Date: 7/14/2005
A CHALLENGE TO IQBAL SACRANIE AND THE MUSLIM COUNCIL OF BRITAIN: If Islam is a religion of Peace, then either explain or change the Koran Predictably enough, New Labour’s “moderate” Muslim spokesmen in groups such as the Muslim Council of Britain have been queuing up to condemn the London Massacre as “unIslamic”. Iqbal Sacranie’s words have been widely quoted: “(the bombers) were not Islamic, because Islam categorically prohibits the deliberate targeting of civilians.” Similar views came from Muslim spokesman Sher Khan (when I was a lad he was a rather mangy old tiger with a penchant for small boys, so I assume this is a different one), Shahid Malik (curious, having someone in Parliament at this time whose first name means ‘Martyr’) and Dr. Muhammed Abdul Bari, chairman of the East London Mosque, who told the media that “What has happened is absolutely shocking and disgusting.” Indeed it is. But no more disgusting than the spectacle of religious leaders (Christian, Hindu and Jewish, as well as Muslim) and politicians (Labour, Tory and LibDem alike) all deliberately deceiving the British people about the true nature of the threat we now face. While, as already pointed out, the BNP does not believe that all Muslims are wicked and vicious; the stark truth is that aspects of the religion they follow ARE wicked and vicious. Terrorism; the slaughter of innocents; war against the Unbelievers; mass murder – all are (assuming the words of various Koranic verses are taken to have their ordinary English meanings) ‘justified’ in the Koran, and anyone who denies this is a liar. How can we say such Politically Incorrect things? Because we have studied the Koran, and because we in the BNP pride ourselves on telling the truth, no matter what it costs us. Let us start with the most cynical piece of “Islam is a religion of Peace” drivel with which the Islamophiles regularly try to seduce children and the child-minded: The verse that they claim means that Islam condemns without reservation the taking of innocent human life, regardless of religion or other considerations: “… whoever kills a soul is like one who has killed the whole of mankind; and whoever saves a life is like one who saves the lives of all mankind.” That’s from Surah (chapter) 5, ayat (verse) 32, and isn’t it a nice, pink, cuddly fluffy liberal rabbit of a sentiment? Maybe, but it is also a deliberate misquotation designed to mislead. Mr Blair, once again, is lying. For the Devil or, in this case, the true word of Allah, is concealed in the missing detail. The real version of Surah 5. 32 is: “… whoever kills a soul, not in retaliation for a soul or corruption in the land, is like one who has killed the whole of mankind; and whoever saves a life is like one who saves the lives of all mankind.” So the truth is that this oft-misquoted verse doesn’t compel Muslims not to kill, but explicitly allows – arguably commands - them to kill, for two different reasons which between them offer a vast amount of scope for those who want to justify murder: First, “in retaliation for a soul”. Put yourself for one moment in the shoes of a Muslim who regards (as vast numbers of them, including senior members of the MCB, do) Blair’s illegal invasion of Iraq, and the mass slaughter of civilians that has gone with it, as murder. Straight away, blowing up the Number 30 bus is “justified” according to the very Koranic verse that the lie-mongers in the media are using to convince us that the London Massacre was “unIslamic.” Second, “or corruption in the land”. Again, it is instantly clear to anyone with any knowledge of the Koran and the Hadiths that all sorts of things that go on in Britain (and, on account of Britain’s influence overseas, elsewhere, including the Middle East) that can easily be taken by angry Muslims to be “corruption in the land.” All of a sudden, bombs are “justifiable”: Banks lending money at interest (bang, there goes the City); homosexuality (bang, there goes Scotland Yard, thanks to the absurd Paddick creature, who clearly can’t distinguish between his unread copy of the Koran and his well-thumbed copy of Gay Times); pretty girls in short-sleeved summer tops (bang, there go the restaurants and clubs); people presuming to make and impose laws on the basis of humanity and reason, rather than on the often contradictory recommendations of the Koran and the Hadiths (bang, there go the Houses of Parliament and our democracy); Muslims obeying those man-made laws (bang, there go Blair’s lapdogs in the MCB, unless they get remission under the verse which allows outnumbered Muslims to “shorten the prayers” and so lull the Infidels into a false sense of security). All those things that, for good or ill, we take for granted, spell “corruption” not just to Osama bin Laden and his merry crew of Wahhabi fanatics, but to every “good” Muslim on the planet. Nor is the Koranic recommendation for how to punish such “corruption” anything like the slaps on the wrist meted out by British courts to executives caught with their fingers in the till. As the very next verse (Surah 5. 33) makes clear: “Indeed, the punishment of those who fight Allah and His Messenger and go around corrupting the land is to be killed, crucified, have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides or to be banished from the land.” So now, the Koran enthusiast Anthony Charles Linton Blair might, if pushed to defend his initial Big Lie - as he would be if most journalists weren’t either Establishment whores or Islamophiles – fall back to a more defensible position. How about: “Well, the Koran and the Hadiths allow revenge killings, and blowing up banks, the murder of homosexuals, attacks on pretty girls, scrapping democracy and killing apostate Muslims; but they are all legitimate targets - Islamic teachings still condemn attacks on the truly innocent.” No, Mr. Blair, they don’t. Take a look at Surah 27. 48, 50 and 5: “And there were in a city nine individuals, who worked corruption in the land and did not set things right… “They schemed a scheme and We schemed a scheme, while they were unaware. “See, then, what was the outcome of their scheming. We destroyed them together with all their people.” Just nine individuals were “guilty” of unIslamic practices, but all the innocents in their entire city were destroyed with them. And presumably, their buses and tube trains with them. On top of such very specific instances in which verses of the Koran spell out very different attitudes to those claimed by the Islamophiles, there are literally dozens of other verses which preach hatred of, and encourage violence against, Unbelievers, which of course includes Christians. Thus the experiences of centuries of history, in which Islamic assaults on every kind of non-Muslim you can think of are a common thread, are grounded not in ‘Islamophobia’ or white racism, but in the Koran itself. It is, quite simply, a manual on how to grind down other people’s societies and to turn them into Islamic dictatorships. How could it be anything else, when Islam divides the world into two, and only two, parts – the Zone of Submission and the Zone of War? Despite the impression given by the BBC, Tony Blair and assorted Church of England bishops, by the way, Britain is still in the latter Zone, which is why forensic scientists and emergency services workers are still scraping Londoners off the walls in our capital city. Despite some undoubtedly tolerant verses (mainly in chapters written early in Muhammad’s career, which are widely regarded by Islamic scholars as having been abrogated by chapters received later, and therefore to be ignored when they clash with the more blood-thirsty material that emerged once the Prophet had a big enough army to win by force of arms instead of guile) the overall impact of the Koran in a society that is not yet Islamic is to institutionalise hate against all who will not bow to Allah. One example will suffice, Surah 9. 123: “O you who believe, fight those of the unbelievers who live near to you and let them see how harsh you can be.” Perhaps Mr. Blair would try to claim that this is just badly reworded version of the New Testament stories about the Good Samaritan and Christ’s injunction to “Love thy neighbour as thyself.” But for those of us outside Blairworld it looks more like an indication of just how vast is the gulf between the teachings of Islam and those which underpin Western civilisation. If it is the latter, then, combined with the mass murder in London on July 7th 2005, it highlights the need for an urgent national debate about how to resolve the incompatibility between Islamic values and ours. And for Blair & Co to tell lies to conceal this is an act of criminal folly. If, on the other hand, it is the former, then it is time for the Muslim Council of Britain and all those ‘moderate’ Muslim scholars out there to tell us all – especially the young hot-heads in their community – what the blood-curdling verses quoted here REALLY mean. There is no point whatsoever them wringing their hands and condemning “extremist” terrorism, if they will not get to grips with the intolerance within their religion that causes that extremism and ‘justifies’ that terrorism. Nor is there any point them waffling on about the 500,000 copies they sent out to Muslims living in Britain of their booklet ‘Know Your Rights and Responsibilities’. Because, having read it, I can do what no journalist has dared to and reveal that, out of its 15 pages of text, fully 13 are about Muslims’ rights, while only two are about their responsibilities. And of those two at least one is very clearly only talking about their responsibilities to other Muslims. The carefully worded reminder to its readers that they are supposed to be “working for the betterment of society as a whole” may fool a few silly liberals into thinking that the MCB are committed to a tolerant, multi-faith community. Anyone, however, who actually understands the first thing about Islam will immediately see that most Muslims will know full well that what its authors mean by “the betterment of society” is in fact its creeping Islamification. So it’s time for the Muslim Council of Britain and others like them to clear up once and for all the question of whether the Koran is a book of peace or a handbook for Holy War: If verses that appear to order good Muslims to disobey, fight, subjugate and kill Unbelievers really mean “buy them a pint and help their grannies across the road” then let’s hear all about it. But if injunctions to disobey, fight, subjugate and kill the Unbelievers actually mean “disobey, fight, subjugate and kill Unbelievers”, then the Koran as it stands – while it may well have its good points when it comes to fighting crime and poverty in parts of the Third World – is a menace to our Western values and society. And if that is the case then something must be done to put an end to such intolerance and hatred: Either Iqbal Sacranie and all his fellow “moderate Muslims” must do what liberal Christians did to the Bible when they removed Christ’s harsh comments about the Jews, and change their Holy Book, and reform their religion so as to make it compatible with modern values of tolerance and democracy, OR They must leave our land – and we must pull our troops out of theirs - before the fundamental intolerance within Islam brings misery and death to generations of innocents of all religions and none. Forget all the BBC propaganda, that is the only choice before us. At least, that’s how things look to us in the British National Party. If we are wrong then please tell us. We genuinely want to hear what you have to say on these matters, and will gladly publish your response on our website. Nick Griffin Chairman, British National Party ----------------- BNP leader Nick Griffin gives a very personal account of his thoughts on hearing the news about ‘home-grown’ suicide bombers, and explains how this development is really no mystery. A long article which includes some shocking revelations about how gross dereliction of duty by the institutionally anti-white West Yorkshire police – including turning a blind eye to paramilitary training in Dewsbury and to boasts of murder – helped to create the climate which turned a group of Asian teenagers into Muslim suicide bombers. “Sooner or later there will be an Islamic terrorist attack in Britain. And when it does the terrorists will turn out to be either asylum seekers or second generation Pakistanis, probably from somewhere like Bradford.” I made that prediction at a private BNP meeting in the Reservoir Tavern in Keighley on 19th January 2004 – 18 months before the multiple Islamic suicide bombings which police last night admitted were carried out by second generation Pakistanis from Leeds and Dewsbury. By now, every newspaper and TV and radio station in the country will have reported these facts. So, 18 months on, it emerges that I was nine miles out, and that, by not predicting that the terrorists would be suicide bombers, I under-estimated their fanaticism. But as a piece of prophesy it was surely better than your average Whittaker’s Almanac, and streets ahead of anything from any other modern British politician, with the honourable exception of Enoch Powell, who was too far away from events to see them through anything other than a glass very darkly and so wasn’t quite so specific. The crucial question, however, is whether I should face seven years in prison for making that prediction? For that is the situation in which I find myself. Next Thursday, 21st July, I must answer bail at Leeds Crown Court on charges of using words “intended or, having regards to all the circumstances, likely, to incite racial hatred.” One of the key points in the opening case summary that the prosecution supplied to Leeds Magistrates Court earlier this year was the claim that, by making the prediction at the start of this article, I either intended to incite, or was likely to incite, racial hatred. These charges were brought on the decision of the Labour appointed Attorney General, under a law which states explicitly that “telling the truth is no defence.” That decision was publicised right at the official start of the General Election campaign, in a blatant piece of New Labour spin designed partly to demonise the BNP in the eyes of white voters, but mainly to claw back the Muslim vote by giving their ‘community leaders’ my head on a plate. So untold (so far) thousands of taxpayers’ money were spent on a team of police officers doing nothing for months except investigating the findings of an agent provocateur and paid liar and spy - working for the Government-funded BBC – who had infiltrated a local branch of the BNP which was being run as a ‘rogue’ operation by another man who was also in the pay of close allies of the Labour Government. And, as a result of all that grotesque use of taxpayers’ money, and because I was “secretly” filmed making that prediction (which I would just have readily made in public had the BBC merely asked for a proper interview and thereby secured the footage for a fraction of the cost) I now face up to seven years in prison for making an uncannily accurate prediction. Of course, the CPS are complaining about other things I said as well. They object to my referring to the way in which sections of the Koran help provide the climate and the ‘justification’ for the worldwide problem whereby a minority of young Muslim men become sexual predators against young girls from other communities. The fact that this is true; the fact that Muslims are not even covered by the anti-free speech Race Laws; the fact that Channel 4’s Edge of the City programme publicised the extent of this problem in Keighley to millions of TV viewers, whereas I was speaking to a mere 70 or so people – none of that mattered to the New Labour CPS when they decided to “get the Muslim vote by giving them Griffin.” The CPS case summary says that, in the two speeches in question: “Griffin draws the distinction between Asians and non-Asians, which is insulting to Asians.” On that basis, every newspaper report on minority crime, and every piece of police radio traffic and internal documentation concerning such crime, is “insulting” to the minority from which the suspects in question are drawn. If applied to ‘wanted’ reports and the police, such a situation would make it impossible to describe and identify criminals – obviously a bad thing. If applied to political debate, it would make it impossible to discuss certain problems in our society – obviously a bad thing, especially when the problems so put beyond the possibility of discussion would be the circumstances in West Yorkshire towns that lead 18 and 20-year-old middle class kids to become suicide bombers. Finally – and this points really are all the ‘case’ against me which the CPS has – I spoke at another private BNP meeting in Morley Town Hall about the way in which the police and the media turn a blind eye to anti-white racist violence – including murder - by some Muslim youths. The CPS claim that this shows that I wanted to incite ‘hatred’. Of course, I did not. But I did want to galvanise our activists for one last push just before the then forthcoming council elections to help us get the political representation that would help us to force the media and the police to acknowledge that ‘racism cuts both ways,’ as a first essential step to getting the violence stopped. This brings me back to tonight’s shocking news, and the professed ‘shock’ among Establishment and ‘moderate’ Muslim commentators. “How, they ask, could some young Muslim men go so wrong?” Well, maybe these people are exceptionally stupid, or maybe they’re wilfully blind, but to me it’s very plain, so let me spell out the key factors: First, the endless anti-white, anti-British propaganda put out in the National Curriculum and on TV has helped to give hundreds of thousands of young Muslims whopping great chips on their shoulders; Second, because successive Governments have allowed several generations of young Muslim men to bring in uneducated arranged brides from Third World countries, the Western education and integration that would have helped to combat extremism in their community has been constantly undermined; Third, Politically Correct policing and crime reporting in newspapers has created among large numbers of young Muslims the impression that they are “Untouchables”. The blind eye or understanding slap on the wrist applies from minor misdemeanours such as littering, spitting or hurling racist abuse at passing whites, through vandalism, twocking cars, stoning fire engines and beating up white boys, through to sexually assaulting white girls, pushing heroin and murder. To give an example of the final category, several weeks before the General Election we provided Keighley police with the name (and other evidence) of the young Muslim thug who has spent months strutting the streets of that town boasting that he stabbed to death Sean Whyte in nearby Colne in an unprovoked racist murder on Sean’s eighteenth birthday. What have they done about it? Nothing, absolutely nothing, despite the fact that they also have other information to go on. (In the transcript of my speech for the court, incidentally, the police couldn’t even spell his name correctly, but put down ‘Shaun White’. Can you imagine how many heads would have rolled in McPherson had found Met records speaking of Steven Laurenz?) What message goes out to that community? “This society is sick, it doesn’t even care about its own people, let alone us Muslims, whether in Iraq or in Britain. We should bring it down and build a better world in its place.” This brings us to what should be the really scary thing for the liberal elite – the bombers probably won’t even come from the drug-pushing, car-twocking, pimping criminals among the Muslim community. After all, they’re still happily pushing drugs, stealing cars and enjoying the benefits from their whores. I’ll make another prediction – that most if not all of the bombers and their close associates will be brighter than average, even originally more decent than average, Muslim kids, who first turned to the Koran out of despair at the squalid criminality around them. Which brings me to the fourth piece of the jigsaw that makes a Muslim boy who could have become a teacher or a chemical engineer become a suicide bomber: the Koran and associated teachings. Let me repeat what I said on Radio 4’s Today programme yesterday morning: The Koran has some tolerant verses, but they are outweighed by ones which are either blatantly intolerant and full of hate towards unbelievers or – to be charitable – can be interpreted as intolerant and full of hate towards unbelievers. It is not a Book of Peace but a handbook for conquering other peoples’ countries – through a combination of example, persuasion, guile, coercion and naked violence. Until the MCB and their fellow ‘moderates’ accept this, and at least try to address, condemn and reform away the elements that ‘justify’ coercion and violence, then their insistence that the only methods by which it is acceptable to spread Islam are example and persuasion must be taken as springing from guile rather than sincerity and truth. And, whatever their real motivation, all the expressions of shock and bewilderment from the MCB won’t stop the three or four groups of awestruck fifteen and sixteen-year-old British-born Muslims who are sitting on three or four street corners in different British towns tonight discussing the heroic martyrdom of four lads just a few years older than them and deciding – tonight, yes, tonight - to follow in their footsteps. Which brings us to the fifth, and final, part of the jigsaw. When a group like the West Yorkshire suicide bombers (and bear in mind that they are not the first Islamic ‘Shahids’ that Britain has produced, although up until now we’ve exported them before they’ve gone off) comes together, it is inconceivable that they could make the move from law-abiding spotty nerds to committed suicide bombers without stages in between. About 18 months ago several farmers and other locals brought to the attention of both Dewsbury BNP and police the fact that a group of “young Asian men” had been seen doing paramilitary training in nearby woods. Nothing, as far as we know, was ever done about it because, of course, the heads of West Yorkshire police are among the most Politically Correct, terrified-of-another-riot, New Labour brown-nosing cretins in the country (and that, believe me, is really saying something). If that was the first sign of this home-grown cell (and if it was a different group then it just means that there are more potential ‘martyrs’ out there in Dewsbury alone), then had the police kept watch for a couple of nights, arrested boys who at the time would have been still at school, and taken them back home for a good paternal hiding, then they would probably have been frightened off and gone back to being computer nerds. Turning a blind eye to the camouflage kit and replica AK47s in the woods might well have signed the death warrants not just of those innocent Londoners, but of their murderers as well. And wicked though they grew and died, not so long ago they weren’t, and to four grieving mothers tonight they still aren’t. But is there not still a big jump between playing soldiers in the woods and blowing up tube trains? Yes, and here too the pathetic reaction of the police to anti-white violence may be the missing link to explain “how they could have ended up like that.” It is now at least four years since Channel 4 produced a remarkably brave film, also using secretly shot footage, entitled ‘Islam in Burnley’. Among the truly shocking footage shown was Abu Hamza speaking to a large and enthusiastic audience in a Burnley mosque. He could clearly be heard telling his overwhelmingly young and British-born audience that it is their religious duty to kill ‘kuffars’ (the traditional Muslim term by which Unbelievers are dehumanised before being subjugated or killed) , and that the best way to develop the skills and the nerve to do so is to start small by putting on a balaclava and going out and punching a passing white in the face, while taking up martial arts training so as to be able to “rip out their throats”. Needless to say, while I have to appear in Leeds Crown court at 9.30 a.m. on Thursday 21st to face up to seven years for telling the truth, no charges have ever been brought against Abu Hamza for inciting young Muslims to go and “lay one on a kuffar” as a stepping stone to learning how to kill the filthy Unbelievers “without wasting a bullet”. We may never know if this gang cut their teeth in terms of law-breaking and confidence in themselves and each other in this way, but it is a fact that Saville Town in Dewsbury, like a number of other predominantly Muslim areas in West Yorkshire and other parts of Britain, has effectively been a ‘No-Go Area’ for young whites (unless they are junkies or prostitutes) for several years at least. So there is no need to pulp vast numbers of trees and waste rivers of ink in the debate as to how nerdy or nice second generation Pakistani boys mutate into suicide bombers. And neither is there any point at all going out looking for the next generation of same to beat up by way of ‘revenge’. All that would do is to create more grievances that would lead even more down the same terrible road. No! The people to blame for the indoctrination in the media and the schools are the political elite. The people to blame for the arranged marriage conveyor belt that imports an endless stream of ignorance and alienation are the political elite. The people to blame for the untouchable status of ethnic minority criminals are the political elite. The people to blame for the continuation of the intolerant strands in Islam - even more than the ‘moderates’ who refuse to address the problem - are the political elite. Their endless bleating about how “Islam and terrorism are not connected” merely serves to help the ‘moderates’ blame everything on Islamophobia and avoid taking responsibility for every aspect of their theological heritage and courting unpopularity by speaking out against the institutionalised anti-kuffar bigotry that besmirches their religion. And the political elite are the people to blame for the refusal to clamp down on crazed hardliners like Abu Hamza, or on the early stages of militancy by those who are swept away by their rhetoric and the devastating but comforting simplicity of their message. So, to conclude, to everyone who reads this article over the coming days of anger, pain and shock, the BNP’s message is this: The problem we face is our own political elite. Violence against Muslims would merely give that political elite the excuse they crave to clamp down on those of us who are challenging their death-grip on British politics. Problems caused by bad decisions by politicians can only be changed by good decisions by other politicians. the only way to make that happen is by changing the politicians, and the only way to do that is by organised, sustained and intelligent political action. That is the only way out of this deadly mess. That is what the British National Party exists to do. But to do it quickly enough to avert catastrophe, we need your help. ===============
[_private/ftarc.htm]