TCS Daily


Britain's Mad Mullah

By Val MacQueen - September 7, 2005 12:00 AM

After the July 7 terrorist bombings on London Transport and the now-traditional evasions, equivocations and barely concealed satisfaction of Britain's seething mad mullahs and the Islamic grievance industry, Tony Blair went on national TV to announce that the government would find a way round the EU Human Rights Act to deport terrorists. "Let no one be in any doubt," he said, "the rules of the game are changing."

Given Blair's history of grandiose announcements of "cracking down" on public drunkenness, drug use in schools, unruly classrooms, crime, NHS hospitals riddled with killer superbugs, and other social ills, the British maintained their equilibrium and paid no attention. The only person who appeared to credit Blair with being able to follow an announcement through with action was self-styled "Sheik" Omar Bakri, a hate-preacher, aka "the Tottenham ayatollah" who, although without a passport, managed to quickly board a plane to Lebanon, announcing that he would not be back.

The 44-year old father of seven is the individual who set up the extremist al-Mouhajiroun in Britain. After 9/ll, he referred to the 19 hijackers as "the magnificent 19". On the day of the mass murder on London Transport, Bakri referred to the suicide killers as "the fabulous four". He had also announced publicly that if he knew of a planned terrorist bombing, it would be against his principles to report it to the authorities.

The day following his panicky flight from Britain, Bakri did an about-face and announced he had only gone to Lebanon on a holiday to see his mother and would be returning eventually. Home Secretary Charles Clarke dove into the fray announcing that he had permanently excluded Bakri from Britain. The Lebanese government then arrested him, although apparently not at the request of the British government, then released him after 48 hours. Later in the week, Bakri suddenly announced he had a Lebanese passport. Presumably, not having a British passport, he will be using it henceforth. Quoted by The Times, he said, "If anyone is accusing me of committing a crime, I will come back to clear my name. I have done nothing wrong. No one can stop me from returning to London."

Now, the Beirut intermezzo concluded, and obviously having decided the coast is clear, regardless of Charles Clarke's bombast, he has not only slipped back in as quietly as he slipped out, but is giving interviews.

He opined in The Sunday Telegraph, on the anniversary of the tragedy of Beslan, that "taking women and children hostage would be a reasonable course of action for a Muslim who had suffered under British rule." He didn't say where in the world there is "British rule" any more, except Britain, so the inference is that Muslims in Britain shouldn't feel shy about taking British women and children hostages. He added, "If an Iraqi Muslim carried out an attack like that in Britain, it would be justified because Britain has carried out acts of terrorism in Iraq.

"As long as the Iraqi did not deliberately kill women and children, and they were killed in the crossfire, that would be OK."

Meanwhile, the recent broadcast of the pre-mortem video made by one of the London Transport suicide psychopaths blaming the British government for "atrocities against my people", has, regardless of the adolescent bleating and angst of this married father of one, handed a public relations field day to the mad mullahs and Islamic apologist "spokesmen" and "community leaders" in a weasel-wordsfest of twisted sophistries.

One unappetizing individual whom Tony Blair, unsurprisingly, appointed one of his special advisors on Islamic affairs, Inayat Bunglawala, favored us with this: "Nothing can ever justify committing acts of terrorism against innocent civilians." He added that it was "plain wrong" to hold all British people responsible for the Iraq war when the country was "bitterly divided" over the invasion. The sly inference is that if "all the British people" really were responsible for the Iraq war, it would be OK to murder them. Although there are British people who oppose the war, saying the country is "bitterly divided" is a manipulative invention.

Dr. Azzam Tamimi of the Muslim Association of Britain said "[the suicide psychopath] seems totally convinced that he ought to punish the British people indiscriminately because of their contribution to electing the government. He doesn't take into consideration that the majority of the people were against the war." Again, the inference is, if the majority of the British people were for the war (which they were when it started) they would have deserved to be murdered by an Islamic fruitcake.

Massoud Shadjareh, chair of the oxymoronic Islamic Human Rights Commission, said: "There is no justification for threats to, and murder of, the innocent, as were evidenced in the broadcasts."

Two key words here, slipped in with sly inevitability by Bungalawala, Massoud Shadjareh and other Islamic spokespersons are "innocents" and "civilians". This plays well to a Western audience who are not aware of its meaning to the Muslim mind. Yet here are the words of the talkative and peripatetic Omar Bakri Mohammed himself: "We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity."

In other words, infidels cannot be "innocents"; but use of the word masks the real meaning being conveyed by the speaker and doesn't frighten the horses.

Bakri also said, openly, "We will use your democracy to destroy your democracy." Yet threats to deport mad mullahs and the ban on Omar Bakri ever coming back to Britain have fled the gadfly mind of Tony Blair, who is now engaged in new initiatives to ban drunken louts from British town centers.

Meanwhile, Bakri, his wife and his seven children continue to live in free housing and collect their generous welfare checks while preaching hatred of the West and defying this weak government to do anything about it.

"Asylum seeker" Yasser al-Siri, who is currently engaged in his own British taxpayer-funded fight against deportation, is absolutely confident that the government's half-hearted efforts will fail. Al-Siri, who is wanted in the United States, drawled, "I am not worried about expulsion. My legal team think it is impossible."

I am sure he is right.

Val MacQueen is a TCS contributing writer.

Categories:
|

TCS Daily Archives