[Image: the EDL demo in Bradford.]
It was only a matter of time before Islamoterrorism showed its face in Bradford. After all, Birmingham is a ‘terror hotspot’, according to our own police and security services, with possibly fewer Muslims (at least of Pakistani origin) than Bradford. And places like London and Luton have of course made a name for themselves in this respect.
No surprise, though. Wherever there are large populations (or even small ones) of Muslims, there tends to be terrorism (plus rioting, book-burning, rape, grooming, and the pushing of drugs from Islamic Pakistan and Islamic Afghanistan).
Two brothers have been charged with terrorism offences in Bradford. They have been charged with a total of 11 offences under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000. More precisely, Saeed Muhammad Ahmed is charged with seven offences of collecting records of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. Naeem Muhammad Ahmed is charged with four offences under section 58 (1) (a).
The most perverse aspect of this case has been the various reactions from the Bradford Muslim community.
For example, one local resident, Wajid Hussain, said:
‘They are very religious people and pray five times a day.’
Another neighbour said that they were ‘devout Muslims’.
These Muslims must know that that very devoutness of these Muslims, the very fact that they are ‘very religious and pray five times a day’, may well be the reason why they have done what they have done. Far from it being a shock to fellow Muslims, it is far more likely that a ‘devout’ or ‘deeply religious’ Muslim would be involved in terrorism than, say, a shopkeeper or one of the very many Muslim drug-pushers of Bradford. Devout Islam is the explanation of all this.
For example, there is a best-selling book entitle Islam the Natural Way, by Abdul Wahid Hamid. It is classed by many as being about ‘moderate Islam’. Indeed all sorts of professional moderate Muslims have sung this book’s praises, including Ziauddin Sardar, Tariq Ramadan and even a non-Muslim by the name of Mrs S. Devon. Yet Abdul Hamid writes, in that book, that a Muslim ‘has a duty to put down evil with his hand, that is, with physical force’. Only a paragraph later he writes that for a ‘for a just cause’ (sharia law? halal meat? an extra mosque?) it is emphatically the case that ‘arms must be taken up’. And he goes on:
‘War is thus justified as a means of upholding the right and repulsing the wrong.’ (So f-ing vague, isn’t it?)
A few pages later Hamid states that ‘the sanction of force is not to be ruled out’.
And all this in just three pages of a smallish book written by a ‘moderate’ Muslim and a keen fan of interfaith.