Norman Kember Will Not Testify

Norman Kember, the British peace campaigner kidnapped in Iraq, will not testify against his kidnappers unless it helped them get clemency. He was told by police that Iraqi police had arrested those responsible for kidnapping him and three others had been arrested. Mr Kember, though, feels unable to testify against them:

I think that some of them had reasons for regarding us as their enemies. I feel that forgiveness is the most positive thing that we can do in this situation. I would rather they went free than they had a long prison sentence.

Don't forget that they didn't just kidnap four men; one of those hostages, am American, was found murdered. Another thing you shouldn't forget is that after spending a month as a hostage he was finally rescued by the SAS. Yet, despite being saved from death by British soldiers, he declined to thank them for rescuing him.

Yet More Problems with the Veil

An immigration tribunal was stopped after a lawyer refused to remove her veil; twice. The judge asked her to remove it once and she refused; the case was the adjourned to that afternoon. Then the judge, having been forced to ask her to repeat her answers, asked her to remove the veil a second time. He said:

I am not very happy that you are appearing in a veil. Would you kindly remove it to assist with communications? It will allow me to see your face and I cannot hear you as well as I would like.

Once again she refused. The judge referred the case to Sir Henry Hodge, the head of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunals, for a ruling on how to proceed.

UPDATE: The lawyer in question refused to explain to journalists her reason for not removing her veil. Her boss at the law firm, Javid Hussain, told reporters:

This was an unfortunate and unprecedented incident. She will continue to dress as she always has done.

Why did Mr Hussain insist she will continue to dress in the same way? Does he not know that a decision is to be made by Sir Henry Hodge on whether she is allowed to or not? Or is he stating for the record that whatever the decision is she will still wear it?

Muslim Denies Calling for Non-Cooperation

Hat Tip to USS Neverdock for flagging this article.

It seems that Osama Saeed, who told Muslims it was their job to resist police investigations, is unhappy about being quoted. He told the newspaper that first reported the story that he was quoted out of context and that he had never called for non-cooperation.

However, the group who organised the meeting released a statement earlier in which they admitted that he had called for Muslims not to pass information to the police. The newspaper itself published the transcript of his speech. Although he did tell Muslims to "resist" and be "stronger in their defiance" of the police, that isn't a call for non-cooperation, apparently. Osama explained:

I’ve been asked if I disavow the statements attributed to me in the Dundee Courier. The fact is that the word ‘non-co- operation’ did not pass from my lips.

Taking him at his word that the resistance he was talking of wasn't a simple non-cooperation, what sort of resistance was it?

Muslims Told Not to Help Police

A local newspaper reported on a disturbing meeting in Dundee. At the meeting, Osama Saeed from the Muslim Association of Britain, told Muslims that it was their job to resist police involvement in their community. He said:

What Special Branch are doing is isolating the Muslim community. There is no extremism in Dundee - they are barking up the wrong tree. My message to the police is '‘lay off,'’ but my message to the Muslim community is we have got to be stronger in our defiance of this.....

The police are doing their jobs and their job is to push the boat out and push the limits they can push. Our job is to resist that, and resist that we must.

Whether or not there is extremism in Dundee is a matter for the police to decide. If Mr Saeed is confident in his assessment then he would encourage Muslims to help the police as much as possible to show the lack of any extremism. In fact, by calling on Muslims to deliberately avoid helping the police he is showing exactly how much extremism there is in Dundee; especially when he tells them it is their job to resist any investigations.

A community under the spotlight removes that focus by showing that there is nothing to see, not by closing all the doors; that just creates more suspicion.

Hat Tip: USS Neverdock. He also tells of his own experience from living in that area.

UPDATE: A leading member of the Muslim community in Dundee has denounced Saeed's call. He told reporters:

I don’t think it is a responsible statement from Mr Saeed. He doesn’t know Dundee. Dundee Muslims are well integrated into the community, and we don’t have any problem whatsoever. I haven’t even met this person, and I don’t think he represents the Muslim residents of Dundee.

However, he didn't just suffice with the usual, MCB-style, "they're not representative, they are not helpful". He actually went the full distance:

Our message is loud and clear — obey the law of the land. If there is criminal activity, or somebody doing something wrong, then we are not going to tolerate it. If it was my own son behaving badly then he would be punished.

We need more Muslims to stand up and tell their community to obey the laws and inform police if criminal or terrorist activity is taking place. Not like the MCB that object to any suggestions that Muslims should be made to tackle extremism.

British Terrorist Sentenced to 40 Years

Dhiren Barot was sentenced to at least 40 years in prison for planning to carry out a host of major terrorist attacks on both the UK and the US. He is a member of Al Qaeda, having travelled to Pakistan and received training in Kashmir.

The Times traces his journey from normal child to Islamic terrorist. Apparently, his life all changed after a sermon from Abu Hamza. This inspired him to look for ways to help "oppressed" Muslims and eventually led him to Pakistan and terrorism.

Yet again we see just how dangerous radical preachers are. It really is about time the government took steps to deal with these people.

Muslim Removed From Diplomatic Protection

A Muslim firearms officer was sacked from his position on the Diplomatic Protection Group. He failed to pass a counter-terrorism check. One of the reasons, who knows what others there were, was that his children "had attended their local mosque for religious studies when the building was associated with an iman whom the police suspected of links to an extremist Islamic group", according to The Independent.

He is suing the police for unfair dismissal. His lawyer said, "Muslims are labelled guilty by association. Doubt is insufficient to save them. They are assumed guilty before being proven innocent."

Time for a reality check for both the newspaper and the lawyer. Firstly, his children did not just "attend" that mosque, they were sent there by their father i.e. by this police officer. That means that the officer in question, who presumably was well aware of the outlook of the mosque, was happy to have his kids educated there with that outlook. That reflects his own outlook on the world. So, it isn't guilt by an association that is happenstance, it is an association that he sought out for himself.

Lastly, this man is not on trial, he is applying for a job. One of the qualifications for that job is that there can be complete trust in the applicant. In this case there cannot be complete trust because he has chosen to associate with a radical Imam. He is therefore not qualified to do this particular job. It isn't a question of him being "guilty" of anything, it is him not being as squeaky clean as is required for this post.

MCB and Khatami

The MCB has released a report about their hosting of former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami. A couple of paragraphs from that article:

He [Khatami] said that whilst Muslims living in the West had an obligation to abide by the laws of the land, the authorities in the West also had an obligation to treat them as equal citizens in all respects. Only then can there be harmony and peace.

What does he mean by "all respects"? They currently enjoy the same rights as every other citizen of this country. The only thing not equal for Muslims is that their religion is not the official religion of this country and that their religious laws are not reflected in the laws of the land. Is that what Khatami wants before there can be "harmony and peace."?

On international events he said that the primary concern of humanity had become the quest for "security". The atrocities of 09/11, unfortunate [?!] and unacceptable, as they were, did however highlight a new era - one in which there was room for one side to create mayhem and oppression in Muslim countries from a safe distance. However, he noted, "we were now in an era of security for all or security for none".

In other words, gone are the days when the West could attack tyrants in Muslim countries without fear of terrorism. Those tyrants now have the ability to direct terrorists against Western countries. That sounds like a threat.

Muslim "Almost Ashamed" for Incitement

Mizanur Rahman, who is on trial for inciting murder at the infamous protest over the Danish cartoons, told the court that he simply got carried away. He had gone to the protest and besides holding placards that read, "let’s annihilate those who insult Islam" and "behead those who insult Islam". At one point he was given a microphone and told the crowd:

Oh Allah, we want to see another 9/11 in Iraq, another 9/11 in Denmark, another 9/11 in Spain, in France, all over Europe. Oh Allah, destroy all of them.

In court, today, he said:

At the time it didn't seem like such a big deal. People more famous than me had been saying the same thing. I feel almost ashamed.....

The majority of this was a prayer. When I was given the mic, I didn't know what to say. I said what other people had said during the demo and what was on the placards. I was repeating what I heard in other speeches.

A few things strike me. Firstly, why is he "almost ashamed"? Secondly, if he regrets what he did, will he be giving the police the names and addresses of the other "famous" people who were inciting the crowd?

Lastly, if he is telling the truth it shows just how dangerous these preachers of hate are. If they were able to incite this man into such a state with just a few speeches, imagine what listening to them for a long period can do. The government must really crack down on people who preach hatred and who incite others to murder and hate.

British Terror Suspects Plans

The full plans of Dhiren Barot, a British convert to Islam who planned to launch terrorist attacks on both the UK and the US, were revealed in court today.

His plans included detonating a "dirty bomb", attacking the London Underground, the IMF building and other financial institutions in the US, and a plot involving exploding limousines parked in underground carparks.

One important point that should not be overlooked is that this man started his planning before 9/11. That is, before any of the excuses given by the left-wing allies of Islamic extremism.

MCB Reaction To Saddam Verdict

The topic of Saddam's death sentence isn't really relevant to this site. The reactions are completely predictable. Those who supported the war, because removing a murderous tyrant is generally a good idea, are glad that justice has been served. Those who, for a variety of reasons, decided that it was better to have Saddam in power think it is a huge tragedy.

Human Rights groups will bitterly complain that he didn't receive a fair trial; they would have made the same complaint had he been tried anywhere else. However, it is interesting to note the reaction of the Muslim Council of Britain. Abdul Bari, the Secretary-General, told reporters:

There are concerns about whether Saddam Hussein was ever going to receive a fair trial in Iraq given the sectarian tension that are rife. We stated at the outset we preferred for him to be tried in an international court.

This doesn't seem to be true, by the way. There do not appear to be any press releases on their site calling for an international court to try Saddam. Nor does a google search show up any such statement. Either way, the next part is the all important part:

There will be many in the Muslim world who will be asking when those responsible for launching the calamitous war in Iraq, in which tens of thousands on [sic] innocent people have died, will also be brought to justice.

Is that the MCB calling for Bush and Blair to be hanged? Or is it just the MCB innocently repeating what they think many Muslims want? Is there much of a difference?