I'm not sure you could called Ahmed's actions treason. Sure they were deplorable, but even if they would be considered treason under British law, the UK doesn't even have the death penalty anymore.
Damien, I think it depends on whether you consider Ahmed's idea of "mobilizing" 10,000 Muslims to be a threat of violence. If so, then it is treason.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:59:00 pm
Anonymous said...
If the parliament had any sense it would have allowed the mobilization to happen, but simultaneously issued an edict that any racial slurs or treasonous actions will be met with banishment to a Muslim nation of choice. If they love their religion so much let them go to a place where its rule is law and they don't have to suffer the infidels presence. More people need to mock the Koran in public if the world is to get anywhere in the war against Islam (Radical Islam for the politically sensitive fools).
Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:03:00 am
Great news from Jihad Watch: Wilders had been invited to screen Fitna before the House of Lords, but was then disinvited. In "The intimidation of the House of Lords," February 3, the incomparable Melanie Phillips explains why, and what happened next: But various representatives of the British Muslim community protested; and Lord Ahmed issued a threat that he would personally mobilise 10,000 Muslims to prevent Wilders from entering the Upper House and would take the peer organising the event to court. In the face of such threats, the meeting was cancelled.Lord Ahmed then boasted of his victory in the Pakistani media. The Associated Press of Pakistan reported him exulting ina victory for the Muslim community.It was of course a major defeat for Parliament’s sovereign right and duty to protect free speech, the right to issue an invitation to a democratically elected member of a European parliament, and the right of British citizens to live without intimidation. It was an appalling development.Now, however, it is fighting back. Wilders has been re-invited to speak and screen his film in the Lords later this month. Parliament now has a second chance to show that jihadi thuggery will not be allowed to prevail within the cradle of democracy. But if it is really to demonstrate this, it should also surely take action against Lord Ahmed, who abused his position as a peer of the realm to threaten mass intimidation of the House in which he sits. If it fails to do so, it will be another notch on the ratchet of Britain’s slide into submission.
5 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formCharge him with treason, give him a fair trial then hang him from Tower Bridge and bury him in pigskin.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:48:00 pm
Pastorius,
This is a welcome development. At least one European government is doing something right.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:52:00 pm
Bleeding heart liberal,
I'm not sure you could called Ahmed's actions treason. Sure they were deplorable, but even if they would be considered treason under British law, the UK doesn't even have the death penalty anymore.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:58:00 pm
Damien,
I think it depends on whether you consider Ahmed's idea of "mobilizing" 10,000 Muslims to be a threat of violence. If so, then it is treason.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:59:00 pm
If the parliament had any sense it would have allowed the mobilization to happen, but simultaneously issued an edict that any racial slurs or treasonous actions will be met with banishment to a Muslim nation of choice. If they love their religion so much let them go to a place where its rule is law and they don't have to suffer the infidels presence. More people need to mock the Koran in public if the world is to get anywhere in the war against Islam (Radical Islam for the politically sensitive fools).
Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:03:00 am