Lord Ahmed is in Danger of Inciting More than Hate

I was just watching the news about the Home Office's bizarre refusal to allow dutch politician Geert Wilders entry to the country when a strange but disturbing debate developed between Lord Pearson & Lord Ahmed on Sky News hosted by TV's third nipple Kay Burley. Wilders recently made a film called Fitna which shows images of terrorist attacks associated with Muslim terrorists like 9/11 and the Spannish train bombings in context to parts of the Koran which apparently justify them. He was invited to screen the film in the UK by Lord Pearson but was refused entry at Heathrow because the Home office backed up by the Foreign Office felt that this would incite racial hatred or violence.

Pearson and Ahmed were pitted against each other and what developed was quite wrong. Ahmed attacked Pearson from the start and bullied his way through the whole of the debate. Pearson sounded like the voice of reason and in actual fact I fail to see anything wrong in what he was saying. He was basically saying that there is an imbalance in society where the the majority in the UK and people with public responsibility are scared to say boo! to anyone from the Muslim faith. Not only that but this has in fact been in well publicised instances to the detriment of the Christian majority who have been discriminated against in favour of a loud-mouthed aggressive minority like Lord Ahmed.

Now I have Muslim blood in me and I can say without reservation that that part of me in no way accepts Lord Ahmed or his type as my mouth piece. Further more, I think that it is exactly people like Ahmed who perpetuate violence and hatred against the Muslim Community. What Pearson says is correct. The passive Muslim majority should have a debate about how they allow Islam to by represented or there is a great danger that people will assume that Lord Ahmed is in fact representative of the Muslim population in the UK and in turn assume that all Muslims are aggressive bullies or worse, terrorists.

It should be remembered that it was during severe economic depression that the Nazi party convinced the German people that it was Jewish bankers and politicians who were to blame for their hardships. It was not long after this that over 6 million Jews were murdered across Europe, the overwhelming majority of whom were neither bankers nor politicians. The world has reminded the German people of their part in the Holocaust since the end of the second world war 'til now and will probably continue to do so for years. The German people however have accepted their wrongs and done everything in their power to repair the damage as much as it ever could be. What people like Ahmed suggest is that it is somehow an insult to them that we choose to associate terrorism with Islam. They seem to suggest that somehow they are the victims in the situation and that somehow we need to apologise to them for the absolutely logical association that has been made of Islam with violence. Instead of accepting responsibility for a sick minority within their religion and working to remove that sickness, they are trying to capitalise on the fact that people have a genuine and justifiable suspicion of them and are attacking that insecurity with great vigour and total ruthlessness.

Now that really makes me mad. What makes me laugh though is that not one person who has vehimentally criticised Wilders' film on the news today, including the arse Milliband, has actually been able to say that they have seen it. Not one!!! How I wonder than have they all come to the conclusions that they have about it and stand to defend them so forcefully? It's just not credible, is it?