendes-3
I apologise that my source is wiki, yet wiki in this instance does at least provide access to a variety of sources on this matter. Perhaps its best if we both say that some Iraqi Jews did feel the Hagannah or Mossad were responsible. Others such as Moshe Gat and Mordechai Ben Porat state differently and blame Arab nationalist or Islamist groups. However you are plain wrong to state that the Israeli government blamed Zionists they did not.
On another point you again surprised me by saying 'I never said the MEK was a Salafist group'. Well I will quote you directly on what you did actually say 'Actually, the U.S is arming al-Quadea affiliated groups carrying out "destabilization campaigns" (i.e: terrorism) within Iran's borders.'
http://amodernlibertarian.blogspot.com/2009/02/nato-general-suggests-member-states.html
There you have it exactly what you said, now are you sure the MEK is an 'Al Qaeda grouping? They are a defunct Maoist grouping in the process of being disbanded by the Iraqi government.
Finally I will stick to my guns that it is foolish to compare Olmert with Bashir. Of course the writ of international law should be observed (so long as that law is democratic and constitutional). But Bashir has murdered hundreds of thousands and seems to have the acquiescence of the Arab league in that endeavour.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7971624.stm
Olmert may have acted over zealously in defending his people according to some, or not at all according to others. There is a difference. I have said it before, but this is not comparing apples with apples.
Thanks for replying anyway and reinvigorating my interest in this blog.
Thanks for replying. I provided a link to where on my blog you said the US was supporting Al Qaeda groups in Iran. However we should agree to disagree or else we'll just end up in a puerile argument over who said what.
I will check out what you said on your blog later. One point I have made which you have not addressed is to contrast Israel's actions with those of recent NATO operations. Of course I am not suggesting that two wrongs make a right. My point is that in both Lebanon in 2006 and recently in Gaza Israel could fairly be said to be operating in self defence.
But what about Serbia in 1999? Serbia posed no possible threat to NATO members and yet was subject to an intense air campaign that destroyed its civic infrastructure. You have condemned Israel's similar (in your opinion) targeting of civic infrastructure in Gaza recently. Yet NATO in 1999 went so far as to blow up Serbia's own television service, I am still amazed that this happened. By contrast Israel recently did no such thing against Palestinian media outlets. Palestinian outlets as you are aware frequently pump out vile propaganda, with a character called Asud a Jew eating bunny. All the Serbian presenters were guilty of in 1999 was of being cocky. I apologise now I don't have time to find a source for Asud but he is real and you have probably seen him yourself. My point is that by comparison with Israel Britain and the USA have recently done worse. I'll make more of a mention of this later after I've checked out your blog.
Post a Comment