Wednesday, 30 March 2011
The EDL should ignore Anjem Choudary and his Muslims Against Crusades… in a manner of speaking
[Right: even SWP/UAF first-year students didn't take Harry dressing up as a Nazi as proof that he is a Nazi... or did they? That's one reason to be suspicious of MAC and Angie Choudary.]
EDL Extra comments on the newKerala.com news item, 'Muslim group threatens to disrupt William's wedding', March 29th, 2011. (Comments are in red.)
Muslim group threatens to disrupt William's wedding
London, March 29 : A group of extremist Muslims has allegedly threatened to disrupt the wedding of Prince William, saying "the day the nation has been dreaming of will become a nightmare". [I am beginning to get a little bit suspicious about Angie Choudary and his Muslims Against Crusades.
Choudary is such an exhibitionist, so in love with notoriety and being on the tele, that no other Muslims, over the age of 21, can possibly take him seriously. He’s like the Muslim version of George Galloway – if George is not a Muslim already. That is, just like Georgey Boy, his prime political aim is to get on the front page of the Daily Mail – which is pretty easy since this guy is taking away all the flack from the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPACUK), the Muslim Council of Britain, Engage, the Muslim Association of Britain and all those genuinely effective Islamist trouble makers in Tower Hamlets who have even grasped power and are now trying to turn that part of London into a Islamic Republic. And all we get is Choudary! Choudary! Choudary!
Who gives a fuck about this Islamist buffoon? What’s worse. Who gives a shit about someone who may well be deliberately playing the Islamist buffoon in order to take away attention from all the beardless Islamists in suits and with – in the old days – Government money?
Who knows? Perhaps either our secret services are employing him or the Muslim Council of Britain is. That doesn’t matter because he’s doing a good even if he’s not getting paid by them. As I said, he’s taking away all attention from the many Islamist groups in the UK that have loads of cash – Saudi cash and otherwise. The ones who appear on Question Time, write numerous articles for the Guardian, and employ Inayat Bunglawalah to prove how beardless he is and that he doesn’t even wear an Arafat scarf.
In addition to all this is Searchlight and therefore Nick Lowles’ new position on extremism as a whole. That of admitting, finally, that Islamic extremism does indeed exist. But hold your horses! Apart from the fact that it took Searchlight and Nick Lowles so long to discover Islamic extremism, considering it’s all around us and on the news almost every day, why have they only just ‘discovered’ Islamic extremism and then only in the singular? Why are all their guns focussed on a single target – Angie Choudary and Muslims Against the Crusades? Is it because that it is easy for an extremist Communist group to aim all its weapons at an established extremist Islamist buffoon? No one will disagree with Searchlight on this on the Left – except the SWP, which thinks that it is ‘Islamophobic’ and ‘pro-imperialist’ to even criticise Osama bin Laden and the sadists in Islamic Jihad.
What about Searchlight pointing its guns at the Muslim Brotherhood surrogates in the UK such as the Muslim Council of Britain and the Muslim Association of Britain? What about pointing the finger at the fanatically ‘anti-Zionist’, and thus monomaniacal, group MPACUK? They are far more dangerous that this Islamist version of George Galloway – if George isn’t already an Islamist.
Is Anjem Choudary, then, some kind of fall guy for a whole host of Islamist groups and individuals? And isn’t it also strange that the most Islamically honest of all Islamic groups, the one that uses the least Islamic taqiyya, MAC, should get the most stick, both from other Muslims (if affected criticism), from Searchlight (if artificial criticism) and even the Left generally? Choudary, as I see it, is simply honest about Islam and what Islam desires. It seems that’s his real crime – even according to his fellow Muslims.] A Muslim group - named Muslims Against Crusades - vowed to disrupt the royal wedding and even threatened to start a riot during the celebrations, The Sun reported citing Scotland Yard officials. [Again, don’t revolutionary Islamist groups usually keep their plans under wraps? There’s something mightily suspicious about all of this. Again, unless Choudary really is nothing but a straightforward exhibitionist in the literal sense of that word – as is Galloway.] Meanwhile, a right-wing group, the English Defence League, has also vowed to act against people who might try to wreck the royal event. [If these cretins literally disrupt a royal wedding, then of course the EDL should try to stop that. However, that doesn’t make anything I’ve just said false or make what I've said be against EDL action come such an event. Even a pure exhibitionist Islamist or an Islamist fall guy still needs to be stopped.] The Muslim group has set up a website showing pictures of Prince Harry with a tagline saying "Bestman is a Nazi". It was referring to a 2005 photograph showing Harry at a friend's birthday wearing a Nazi armband. [Again, the pathetic nature of this web photo contributes to my theory about Choudary and MAC.] The site termed the royal family "enemies to Allah and his messenger". [On the point of Choudary’s honesty. Strictly speaking, this is what every Muslim should believe about the royal family. No ‘earthly leaders’ can lead without ‘Allah’s approval’. Simple as. If ‘moderate’ or ‘progressive’ Muslims dispute that, then they dispute Islam solely in order to ingratiate themselves, or Islam itself, into contemporary British society. Choudary isn’t doing that. In that sense, he’s a true Muslim.] The British flag is shown in flames along with pictures of Muslim children who the group claims were killed by British soldiers. The site asks William and Harry to "withdraw from the British military and give up all affiliation to the tyrannical British Empire". [Not that different to that which the No Respect Party or SWP/UAF is saying. In fact - it’s identical!] "We promise that should they refuse, the day the nation has been dreaming of will become a nightmare," it says. Police have said they could use stop-and-search powers to stop wedding protesters and guard against any terrorist threat.