Western Resistance

« Pakistan: Islamic Rape Laws Amended - 1,300 Women To Be Freed From Jail | | Saudi Arabia: Islamists Break Out Of Prison »

July 8, 2006

UK: 7/7 And The Lie That Islam Means Peace

Yesterday, on the anniversary of the bombing of London on 7th July, 2005, wreaths were laid by figures such as the Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, and London's Mayor, Ken Livingstone, taking a brief break from promoting the current Islam Expo - a tasteless exercise in publicising Islam through applied arts, souk-music and speeches from supporters of terrorism such as Azzam al-Tamimi.

I do not wish to dwell on the sufferings of the relatives and victims of 7/7, as their pain yesterday was at a high level, made worse by the release of a "farewell" video by Shehzad Tanweer, who killed 7 people and maimed many more at Aldgate Station. The video, released only the night before the anniversary, was designed to create maximum hurt to the bereaved and traumatised.

But while the media has been writing tributes to the victims, I would rather now just draw your attention to the faces and names of those 52 innocent human beings who died on that fateful day, which can be found here. A click on the name below the face will bring up a short biography of each victim.

There has been much worthy reporting in the UK media in the days leading up to yesterday's commemoration. But there has also been an insidious attempt to try to justify the religion of Islam as being something altogether peaceful and disconnected from the events of 7/7.

Chief among the apologists for Islam is the Guardian. I now shudder to think I ever had my writing published in such an appallingly devious newspaper. The offensive timing of the Islam Expo has been conveniently excused by the Guardian by explaining that the venue had been booked in 2002, long before the events of 7/7. There has been a whole year in which to cancel the engagement and find a more appropriate location which could be booked at a less inauspicious date. Ihtisham Hibatullah, a spokesman for the Expo, states: "Around July 7 there will be a lot of interest around Muslims in this country, so why not have the mainstream Muslims' voice rather than the fringe?"

Aye, there's the rub. What is mainstream Islam? Why should the Prime Minister this week state in the Houses of Parliament that it is for the 'moderate" figures of Islam to tackle the "extremists"? Is there really a distinction to be made?

Today, the Guardian produces yet another litany of misinformation about Islam, in a piece by Karen Armstrong entitled "Violent Islamic radicals know they are heretical". And in this lame piece of propaganda, the self-styled expert on God in all his incarnations bleats on about how the events of 7/7 "violated the essential principles of any religion."

Karen Armstrong is a former nun, who went on to write several books attempting to reconcile Islam with other faiths, and all the while avoiding the blatantly obvious Koranic verses, the Hadiths, and the war-like history of Mohammed himself. She spins a cocoon of pleasantries which are trite, always seeking to view Islam through a lens of Christian morality and avoiding the truth.

Armstrong whines about how the Muslim community is feeling "strain" at the moment. But where does her rose-tinted view of Islam accommodate the following Koranic texts:
"Slay the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them. - Sura 9, verse 5.
"Strike off disbelievers heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes." - Surah 8, verse 12.
"And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression," - Surah 2, verse 193
"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you," - Surah 2, verse 216
"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah" - Surah 3, verse 28
"Then fight in Allah's cause - Thou art held responsible only for thyself - and rouse the believers. It may be that Allah will restrain the fury of the Unbelievers; for Allah is the strongest in might and in punishment," - Surah 4, verse 84

The Hadiths are far worse, and the historic examples of the spread of Islam via the sword convey a message of war against the infidel, and an agenda of global domination. This is what Islam was about, to dominate and crush all that oppose it, not to make sly compromises.

If Karen Armstrong really understood Islam, then perhaps her book "The Battle for God: Fundamentalism in Judaism, Christianity and Islam" would not have been amongst a list of 18 books recently banned in "moderate" Malaysia, under its Printing Presses and Publications Act of 1984.

But the general public is not expected to have read the entire Koran or to know the Hadiths. So it easy for the ignorant to be kept more ignorant by organs of appeasement and dhimmitude such as the Guardian. Today (with a hat tip to Marc at USS Neverdock) there is another example of twisted reasoning and apologia for 7/7, found in the Guardian Comments section, entitled: 7/7: not enough has been done in which a hijabed Muslim woman, Rajnaara Akhtar (pictured), explains that the government of the UK must accept some of the blame for the 7/7 bombings.

And why? Because, as she says, "July 7 was driven in the main by men sympathetic to the plight of thousands of innocent civilians who died because of our government's actions. For those actions, we paid the price with over 50 British civilian lives." Extremism is the fault of Blair, for, "if he would stop creating terrorists, perhaps the Muslim community wouldn't have to then root them out for him."

This hijabed Muslimah, portraying herself for all the world like a turkey dressing itself up for Thanksgiving, is willing to suggest that the 7/7 bombers had motive - mitigating reasons for doing what they did, and Britain must accept what happened.

This argument, that Britain's foreign policy is to blame for the tragedies of 7/7, is mirrored by others in the Muslim community. The organiser of the Islam Expo, which is currently being held at Alexandra Palace, overlooking north London, is Anas Altikriti. Last week he wrote: "We will not stand for our country and people being terrorised nor will we stand for our government terrorising any other peoples."

Only a few details of the Shehzad Tanweer video were released on the eve of 7/7, but the Yorkshire Post provides more from Tanweer's "justification" for his subsequent murders. Not as confident or articulate as his buddy Mohammed Sidique Khan, the leader of the cell, Tanweer has a similar message.

He states, like Rajnaara Akhtar, that the UK government and people are "directly responsible" for "Palestine, and Afghanistan and Iraq". We (I am British) "openly declared war on Islam and the foreigners in the crusade against the Muslims...We love death the way you love life". He says of his companions that they are 100% committed to the cause of Islam. He calls the British government "lying" and says Muslims should not support them. He says British Muslims should "stand up and be counted" and threatens that unless the UK government cease "all financial and and military support to the US and Israel" then "the war will never stop."

But the words of Mohammed Sidique Khan are clearer, and convey one plain message. Islam is not about compromise. It is about victory. Comply or die. In his video speech, filmed at the same location in front of the same tatty cloth backdrop, Khan stated: "Until we feel security, you will be our targets - not until you have stopped the bombing, gassing, imprisonment, and torture of my people, we will not stop this fight. We are at war, and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation.........Jihad is an obligation, on every single one of us, men and women, and by staying at home, you are turning your backs on Jihad, which is a major sin, it's a Kabira gona (clears throat). If you have any doubts or reservations about this and the other Jihad ayas, then I strongly suggest you research them, check the Islamic history - the books are very widely available - look to the classical scholars. See what sort of lives they led."

"Our so-called scholars today are content with their Toyotas and semi-detached houses. They seem to think their responsibilities lie with pleasing the khuffar instead of Allah, so they tell us ludicrous things, like "you must obey the law of the land". So how na- how on earth did we conquer lands in the past if we were to obey by this, this law? By Allah, these scholars will be brought to account, and if they fear the British government more than they fear Allah, then they must desist in doing talks, lectures, and passive fatwas and they need to stay at home where they are useless, and leave the job to the real men, the true inheritors of the Prophets."

We get agitated by the actions of "extremist" preachers such as Abu Hamza, the ranting cleric of Finsbury Park Mosque, whose sermons were attended by Khan and Tanweer. We get frustrated by police refusal to act, even when Abu Hamza was complicit in terrorist kidnappings in Yemen, which led to the deaths of three innocent British tourists and one Australian.

It is easy to write off these extremists as "aberrations", but they are only aberrations of OUR normality. The so-called extremists know their Koran, they know the Hadith, and that is why such preachers as Hamza and Abdullah al-Faisal are in prison for soliciting to murder.

We recoil in horror at the ideas promoted by former members of Al-Muhajiroun, such as Abu Izzadeen and Anjem Choudary.

Abu Izzadeen, according to the Times was in Birmingham, last week. The leader of the Saviour/Saved Sect, he was preaching at the Small Heath youth and community centre, and said that the 9/11 attacks upon the World Trade Centre "changed many people's lives." He then added: "especially for those inside," a quip that brought laughter from his audience. The video of his "sermon" was displayed on Al Ghurabaa's website.

But though it is hard to admit it - these guys are the "true inheritors of the Prophets" as Mohammed Sidique Khan said in his farewell video.

Most Muslims are peaceful, but that is in spite of the Koran, and not because of it. Last year, Hazel Blears, Home Office Minister, went on a post-7/7 fact-finding tour around Britain's Muslim communities. She learned nothing, as she declared, without a twitch in her demeanour, that "Islam was a religion of peace and love". Not just peace, but "love". Love of what? Warfare? Total and absolute control over others? Did Mohammed hug a bunny to his chest before he ordered the decapitation of the males of the Jewish Banu Qurayzah tribe in Medina?

Many Muslims have not even read the entire Koran, and though they are, generally, the "good" Muslims, they are not true Muslims. They are only nominally Muslim. For many, being Muslim is like being part of a club, like Dumas' Musketeers, where the Ummah says "All for one, and one for all", and Muslims will support their neighbours' honour, irrespective of how truly honourable or not they may be.

Anjem Choudary is head of Al Ghurabaa, a spin-off group formed after the demise of Al-Muhajiroun. This is an extract from an article of how they perceive the prophet Mohammed, using historical examples culled from the Hadith: "At the time of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) there were individuals like these who dishonoured and insulted him upon whom the Islamic judgement was executed. Such people were not tolerated in the past and throughout the history of Islam were dealt with according to the Shariah. Ka'ab ibn Ashraf was assassinated by Muhammad ibn Maslamah for harming the Messenger Muhammad saw) by his words, Abu Raafi' was killed by Abu Ateeq as the Messenger ordered in the most evil of ways for swearing at the( prophet, Khalid bin Sufyaan was killed by Abdullah bin Anees who cut off his head and brought it to the prophet for harming the Messenger Muhammad (saw) by his insults, Al-Asmaa bintu Marwaan was killed by Umayr bin Adi' al-Khatmi, a blind man, for writing poetry against the prophet and insulting him in it, Al-Aswad al-Ansi was killed by Fairuz al-Daylami and his family for insulting the Messenger Muhammad (saw) and claiming to be a prophet himself. This is the judgement of Islam upon those who violate, dishonor and insult the Messenger Muhammad (saw).

Shortly after these incidents the people began to realise that insulting the Messenger of Allah (saw) was not something to be taken lightly, and that by doing so would mean that you would be killed for it, a concept that many have seem to forgotten today."

Choudary was recently fined for organising the demonstration on February 3 at the Danish Embassy in west London. Here banners called for the beheading of those who insult Islam. He arrogantly proclaims that he would not report a potential suicide bomber to the police.

The British public have started to realise that extremism in the Muslim community is not a problem that can be tackled through appeasement, and that no matter how Islamic extremism is tackled, it is an inherent part of the faith.

This mistrust of Islam and its followers is growing, not subsiding. A report by Agence France Presse, via the Hindustan Times quotes professor Muhammad Anwar, from the Centre for Research in Ethnic Relations at the University of Warwick. Anwar states: "Muslims are seen as dangerous and not loyal to the country." The article states that "malaise and mistrust are on the rise in Britain between the majority and the Muslim minority, a year on from the London bombings."

A new poll by Pew Global Attitudes was released on the eve of 7/7 and is quoted in Reuters. 42% of those polled were worried by Muslim exremism in Britain, a rise from 34% when similar questions were posed on May 2005.

The poll includes Germany (40% compared to 35% in 2005), and France, where those worried about Islamic extremism dropped to 30% from a figure of 32% in 2005, and also Spain, where similarly fears dropped to 35% from a figure in 2005 of 43%.

There are proportionately less Muslims in Britain - 1.6 million or 2.8% of the national demographic, compared to France, but an earlier Pew report, released in June, found that British Muslims were the most anti-Western of all the Muslim communities in Europe, and also the most antisemitic.

The latest Pew survey finds that amongst Muslims themselves, forty-three percent were very concerned by rising Islamic extremism, higher than France (23%), Germany (23%) and Spain (21%).

Even the victims of 7/7 are not safe from the abuse and intimidation of Britain's homegrown jihadists. The Times relates that Rachel North, who survived the Kings Cross bomb detonated by Jermaine Lindsay has been the target of threatening emails. She states: "I've had abusive e-mails from people saying that I am part of a government conspiracy, that it's a shame I didn't die in the bombings. It's pretty low, but I have chosen not to publish these e-mails because I don't want to give them publicity."

Britain has allowed hate-promoting preachers like Omar Bakri Mohammed, leader of Al-Muhajiroun, and Abu Hamza, to stay for too long, disseminating their uncompromising take on Islam. And the mistake of allowing such people to stay came home to roost on 7/7 last year. Their ideas have infected a whole generation, who will not consult with a local imam or maulvi for advice on any issue. They will go to a Hadith, they will go to an Islamist website and from there be directed to a relevant Koranic text, or an online sermon, to justify armed jihad.

The message of terror is embedded in the Koran and the Hadiths. "I am made victorious through terror" said Mohammed the so-called prophet (Bukhari, Bk 52, 220).

There can be no compromise with Islam. Blair made the mistake of rewarding the Hamas-eulogising Iqbal Sacranie with a knighthood in June 2005, and charging the Muslim Council for Britain with doing his fieldwork for him, oblivious to the MCB's true agenda - to spread Islam like a virus, in all its forms.

The message of Mohammed Siddique Khan is addressed to Muslims, but also it is a message even more relevant to non-Muslims, that Islam is not a religion of peace. It never was, and it never can be, unless vicious texts in the Koran and Hadith are abrogated. We should listen to Khan, and spread his message - and use his own advice to discover more about the violent true nature of jihad. It is clear: "If you have any doubts or reservations about this and the other Jihad ayas, then I strongly suggest you research them, check the Islamic history - the books are very widely available - look to the classical scholars. See what sort of lives they led."

The truth is out there. And the truth will piss you off. We have been sheltered from the truth by our mealy-mouthed politicians, eager to appease their Muslim electorates, and we have been cowed by fear to not challenge Islam. But only when you know the truth can you know how to fight its excesses and its undue influence. Which other community, comprising less than 3% of the demographic, has ever been so influential on our policies, a tail wagging the dogsbody that is the body politic?

The truth may hurt, but knowing the truth will make it easier to fight the lies of Islam's advocates and spokespersons, and it will hurt far less than than living as slaves to fear.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at July 8, 2006 8:50 PM

Comments

Posted by: aviceda at July 9, 2006 12:29 AM

Posted by: anathema at July 9, 2006 8:11 AM

Post a comment