The Conservative Party co-chairman said that being “brave” rather than having a “play-it-safe life” was a worthwhile price for being a pioneer at the highest levels of government. [How is Warsi ‘a pioneer’? No. Seriously? Unless that pioneering is her stance against Muslim extremists.]
It is believed that the peer has faced serious threats from Muslim extremists.
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Baroness Warsi said her situation “worried” her family. [Perhaps Warsi is a moderate Muslim to the extent that she is not a Muslim. Perhaps the ‘extremists’ are right on this. We should at least contemplate the possibility.
Just because Warsi repeatedly says that she’s a Muslim, and even sincerely believes it, can one be a true Muslim in the Conservative Party? Indeed can one be a true Muslim in democratic politics at all? Can one wear western dress, go to kuffar events, interact with the kuffar more than Muslims, etc. and still be a Muslim? Or still be a good or true Muslim? It doesn’t matter, in the end, if Warsi herself thinks she’s a good or true Muslim. What matters is if she is a good or true Muslim. And that can only be discovered by studying what Islam says, in the Koran, the hadiths, and elsewhere, and by noting what the experts (the clerics and the scholars) say. And what they tend to say, on the whole, is that Warsi is neither a good nor a true Muslim precisely because of her political lifestyle, etc.
So who do we go with? An individual Muslim, Warsi, or the broad consensus of Islamic teachers and experts?
This is much like the everyday problem many non-Muslims face vis-à-vis their relations, often good, with some Muslims. That is, they say that Muslim X is ‘a good guy’. He ‘likes a pint’, ‘has a laugh’, ‘goes to the pub’ (as in EastEnders!), watches Hollywood films, etc. They conclude that if Muslim X is like that, then Islam itself can’t be that bad after all. Good-guy Muslims must equal nice and fluffy Islam.
But what if all the good qualities of Muslim X, and Anila Baigs (of the Sun) of this world, are in spite of Islam, not because of it? Just as there were good Muslim scientists and poets in the 13th century who were indeed good scientists and poets - but in spite of Islam, not because of it. That is, they were poets and scientists who just happened to also be Muslim. Islam itself had nothing whatsoever to do with it. The same goes with the Muslim Xs and Anila Baigs of this world. The same goes, indeed, with Baroness Warsi]
However, she said: “Why go into politics if you are not going to be brave?
“If you want to stand on the sidelines and not stand up for what you believe in, politics is the wrong game to be in.
“It worries my parents and it worries my husband and it worries my kids and they obviously don’t like it when I hold this approach. [Tory politicians were also under threat from the IRA in the 1980s and before.]
“If that means you have a short but productive life, that is worth doing, than having a long but play-it-safe life. I believe that there are things that are far more important.
“If people when they were fighting against apartheid or fighting for the black civil rights movement … thought I could be dead tonight if I do this – I don’t think people think like that when people feel passionately enough about something and feel this is an issue of huge principle.”
Two years ago on a visit to Luton, Baroness Warsi was attacked by Muslim extremists who do not support a Muslim woman having such an important role in British political life. [Again, perhaps these ‘extremist’ Muslims were Islamically right to do what they did to Warsi. And Warsi herself is Islamically wrong, as a woman and a democrat, to be doing what she’s doing. Let’s face that harsh reality if that reality is the truth.]
“If Luton was anything to go by when I was egged, my natural reaction was to turn round and start on them rather than walk away,” she said. “My natural reaction is always – how dare you?”