Gary Monro’s blog

Police have closed-dircuit television (CCTV) evidence that traces four British Pakistanis from Yorkshire down to London Kings Cross. Personal identification for two of the men have been found at blast sites.

One of their cars has been found with explosives in it and several controlled explosions have taken place at addresses in Yorkshire.

One man, a relative of one of the four, has been arrested.

Three of the four are believed to have died in the outrage. The whereabouts of the fourth - if he didn’t die in the bombing - is not known.

The suggestion is that these men were ‘new skins’ - they’d never come to the attention of the police before so are basically unknown. They would have received training and equipment from outside sources - who themselves probably left the country before the blasts.

I think it’s pretty amazing the police have discovered so much so soon. More news will surely follow…

Some Muslims are concerned that the content of their holy book might breach the religious hatred law when it comes into force. This concern may have been initiated by Boris Johnson’s question in Parliament recently. I’m quoting directly from a Muslim forum that you can find here (the subject is, ‘Quoting Koran Could Be Illegal Under Proposed UK Bill’). The person who posted the comment quotes from CNS News.com.

A British lawmaker says reading excerpts from the Koran that advocate harsh treatment for Christians, Jews and unbelievers would violate a religious hatred bill currently before parliament.

“If this bill makes any sense at all, it must mean banning the reading, in public or private, of a great many passages of the Koran itself,” Conservative MP Boris Johnson said.

Mr Johnson read out several chapters from the Qur’an regarding the treatment of non-believers, including this from Sura 22:19:

“As for the unbelievers, for them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skins shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods.”

Well that doesn’t leave me with much to look forward to then.

Johnson said while the Koran was not “unique in its hostility to other creeds,” he challenged a government minister to explain “why and how you think the repetition of those words in a public or a private place does not amount to an incitement to religious hatred of exactly the kind this bill is supposed to ban.”

As a non-believer I’m absolutely buggered either way but I’ve always thought that, if I were truly a believer then I wouldn’t worry a hoot about what other people said about my relgion because I’d have god on my side and the critics wouldn’t. Mr Johnson puts it a bit more eloquently:

“If a religion is worth believing it ought to be strong enough, frankly, to withstand the most scurrilous and monstrous attacks and, if a religion is worth believing in, those assaults should diminish the critics and not the religion itself,” he said.

There’s also a mention of comic Rowan Atkinson’s opposition to the law:

“Mr. Bean” actor Rowan Atkinson has voiced reservations that a politician “subject to the political agendas of the day” should hold such discretionary powers.

The government may see it as desirable at some point “to prosecute a few writers or journalists or playwrights in their desire to ingratiate themselves with a particular religious community,” he said this week.

Well, my friend, the whole bill’s the result of Blair wanting to ingratiate himself with the Muslim community after upsetting them with his Iraq adventure.

But then, zooming along to The Muslim Weekly ( 8-14 June edition, under the ‘MCB News’ tab), we find that, in fact, Muslims’ fears that the more fiery parts of their religion will fall foul of the legislation are unfounded. A delegation of Muslim scholars and leaders met with Home Office Minister Paul Goggins to seek clarification.

The Minister assured the Muslim community that there was nothing in the bill that would prevent scholars from delivering their sermons or from reciting from the Qu’ran and ahadith. The Minister reiterated that what the bill would do is criminalise incitement to religious hatred against individuals.

Now this worries the heck out of me. And it makes me a bit cross too. I recognise myself as being one of the targets of the verse quoted by Boris Johnson (above). Those lines are hateful. If you change the word ‘unbeliever’ to ‘atheist’ or ‘Christian’ or ‘Jew’ or ‘Black’ or ‘Jamaican’ or ‘Welshman’ you have a very clear idea of who the speaker is referring to. The word ‘unbeliever’ is actually an umbrella term for all the above.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie [one of the delegation] stated that he was at eased that matters that had caused some obfuscation in the community had been cleared.

‘We’re happy that the Home Office has agreed to consult the faith communities when preparing the guidelines to the bill. Muslim scholars may proceed uninhibited in the performance of their duties’, he said. The delegation made suggestions to the minister to that it may be preferable to totally exempt the holy text, which will include the Qu’ran and the hadiths from the remit of the Act.

(Emphasis mine).

But doesn’t this need to exempt their religious texts from the legislation amount to an admission by these Muslims that at least some small part of their holy text is hateful? How on earth can this delegation demand that the rest of us not be hateful while requesting special exemptions so that they themselves can be hateful?

I don’t know if I’m the last person to spot this - I usually am - but this is a very serious problem with a bill that is already pretty seriously flawed. If I put Boris Johnson’s points next to The Muslim Weekly’s article I’m left with the uncomfortable feeling that, more than just creating legislation for a particular group of target voters to be used against the rest of us (which is bad enough) we find that the beneficiaries of this law are being assured by a government minister that they will not have to obey it themselves.

How on earth this will foster peace, respect and goodwill amongst British people I do not know. This legislation divides us neatly into two camps: Muslim and non-Muslim. Islam already does that - it has The House of Islam and The House of War. Which is pretty charming in itself. But now, when more than ever we need peace and unity between all British people, the Labour government is helping those divisions along! Can you imagine what the British National Party (BNP - far right party, anti-Muslim, not always the gentlest of souls) will make of this?

Now Paul Coggins did respond to the delegation’s request the whole Qu’ran be exempted from the law:

The minister said, it would be difficult to exempt scriptures because there is likelihood that extreme groups like the BNP may use verses of the Qu’ran to incite hatred against the Muslim community. Therefore, the very purpose of the Act would be defeated.

Well, he’s effectively said that imams can quote from the Qu’ran and the ahadith freely so that amounts to a de facto exemption in itself.

But what do his comments about the BNP mean? Is he saying that if he exempts the holy text from the law then the BNP get free reign to quote from it in order to stir up trouble with Muslims? So does he not want to exempt it from the law so that they can’t? Doesn’t that also amount to an admission that there’s stuff in the Qu’ran that is sufficiently fiery that it could be used to stir up hatred?

My head’s spinning… It seems this Muslim delegation and the Home Office Minister recognise there’s hateful verses in the Qu’ran, fully accept it, and just want to make sure it’ll have no effect on Muslims when the law passes.

Wonderful. Just dandy. This is ‘do as I say, not as I do’ on a legislative scale. It’s oppressive, deeply unfair and may very well exacerbate the very divisions that Muslims claim already exists. What laws will they come up with then?

I’m just blogging about this so I can post the picture. We need a bit of colour what with all the bad news so I’m going to blather about something trivial while you all gawp at the khubsurat lardki (that’s Hindi for ‘bit of alright’)…

Anyway, it seems India has quite strict rules regarding the use of its national flag - rules that are about to be changed.

Only senior government leaders and state institutions were allowed to fly it on their premises; ordinary people were allowed to fly their flags or wear tricolour badges only on Republic Day, Independence Day and Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday.

Now, the flag can be used in articles of clothing so long as it is used respectfully. So, nothing below the belt (the Indian Codpiece Association are bitterly disappointed), no strappy dresses and no underwear. And the flag may not be used in household items like napkins or cushions.

Malini Ramani, [see picture] a popular fashion designer, had an inadvertent run-in with the law when she appeared at a fashion show dressed in a tight, strappy, knee-length dress bearing the stripes and the wheel of the tricolour. Her appearance sparked a national debate and led to police action.

She’s hoping that, in light of the new ruling, the case currently being pursued against her will be dropped. She says her wearing of the flag was a sign of patriotism rather than disrespect. I think she looks rather nice in her Indian dress; I think it’s the half a Cobra in her hand that irritated the Indian authorities more…

A victimised family’s diary of despair includes:

Driven to distraction by the low scum that stalks our streets, special-needs teacher Linda Walker, 48, finally lost her cool and fired a pellet gun at the feet of her worst tormentor, Robert McKiernan, 19, - a nice boy who has a number of convictions, including burglary.

She was sentenced to 6 months in jail for affray and ‘possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear’. After 36 days she was freed when the Appeal Court judges quashed her sentence - but not the conviction.

Mrs Walker lost her job at New Park High School in Eccles, Salford and, yesterday, learnt that her appeal against the dismissal has failed. Her 25-year career is now over.

Throughout the 2005 election campaign we were treated to politicians of all parties trying to outdo each other on how many police officers they would put on the streets. But what good is an army of police officers (or, pen pushers as it is suggested they’re becoming) when the justice system doesn’t recognise the difference between ‘law’ and ‘justice’?

Just what kind of message do Britain’s yobs receive when their victims end up in prison prior to having their careers ruined? How free and easy is it when you can commit crime and, far from the police coming after you, they join in with you and go after your targets?

And remember: we have children growing up into this culture learning that there are few restrictions, you probably won’t get caught and, if you do, you have rights and it’s by no means certain that anything unpleasant will happen to you at all. Which is why we face savagery, thieving, rape and murder carried out by our children.

The slide of this country into social anarchy and chaos leaves the decent majority (yes, Mr Politician, sorry to be a nuisance - it’s us again) despairing of ever being able to live our lives in peace. I was once fairly indifferent to Tony Martin’s case (six years ago he shot dead a burglar in his house and wounded the other) but now, although I have no real views on gun law (so tend to settle for the default ‘belief’ that they’re better off banned) now start to think that, in this world of ‘rights’, the right of a householder to use lethal force against his tormentors should be seriously considered.

Until one of our politicians stands up and says what the rest of say - that we want a war on these people - not a bloody social worker’s report - the law is an ass, the police are failures and the judiciary are a joke. But most of all our political class - the root cause of all this - are an absolute disgrace.

Do not be surprised when more of us decide to give up on the authorities altogether and take matters into our own hands. Despite the fact that we know the law is not on our side in these things there are fewer and fewer of us who seriously believe our politicians take our safety seriously.

I am a big fan of America and Americans. I love their country, their attitude and their people and I visit friends and family there regularly.

I am one of those people whose envy of America turns into respect and the willingness to learn from them - rather than the contempt and tendency to hate them displayed by some others. Americans have been vocal and resolute in their sympathy and support for the British in the wake of the attack on our capital city. When they say they support us, when they say they feel an empathy with us at this time you can be very sure they mean it. Although I do not support the war in Iraq I do regard the action as consistent with a determined, dynamic and courageous country - and one that I admire.

That’s why this news just doesn’t make any sense to me.

Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned by commanders from travelling to London in the wake of Thursday’s bomb attacks.

RAF Lakenheath spokesman, Staff Sgt Jeff Hamm, said: “Because the attacks were so recent there is an uncertainty as to the reasons why and how imminent the threat is right now.

“Obviously it is in the interests of the air force to ensure its personnel are as vigilant and as safe as possible.”

He said the US sympathised with Londoners, but added: “While it’s important for some to carry on business as usual, the interests in keeping the air force out of harm’s way until we have a bit more knowledge about what has happened is greater than the need to send them back into the city.”

Whatever the American authorities say, this attack was indiscriminate. It wasn’t targeted at any particular race or religion. Therefore, Americans aren’t in any special danger.

So if Americans in the UK want to stand ‘with’ us - rather than ‘behind’ us - then please do as we are doing. Don’t stay in your bases, behind razor wire. Go back into London as if none of this had ever happened. Show them you won’t be cowed by their cowardly acts.