Rumbold of Pickled Politics knows very well why Islam4UK must be countered:

I think that the authorities are right to let Islam4UK’s demonstration go ahead, despite its unpleasant nature. But I am also heartened to see that a counter-demonstration has been organised, and not by the likes of the EDL or the BNP. Anjem Choudary’s goal is to become the face of British Islam, thus increasing communal tensions and making life worse for your average British Muslim. Demonstrating against Mr. Choudary isn’t a vote for the war, but rather a refusal to let him dominate the public’s perception of Muslims.

Which is why the British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD) announcement of its plan to hold a counter-demo to oppose Islam4UK/Al Muhajiroun is such welcome news.

One of the most effective oppositions to the communalism of Islam4UK Muslim that has recently emerged is the BMSD. It’s vital that the British public see Islam4UK for what it is and best way for that to happen is when we have sensible Muslim voices like Imran Ahmed’s in the media. The reason why his message ought to be printed in newspapers like the Daily Mail is a point of crucial significance which should not be lost on anyone.

*****

Imran Ahmad is the author of Unimagined: A Muslim Boy Meets The West and a Trustee of British Muslims for Secular Democracy

For millions of ordinary Britons, Wootton Bassett has become a symbol of national pride in the bravery of our service personnel, and of national grief, for the loss of so many young lives.

It is a testament to human decency which, until now, has transcended political or religious beliefs. Now, one man wishes to desecrate that solemn symbol in a vile and outrageous bid for publicity. Anjem Choudary’s plan to parade empty coffins through Wootton Bassett, as part of a campaign to highlight the supposed ‘persecution’ of Muslims by British troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, is deliberately provocative and unspeakably callous.

As a British Muslim myself, I am appalled by his tactics. Appalled, but not surprised. For this is a man whose ideology is as poisonous as it is illogical.

And, like the vast majority of Britain’s Muslim community, I am horrified by his disrespect, offended by his disregard for the grieving, and incensed by his failure to appreciate this country’s commitment to equality, tolerance and compassion.

I came to Britain in 1964, when I was one year old – like Anjem Choudary’s, my family migrated from Pakistan. Undoubtedly, race relations back then were far from perfect.

For us immigrants, Britain was a cold nation in more ways than one. But this amazing country has transformed itself in half-a-lifetime from being casually racist to being proudly anti-racist. (How ironic that Pakistan, on the other hand, remains utterly divided along all kinds of sectarian lines.)

Sadly, in the past few years, a tiny handful of fanatics have sought to undo that culture of mutual respect.

The July 7 bombings, and subsequent failed terror plots, were part of a deliberate campaign to inflame tensions on our streets. That Britain has not risen to this provocation is a tribute to its people and to the values that unite the majority – whatever their differing cultural backgrounds.

Indeed, I am awed by the way that this nation has remained so calm in the face of Islamic fanaticism. It is proof of its maturity and civilisation.

But this has served only to enrage followers of Choudary’s ‘Islam4UK’ organisation, which slowly and deliberately seeks to divide British society along religious lines, hoping that Britons will adopt a hatred of Muslims similar to the one Hitler’s Germany had towards Jews in the Thirties. (Witness the way Choudary yesterday deliberately compared British soldiers to Nazis).

Fanatics like his followers don’t like the idea of peaceful coexistence. They want open conflict. To that end, they have hijacked Britain’s tradition of free speech (which they themselves don’t believe in) to further their own medieval ends.

Britain does not hate Muslims, but these people are trying to make it happen by spreading lies about a supposed ‘war on Islam’ by Britain and America.

Sadly, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have provided plenty of fuel for their fantasies. So let us look a little closer at those two regions, the source of their warped sense of victimhood.
We know that the Afghanistan conflict was directly due to the attacks of 9/11, which were planned from within the Afghan tribal areas.

Yes, there are many ‘if onlys’ that might have prevented a full-scale conflict with the loss of innocent lives: if only the West had helped rebuild Afghanistan properly after the Soviets were driven out; if only the Taliban had been willing to forego their ancient hospitality code and give up Osama Bin Laden; if only the war for hearts and minds had been fought as thoroughly as the war of bullets and bombs.

But the question right now is: are we willing to surrender Afghanistan once more to the Taliban? Would that not be a betrayal of the Afghan people, particularly the women and children? We cannot leave them to live under the brutality and tyranny of the Taliban again.

What that country needs now is security, extensive reconstruction and social development – including the provision of guaranteed education for girls and full human rights for women.
In Islam, this is what we call the ‘greater Jihad’ – striving for good. Ultimately, that’s what British troops are still fighting for, and still losing their lives for. For Choudary’s followers to oppose their efforts is just ignorant and regressive tribalism.

Which brings us to Iraq. The campaign to overthrow Saddam may have been about many things – about the supposed threat from Weapons of Mass Destruction; about oil; economic security; regime change and so forth. But to believe it was part of a wider ‘war on Islam’ is utterly stupid.

Saddam Hussein was a secularist; he ran Iraq as a non-religious country, to keep a lid on the simmering hatred between Sunni and Shia.
So whatever provoked the invasion of Iraq, a ‘war on Islam’ it most certainly was not. (If that had been the West’s true intention, there are many other Muslim nations which would have been a more suitable target).

As with the invasion of Afghanistan, the Iraq war may have been poorly conducted, with post-war reconstruction inadequately considered. But lumping these two conflicts together and saying they are part of a global campaign by the West to ‘conquer Muslim lands’ is just ignorant, paranoid and deliberately divisive.
But then what do you expect from Choudary and his kind? Some British Muslims are so paranoid, they even believe the security services killed Princess Diana because she was going to marry a Muslim.

Or the latest conspiracy theory, promulgated on Islam4UK’s website: that the British Government did not do enough to save the alleged drug smuggler Akmal Shaikh from execution in China last week because he was a Muslim.

Truly, there is no limit to the absurdity of their beliefs. Yet sadly, their inflammatory tactics have succeeded in garnering disproportionate attention.
A recent parade of homecoming soldiers in Luton was hijacked by Choudary’s followers shouting ‘Criminals, murderers, terrorists, butchers of Basra’, provoking a near-riot with the local community.

Now Choudary is seeking to repeat that same conflict on a far greater scale on the streets of Wootton Bassett. It remains to be seen if he is just a selfpromoting loudmouth or genuinely intends to press ahead with his protest. But if so, he must not be allowed to succeed.

There is a time and a place for legitimate opposition to Britain’s involvement in Afghanistan or elsewhere. It should be expressed through the democratic process by lobbying politicians; not by jeering at our returning service personnel or insulting their grieving families.

The proposed Wootton Bassett march serves no purpose other than provocation, should be treated as a threat to public order, and permission should be denied.

Let’s not allow a fringe mob to sabotage this country’s progress.

Then AM abandoned their plan to march in central London and instead held a rally in Walthamstow. Predictably, the Express covered this protest and incendiary comments made at it by AM’s current leader Anjem Choudary (referred to by the article’s author, James Fielding as a “Sheikh” despite the fact that Anjem doesn’t even know basic Arabic) but omitted to mention any counter protests.

As covered here, British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD) did turn up and organised a well-natured counter-protest against AM, bearing placards saying “Laugh at those who insult freedom/They are very silly people” and “Debate those who insult Islam/You might change a mind”. BMSD’s Shaaz Mahboob has today written a piece for Comment is Free looking back on a “A good day for democracy”, as he calls it. It is well worth a read.

Inayat Bunglawala has also written a piece for Comment is Free, but from a rather different perspective. He decided to call off the counter-protest his ‘Muslims4UK’ group were co-ordinating when AM announced they’d not be turning up. Revealingly, there are twelves mentions of “I” and “me” in this article but, like in the Express, none of the BMSD demo (even calling his article “The demo that wasn’t”.  What are we to think of Inayat Bunglawala on this matter, especially when put in the context of Shaaz Mahboob’s comments in his article?

Sadly, we were not joined by the Islamic Society of Britain and Inayat Bunglawala’s group, Muslims4UK, who called off their own counter-demonstration. Also, disappointingly, we discovered that Inayat Bunglawala had formally requested that the police set up a separate pen, so that they would not have to stand with pro-democracy and anti-sharia Muslim groups such as us. This sort of sectarianism is incredibly damaging, not only to Muslims, but Britain as a whole.

Inayat seems to be trying to claim credit for these counter protests despite the fact that, in his own article, it seems pretty obvious that others contacted the police at the same time as, or before, he was organising a protest.

The day after I handed in my official “notification to hold a procession” form to the police, they contacted me to say that a number of groups had registered to hold counter-protests against al-Muhajiroun.

If counter-demonstrations against AM are to be successful in grabbing press and public attention away from Anjem and co’s calculated craziness, those opposing them need to be united and organised, avoiding factionalism and one-upmanship. This Saturday Inayat let the side down. Hopefully, the next time AM organise a publicity stunt, he will behave better and help the cause, not divide it.

Macaroon member demonstrating his wit and intellect

One of the hazards of being a London resident these days is that, if you decide to go to your local high street on a Saturday morning to do a spot of shopping, you risk running into Anjem Choudary and his (tiny) collection of belligerent, under-thinking (and undersexed) young men sometimes known as al-Muhajiroun (or al-Macaroon here at the Spittoon) and the “roadshows” they organise to try and identify vulnerable targets for radicalisation.

Last weekend it was the residents of Camden who woke up to find it was their turn to host these misfits. Although their video suggests that the “roadshow” passed off peacefully, this was not the case. Have a look at these photos:

Anjem getting a ticking off from the guardians of kufr/police

My correspondent informs me that a passing punk (of which there are, of course, many in Camden) was handed a leaflet by one of the Macaroonies. Recognising the pathetic unpleasantness of the leaflet, the punk tore it up. In a demonstration of his wit and intellect, the Macaroonie who was distributing the leaflets, erm, punched the punk in the face and the shambolic scenes above resulted.

How long must the police continue clearing up the mess made by an organisation that should have been banned long ago?

If ever proof were needed of the phenomenon of one set of extremist nutters requiring the existence of other set of extremist nutters to validate its own existence, it is this video statement from Sheikh Andy, in which he takes full credit for the creation of the EDL, which he says was caused by the provocation by “sincere Muslims” in Luton and Birmingham:

“The EDL and Casuals United who rose solely against the Extremist Muslims, erm Muslims, have a right to object to what we are calling for and engage in public dialogue wand discussion. But we should not allow those people, like the UAF and the Socialists and the Respect Party and the Labour Party to hijack this agenda for their own personal and selfish aims which have nothing to at to do with Islam”

The peaceful co-existence of Muslim communities in Britain is threatened by the provocative antics of Sheikh Andy and his Al-Macaroon “Roadshows”, the mindless violence of the EDL football hooligans and the agitating skullduggery of the SWP and Unite Against Fascism. And all Muslims in Britain should be aware of their agendas.

Shabba Goy, on Harry’s Place, makes this brilliant observation:

Choudhary’s video rather gives the game away – they all need each other. The EDL is a fantastic gift to SWP-UAF as they can put aside their total inability to deal with the rise of the BNP and pretend it is the 1970’s again and they are the ANL fighting the NF. The EDL is exactly what Choudhary’s ‘Sharia Roadshow’ is designed to provoke and of course the sight of Trots and Islamists shouting violently on the streets is what the EDL wanted.

It’s all rather silly isn’t it? Except of course that when you take politics on to the street, especially highly-charged racial/religious politics, with football yobs on one side and nutballs yelling about ‘kuffar’ on the other – there is always the chance that it really does spill over into violence – and high-profile violence captured by the tv cameras as well. That of course runs the risk of increasing tension in areas with significant Muslim populations. Which is, I suspect what the EDL’s masterminds, the SWP and Anjam Choudhary would all like.

All extremist organisations know that their best chance of growing comes in situations of polarisation and tension – for the far right it is their ‘race war’ fantasy, for Choudhary and co it is the impending clash between “Muslim v Kafir’ and for the SWP it is the ever-so exciting state of ‘resistance’ or rebellion.

One is reminded of the lyrics from this ’70s track by Stealers Wheel:

It also does a sideline in hosting the nastiest Islamists London has to offer. It has regularly been the location for talks held by “Young Muslim Cooperation”, a blatant front for al-Muhajiroun. Salafi Media (another al-Muhajiroun front) hosts a large number of videos recorded at Oxford House. So unwilling is Oxford House to recognise the unpleasantness of their guests that, when the police stepped in to stop an event being held at Queen Mary’s University of London, al-Muhajiroun were allowed at the last minute to move the festivities to Oxford House. Islam4UK, the most open of al-Muhajiroun’s many fronts, even planned a conference Rise of the Khilafah there back in February.

Now Oxford House is being advertised as the location of a meeting held by ‘Salafi Youth Movement’ (yet another al-Muhajiroun front) called ‘Jahanam – A Gangsters Paradise II’. Flyers for this event are circulating in east London advertising two important details. (1) It is to be held at Oxford House and (2) it will take place on the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

‘Salafi Youth Movement’ doesn’t exist. If you look at the back of the flier (not pictured) two contacts are given. Abu Yahya and Abu Muaz, both of whom are openly members of al-Muhajiroun front Islam4UK. If you doubt this, here is some more evidence of these two men being linked to al-Muhajiroun.

Abu Yahya, was a leading member of Ahl ul-Sunnah Wa al-Jamma, a successor organisation to al-Muhajiroun when it temporarily disbanded in 2005. His telephone number is given as 07961 577 221, this is also the contact number given in Anjem Choudary’s (leader of al-Muhajiroun) The Islamist magazine as a contact number for “The Shariah Court of the UK”. The Shariah Court of the UK is, you guessed it, an al-Muhajiroun front.

The other contact given is Abu Muaz. Islam4UK has a video of him accepting Glen Jenvey’s conversion to Islam in his role as a “lecturer” at the “London School of Shariah”, of which Anjem Choudary claims to be principle lecturer. Abu Muaz’s number, 07852 749 999, is given on Islam4UK’s website as a contact for the Rise of Khilafah conference they held at Oxford House.

Al-Muhajiroun are one of the vilest organisations out there. This is how they marked the second anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, calling the hijackers the “magnificent 19″. Their links to terrorism are well documented and yet Oxford House, which would not dream of hosting the BNP, is willing to host an even nastier organisation, al-Muhajiroun. Now Oxford House is willing to host them on the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

This should be a no-brainer for Oxford House. Cancel the booking. Now.

This is a statement I personally was quite troubled by when I first read it, but then Bunglawala’s ramblings quickly demonstrated that Mahboob has a point – at least in the case of the Black Knight himself.

The condemnation of the Luton protestors had everything to do with their being unrepresentative of British Muslim opinion and nothing to do with fearing a public backlash. British Muslims are long accustomed to the views of the fringe minority being exaggerated out of all proportion and erroneously treated as ‘majority opinion’. To suggest that denouncing the protestors was some ruse to deflect criticism by the British public is patently wrong.

In trying to contradict Mahboob’s point all Bunglawala achieves is to reveal himself as one of the group Mahboob describes: a British Muslim who condemned the Luton protests not out of “love and respect for the British soldiers” but out of concern for what the protests would mean for British Muslims. This is even clearer in the iEngage article Bunglawala links to above.

It is a discredit to all those that opposed the invasion of Iraq to see individuals seeking to use the war in Iraq to deliberately polarise relations between communities in the UK.

Images such as these are a gift to the many Islamophobes in our newspapers and broadcast media. Have a look at these stories that have already been published and the readers’ comments they have elicited. Even the BBC’s George Alagiah referred to the hooligans as ‘Islamist protestors’ during the BBC1 6 o’Clock News.

While the tiny group of protestors might feel they have scored a small victory with the amount of news coverage they have generated, the wider consequences of their incendiary and irresponsible actions will unfortunately be felt by much greater numbers of ordinary innocent Muslims. [emphasis added]

No mention of love or respect for British soldiers; not even any concern shown about the al-Macaroon protests being “unrepresentative of British Muslim opinion”. No. All Bunglawala provides is a perfect demonstration of Mahboob’s point; Bunglawala condemned the Luton protests because he was concerned that “the wider consequences of their incendiary and irresponsible actions [would] unfortunately be felt by much greater numbers of ordinary innocent Muslims”.

Bunglawala shows no concern for how British soldiers (and their families) might feel so his attempts to discredit Mahboob’s case only end up strengthening it.  Yet more risible stuff from British Islamism’s Black Knight.

Islam4UK is an odious organisation headed by Anjem Choudary, the new head of the-should-be-banned-extremist-outfit al-Muhajiroun. Islam4UK’s followers – who have been dubiously re-named as the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’aah (ASWJ), lit. meaning ‘Adherents to the Sunnah and Community’ (a vague term) – propagated ‘the Deen [religion] of al-Islam to the local community’ in Tooting, and provided an ‘illuminating foretaste of how Britain would transform under the Shari’ah [Law].’

Don’t be fooled. These aren’t just a bunch of guys literally trying to follow in the footsteps of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed’s example (Sunnah), but manipulate the term to create front organisations and generally act as thugs while doing their so-called ‘dawah’ (more like distorting the Prophet’s example) work.

For example, ASWJ is an organisation that was created in November 2005 by former leading members of ‘al-Macaroon’ – including Abu Izzadeen and Simon Keeler who have been convicted for terrorism related offences. ASWJ was created after al-Muhajiroun disbanded (now re-launched) in 2004 and its two successor organisations, Saved Sect and al-Ghuarabaa, were banned in July 2006 for glorifying terrorism. Organisers and followers of ASWJ are bum chums with Choudary – only because they are the same group of ‘pals’ that operates under different pseudonyms.

This is what Islam4UK’s website also said about the road show in Tooting:

Topics spoken about included: the purpose of life; the inevitability of death, hell-fire, paradise and the Day of Judgement; the beauty of the Islamic Shari’ah. The ills of democracy, freedom and man-made law in the UK were also voiced, vividly encouraging the community to reprehend the British law & order, in particular Gordon Brown.

Alhamdulillah (all praise is to Allah alone), by His guidance, 5 members of the public reverted (converted) to Islam and embraced the Shari’ah wholeheartedly.

Oh no. This chilling video [see non-Muslim embraces Islam #1] shows the venom spouting media craving Anjem Choudary ‘reverting’ a 10 year old boy to Islam.

Also watch the video at the bottom of this webpage. These were the very same individuals who were present in the Douglas Murray / Anjem Choudary debate that never happened on 17 June 2009 in Conway House, London. They wanted to impose gender segregation upon the whole audience, and decided to riot like children after they didn’t have their way.

It is interesting to note that the Islam4UK thugs and their sidekicks operated right under the nose of Sadiq Khan – Tooting’s MP, and preventing extremism ‘expert’ who was once ‘Community Cohesion’ minister.

Anjem Choudary vs Douglas Murray

Global Issues Society will be hosting a debate between Anjem Choudary, who will argue that Sharia law should take precedence because it is “divine”, and Douglas Murray (Centre for Social Cohesion, Director), who will argue that British law supercedes. The debate will take place on the 17th of June 2009 (click on the poster image for venue details and timing).

This will be the first time that Anjem Choudary will be speaking as the new UK head of al-Muhajiroun. Exiled hate preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed set up this foul, fringe and extreme Islamist group in 1996 and was it previous leader. The group disbanded in November 2004 before the government could ban it. Now they have re-launched, and unfortunately, the group is still legal.

Please do come to this event and support the motion against Choudary, and let’s challenge him and his followers.

The Sun:

Banner-waving drunks, some disguised under balaclavas, trapped terrified Asian staff inside a restaurant.

The Daily Mail:

There were reports of violence, with onlookers claiming that an Asian man was hit across the face with a banner and left with a bloody nose.

'Anti-Islamist' extremists

Protestors wore masks with the horned face of Sayful Islam, who is lucky enough to be the public face of the protests against British soldiers in Luton in March. Those protests were launched by members of the Ahle Sunnah al Jamaah, a splinter group of Al-Mouhajiroun. The incident sparked off a nationwide wave of anti-Islamist tirades. And rightly so.

Sayful Islam displays his Beard of Terror

A local mosque was firebombed earlier this month and the connection between that and the anti-Troops protest as a form of retaliation cannot be excluded although the police claim to have made no headway in the case and have ruled out far-right culprits.

Sunday’s event was organised as a peaceful counter-protest to Islamist extremists by a group called March for England. They were joined by a local group called United People of Luton. The troublemakers were a group of 500 who ran away from police who had been escorting them along the route of the march.

Hundreds of “anti-Islamist” protestors clashed with the police, brandishing England flags and shouting racist abuse. One Asian man was hit in the face with a banner and left with a bloody nose.

Let’s be honest here, these violent protestors are no more “anti-Islamist” than Nick Griffin is “pro-Jewish”. They were a 500-strong mob of racist idiots who were out to cause as much violence as possible.

The question is, are we looking at the prospect of a long-hot summer of racist violence and thuggery under the pretext of more anti-Jihadi protests?

First it was the BNP. I’m not going to link to their website to avoid helping its google ranking, but coverage of this story is unsurprisingly unpleasant. It is replete with lines like:

The shocking anti-British army protest by a group of Muslims in central Luton is a portent of what is to come unless the Islamification of this country is halted

This is in addition to references to “the colonisation of this country by Third Worlders” and “Luton is well known as a heavily Muslim colonised town” as well as dark warnings from their defence spokesman.

Mr Mullins said that a recent intelligence community report had warned of large scale unrest this coming summer, spurred on by the economic crisis. “This is bound to be exacerbated by the presence of large numbers of people in Britain who are hostile to everything for which this nation stands,” he said.

But now it’s the turn of the Express to use the Luton protests to advance unpleasant views of a different variety. Reporting on the news that three of the al-Muhajiroun lot have been arrested on suspicion of breaching public order, the Express itself attacks the basic precepts of law and order.

To compound the injustice, police stepped in to defend the militants from patriotic well-wishers who tried to oppose them.

Don’t get me wrong, what those protesters were doing was despicable and if they have broken the law they should be prosecuted. But the Express is calling for the police to stand by whilst people, albeit people with unpleasant placards, get attacked. Here is a video which makes pretty clear what kind of objection those “patriotic well-wishers” were going to raise to the al-Muhajiroun protesters.

It seems pretty obvious that the protesters were in physical danger and that the police were right to stand between them and the very angry crowd. Even if you are expressing deeply offensive views and have caused a breach of the peace, the police should still protect you from an angry mob.

It gets worse though. The Express then suggests that it should be a matter for outrage that the police gave protection to one of of the protesters after his home was attacked.

Bashir, who is in his 20s, sparked further outrage when he was given 24-hour police protection after the windows of his home were broken.

However unpleasant your views, whatever crimes you are suspected of, the police are there to guarantee your safety. Even if you belong to an al-Muhajiroun front. But, on another note, this man should not even be in the news. He and people like him are best ignored, not put on frontpages. The BBC’s continued habit of inviting Anjem Choudary onto their programmes and the tabloid press’s obsession with reporting every crazy utterance that leaves his mouth only helps him, the BNP and those who have no respect for the rule of law.

It’s time to give Anjem Choudary and his chums exactly as much recognition as they deserve. None. They can spend the rest of their lives making waves in a dirty little puddle of obscurity rather than across the entire British media. We must not let their unpleasantness continue to provide fuel for the unpleasantness of others.