182 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 7:17 am

    1) These are the kind of pictures that make Middle England think that Asians (i.e. Muslims) are getting special treatment. That’s the last thing we need.

    ‘Middle england’???!?!?

    FUCK OFF. Who gives a shit what the daily mail readers think?

    2) He also wants people to know “what sort of things extreme Islamists believe”. Unfortunately, it will only make many people think that there are tons of people harbouring such views, and view us all with suspicion.

    Who cares?

    3) Bringing such fanatics into the public eye only gives them the air of publicity they crave and may attract more followers who see them as “standing up” to the govt. It plays straight into their publicity stunts agenda.

    Nah, i have more faith in Britain. Regardless of Black/white/brown/pinky white* i doubt the BNP/Al muj will ever amount to anything serious. And yes i know about the european elections, i don’t care. I think the average person is inherently decent.

    Following on from a thread on BC awhile ago, chinese people aren’t ‘yellow’. They just fucking aren’t!!! they’re whiter than white people!!!! who are more pinky whites. Someone give me the name of a pinky white colour damnit.

    4) The British media treats the extreme far-right Neo-nazi groups (Skrewdriver, Combat 18, Red Watch, RVF, NF etc) very differently by denying them that oxygen of publicity and thus playing down implications that extreme (non-Muslim) elements are still very much alive.

    Screwdriver was a band right? and the lead singer died in a car crash? or was that 10 odd years ago.

    Anywho you worry too much.

  • 2. Siddharth  |  February 7th, 2006 at 8:02 am

    Why aren’t they being rounded up is a good question. Why are they, instead, being publicised and upgraded from a bunch of worthless retards to the acme of ‘Muslim Opinion in Britian Today’?

    I suspect for the same reason that whenever there were millions of Britons marching at the start of 2003 to protest against the Iraq War, news cameras were trained on these Muslim caricatures only. They took pains to ignore the large majority of normal British people who formed the large majority of the marchers.

    BevanKieran has rightly suggested in another thread that this was an act of racist journalism as much as the Jyllands-Posten cartoons. In fact, these muppets are walking-talking Muslim cartoons, are they not?

    Investigate, arrest and prosecute the muppets.

  • 3. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 8:17 am

    It is wonderfully beyond any possibility of parody that the guy turns out to be a convicted drug dealer out on parole!

    Someone (sorry I can’t remember the name) who was described as having helped to organise the more “radical” protesters claimed on Newsnight last night that the placards had been cleared by the police in advance.

    Somehow that wouldn’t surprise me…

  • 4. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:07 am

    Have you guys read The Times today?

    46% of British Muslims ‘think the Jews in Britain are in league with the Freemasons to control the police and government’.

    30% of UK Muslims do NOT believe Israel has the right to exist.

    37%, more than one in three, about half a million people, think the Jewish community in Britain is a ‘legitimate target’.

    7% think suicide bombs are fucking justified. That’s suicide bombs in.. Britain. Yes. 7% of British Muslims - maybe 100,000 people, or more - think suicide bombs are justified in their own fucking country. Our country. Your country.

    Do you still think the coverage of the demo was an attempt by racist media to slant the image of British Islam? Or were those guys with the placards actually quite typical? Tell me? Is British Islam seriously diseased? Sick at heart? WTF is going on? Are Muslims just stupid, or what? Half of them think the Jews are in league with the Freemasons to control the state? Half of them??

    You know, call me old fashioned, but I have serious problems with a community where one in three think it is justified to attack Jews in the street, and nearly one in ten think it is just fine and dandy to blow us all up.

    Serious problems.

  • 5. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:09 am

    Im not sure why the drug conviction is particularly relevant to the point he was making.

  • 6. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:11 am

    Actually the media really seem to have highlighted this; OMG HES A DRUG DEALER, well yes but i can’t really see the relevance to the issues being discussed. Johnny Vaughn was also drug dealer, he served his time it shouldn’t matter now, besides most of his clients were/are probably linked to the media…

  • 7. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:13 am

    What “point” was he making?

    He’s simply a good-hearted, devout drug-dealing boy…

  • 8. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:21 am

    Sunny, at last someone picks up on my main beef. However, why blame the police? I mean, I heard top plod explaining their strategy this morning at it is clear that public order was the main priority. They didn’t want to provoke a reaction, which seems sensible.
    So your headline is misplaced. I mean, what are they gonna charge them with? All the legal advice I’ve heard is that any charges are unlikely to stick.
    Your headline should read, is the liberal establishment unwittingly conspiring against us (excuse me, but like sunny, a nonmoslem, I would also like to express some solidarity with the British moslem community)? Because rather than worry that British muslim anger is being properly reported by lazily resortying to the nutter element, they should remember that these fool bwais aren’t really representative of mainstraem opinion.
    As I’ve said before, like the footy hooligans of the 1980s, they should get dick all coverage.

    P.S. Suicide bomber is a former crack dealer — how funny is that? Underlines, just how unGodly these people really are. Although, of course, these are just legal definitions. Perhaps, Kulvinder would like to get back to me to point out that one man’s drug dealing scum is another man’s legitimate businessman.

  • 9. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:22 am

    sorry there is an “and” missing in my second sentence, after the word “morning”

  • 10. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:30 am

    It turns out that this twat Omar Khayaam is a drug dealer on parole for selling cocaine - fuckwit.

  • 11. Chris Stiles  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:35 am

    Right - it’s a conspiracy. When in doubt play the eternal victim card.

  • 12. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:36 am

    Stupidity seems to run throughout the UK

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm

    To the batmobile! the people of britain are untelieducated fairists who need to be culled or something! quick do something now!!!!

    Writing as a non-muslim

    46% of British Muslims ‘think the Jews in Britain are in league with the Freemasons to control the police and government’.

    Theres always been some anti-semitism in islamic society, is it that surprising that 46% of muslims think that way?

    30% of UK Muslims do NOT believe Israel has the right to exist.

    So? Unless the existence of Israel is some sort of axiom that cannot be challenged why does it matter? The spainiards don’t believe Gibraltar should exist in british hands, the entire planet doesn’t recognise the official existence of the republic of china. The far left doesn’t believe Israel should exist.

    I say it all depends on how you define Israel’s borders.

    37%, more than one in three, about half a million people, think the Jewish community in Britain is a ‘legitimate target’.

    See first answer.

    7% think suicide bombs are fucking justified. That’s suicide bombs in.. Britain. Yes. 7% of British Muslims - maybe 100,000 people, or more - think suicide bombs are justified in their own fucking country. Our country. Your country.

    Id disagree with them, in present circumstances anyway, but so what? It hardly means they’re going to do something about it themselves. 800K voted bnp in the european elections, doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

  • 13. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:42 am

    What “point” was he making?

    As far as i can tell he was stating or showing in a fairly confrontational manner that freedom of speech is actually limited in this country, and that many people can be offended enough to call for legal action over it.

    If i were him (which im not) id claim it as a piece of contempory performance art, displayed and enacted in a way to make the hoi polloi more at tune and in touch with modern thinking. The public setting in the media spotlight, highlighting the filtration of ideas through corporations as well as demonstrating that most people can’t be bothered to go to Sharon Tate.

  • 14. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:44 am

    Id disagree with them, in present circumstances anyway, but so what? It hardly means they’re going to do something about it themselves. 800K voted bnp in the european elections, doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

    Eh….Kulvinder….unfortunately they are and do do things about it - individuals have and continue to plan suicide bombings - if you think there is nothing to worry about it then fine - I will call you wrong - but don’t insult people who are worried about it and say that this is a deeply and seriously demented belief for people to hold in such large numbers.

  • 15. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:48 am

    As far as i can tell he was stating or showing in a fairly confrontational manner that freedom of speech is actually limited in this country, and that many people can be offended enough to call for legal action over it

    I can’t work out if you are a comedian or not.

  • 16. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:49 am

    Kulvinder

    Did you used to buy crack off this guy Omar Khayaam?

  • 17. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:51 am

    If theres 100K suicide bombers in the country i really think the secuity services (hi if you’re reading btw!!) would have some sort of an idea. If they don’t, well, the nation deserves a collective darwin award, and since theres 100K suicide bombers about…

    Just because you say somethign is justified (and i don’t think blowing up commuters is) doesn’t mean you actively participate in it. Yes there are nutters about, and yes the people who think those actions are justified need to be asked why exactly. But heckling at them ‘oi weirdos what the fuck is wrong with you’? isn’t reallly the way to get the empathy required to change someones opinion.

  • 18. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:54 am

    Kulvinder

    You disagree with those who support suicide bombings “in present circumstances, anyway.”

    Under precisely what circumstances would you agree with them??

  • 19. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:54 am

    I can’t work out if you are a comedian or not.

    Im well funny.

    Kulvinder

    Did you used to buy crack off this guy Omar Khayaam?

    Nah

  • 20. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:58 am

    Kulvinder

    Who is heckling? Your stance is that there is something wrong, something crazy to even think that a culture of support for suicide bombing is even worrying - as if it is just a simple question of women who pierce their noses or dietary laws we are talking about. And your suggestion that speaking up like this is some kind of imposition and irrational and unfair ‘demand’ being made on them is a certain liberal position parodied beyond oblivion - it is hilarious and utterly ridiculous.

    Maybe we can invite them for a picnic and serve them cups of tea and lemon tart - and say ‘Oh, I dont want to upset you or cause you any discomfort. I totally understand you might be offended, and I dont want to offend you, but I do rather wish you would not support suicide bombing? What? Yes of course, yes of course, how silly of me for asking, it is of course arrogant of me to even bring this up. More tea?’

  • 21. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:58 am

    Kulvinder

    You disagree with those who support suicide bombings “in present circumstances, anyway.”

    Under precisely what circumstances would you agree with them??

    If an authoritarian government took over and enslaved the nation. That wasn’t a particular sceneario, or one that would ever become likely, its just an self-admission that most people would agree to. The average person would be willing to die for a cause, if it was great enough, if they’re willing to die for it they’re willing to die for it kamakazi style. That doesn’t mean i can ever envision it becoming a reality (i can’t even be bothered with the army ffs), but in the broadest general terms, lets say adolf stalin came to power and someone asked you to take him out, would you say no?

  • 22. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:59 am

    Under precisely what circumstances would you agree with them??

    Yeah Kulvinder, under what circumstances would you agree with suicide bombing?

  • 23. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:00 am

    Kulvinder

    What if the martians came to Earth? What if a gigantic locust arose from the core of the Earth? We could do suicide bombing then, for sure!

  • 24. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:02 am

    Nah, i have more faith in Britain.
    Stupidity seems to run throughout the UK

    You sure you don’t smoke crack? You seem a bit confused.

  • 25. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:03 am

    Your stance is that there is something wrong, something crazy to even think that a culture of support for suicide bombing is even worrying - as if it is just a simple question of women who pierce their noses or dietary laws we are talking about. And your suggestion that speaking up like this is some kind of imposition and irrational and unfair ‘demand’ being made on them is a certain liberal position parodied beyond oblivion - it is hilarious and utterly ridiculous.

    I think theres something wrong with polling a group of people, selectively and perhaps incorrectly extrapolating from the data, and mapping what you write on that populous at large. I don’t think the muslim community as a ‘whole’ should be talked to, just the nutters.

    btw

    The nearly 1.6 million Muslims in Britain (more than three times the number of Jews) are a diverse group. Attitudes vary between those of Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Ugandan and Kenyan Asian origins, as well as recent refugees, often not used to being politically involved. It is hard to capture the nuances of such differences.

    .. There is no single, agreed voice for Muslim opinion…

  • 26. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:03 am

    Kulvinder first to volunteer hopefully…

  • 27. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:04 am

    Sarcasm doesn’t read well on the internet

    The stupidity line should have had :rolleyes: or something similar after it.

  • 28. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:09 am

    Kulvinder

    I really do not believe that you don’t smoke crack. You come across as a crack head.

    Yeah we know that the sample may be unscientific and we accept that. What we do not accept that there is not anything to worry about. We also know there is huge differentiation depending on the background of Muslims - Pakistani, Turkish, Ismaili etc etc. But that just calls for a more focussed polling - I bet for a fact that the rate of support is higher amongst Mirpuris than it is amongst Gujarati Ismailis. Fine, there is lots of variation.

    But that still does not mean that it is wrong to worry about this - that there are people so devoid of moral bearing that they can support the act of suicide bombing. This is not a matter of playground ethics - these are people in which actual suicide bombers can mix and mingle with whilst the people who are ‘relaxed’ about their activities turn away, or ignore them with a nod and a wink, whilst they plot to kill you, your family, your friends, and everyone else who happens to be net to them when they decide to press the button to ignite the candy on their stupid and wicked bodies.

  • 29. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:10 am

    News - Crack Dealing Suicide Bomb impersonator has been detained by police.

  • 30. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:13 am

    Stupid dumb arrogant fuckwit of the month

    +++++

    A Muslim demonstrator who imitated a suicide bomber in London to protest over cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad has been arrested.

    Bedfordshire Police said they arrested Omar Khayam, 22, of Bedford, on Tuesday - the day after he apologised for his “insensitive” protest.

    It has emerged that Khayam is a convicted drug dealer who was jailed in 2002 and released on licence last year.

    He was given five and a half years in prison in December 2002.

    If the authorities decide he breached the terms of his licence, he could go back to jail.

    Khayam apologised to those affected by the 7 July bombs, saying his protest was as “insensitive” as the cartoons.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4687996.stm

  • 31. SajiniW  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:15 am

    I think Sunny’s hit the hail on the head.

    Whether the protesters were ’set-up’ or not, remains to be seen. The placards they carried were offensive and unreasonable, revelling in ignorance and hate.

  • 32. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:16 am

    Chris Stiles,
    I don’t think Sunny is playing the victim card. He’s just positing the question and highlighting that the viel placards and protest was completely unrepresentative and did the protestors no favours.
    In his own way he is asking for the police to act more forcefully, although I doubt they can until th y have a clearer mandate and greater PERCEIVED support from British moslems. Maybe if there is a conspiracy, it is that — a pragmatic one.

  • 33. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:17 am

    Sunny doesnt play the victim card.

  • 34. SajiniW  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:18 am

    The police haven’t been afraid to be heavy-handed in the past - Jean Charles de Menezes, for want of an incident.

    They shouldn’t be afraid to jail those who preach hate in the future.

  • 35. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:23 am

    In fact this is a great example of Ian Blair’s racism / sensitivity obsession completely backfiring, with the placards now being shown again and again on TV etc.
    It’s not a conspiracy to make Muslims look bad - but the law of unintended consequences has caused that to happen.

  • 36. SajiniW  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:24 am

    Slightly off-topic but does anyone have the Met’s Stop and Search figures for the last six months or so?

  • 37. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:25 am

    OK, OK, all you wannabe Petrocellis!
    What are they gonna charge them with and can they secure a conviction?

  • 38. SajiniW  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:31 am

    Disorderly behaviour. Inciting Hatred.

    They can’t secure a conviction now, since the event is over, but should this happen again, the police should make examples of especially offensive people, like Mr Khayyam and give them a criminal record.

    A lot of the Muslims on the protest would think twice if they were to get a record - no one’s ever been able to plead ‘religion’ in court the way psychopaths plead insanity.

  • 39. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:34 am

    Ahem. I think you’ll find that Mr. Khayyam already has a criminal conviction. Guess that is why he was pleading like a puppy dog on TV that he was sorry.

  • 40. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:38 am

    What are they gonna charge them with and can they secure a conviction?

    ++++

    Scotland Yard announced yesterday it has set up a special squad to investigate Islamic extremists who demonstrated outside the Danish embassy in London last week, promising a “swift” inquiry which could result in charges of inciting violence or murder.

    Guardian

  • 41. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:39 am

    we shall see Jay whether we get convictions, and what on

  • 42. Chris Stiles  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:41 am


    He’s just positing the question and highlighting that the viel placards and protest was completely unrepresentative and did the protestors no favours.

    He’s doing more than that:


    Surely it’s a conspiracy … The rest of us stuck in the middle
    are having a hard time just keeping up.

    Which reads “There is a group of people (media/police) who are purposely trying to make us look bad, and there is nothing we can do about it”.

    Right, call that what you like.

  • 43. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:43 am

    I suspect they won’t get convictions.
    That is a different question from arresting them on the day.
    The only guys arrested were two “anti-protest” protesters who were arrested on “breach of the peace” grounds only of course to be released with no subsequent action taken.
    There is no reason the police could not have done the same to our crack-dealing friend had they not wanted to be so sensitive…

  • 44. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:46 am

    Now what will happen is that, because of the row, police and CPS may be forced into “doing something” - with probably no convictions at the end of it but loads of publiciity for the idiots in the meantime.

    Congrats again Sir Ian Blair!

  • 45. Cinnamon  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:58 am

    I hate to repost something, but, I think when I originally pointed this out, people didn’t make sense of it because stuff was happening too fast.

    Allow me to rehash:

    What was strange is that the march in question was advertised on the BBC website — the page has been changed now, but originally contained the following:

    “Demonstrators are set to gather at Regent’s Park mosque in central London at 1400 GMT after Friday prayers and march to the Danish embassy in Sloane Street.”

    This was attached to the following article:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4676524.stm

    But… it is rather odd, no?

  • 46. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 11:00 am

    Well that’s the BBC for you…same mindset as Ian Blair, often the same unintended consequences…

  • 47. Inders  |  February 7th, 2006 at 11:38 am

    Kulivinder is apolgising for views that are not acceptable. If white people were saying those kinds of things, we all would lose our minds.

  • 48. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 11:40 am

    Unfortunately, it will only make many people think that there are tons of people harbouring such views, and view us all with suspicion

    There are tons of people harbouring these views. Not a majority. And as Jay points out, probably lower among Alevi Kurds than in the kids of Kashmiris.

    My point is that fascist views are, in fact, more popular among some sections of British Muslim opinion than - say - the BNP are in places like Barking, where it polled almost 17%.

    This is something that we should be very worried about.

    Now, does support for suicide bombings translate into participation in terrorism. Only in a few cases. But it does suggest that there are people growing up in Britain in homes and communities in which racist conspiracist theories and admiration for terrorism is the norm - and not simply an isolated kooky zany aberration. These are, at least, the safe houses for terrorists.

    We shouldn’t pretend it is not so.

    If we had a poll which suggested - say - that 52% of white people in Barking thought that Pakistan should cease to exist, what would the reaction here be? What if 37% of white people in Barking said that they regarded attacks on British asians as legitimate, as part of a strategy to reclaim Britain for the British? Or 7% said that they supported suicide bombings against temples, mosques and Gurdawaras?

    Or that 46% of white people thought that their asian neighbours were part of an enormous conspiracy to control the world.

    All of this would provoke outrage on Pickled Politics, and quite right too.

    Sunny - I’m assuming that your piece is tongue in cheek. Tell me it is so.

  • 49. Rohin  |  February 7th, 2006 at 11:51 am

    David, remember that no stats are the gospel truth. I don’t know how many people were asked and where the study was conducted.

    BUT! I completely agree that the proportion of Muslims in Britain who do not condemn suicide bombing is higher than many Muslim commentators state - but then again, not as endemic as right wingers allege.

    I have always said that it is an attitude not far from burying one’s head in the sand to dismiss extremist views as a miniscule minority of Muslims in Britain. It IS a minority, but a sizeable one I’m afraid. Actual TERRORISTS are miniscule in number, but I know many Muslims who I would otherwise call moderate who say things like “well, it’s bad but they were kind of asking for it” about 7/7.

    However, seeing as we’re agreed on that point David, why does that preclude these people from being arrested? I want them charged. Sunny’s point about viewers watching these people and thinking all Asians/Muslims think like that is valid. Hence if the Islamic community is vocal in calls for their arrests, it can only be a good thing.

  • 50. raz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 11:54 am

    A majority of Britsh Muslims now recognise Israel’s right to exists. Excellent news, and something I have long been campaigning for. Let’s hope this number keeps climbing and climbing,

  • 51. Rohin  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:00 pm

    Raz - half-full glass thinking there! I don’t mean that in a bad way, just shows that stats can be interpreted however the interpreter wants them to.

    To re-iterate and clarify my point above - the overriding concern for me as a brown-skinned person (i.e. a non-Muslim, non-white Brit) is that, as Sunny says, the last thing we want is for the impression to be given that a minority group is getting special treatment. And that is what it looks like now.

  • 52. Rohin  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:07 pm

    OK I’ve examined the stats - 500 people surveyed, a third from London and all about the age of most people on here (angry young men?)

    It’s alarming reading, but who knows whether it’s representative of British Muslims as a whole.

  • 53. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:10 pm

    Similar results to polls taken post 7/7…?

  • 54. Jezza  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:12 pm

    “Mainstream British Muslim organisations yesterday publicly distanced themselves from further violence over the Danish cartoon issue by backing a rally in London in support of political and religious dialogue.
    . . Plans for the rally, to be held in London’s Trafalgar Square next Saturday ”

    http://news.ft.com/cms/s/7c89dcca-977f-11da-82b7-0000779e2340.html

  • 55. j0nz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:13 pm

    David t spot on.

    Even if these statistics were half that portrayed in the survery, it’s still shocking. A seperate well known poll showed an average of 6% if British Muslims saying the London bomb attacks were justified. A bitter pill to swallow, perhaps?

    The parallel David T draws is something that many Britains will also draw. And of course these exteremists should be arrested.

    Kulvinder you need to go cold turkey…

  • 56. raz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:13 pm

    Rohin, the great Indian cricket commentator Navjot Sidhu once made this astute obsevation about statistics:

    “Statistics are like miniskirts - what they reveal is suggestive but what they conceal is vital”

    :) :) :)

  • 57. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:16 pm

    Rohin:

    We’re in almost complete agreement.

    My main point about not arresting demonstrators is that - in my view - the only offence they could be arrested for is a very minor one, tryable in front of the magistrates court only.

    This demonstration may be offensive, but it is clearly political speech and should be protected - to a higher level than it should be were it merely empty abuse.

    I think it is important to know what extremists say - in part so that we can counter it, and in part so that we don’t labour under the comfy misapprehension that such views do not exist. Al Muhaj have done us a service. I’d much rather that our opponents were open and honest about their views than that they hid them in double-speak, like the BNP do.

    The notion that these individuals have committed the more serious offence of making “threats to kill” is in my view wrong. I very much doubt that anybody seeing these posters genuinely believe those threats.You might get a conviction if you prosecuted them for threats to kill - or you might not. Depends on how unpopular the defendants are…But that’s no way to run a criminal justice system

  • 58. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:24 pm

    But that’s no way to run a criminal justice system

    Preosecutions are made sometimes on the balance of what is the public interest surely. I think that this needs to be done.

  • 59. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:26 pm

    The “double standards” concern is a real one.

    But is the product of a futile attempt to censor political speech by racists. The Incitement to Racial Hatred offence - rarely prosecuted, and rarely convicted - is an effective dead letter. The creation of a Religious Hatred offence will also be a dead letter.

    The placards, however, could constitute neither incitement to religious or racial hatred. So what are we to do? Try to find a further category of non-religious and non-racial “hatred” which the law should especially prosecute, and create a new criminal offence for that?

    The solution is to make controls on speech ideologically neutral.

  • 60. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:30 pm

    Preosecutions are made sometimes on the balance of what is the public interest surely. I think that this needs to be done.

    Yes but you have to have a specific offence to prosecute somebody for.

    You could certainly bind the protestors over for breaching the peace. Or prosecute them for the very very minor offence of s. 4 POA, for which they’d get somewhere in the region of 1 month in chokey. The offence you’d be prosecuting them for is basically the one which drunk blokes mouthing off after closing time get done for.

    Where’s the public interest in that? Their prosecution would be seen as a “slap on the wrist”, and their sentencing would be accompanied by hand wringing about how it was impossible to prosecute them for anything more serious.

  • 61. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:36 pm

    Should our crack-dealing friend be sent back to prison - which is what has happened according to the BBC site?

    Would that have happened (if it has) without the row?

  • 62. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:39 pm

    It seems rather petty to me.

    What is it with druggies and Al Muhaj? Choudhry used to be an enormous spliff head when I knew him.

  • 63. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:39 pm

    Where’s the public interest in that? Their prosecution would be seen as a “slap on the wrist”, and their sentencing would be accompanied by hand wringing about how it was impossible to prosecute them for anything more serious

    It is better than nothing - better than leaving them unpuished. For the sake of Muslims, for the sake of non Muslim Asians who bear the brunt of hostility caused by these people. And besides, calling for people to be beheaded, is not that an incitement to murder?

  • 64. Jai  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:41 pm

    In a semi-related topic, I’m assuming many of you saw Newsnight yesterday evening.

    I don’t normally believe in slandering people who are not in a position to defend themselves, but on this particular occasion I think I should make an exception in the case of Anjem Choudhary. (In fact, I hope that what I am about to say does indeed get back to him).

    Anjem Chourdhary is probably the worst possible ambassador for Islam (apart from people like OBL, the president of Iran etc, of course) if he genuinely wishes to promote the religion and convince others to convert to the faith. Considering his complete lack of dignity, respect for others, manners, and basic interpersonal skills, he is in fact a liability for proselytising Muslims and his organisation would probably be better served if they prevented him from opening his mouth in public at all. He comes across as some kind of arrogant, uncivilised, thuggish village idiot (along with being a pathological liar and quite possibly a borderline psychopath) and, paradoxically, undermines the very cause he seeks to promote as a result of his own personality and behaviour towards other people. I wonder if he has the humility and clarity of thought to be aware of this. I doubt it.

    If he has any common sense at all then he will take this on board before he humiliates himself any further and continues to promote himself as a ridiculed, waffling laughing-stock in the eyes of the rest of the country (along with being a counter-productive liability to his cause, to Islam, and to the Muslim community as a whole).

    On the other hand, he might actually enjoy the condemnation by the wider population due to some ego-driven masochism, in which case he has even more “issues” than the psychiatric behavioural problems he is already very obviously suffering from.

    I suspect that much of his behaviour is driven by a need for attention and in order to feel “important” — in which case, the most productive course of action would be to cut off the oxygen supply of publicity and for the media to deliberately ignore any statements or attempts to gain televised interviews on his part (the same technique we have regrettably had to use with Bikhair on PP, for example).

  • 65. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:43 pm

    What is it with druggies and Al Muhaj? Choudhry used to be an enormous spliff head when I knew him.

    You knew him? Was he Al Muj back then? Spliff head - that’s funny.

  • 66. Jai  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:46 pm

    Re: “Spliff head”

    Hasn’t recent medical research demonstrated that repeated use of cannabis can severely increase the risk of schizophrenia and other psychotic mental disorders ?

    Going by the evidence of Anjem Choudhary’s behaviour last night (and during previous interviews over the past few years), his past drug use would certainly explain a lot.

  • 67. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:48 pm

    It is better than nothing - better than leaving them unpuished. For the sake of Muslims, for the sake of non Muslim Asians who bear the brunt of hostility caused by these people. And besides, calling for people to be beheaded, is not that an incitement to murder?

    What would happen is this. Some would regard them as martyrs, and you’d find that their popularity and status increased with the 7 percent suicide bombing supporters.

    Others would - and indeed are - using the opportunity to paint themselves, falsely, as the voices of moderation. This is precisely what MPAC - a vicious racist conspiracy obsessed organisation - has been doing in the last week. They’d come out and support the prosecution, and call for harsher sentences, and all that. And then, the next week, you’d have another article on the website about jews controlling the world by proxy…

    No, expressing support for acts of terrorism isn’t incitement to murder. You might be able to get a very prejudiced jury to convict on a prosecution for that offence, but a judge shouldn’t even let it go to a jury.

  • 68. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:49 pm

    Yeah, we were mates, if you can believe that. He’ll probably seek me out and kill me now…

    I knew him when he had a really really bad orange-ish permed mullet and was called “Andy”.

  • 69. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:54 pm

    Rohin, take yr point, but I think you will find there was a similar poll done by the Telegraph which came up with very similar results.

    We can’t go all head-in-sand-y on this one and blame it on the number-crunchers.

  • 70. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:57 pm

    Kulivinder is apolgising for views that are not acceptable. If white people were saying those kinds of things, we all would lose our minds.

    Im not apologising for them! i just don’t believe that it amounts to the end of the world as we know it, or that ‘british islam is diseased’ or that ‘muslims are stupid’.

    Rhetorical statements of that nature don’t help anyone, debate with those that do support attacks on random commuters, try and apply some rationality to their fairly twisted minds, but don’t go OTT about dem damned muslims in Britain. The psychopathic extremist nutters on the far right and within islam don’t exactly think highly of me, either as a british asian or as a sikh, but im just not fussed about it.

    If the ‘white people’ held views to those extremes in those percentages i wouldn’t try to claim the moral high ground regarding their opinions,id accept that there may well be rational and understandable driving factors that lead to an increase in the support for the far right. Id rather try and eliminate what pushes them to those beliefs than brand their thoughts as inherently unacceptable and be dismissive.

    Its my opinion that verbalising a thought shouldn’t be illegal, that doesn’t mean that mediocre discussions should be paid great attention, whether that be from a danish newspaper or as is apparently about to happen from an iranian one.

    Omar Khayam did something that offended british people, he apologised for it. I do understand the point hes trying to make but i accept his methodology left something to be desired, nevertheless he should be commended for empathising with the hurt he caused instead of being villified at all cost to abate a public blood lust.

    Im never going to take the absolute moral stance of condeming every single person who kills himself for a cause or accepting that everyone the government or the US calls a terrorist is one. Context is obviously important. And before anyone asks, yes, i have found all the islamic terrorist attacks of the past few years abhorent but i don’t jump up and down shaking my fist because of them.

    I don’t trust moral panic no matter who its from. The sky is not about to fall on anyones head.

  • 71. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 12:58 pm

    btw this

    The nearly 1.6 million Muslims in Britain (more than three times the number of Jews) are a diverse group. Attitudes vary between those of Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Ugandan and Kenyan Asian origins, as well as recent refugees, often not used to being politically involved. It is hard to capture the nuances of such differences.

    .. There is no single, agreed voice for Muslim opinion…

    was taken from the times article that had all those figures in it!!!

  • 72. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:00 pm

    The question is, if he is so unrepresentative of the muslim community (which he no doubt is), WHY was Choudhary interviewed on Newsnight in the first place?
    Don’t these guys enough publicity?
    Just because the nutters ARE the news, that doesn’t mean we should giove them a platform to their views.
    Why does the BBC et al display greater restraint when the scum in question is native, such as the BNP?
    Does my head in.

    Inders, give me a straight answer. Do you dislike white people?

  • 73. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:08 pm

    Kulvinder

    You are the proverbial ostrich with your head in the sand.

  • 74. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:10 pm

    Id rather try and eliminate what pushes them to those beliefs than brand their thoughts as inherently unacceptable and be dismissive

    So ylou are upset because people regard suicide-bombing as inherently unnacceptable? That causes you to splutter and cough and chase your tail in abstract moral relativism irrelevancy.

    Carry on - but realise that some people live without their head stuck up their arse.

  • 75. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:11 pm

    David Y. I understand your.. logic… on the placards case. From a purist, jurisprudential point ov view… you might have a point. It would be hard to convict on the incitement laws.

    But there are two things you ignore.

    1. The public interest, for a start. A good part of Britain is wildly outraged by what happened on Friday, and think it proves there is one law for ethnic minorities and another, harsher law for whites. They may be onto something - they may not - but this perception is disastrous for race relations. For Muslims and Whites alike, as Sunny and Jay have pointed out. For that reason alone some arrests might be good - to assuage white anger. Note that the police did arrest two people at the demo - two pro-freedom of speech protestors.

    2. You could get them on ‘behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace’. Let’s face it - how much more breach of peace-y can you get than praising 7/7 IN LONDON.

  • 76. Jezza  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:11 pm

    Dear David

    why don’t you go to press about anjum choudry having been a drug dealer in the past. get enough evidence i.e. information regarding past acquaintance ; and take it to the Sun . Damaging the main protagonist will destroy the group . . ( that is if you really were friends with anjum )

  • 77. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:11 pm

    David t

    So how did Andy become what he is now? Usual story of University extremists?

  • 78. Kulvinder  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:16 pm

    Kulvinder

    You are the proverbial ostrich with your head in the sand.

    My dad can still beat up your dad.

    So ylou are upset because people regard suicide-bombing as inherently unnacceptable? That causes you to splutter and cough and chase your tail in abstract moral relativism irrelevancy.

    Carry on - but realise that some people live without their head stuck up their arse.

    Id wager people who regard their views as inherently right, or have an unwavering self-righteous zeal without a hint of contemplation are usually the ones who find it easiest to fly planes into buildings.

  • 79. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:19 pm

    Kulvinder

    Id wager people who regard their views as inherently right, or have an unwavering self-righteous zeal without a hint of contemplation are usually the ones who find it easiest to fly planes into buildings.

    Yeah!

    That’s right!

    People who say that suicide bombing is wrong are EXACTLY the kind of people who fly aeroplanes into buildings!

    Just because they say that suicide bombing is wrong! And are concerned about it!

  • 80. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:20 pm

    SeanT

    You could do them for all sorts of things - but they’re all pretty trivial offences.

    But who knows: perhaps they’ll be prosecuted for some form of incitement or threats to kill, and will say something so stupid in interview/court that they’ll get themselves potted.

    On that note, I’m hearing that Hamza has been convicted.

    On Andy/Anjum - he’s already been done over by another mate of his - in the Daily Hate.

    I dunno how he went potty. He was a liberal bloke, most of his mates were white lefties. He was kind of on the fringes of the SWP - i.e. he’d go to the odd meeting, and was generally interested in progressive causes. I remember discussing the Satanic Verses with him, and he was very upset about that - but strangely inarticulate about why - kind of “It’s not right, man, its not right”…

    Basically, he didn’t get a training contract after university at a city law firm - he didn’t present himself particularly well. I think he then had a kind of crisis and ended up being rescued by Hizb. He was involved in it during the Omar Bakri M period. I think he was quite chummy with a bloke called Makbool Javaid who is a partner in a big city law firm, and a HuT activist - can’t say too much about him though because he is pretty litigious! Out of that came the Society of Muslim Lawyers, which was an early HuT front group. Perhaps he thought it would be good for his career. I dunno. Everybody who knew him is flabberghasted.

    Why did he flip - I dunno. Why do people join cults? Or become heroin addicts? Or, indeed, end up in far right fascist organisations, despite having mates who are black.

  • 81. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:20 pm

    Yup, Hamza potted

    http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-02-07T130715Z_01_L27708378_RTRUKOC_0_UK-SECURITY-BRITAIN-HAMZA.xml

  • 82. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:21 pm

    David T

    Regarding your point about not prosecuting them because it gives other extremist organisations the chance tp play the good cop - I wold say we have to balance that up with the real need to take action and that outweighs the strategic political gain and kudos they gain by this - it is a very very real need to do something. MPACUK and others - there will be other chances to trip them up or catch them at their games later - for now, it is not a good reason to not prosecute.

  • 83. Col. Mustafa  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:22 pm

    Omar’s a stupid young muslim that clearly wanted to show off to his friends and people of the same mentality.

    He’s the dude that goes to the rally slightly more excited than everyone else.
    He probably got alot of “woah that guys nuts, hes dressed up like a terrorist”
    or “Damm, we should of all dressed up like him”
    or ” hes blatantly asking to get arrested”.

    Omar himself went 3 steps too far IMO; but that seems to be the cool thing to do among people of any persuasion.
    Should he be arrested for it, i dunno.
    I think hes just the type of guy that is looking for attention rather than actually harming anyone.

    The idiot’s been arrested anyway according to some.

  • 84. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:25 pm

    David t

    Fascinating about Andy/Anjum - thanks

  • 85. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:25 pm

    El Cid

    The BBC gave Choudhary airtime be last night because he was seen to represent the “radical” wing. He was well outnumbered…though not out-interrupted!

    The BNP are given far less airtime (though Griffin was interviewed briefly on Newsnight) because they are seen as generally “beyond the pale”.

    BBC midset at work again…

  • 86. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:27 pm

    Well let the BBC understand that they are under on obligation to give the extremists airtime

  • 87. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:28 pm

    I think you’d be very surprised at the level of support Hamza and OBM has.

  • 88. j0nz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:30 pm

    OBM? Osama Bin.. Man?!

  • 89. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:31 pm

    DavidT

    ditto - very intriguing backstory to Chowdhury (sp?). On a cheerier note, he’s so crap at TV and stuff i don’t think he’s much of a threat - i don’t think he could persuade his way out of a wet paper bag.

    its the Hizb guys who are more plausible… ish…

  • 90. j0nz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:33 pm

    Did anyone see the intial clip on Newsnight, where are very aggressive, arrogant policeman threatened a lorry driver with ‘your get youself nicked in a minute’ whilst jabbing said lorry driver, because he got out to protest about the vying Al-Moomin gang?

  • 91. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:33 pm

    David

    I wouldnt be surprised - Sikhs and Hindus have been observing this drift towards extremism for much longer than it has been on the radar of mainstream society because we are intimate with Pakistanis in so many ways - but it was always considered alarmist or bad form or communalist to make an issue of it. I mean, since the early 1990’s.

  • 92. Col. Mustafa  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:37 pm

    Osama bin maniac, maybe???

    I switched over over to ch 5 at some point last nite to see a race debate going on.

    Some guy from the MCB, some guy from the BNP, and some other guys.
    Wasn’t really paying much attention to who they were.

    But i would of loved to see that sort of debate where everyone can say what they really want to say.
    But they weren’t saying what they really wanted to say; they were being held back on so many topics by being PC.

    How do we move forward if we can’t even talk about stuff?

  • 93. SajiniW  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:39 pm

    Jai - I’m working on an acute psychiatry ward at the moment.

    Everyone on the ward is a schizophrenic. Everyone on the ward does skunk.

    Causal? I’m not so sure, since people do get schizophrenia (there’s increased frequency in relatives of schizophrenia patients) without using skunk.

    On the flipside, numerous people use skunk without developing schizophrenia.

    It’s co-incidental that some people’s symptoms started after they started doing skunk.

    I think it just makes symptoms worse, more so in genetically susceptible people, just like the ‘cat’ the Somalians chew.

    There are statistics on the matter though - Professor John Henry has published extensively on the matter.

  • 94. j0nz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:42 pm

    David how do manage to know all these people? Did you attend SWP in your yoof days?

    Paxman said “that’s enough, matey”. I wonder if he’d say that to Griffin if he kept going on? And yes whoever said earlier it’s weird almost warming to Tariq Ramadan.

    And who was that rather hot Conservative party spokes woman?

  • 95. j0nz  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:43 pm

    Precisely Col Mustafa #92

    Real debate lets get Chowdry and Griffin to battle it out on TV.

  • 96. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:44 pm

    Jay

    On the contrary - the BBC should give extremists airtime - but not just Muslim ones.

    To some extent though they have difficulty - whether through a left / liberal mindset or a patronising / racist “they don’t know any better” mindset - in differentiating between Muslim extremists and moderates. They have no such difficulty in excluding e.g. the BNP.

  • 97. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:45 pm

    Chris

    Give them airtime once a month. Fuck them for the rest.

  • 98. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:48 pm

    OBM = Omar Bakri Mohammed by the way!

  • 99. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:49 pm

    he’s so crap at TV and stuff i don’t think he’s much of a threat

    His zits have cleared up though, which is nice.

    I dunno why I know everybody, but I do seem to…

  • 100. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:53 pm

    Jonz - Ramadan and Choudhary exchanged a wry smile at one stage in the debate…

    Ramadan seemed reasonable versus Choudhary (who wouldn’t?!) though rather less so when he was paired up with another guest , the female editor of an Iranian journal or website (?) based in the UK - I assume an anti-clerical one - who was a little more challenging about his let’s all calm down line on things which is not quite as benign as it sounds…

  • 101. Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery  |  February 7th, 2006 at 1:58 pm

    I feel sorry for Muslims.

    Islam has now become an extended penal code. A set of detailed and intricate prohibitions and restrictions.
    The piety of a Muslim today is judged by the number of things he avoids and the more pious one is the one who finds Shirk/Bidah in the most harmless of activities like taking photographs, celebrating birthdays, saying Khuda-hafiz and so on.

  • 102. Col. Mustafa  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:06 pm

    Millions of people do Skunk around the world.
    I can understand that people already of a certain persuasion can be even more influenced by taking skunk, and then send them over the edge.

    But that doesn’t mean its skunks fault.
    Could be the environment they grew up in; could be that persons life experiences; could be trying to understand certain concepts.

    I had a friend like that when i was younger who would simply lose the plot after getting stoned.

    I mean so much paranoia that it fucking scared me.
    There was a point where he was plotting to kill one of our other m8s and he was trying to convince me to help him.
    It was at that point i kinda snapped out of my state and tried to understand why he thought everyone was against him.
    I mean he was literally a different person that had lost control.

    He stopped doing it after that as he realised to himself and after we had a really good talk with him that hes not the sort of person that should be doing it.

    Another time while drunk, he pulled a knife on his long time best friend because he thought his m8 had nicked all his money from his bank.
    This is in the middle of some party, we just see him holding a huge kitchen knife edging towards his m8, who was laughing at first but then running.

    But yeh i can understand the effects drugs of any sort can have on someone that can’t handle it.

    Heres the thing though, that m8 of mine is still my m8 and through time and going cold turkey for ages he somehow sorted out his problem in his own head.
    Obviously his environment helped him i.e us and he does what he wants now and is perfectly normal, so to speak.

    Everynow and again we notice maybe abit of paranoia creeping in, (in a bad way that is, while drunk obviously)
    but we make sure it doesn’t by using logic.

    Now he leads a perfectly healthy life and is a good guy.

    Which brings me to the current state of people diagnosed with schizophrenia.
    I have 2 psychiatrist friends that work around london with so called schizo’s.

    I don’t agree with the method’s they use to treat patients.
    Its an easy way out, and they don’t even want to get to the root of the problem.
    They assume they’re already mad and treat them like that.
    So ofcourse if they’re taking drugs its gonna make em more crazy.

  • 103. Jezza  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:07 pm

    davidt - put up the anum choudry drugs expose on the daily hate . when was this ?

  • 104. squared  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:08 pm

    Someone give me the name of a pinky white colour damnit.

    Salmon? Blush? Pastel red?

    I agree sunny, deprive them of the publicity. Just to be fair. A lot of my non-brown friends are just becoming really annoyed that all they see on the news these days is muslim-related and they feel that muslims ARE getting special treatment.

    But I do have faith that most people won’t view the minority as people speaking for the majority, so I don’t think we should be too worried.

  • 105. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:11 pm

    Jezza

    A few years back. There was a particularly tragic bit about him scrabbling around in the ciggy butts to find enough baccy to make a spliff, after a party.

    But, in all honesty, how many of us can truly say that we have never been in that position…

  • 106. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:14 pm

    Yeah Jay, once a month. That’s more than enough.

    As for I think you’d be very surprised at the level of support Hamza and OBM has.

    David T, I think you might — might, i’m being diplomatic — be surprised about how LITTLE support they actually have. The BBC et al merely empower them.
    You might think that Finsbury Park is a hot-bed of Islamic radicalism, but as a citizen of this part of the world I can tell you that it is not.
    Also, more native Anglo-Irish people sympathise with the views of the BNP than meets the eye, I’m sure, but they remain Tory/Labour/Whatever because they just can’t find it within them to go that extra mile.
    In the same way, many moslems are aggrieved by perceived injustices around the world and supposed insults to their religion, but that don’t suddenly make them criminal eeejets.

  • 107. Jezza  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:19 pm

    ur useless!

  • 108. Steve M  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:21 pm

    LOL David T - Even your hidden depths have hidden depths.

    PS: I have no doubts whatsoever that a number of the demonstrators will be arrested and convicted. The yardstick will be laid with the length of Abu-Hamsa’s sentence.

    The guy that does the black slogans on white card though. He has a talent.

  • 109. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:22 pm

    Actual paid up members are pretty low. But sympathies with extreme islamist figures like Omar Bakri Mohammed run at around one in 7.

    As you say, the comparison is probably with anglo-irish support for the IRA. Or ulster protestant support for “Loyalist” paramilitaries.

    The former is a very good parallel - indeed, if we turn the clock back 30 years, we find the same people chumming up to Irish terrorist movements as now cheerlead and “understand” for Islamist ones.

    (i.e. Ken Livingstone)

  • 110. Col. Mustafa  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:22 pm

    “A few years back. There was a particularly tragic bit about him scrabbling around in the ciggy butts to find enough baccy to make a spliff, after a party.
    But, in all honesty, how many of us can truly say that we have never been in that position…”

    Good to see people with similar life experiences.

  • 111. Sunny  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:28 pm

    Lol, I wrote this at 6 in the morning, so excuse me if it reads shit or doesn’t make much sense.

    1) It was a rhetorical question. I think Ian Blair is drawn towards creating constant moral panic over everything (Garry at BSSC can attest to that), but I think generally he’s got his heart in the right place. I guess I’m just pissed off.

    2) The stats are a pile of wank. I remember having this discussion on HP before and I went through the actual YouGov stats and the questions were so loaded… On top of that the inference made from the answers themselves were totally over the top. Where’s this survey, and what were the questions asked? I’d like to see it.

    3) As Raz said, its great news that British Muslims are accepting the right of Israel to exist. Given that Israelis keep on screwing over Palestinians, and havig that farce of an election, and the rest of the idiots like MPAC keep screaming about a Zionist conspiracy, I think 70% is a fucking huge number however you look at it.

    4) David T I see you point about whether its difficult to convict these buggers. And yes, you’re right in that having these idiots out there constantly actually ends up repelling most Muslims and making it difficult for Islamists to attract more people.

    The upshot of that is that the entire debate switches to the right. Al-Ghuraba become extreme right. Hizb ut Tahrir become right wing, and MCB/MPAC become “moderate”. No no! MCB are on the socially conservative right! Anyway, that is for another article.

    4) My main issue though is how we deal with the cartoons controversy from now. I don’t want to scream about a clash of civilisations like Michelle Malkin, and I still don’t think this controversy is so worthy that its made out to be.

    And I’m pretty much in agreement with Kulvinder throughout… only probably because I know how he writes and the angle he is coming from. Given he’s more libertarian than me on many issues I’m suprised more of you don’t get what he’s saying….

  • 112. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:29 pm

    when i said anglo-irish i meant english.. irish immigration is so ingrained that there is no diff in my eyes (Wayne Rooney, Reggie and Ronnie Kray, Ronnie O’Sullivan, etc — you get the picture?) Anyway, I’m sidetracking

  • 113. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:34 pm

    I am in two minds about Malkin.

    1. She is very very right wing

    2. But she is a HOTTIE!!!!!!!!!

  • 114. Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:35 pm

    The bottom line is this:

    We are all very close to admitting what many on the far Right clearly seem to believe, but are not willing to openly state. That is, we are not simply fighting terrorists and radical extremists, but are in fact engaged in a holy war against Islam.

    This, IMO, gets to the heart of why the Right Blogosphere is obsessed with this story, the way they were obsessed with the recent French riots. They want a holy war against Islam. They are itching for it. Not that any of them would volunteer to fight, of course …

    Meanwhile the Right Blogosphere has gone foaming-at-the-mouth, hair-on-fire crazy over the cartoon controversy. They’ve worked themselves up to a screaming pitch about the mad dog Muslims who are fixing to massacre Europe. They have gone off the insufferable self-righteousness scale because most American newspapers will not republish the cartoons, and those newspapers and the State Department and, of course, liberals are all wussie sell-outs of democratic principles.

    Can we say they’ve come unhinged? I think we can.

    Amen!

  • 115. Chris  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:37 pm

    LOL - Ian Blair’s heart in the right place … sorry I am still laughing…

    Can you not see that his “heart in the right place” idiocy is what caused the problem about which you are complaining?

  • 116. Steve M  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:41 pm

    Sunny,

    Perhaps the answer to your question of how we deal with the cartoon issue from now on is similar to the answer to the question of press intrusion for the young royals. The press were ‘politely asked’ if they would leave Diana’s sons alone until they were 21. They could be equally politely asked on this issue.

  • 117. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:46 pm

    Get? Get what re Kulvinder?
    If he not an effective communicator, maybe you could enlighten us — what is his angle?

  • 118. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 2:55 pm

    Jay, did you spot it?

  • 119. Sunny  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:02 pm

    But she is a HOTTIE!!!!!!!!!
    And how annoying is that! Ann Coulter was so much more easier to sneer at. It’s a vast right-wing conspiracy I tells ya.

    Steve M - AFAIK, most Muslims in Europe are already turned off by the riots and the madness in the Middle East, and the blogosphere attests to that.

    In a way, it is good for the riots to carry on because it creates a deeper chasm between right minded Muslims and the idiots who burn anything when they get annoyed. I think the Middle East countries are huffing and puffing for two reasons:

    1) they’re trying to show off their clerical muscle… certainly in the case of Saudi Arabia and Iran.

    2) The military dictatorships are playing up the protests to show the west that there is still a danger the country might be over run by fanatics unless they’re continually given more support. That I would say applies to Syria (for sure), maybe Pakistan, and maybe even Lebanon (but there is a Syrian hand there).

    Note that HARDLY ANYTHING has happened in more multi-cultural places like Malaysia and India, where there are tons of Muslims. The Malaysian govt would smack down any stupid protest for sure, and I’m surprised the Indonesia govt didn’t do more to smack its own mob down.

  • 120. Sunny  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:04 pm

    El cid - his points on the poll and the moral panic created from it. SeanT laps it up hungrily as always :)

  • 121. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:10 pm

    Fair dos. He has been a bit of an agent provocateur in other threads, but I guess that’s what anarchists do. Still, I’ve never been a fan of art that shocks just for shock’s case. Too easy and lazy in my view.

  • 122. Jai  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:15 pm

    SajiniW,

    Thank you very much for your response re: cannabis and schizophrenia.

    In your professional judgement, is Anjem Choudhary actually suffering from some kind of psychopathic illness — just based on what we’ve all seen of his behaviour ?

    If so, would it be possible to have him sectioned under the Mental Health Act or, at least, for his GP to be forced to refer him for psychiatric treatment ?

    (One of my family members is a senior Consultant-grade doctor at a hospital and believes that Anjem Choudhary is at the very least clinically neurotic, and potentially even more severely ill. I should emphasise that he’s not volunteering to have Choudhary “taken off the streets”, but I thought I should mention it as another professional medical opinion).

  • 123. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:16 pm

    Gimme those polls! Gimme! Yum! Get your stats our for the lads!

    Etc?

    lol. Maybe something in that…

  • 124. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:17 pm

    Ha Ha Ha

    Stupid Twat of the Year!

    A demonstrator who imitated a suicide bomber in a Muslim protest over cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad has been recalled to prison.

    Omar Khayam, 22, of Bedford, is a convicted drug dealer who was jailed in 2002 and released on licence last year after serving half his sentence.

    He was arrested and recalled to prison for breaching the terms of his licence.

    Khayam apologised for his “insensitive” protest on Monday but said he had been offended by the cartoons.

  • 125. Jai  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:19 pm

    =>”Note that HARDLY ANYTHING has happened in more multi-cultural places like Malaysia and India, where there are tons of Muslims.”

    Not quite. There have been some major riots in New Delhi, although not on the same scale as those in the Middle East.

    =>”Real debate lets get Chowdry and Griffin to battle it out on TV.”

    Having recently seen Christopher Hitchen’s performance on CNN regarding this issue, I think it would be entertaining to have him pitted against Anjem Choudhary in a one-on-one TV debate (especially considering Choudhary’s tendency to resort to hectoring and verbal/psychological intimidation tactics — which Hitchens would no doubt be able to easily counteract).

  • 126. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:22 pm

    El Cid

    Naah - I don’t know what he is on about either - something about how those people who pass judgment on suicide bombing, in their attitude and vehemence to that belief of hating suicide bombing are quite similar to people who fly planes into buildings….or something like that

    Still, I’ve never been a fan of art that shocks just for shock’s case. Too easy and lazy in my view

    Like crude and provocative cartoons of Mohammad? Yeah - same here.

  • 127. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:24 pm

    al Muj

    Great point # 114! Applies to many visitors here too!

  • 128. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:29 pm

    It is vitally important that these crazy Mo-fo’s are arrested to show that there are not double standards for crazy Mo-fo’s who happen to be Muslim and one for others.

    Michelle Malkin - you guys are just lazy - she looks nice in one photo, straight on, but in the other pics when she is looking to the side you realise its all make up and camera angle. Not that hot. Admit it David T - it’s the taboo and transgression of her right wing firebranding that turns you on ;-)

  • 129. Steve M  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:32 pm

    Interesting analysis, Sunny.

  • 130. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:40 pm

    anglo-irish supporting the IRA. not bloody likely, you are forgetting Brendan Behan’s description of an Anglo-Irishman as “a protestant with a horse”.
    Catholic Irish? maybe. Ulster Catholic Irish? in many cases more than maybe. (that’s part of my background - Ulster Catholic, not supporting the IRA.) doesn’t mean that all but a fringe group would sign up for anything violent or purposeful though. It should also be noted that Irish Republicans have far better (and more unintentionally humourous) songs than the Islamists do… “The Man from the Daily Mail”

  • 131. Rohin  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:43 pm

    Just some quickies:

    Thanks for the reply David - you have given me some food for thought I must say. I’m dithering, but I think I still want them arrested. Although yes, I acknowledge nothing may come of it. Fascinating back story on ‘Andy’ there - I know a few similar stories with less high profile people who have gone from being progressive to zealous. The point you make about fascists having black friends is one I was discussing with me Mum yesterday as I watched the Race Hate Debate on channel 5 with her.

    Racists, fascists, fundamentalists - their hatred comes from fear. Most of these people haven’t got the balls to declare their views publicly, they hold clandestine meetings with white supremist rock/flags of jihad away from outsiders. Why? Because they’re scared. Their balls grow when it’s just them, but in reality you’ve probably met them without realising their views, as they’re so well hidden. Because although they hate niggas/kufirs, they hold their tongue because they are invariably working underneath black people and infidels at the menial job they do.

    Jai, if we started sectioning people who fit criteria for mental illness, the wards would be inundated. Believing that Zionists rule the world in a secret society - is this any less crazy than the schizophrenics who tell me that the FBI is after them? Interestingly, a long case I presented was an Egyptian paranoid schizophrenic with the most amazing delusions about his mother, his penis and the caliphate.

    Michelle Malkin is NOT hot, what is this bizarre delusion? She’s hot FOR POLITICS, but in the real world she wouldn’t even get my number, no matter how hard she tried. It’s easy to dislike her - silly neocon bint.

  • 132. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    Republican songs are excellent.

    Loyalist songs, by contrast, are complete rubbish. “The Auld Orange Flute” my arse!

  • 133. Sunny  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:45 pm

    There have been some major riots in New Delhi,

    Jai I think that is exaggerating a bit. Some people went on a protest, some police blasted water at them. And there was a strike in Kashmir. Hardly a major incident considering more things get burnt annually by the VHP crew during Valentines Day.

  • 134. Kay  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:49 pm

    Do they media have nothing better to focus upon?

    If a few muslims are allowed to burn flags and display posters with derogatory comments, then surely such neo right wing groups are allowed to have their say as well.
    It works both ways.

    Firstly, the IRA were threats, now thats died down the government need another group to ‘point the finger’ at.
    During the time of the IRA attacks Irish people were ostricised and mocked, now the same is happening
    to muslim.

    With regards the the title of the post, perhaps they are. Who knows?!

  • 135. Sunny  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:49 pm

    How dare you insult MM like that Rohin! I’m enraged! Taking a cue from the Iranians I’m going to draw some cartoons making fun of….errr… you, and show you how much hurt you’ve caused me

  • 136. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:51 pm

    Rohin, er… this is a bit OT, but I’m writing a novel about a doctor in London during 7/7. He has a mate who is a psychologist working in an acute psychiatry ward.

    If you have a sec, could you help me with a couple of research questions? (I’m happy to do this by email whenever if its easier)(I did say this was O/T!)

    1. Would an acute psychiatry ward be in a secure part of a big London hospital? i.e. would it have big thick locked doors?

    2. Would there be psychologists attached to the ward, as it were - i.e. who work there mainly, have desks there or thereabouts… or would it just be nurses and then specialists come in occasionally…?

    3. What does an acute psych ward look like. Mainly beds like in the films? Are there other facilities?

    Sorry to trouble you. More than happy to give you a big fat acknowledgment in the book if you can help. Or even if you can’t.

    ta…

  • 137. El Cid  |  February 7th, 2006 at 3:55 pm

    Jay, that was seamlessly linked together in #’126.
    Touche!
    Still, that doesn’t mean…

  • 138. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:08 pm

    Even I though I do generally find the right sort of right-wing women (i.e. including neo-cons, but not paleo-cons) quite sexy, I must state clearly that INHO MM is NOT hot, sorry, that’s my take on the matter. Condi Rice, however, that’s another story..

  • 139. Jai  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:15 pm

    Rohin,

    Re: Mental Health Act

    I understand your point about the difficulties of going after anyone and everyone who’s a candidate for sectioning, but in this case I think it would be a viable course of action in the case of at least some of the major jihadist ringleaders. Anjem Choudhary has openly stated his aim is the overthrow of the current democratic form of British government and the imposition of Shariah Law — treasonous intentions at the very least. Moreover, the fact that he also explicitly states that the only law he believes himself subject to is Shariah and not the legal system of the United Kingdom (a criminal mindset), coupled with his overtly aggressive and threatening behaviour towards others, shows that he is indeed a danger both to himself and to the rest of society (both on an individual level and in terms of his more long-term aims).

    If he can indeed be removed from the equation due to psychiatric illness, then this solves at least part of the problem. Remember that Al Capone was jailed for tax evasion, not his mafia activities. Furthermore, proving that his activies and behaviour are indeed due to confirmed mental problems also has further knock-on effects regarding credibility, followers, ability to recruit further support etc. Would anyone in their right mind continue to follow someone who had been successfully diagnosed as suffering from clinical psychiatric disorders ?

  • 140. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:25 pm

    Sean

    You’re not…. Ian McEwan!?!!!?!

  • 141. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:28 pm

    DavidT

    You know he’s not. Although looking at the price of his books on amazon.co.uk has reaffirmed my faith in the system of market economics that finds the true value for all products.

    I was wondering if you (DavidT) and he (SeanT) were related.

  • 142. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:28 pm

    seanT

    Is it a rollicking thriller or a boring pompous arty-farty Ian McEwan style book? We need to know.

  • 143. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:29 pm

    (distantly, obviously)

  • 144. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:32 pm

    Jay Singh,
    Do you honestly not know of this legendary authorial genius? (He has actually posted more good sense on PP than ever on HP, so maybe not) “Kissing England” is his meisterwork, his Macbeth, his Crime and Punishment, his Dead Souls, all rolled into one.

    Maybe I should leave the Fitzrovia/Bloomsbury area. Having such genius about is damning for one’s confidence in one’s own artistic abilities

  • 145. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:33 pm

    Is he actually a published author then? Wow. I am impressed.

  • 146. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:37 pm

    Sean Thomas is his name (I don’t think this is any breach of confidence - if it is please feel free to delete this). Google or Amazon him. He is an award-winner.

  • 147. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:38 pm

    Come now. This is grossly unfair!

  • 148. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:39 pm

    Alright guys, enough of the faux fanmail.

    Yes I am a published author, for my sins. And I hear that amazon are doing a surprisingly large discount at the moment on one or two items from my back catalogue. Sigh.

    Still… I have just sold my forthcoming memoirs (Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You; Bloomsbury Books; May 2006) to… Norway! So things aren’t all bad.

    The book I am planning is a novel that turns on the 7/7 events.. when an atheist doctor’s gilfriend is killed in the Tavistock Square bomb (yeah, laugh a minute). He is then haunted by her ghost.. sending him doo lally.

    Trust me. It works. I think. There’s a big twist at the end which I can’t tell you, obv!

    Venichka, you live in my purlieus?! Do you drink the cheap lager at the Fitzroy? Like me??

  • 149. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:40 pm

    Hehehe!!

    Bad Sex Award Winner

    Nice one dude!! Sony Walkman eh? Kinky boy!

  • 150. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:40 pm

    The book I am planning is a novel that turns on the 7/7 events.. when an atheist doctor’s gilfriend is killed in the Tavistock Square bomb (yeah, laugh a minute). He is then haunted by her ghost.. sending him doo lally.

    Is it a comedy?

  • 151. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:42 pm

    Sorry if I was being mean…oh no all that Walkman talk has stepped up here, too.

    I don’t live here, mate, I do work here though . (don’t live that far away though). Not a big fan of the Fitz, tbh - prefer the Newman Arms round the corner…or, some even better places more at the Clerkenwell end of Bloomsbury

    Promise to read your next book, though…

  • 152. David T  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    Why write about sex at all Sean.

    After all, we have the internet now.

  • 153. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    (I am not referring to the Griffin, btw)

  • 154. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 4:46 pm

    Who is ready to have their blood pressure raised?

    Student editor suspended after printing cartoon

    A student newspaper has been forced to recall thousands of copies after it became the first British paper to publish one of the controversial cartoons satirising the prophet Muhammad

    A student union spokeswoman said Tom Wellingham, the editor of the paper, which won newspaper of the year at last year’s Guardian’s Student Media Awards, had been suspended alongside three other journalists.

    “The editorial team enjoy the normal freedoms and independence associated with the press in the UK, and are expected to exercise those freedoms with responsibility, due care and judgment,” she said.

    “The students’ union very much regrets any upset caused or disrespect shown by the publication of the controversial cartoon and has taken immediate action by promptly withdrawing all copies of this week’s edition of Gair Rhydd at the earliest moment possible.”

    She said a “majority” of the 10,000 copies printed had been collected and would be shredded. Fewer than 200 copies of the edition, distributed on Saturday, remained unaccounted for.

  • 155. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 5:03 pm

    Venichka. Yes the Walkman simile will follow me to me grave! But I don’t mind… cause i think it was one of the more most gloriously outrageous pieces of prose I will ever write. People don’t believe this - but I wrote it hoping to win the Bad Sex Award. And to entertain and be insane, too.

    Newman Arms…. is that the little one on Rathbone whatsit? With the pies!? If it is, I heard that pub was the model for the proles’ pub, in Orwell’s 1984. He used to live on Percy Street, I think. As did Hitler’s brother, allegedly. And Stalin and Lenin drank in the Fitzroy. Amazing area.

  • 156. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 5:10 pm

    The one with the pies and the little room it is. Splendid little place. Interesting to here that re: 1984, yes, I can see it…back in the days when Fitzrovia was still North Soho.
    Funny that there is a really rather ugly memorial to Orwell on the outside of the flat he once lived on by South End Green (Hampstead), but nothing to recall Joe Orton’s inordinate love of the gents’ lavs just opposite…

    (Meanwhile, I continue to boycott “the Boot”, because of its role in the Gordon Riots, ooh, a few years ago.)

  • 157. seanT  |  February 7th, 2006 at 5:16 pm

    The Boot? Is that in Fitzrovia? Or Hampstead? Whassat? Do you mean the Marquis of Granby?

    That’s a funny pub - the Marquis. Used to be one of the only gay pubs in London, in the war… Relatedly or not, in the 1940s a man was once kicked to death on that bit of pavement outside. A fact I like to remember whenever I start getting Daily Mail on my ass, and worrying about London’s increasing crime rate.

    The Good old days? Hmmm…

    But we have yanked the thread a little O/T!

  • 158. Venichka  |  February 7th, 2006 at 5:23 pm

    Nah - the Boot - it’s a bit south of Kings Cross/Euston. Technically Bloomsbury, I suppose. But more the drug-injecting than lesbian authors bit.

    To get Daily Mail on yer ass I commend a trip south-eastwards to Slade Green - visinting last week I was reminded of the Mail (or was it Express headline) “Feral Youths Who Rule Our Streets”).. I mean I grew up on a big sprawling council estate on the edge of London but it’s nothing like that.

    But we have gone way OT - this is like the sort of conv. I have with Graham at HP.

    Back to the topic.
    Are the police conspiring against us? That is the question.

  • 159. Jay Singh  |  February 7th, 2006 at 5:26 pm

    Ah Bloomsbury….the heroin dealers, pimps, battered prostitutes, syringes littering the way, who cannot love Bloomsbury?

    Seriously though, the mix of sleaze and culture is quite unique.

  • 160. Don  |  February 7th, 2006 at 5:38 pm

    Jai,

    Re; Mental Health Act.

    It might sound tempting, but using the mental health act to bang up the politically annoying is a road we really don’t want to go down.

  • 161. Jai  |  February 7th, 2006 at 6:41 pm

    Anjem Choudhary was apparently interviewed by CNN today too. Amongst other rhetoric, he openly stated that “Sheikh” OBL is the “Emir of Jihad” and is an example of “real” Islam, and that he supports OBL. He even refuted Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani’s recent admonishment of Muslims as being part of the problem (promoting a “dark and distorted version of Islam etc), so in his view even the Shia leader has no spiritual authority and does not reflect/possess an accurate interpretation of Islam.

    As I said before, he’s discrediting himself and Islam by his own words.

  • 162. Bikhair  |  February 7th, 2006 at 7:05 pm

    Jai,

    “Anjem Choudhary was apparently interviewed by CNN today too. Amongst other rhetoric, he openly stated that “Sheikh” OBL is the “Emir of Jihad” and is an example of “real” Islam, and that he supports OBL.”

    Any student of prophet traditions would have seen this guy coming a mile away. In that same vein he isnt the first nor will he be the last.

  • 163. Siddharth  |  February 7th, 2006 at 7:28 pm

    But, in all honesty, how many of us can truly say that we have never been in that position…

    Yes, true. But a red mullet is a crucifiable offence.

  • 164. Siddharth  |  February 7th, 2006 at 8:20 pm

    DavidT’s description of the the Politicisation of Anjem Chowdhury was so interesting.

    I crossed paths with Anjem back in the early 90s as well. I was a contemporary of the time that Muslim students and “yoot” were going through a politicisation along with a search for identity. To find themselves and their role as 2nd and 3rd generation British Asians. They were the heady days of Londonistan.

    I too went through some kind of psychic and spiritual crisis back then. But in my search for the ‘Islamic Way’, I met with many many false sheiks and charlatans. Amongst them, the Fundamentalists. The Salafis and the dreariest and stupidest of them all, the Hizbut Tahria, OBM and his arse lickers. I always found them too shouty, too sure of themselves and way too antagonistic for their own good. And no way did my interpretation of Islam have anything to do with some Post-Modernist fantasy of a Muslim State! They apalled me, reader, and I fled.

  • 165. jamal  |  February 7th, 2006 at 8:48 pm

    “He got home, found himself on TV, and no doubt got bitch-slapped by his mum and forced into apologising.”

    lol.. I was thinking that too. And the idiot was on license.

  • 166. jamal  |  February 7th, 2006 at 9:39 pm

    This is an intresting article with some good links. In response to a few points;

    “the protests were orchestrated by the Saudis, most likely to deflect attention from the people who died during Hajj.”

    I today read an article by Juan Cole that disputes this point and provides a detail account of the affair dating back to september.

    “the deeper agenda seems obvious. The Middle Eastern countries and their imams want obedience and loyalty from their bretheren in Europe. They want to convince them that they are never going to be accepted and they are not part of those countries. They want to drive a wedge between the ‘infidels’ and their brothers”

    While this is true, I am of the opinion that the “west” (i hate using this word in this way) does this also. With reference tothe cartoons issues alone, they were printed, considered acceptable, reprinted and supported by many. Islam was portrayed as a violent religion, and the anticipated response of Muslims has made it believable?

    “The rest of us stuck in the middle are having a hard time just keeping up. “

  • 167. Bikhair  |  February 7th, 2006 at 10:02 pm

    Jamal,

    To your point, wouldnt you agree that emaan dirves a wedge between us and them? Obviously Muslims can lead perfectly normal lives in Darul Kufr but much of their society we would have to abstain from.

  • 168. jamal  |  February 7th, 2006 at 11:59 pm

    I dont think there has to be a wedge to an extent that we cannot work and live together as colleagues and neighbours without the conflict.

  • 169. Bikhair  |  February 8th, 2006 at 12:59 am

    Jamal,

    “I dont think there has to be a wedge to an extent that we cannot work and live together as colleagues and neighbours without the conflict.”

    That is what I meant.

  • 170. Rohin  |  February 8th, 2006 at 12:50 pm

    Sean - sure I don’t mind helping, drop me an email (in the About Us section). I’m writing a book too! All the cool people are.

    It’s an interesting premise Jai, but as Don says, we don’t want to go down that road. Interestingly we have to be very careful these days when it comes to beliefs like the ones you talk about, as we’re told be culturally-sensitive. I.e. what you and I might think crazy may be a cultural norm in some far off land. I think we’ve got more chance of getting him on treason charges.

    It comes in light of figures which showed a massive skew towards black people being diagnosed as schizophrenic. Way more than other groups. Most then assumed it was because foolish doctors were misdiagnosing voodoo priestesses and witch doctors as mad - but this was proved to be entirely unfounded as first generation black immigrants had normal schizophrenia rates. It’s higher in 2nd and 3rd gen black people. So even though the cultural sensitivity was never a problem, the emphasis has remained and we have to pussy-foot around beliefs that could be put down to religion. We had a catholic patient who said some crazy ass shit too!

  • 171. seanT  |  February 8th, 2006 at 2:25 pm

    Thanks, Rohin - really kind of you.

    I’ll drop you a line anon.

    Ta.

  • 172. Jai  |  February 8th, 2006 at 2:59 pm

    Rohin buddy,

    Interesting points you make about the extra degree of cultural sensitivity doctors have to bear in mind.

    Okay, so in Anjem Choudhary’s case, nailing him purely due to his somewhat extreme (and highly dangerous) interpretation of his religion is potentially difficult. I understand that. However, although his religious beliefs may be the root cause of his problems, it’s the outward SYMPTOMS resulting from his beliefs that we are concerned with. He can believe whatever the hell he wants to — but when those ideas and ways of thinking wreak havoc on his sanity and cause him to be a danger to others (re: the unstable and emotionally erratic behaviour demonstrated on Newsnight earlier this week, especially with regards to his behaviour towards women) and, given his treasonous agenda, towards wider society as a whole (remember he views OBL as an “accurate” representation of jihad and Islam, so who’s to say he won’t incite similar tactics here in the UK ?), then perhaps there is indeed some action which can be taken from a medical perspective.

    Let me clarify matters: You saw how he behaved on Newsnight. This is by no means the first time he has acted in this way in public. His behaviour was not an example of a mentally stable individual. As a medical professional, I’m sure you’ve picked up on this too (and as I mentioned above, I’ve already heard one professional opinion from a very senior doctor based on the televised evidence we’ve all seen to date, ie. Choudhary is definitely suffering from clinical behavioural disorders, although a more specific diagnosis would require more detailed research and assessment of his behaviour — obviously, this is something I doubt Choudhary would willingly submit to, hence the suggestion of an intervention by his GP, other doctors, and/or the use of the Mental Health Act).

    Choudhary is basically like a spoilt child, who will keep on pushing the boundaries of what he can get away with, until someone pushes back sufficiently. He lacks the maturity, self-restraint, and self-discipline to be able to control himself, and his overtly bullying personality is self-evident. I’ve already mentioned his unashamedly intimidatory behaviour towards women, especially Muslim women; we’ve also seen how he cannot stop himself from ranting even if the presenter (eg. Jeremy Paxman, although he behaved in the same way towards Nina Hussein last week) repeatedly asks him to stop, or even if the cameras and microphone are taken off him completely (one can still hear him gibbering away in the background). It’s like watching some belligerent schoolboy arguing with his father — he uses the same childish teenage tactics — and refusing to either stop or amend his behaviour because the “counter-force” and subsequent consequences are not firm enough.

    I agree with you that charges of treason may be a more viable course of action, but if he was an “Average Joe” behaving in this way, and was not a Muslim or being represented as such, then surely such an individual would indeed be a candidate for confinement and treatment on psychiatric grounds. The clinical evidence for his illness is already there, isn’t it ?

  • 173. Kay  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:13 pm

    Well if Anjem’s a psychotic freak then he shouldn’t be invited to participate in such programmes or even be interviewed.
    The researchers should be a wee bit careful abt inviting radical freaks like him.

  • 174. Jay Singh  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:35 pm

    I am just watching Choudhry’s performance on the Newsnight special now - it is quite good comedy actually.

    The debate starts about six minutes into the programme.

    Anjum Choudhry The Crazy Mofo

  • 175. Jay Singh  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:45 pm

    I think Choudhry’s performance is hilarious in its dementedness!! And deeply embarassing.

  • 176. Kay  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:48 pm

    He should be a wee bit vigilant cos’ for the dude should be aware that he’s unconsciously acting as an ambassador.
    He needs coaching

  • 177. Jay Singh  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:52 pm

    The man is a total barmy fruitcake! He looks funny. He looks like a Proboscis Monkey.

  • 178. Jai  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:54 pm

    Jay Singh,

    This is exactly what I’ve been talking about in this thread. See what I mean ? (PS I’ve just submitted a post with the link you’ve supplied on Sepia Mutiny — I hope this is okay with you).

    Kay,

    My point too. On the other hand, some would say we should just let him (metaphorically) hang himself with his own rope.

  • 179. Jay Singh  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:54 pm

    Anjum Choudhry?

  • 180. Jai  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:58 pm

    Jay Singh,

    Re: “post with the link you’ve supplied on Sepia Mutiny”

    Sorry, I mean that my post is on SM, but I’ve used the link you just supplied here.

  • 181. Kay  |  February 8th, 2006 at 3:58 pm

    Anjum not Anjem. Maybe he’s a jem for his other half but certainly not for the community.

    Freak

  • 182. Col. Mustafa  |  February 8th, 2006 at 4:03 pm

    Yeh i just watched the Newsnight interview that everyone was going on about.

    Anjum has a great method of debating.
    Just talk over everyone and then say “what what, im in a discussion, im discussing things” while you got Tariq sitting there pretty much giving up talking to him after 30 seconds.

    Its so hard to deal with people like that; theres no reasoning there whatsoever.

    I think he might be slightly unstable, but he knows what his actions are doing.

Leave a Comment

hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed