The Face of Moderate Islam in Britain

This is the latest in a series of guest essays by the British author Paul Weston.



The Face of Moderate Islam in Britain
by Paul Weston

The Muslim beating handed out to Canon Michael Ainsworth, priest at the St George-in-the-East church of Shadwell, East London earlier this month and last week’s conviction of a Muslim for the rape of a 27 year old woman in nearby Whitechapel during 2005 share a surprisingly common link in the attitudes and associates of The Muslim Council of Britain.

In the wake of the faith-hate attack, Inayat Bunglawalah, media secretary for The Muslim Council of Britain, wrote a quite extraordinary article in the Guardian entitled: “Jihad or Alcohol” where he claimed: “An alcohol fuelled attack on a Christian priest in East London has stirred up more Islamophobia.”

The amusingly named Bunglawalah was distinctly unfunny in his article, where he attempted to suggest the attack — and subsequent media reporting of it — had nothing to do with Islam’s anti-Christian ideology and everything to do with the British media’s (with the honourable exception of the BBC and Guardian) ongoing Islamophobic agenda.

Quite how he can turn such a cowardly attack on a priest into an attack on the Islamophobic British is positively surreal, and quite how the Guardian allowed him the platform to deliver it even more so. Bunglawalah relied on half-truths, evasion and a refusal to name the perpetrators as Muslims as he distorted their actions as alcohol fuelled high jinks — which is understandable, I suppose. To recount the actual facts of the event would presumably have made even Bunglawalah an Islamophobe.

Bunglawalah’s article also carried a press release from the East London Mosque, which decried the attack by “Asian” youths on Canon Ainsworth. Bunglawalah presumably thinks that citing a religious organisation of such undoubted munificence would add credibility to his dissembling, but the mosque in question should really carry no moral authority — more of which later.

He finishes his article by criticising Melanie Phillip’s article in the Spectator (in which she accused the attackers of being Jihadists rather than common or garden drunks) with his piece de resistance: “Alcohol fuelled anti-social incidents are worrying and reprehensible enough without being hijacked by those with a not so subtle anti-Muslim agenda of their own.”

What the discombobulating Bunglawalah omitted to mention in his Guardian puff piece was that this was not an “anti-social” incident at all, having already been classified by the police as a faith-hate crime. A curious aberration considering the time and trouble the Muslim Council of Britain has gone to in order to get just such legislation passed in the first place.

Bunglawalah also failed to mention the insults hurled at this harmless 57 year old man of God prior to his attack by the three plucky Muslims, which were reportedly: “You f***ing priest” and “this should not be a church, it should be a Mosque.” Nor did he mention the previous attacks on the church which left its elderly congregation cowering in fear as bricks smashed through its ancient stained glass windows, nor the repeated vandalism of gravestones in nearby St Dustan’s church.

The bungling Bunglawalah was remiss again in his failure to mention that half of all London’s clergy have been the victims of faith based attacks over the last twelve months, and as this happens rarely in the leafy avenues of Chelsea and Richmond it is possible that ALL of East London vicars face violence on a regular basis, as articulated by the Bishop of London, the Rt Reverend Richard Chartres, who said: ”over the years we’ve had murders, we’ve had assaults on the Clergy….but of course if you go out onto the streets, if you belong to the community, if you’re part of it, then you’re vulnerable.”

This incredibly depressing statement is backed up by ex-policeman Nick Tolson of Churchwatch, who notes that whilst the Police and Crown Prosecution Service are overly eager to classify attacks on mosques or Muslims as hate crimes, they are equally reluctant to classify attacks on churches and vicars as such.
- - - - - - - - -
Dr Anthony McRoy, a Christian expert on Islam, also stated on the Churchwatch web site that attacks on churches in Bradford, Burnley and Oldham were a routine occurrence, and questioned why a firebombing had failed to become mainstream media news. The answer to this, of course, is that the supposedly Islamophobic British media go out of their way to ignore such stories, not that they get much in the way of thanks from their Islamic masters.

It is unfortunate that Canon Ainsworth’s wife inadvertently helped Bunglawalah’s perverse disassociation with Islamic reality when she stated:

“Clearly the Muslim community is very shocked. These individuals were clearly under the influence and this was a random act… normally community relations here are very good. We have had very strong messages of support from the East London Mosque and Tower Hamlets Mosque with whom we have good relations.”

I hesitate to suggest that Mrs Ainsworth is exhibiting classic signs of Dhimmitude, but firstly, this was not a random act, as she knows only too well, and secondly she should be careful in her acceptance of support from the Tower Hamlets Mosque which has been pressurising Muslim dominated Tower Hamlets Council to dig up the 350,000 dead Christians in a local graveyard in order to provide space for dead Muslims, and she should be even more circumspect with regard to the East London Mosque for the following reason.

The East London Mosque is partly funded by Wahhabist Saudi money, in addition to European Development Fund money. In 2004 it opened a new study centre where the guest of honour was Sheikh Abdur-Rahman-al-Sudais, an imam at the Grand Al Haraam Mosque in Mecca, the heart of Islam. Although Sheikh Sudais was granted a visa to enter Britain, he has been refused one for Canada because of his repeated calls for the annihilation of the Jews, along with solicitations of violence against Christians, Hindus, and British and American soldiers. The BBC choose to ignore such trivial details, describe him only as a “controversial” figure, and promote him as a Muslim leader working to achieve “community cohesion” despite Sudais’s following inflammatory rhetoric:

“Read history and you will understand that the Jews of yesterday are the evil fathers of Jews of today, who are all evil offspring, infidels, distorters of words, the scum of the human race whom Allah cursed and turned into apes and pigs…these are the Jews, an ongoing continuum of deceit, obstinacy, licentiousness, evil and corruption.”

Well, gosh, what can you say to that? Quite frankly such an outburst by the East London Mosque’s guest of honour would have left even Adolf Hitler at lost for words! Awestruck, admittedly, but lost for words nonetheless and not a little envious of the Sheikh’s command of anti-Semitic vituperation.

But this is not why I draw attention to said mosque; I do so for the part in played in the rape of a 27 year old woman in Whitechapel.

Abdul Makim Khalisadar, an East London Mosque-goer was convicted last week of raping the unnamed woman who, pregnant with twins, had a knife held to her throat and was punched repeatedly in the face until she said “I love you daddy” whilst Khalisadar violated her.

Khalisadar was not originally arrested in relation to the rape. He was already under police surveillance over his alleged involvement with a Kazi Nurur Rahman, a fellow Muslim sentenced to nine years imprisonment after pleading guilty to attempting to procure explosives with which to carry out a terrorist attack. Khalisadar’s computer disc was searched for evidence associating him with Rahman, where the police found downloaded images of child abuse. They DNA tested him for possible paedophile offences and subsequently linked him to the Whitechapel rape.

When he was arrested he claimed he could not possibly have carried out the rape, because at the precise time it happened he was attending a 3:00 AM sleepover at The East London Mosque, as one does, and produced seven other East London Mosque-going alibis who swore under oath that they were all with Khalisadar, dressed in pyjamas and partaking of milk and cookies as they discussed the meaning of life.

Well, they all lied. Khalisadar’s DNA was his undoing. He was sentenced to ten years in jail and his seven honourable friends were sentenced to twelve months for perverting the course of justice. Burqa-clad women in the court gallery screamed abuse at the judge, and accused the violated woman of being a prostitute. In light of a media blackout regarding the race of the woman, and the reaction of Muslim women to her, I am assuming she is English until proven otherwise.

The East London Mosque would appear to be a slightly unedifying religious institution, home as it is to purveyors of paedophilia, rapists, lying friends of rapists, friends of terrorists and Jew haters extraordinaire. To those with more than a casual knowledge of Islam, none of this is remarkable in itself, but what is remarkable is the fact that the Chairman of the East London Mosque is a certain Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, better known as the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain.


The MCB is held up by as the true face of moderate Islam by the British government, which has rewarded Dr Bari with an OBE for his efforts in the promotion of community cohesion, following on from the knighthood awarded to his predecessor, Sir Iqbal Sacrani.

But the MCB is no such thing. On top of the troublesome connections outlined in this article, they have also stated that Britain would benefit from Sharia law, they are connected with the Muslim Brotherhood — which seeks a global Islamic rule — via their affiliation with its spiritual leader, Sheikh Yusuf al Qaradawi, and are outraged he has been refused a visa to visit Britain, apparently having no problem whatsoever with a man who condones suicide bombing against Israelis, the murder of homosexuals, the beating of women, and a man who boasts that Islam will conquer Britain and the West.

In these strange totalitarian times we live in, it is no longer possible to suggest that the Muslim Council of Britain and the East London Mosque are representative not of moderate Islam, but of imperialist Islam, of genocidal Islam, of violent, oppressive, raping, gay-murdering, honour killing, forced marrying, girl-mutilating, Christian-hating, Jew-hating, suicide-bombing Islam — so I will refrain from doing so. I will let readers draw their own conclusions and would suggest they also read — if they have not already done so — Adrian Morgan’s meticulously researched article on the MCB and Fjordman’s Jihad Watch article on Muslim expansion in the West.

What I would say though, is that the last few weeks reveal a great deal about the state of Britain.

Canon Ainsworth’s wife fears that publicity over her husband’s beating will lead to racial tension in the area, by which she means she is terrified that the Muslim majority in the Shadwell enclave will exact revenge for the temerity of drawing the medias attention to their initial violence.

Bunglawalah’s disgraceful attempt on behalf of the MCB to turn the faith/hate attack into an issue of Islamophobia reveals him to be a devious man whose true intentions, along with those of Dr Bari, are not community cohesion but Islamic expansionism. The refusal of the British government to denounce the MCB, coupled with the Guardian’s promotion of Bunglawalah in the full knowledge he was being economical with the truth are symptomatic of more than just shoddy government or shoddy journalism. They are evidence of a complicit alliance with Islam in their war against Britain and the West. The quisling politicians and journalists would, in different times, be thrown from their offices for aiding and abetting an enemy, an offence of which they are most categorically guilty.

If one replaced The Muslim Council of Britain, Dr Bari, Mr Bunglawalah, the attack on a priest within church grounds and the rape of an English girl by a Muslim man — with the British National Party, Nick Griffin, Phil Edwards, the attack on an imam within mosque grounds and the rape of a Muslim girl by an Englishman, there would be, quite correctly, a national outcry led by the British government, the BBC and the Guardian. An outcry followed not only by the Islamic community, but also by the vast majority of the British people themselves, who, unlike their Muslim counterparts, really are moderate.

This is not of course the case here. After all we are merely white Christians living in our homeland bequeathed to us by the blood and sacrifice of our forefathers. There is no outcry, no rioting, no pressure to disband the MCB and its sinister leaders or to close down the virulently racist East London Mosque, and no heads to roll from political or media organisations.

But in the instance of this disgusting Muslim attack on a Christian priest, the sordid behaviour and lies of the inhabitants of Dr Bari’s mosque, and the perverse machinations that ensued, certain people and certain organisations have been seen to take very definite sides, and in so doing have made their position abundantly clear to the majority population of this country.

I’m not sure how much longer the British people will put up with all of this. A tipping point must surely be in the offing, and to judge from comments in the online MSM (including the BBC and Guardian) in relation to the incidents mentioned above, the British people are becoming increasingly — but not yet uncontrollably — angry. Not just with Islam, but with their elected representatives who appease the violent alien population and ignore and criminalise the peaceful indigenous one.

Britain is being dictated to by a violent but tiny minority of the population. Its politicians and main media outlets have taken the side of a quasi-political movement masquerading as a religion whose history is one of unremitting violence and imperialism, and a political movement at the furthest extreme from Western Civilisation as is humanly possible.

The result of this is a country exhibiting clear signs of defeat and Dhimmitude. Our clergy and armed forces are advised to discard their dog collars and their uniforms when they enter the public domain in order to avoid being attacked. This should be an impossible, unthinkable situation, but it is the sad reality of a country ruled by an elite who seek its destruction.

But, to finish on a less depressing note, the leftist enablers of the slow motion Islamic colonisation of Britain number only in their thousands, and the colonisers themselves a mere 3% of the population today. If we wanted to, we could put a stop to this tomorrow were the knowledge and the will to hand. The will is there amongst those aware of the true nature of Islam, although the numbers are currently too low — but with every passing day the numbers grow and will continue to do so until they become unstoppable.

Islam has gone too early. Various Islamic leaders openly boast they will subsume the West through demographic growth and mass immigration, which they could have done if they had lain low rather than self-detonating and engaging in open sedition. But they are out in the open now. 9/11 and 7/7, the Madrid train bombing, these were our wake-up calls and should have been Islam’s too, but they are not endowed with massive intellect. Do they really think they can carry on as they are whilst a massive majority quietly accept their fate? They appear to think we will, just as our equally ignorant leftist rulers think we will, but it ain’t ever going to happen.

There are already hints of impending revolution, the heady aroma of which hangs heavy in the air. If things continue as they are for another five years, the possibility of revolutionary change will cease to be a mere possibility and become a certified probability. And that day cannot arrive soon enough.

©2008 Paul Weston