from the quill of Antisthenes the Younger
A certain 11-11 anniversary is approaching again, and I do not mean the one where that socialist hypocrite Whitlam got his comeuppance. [Fog of Chaos – Reminiscence of dismissal] The World War I ended ninety-five years ago and we thus have only five years to go to make it without World War III. It would be undoubtedly a great achievement, thought the victims of the countless “little” wars might disagree. And, after all, why bother with the big one when you can achieve what you want by little ones and by infiltration and subversion? The noise of a big one could wake up the people.
“First, the good news. Islamic leaders across the nation are urging members of their congregations to wear the poppy in the run-up to Remembrance Sunday.
Julie Siddiqi says that the anniversary of the outbreak of World War I affords an opportunity to tell younger Muslims that ‘we are in this together’. Stalls selling poppies have been set up at mosques, in conjunction with the Royal British Legion. Julie Siddiqi, the executive director of the Islamic Society of Great Britain, said: ‘British Muslims should be wearing poppies not burning them.’”
“Now for the bad news. Unfortunately, there is a sizeable minority of Muslims who appear to hate their adopted homeland.
Well, I say ‘adopted’. Many of the most extreme elements of Islamism were born in Britain and have been radicalised by deranged preachers from both home and overseas. It doesn’t help when rabble-rousers like Choudary are indulged by pusillanimous police chiefs, terrified of appearing to lack cultural ‘sensitivity’.
More than 3.5 million soldiers from the Asian subcontinent fought for Britain in both world wars, not just Muslims, but Sikhs and Hindus, too, with tens of thousands killed in action.
Frankly, I’ve always believed Choudary, like his oppo Captain Hook, before he was given a one-way ticket to Orange Jump-Suit Land, gets away with it not because he manages to stay a cigarette paper’s-width within the law but because he’s a paid informant for the Old Bill and the Funny People. That’s what keeps him out of the slammer.
There are others whom the security services believe pose much more of a clear and present danger.
One of those individuals is Somali-born Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed — so bad, they named him twice.
He is considered such a menace that he has been subject to a control order called a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure, which allows the police to keep him under constant surveillance.
Last Friday, he was observed entering the An-Noor Masjid Mosque, in Arthur Daley’s old stamping ground of Acton, in West London, the spiritual home of Mr Mukerjee. He went in at 10am and was seen inside the mosque at 3.15pm. After that, he vanished.
A Met Police spokesman said yesterday that ‘Mr Mohamed’ changed into ‘Islamic clothing and has not been seen since’.
By ‘Islamic clothing’ they mean the burka, so why didn’t they say that? CCTV footage shows someone assumed to be Mo emerging in the full pillar-box job. ‘Mister’ Mohamed went in the front door dressed like Ali G and came out the back looking like the Elephant Man.
We are told that: ‘Ports and borders were notified with his photograph and details circulated nationally.’ A fat lot of good that’s going to do. It would be a brave copper or border guard who asked anyone in Muslim garb to lift their veil. The yuman rites brigade would go ballistic.
This wouldn’t be the first time a suspected terrorist has had it away on his toes under cover of the burka. One of the July 21, 2005, London bombing conspirators made it to Birmingham clad from top to tail in ‘modest’ female Islamic clothing. And some of those responsible for the Nairobi Mall massacre concealed their Kalashnikovs beneath burkas.
Frankly, I couldn’t care less what people wear and I’m not going to rehearse the ‘for and against’ the burka arguments in much detail.
I think the pretty headscarfs many Muslim women choose to wear are simply delightful, no more threatening than the Flo Capp headgear our mothers and grandmothers used to put on when they were doing the housework or heading outdoors in the rain.
Burkas are, however, a whole different order. They are a statement of rejection, of isolation from mainstream society. They are also, it would appear, a handy disguise for male terrorism suspects on the run.
I’m with Ken Clarke when he says that women should not be allowed to wear the full-face veil in court because it is difficult to give evidence from inside ‘a kind of bag’.
What always amuses me is the way in which so-called ‘liberal feminists’ contort themselves to defend the right of Muslim women to wear the burka. They try to pretend it’s somehow ‘racist’ or ‘anti-Islamic’ to ban the burka.
Women who opt to hide their ‘modesty’ in these ridiculous sackcloth bin-liners are no less patriotic than the rest of us, they insist.
When I see a bird in a burka wearing a poppy, I might just agree with them.”