Asia Bibi Case Shows UK Government Loves Extremists, Bans Those Persecuted By Extremism

Asia (Ayeesa) Bibi. Pakistani Christian woman spect seven years on death row for insulting Islam (Picture source:https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/ )

Although most working and middle class people in Britain who live outside London and are not employed in the public sector (especially education or the health service,) are aware that the ruling elite is so afraid of radical Islam, like other EU governments they dare not risk offending the Mullahs in any way, not many people are happy about it, particularly as the elite appear willing to accommodate extremism and turn a blind eye to persecution of minorities in Muslim nations. The British government’s idea of who is — and who is not — a legitimate asylum seeker becomes stranger by the month.

In November 2018 it was reported by all sectors of mainstream media that the Pakistani Christian mother of five, Asia Bibi (aslo called Ayissa Noreen), imprisoned and sentenced to death by a Muslim court in Pakistan for drinking from a cup that was used by Muslim women, after having her sentence commuted due to pressure from international human rights groups, was released to live in a predominantly fundamentalist Muslim community, though fearing for her own life and the lives of her children. We also learned that Asia was unlikely to be offered political asylum by the British government due to concerns about “community” relations in the UK.

In plain English that means the UK government was worried that Muslims of Pakistani origin in Britain, who have no objection to members of their own community raping British, non Muslim women, might be so offended by the presence in the UK of a Christian woman who had committed the heinous crime of drinking from a cup that Muslim women had used, and by doing so making those women “unclean,” they might muder not just her but her entire family.

For her trivial crime, Asia Bibi spent the best part of a decade on death row in Pakistan, before being officially declared innocent of a trumped-up charge of “blasphemy”. In my not-so-humble opinion, we ought to be going out of our way to offend followers of such an, inhuman religion. We should be denying Muslims entry to our civilized nation, we should be withholding planning permission for the mosques that are springing up on every street corner, built with the aid of British taxpayers’ money.We should be doing everything possible to resist the spread of Islam.

Yet, as Asia Bibi — whose story makes her one of the people most deserving of asylum in a safe country — continues to fear for her life in a cesspit of medieval savagery, Britain’s idea of who should be allowed to travel to the country (and stay) looks ever more perverse.

For example someone who had no trouble being granted entry to Britain so that he could spread his message of hate for all who resist Islam in London is Dr Ataollah Mohajerani, Iran’s former Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance. Mohajerani is best known for his book-length defence of the Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa against the British novelist Salman Rushdie in the 1980s.

After the Khomeini pronounced fatwa the world’s Muslims to kill Rushdie for writing a novel The Satanic Verses which took a satirical view of certain passages in The Koran, saying Rushdie was guilty of blasphemy, Mohajerani wrote a 250-page book, A Critique of the Conspiracy of The Satanic Verses, which justified the death-sentence.

Having fallen out with the regime in Iran, Mohajerani is now living in the affluent London suburb of Harrow, where he continues his campaign against Rushdie without any restraints being placed on his freedom to incite violence against the author.

Time and again we have learned of extremist clerics such as the Pakistani clerics Muhammad Naqib ur Rehman and Hassan Haseen ur Rehman being allowed to enter the UK despite their preaching and writings regularly calling for the murder of people merely suspected of having blasphemed against, or apostasised from, Islam. (Asia Bibi, you might recall, was sentenced to death for having a drink at a public drinking fountain. Did she intend to insult Islam? No. Did she intend to render other women who used that cup unclean? No. She was thirsty, she had a drink. That’s all.

Nevertheless, while the UK government continues to allow extremist clerics such as those to enter Britain, our Home Office — the government department which oversees policing and security — maintains an ever-growing list of people who are not Muslim but who have been critical of aspects of Islam and who, without due process, in fact without any charges being laid against them are legally sanctioned by being deprived of their right to free speech for blasphemy against Islam . It should be noted that the last criminal prosecution for blasphemy against a Christian faith in Britain was in 1908 and though it remains technically a civil offence no successful prosecutions have been made for almost a hundred years.

It is almost as though the UK’s spineless, craven government has decided that while extremists can say what they like about Christians, secular humanists, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans and Shamanistic Animists, to the extent of inciting violence against followers of those faiths and philosophies, and will only rarely be banned or deported, critics of such clerics can be banned with ease and if an ordinary citizen says Islam is a cruel, primitive faith they can be prosecuted for “hate speech”.

Apologists for Islam might say it is a long time since Mohajerani wrote his book justifying the murder of a British citizen and we should all let bygones be bygones — as though advocating murder (a murder which did not happen because British taxpayers spent several million pounds on protecting Rushdie,) is the sort of thing anyone might do in a moment of weakness, there is a distinct trend among supporters of liberal and left wing politics towards taking a more relaxed view of the hatred expressed by Islamic extremists than of reasonable criticisms made by their critics.

This kind of thing keeps happening. Earlier this year Canadian blogger Lauren Southern has been refused entry into the UK because she her citicisms of Islam constitutes a threat to public order. (Since when was telling the truth a threat to public order?) This week we learned that the UK government has allowed in a man called Brahim Belkaid, a 41-year old of German origin, believed to have inspired up to 140 people to join al-Qaeda and ISIS. The British press this week discovered that he was able to settle in Leicester nearly five years ago after returning from Syria, where he is suspected of having supported terrorist groups. It does not appear that Belkaid has used his time in the UK to lie low or mull over his past mistakes. As his activities on the streets and on social media attest, he has in fact been openly continuing to preach hatred for western and Christian values and recruit for his radical version of Islam.

There are several possible explanations for the operation of such an insane policy, one that aids and gives comfort to people who want to harm Britain and it’s people. One is that the British government is so afraid of kicking off a campaign of organised violence by Islamic extremists — possible but as there are sixty million of us and six million of them it suggests extreme cowardice among our leaders. Two is that nobody in Whitehall or the British security services know what they are doing, to the extent that they think pretty Canadian bloggers pose a greater threat to Her Majesty’s Peace than bearded men clad in middle eastern garb who say things like “kill the infidel”, “homosexuality is an abomination” and “western women are whores,” thus harmlessly exercising their right to free speech.

Then there is that classic British excuse for everything known as “cock-up theory”or “Oscar Wilde theory”, i.e. to have allowed in one hate preaching jihadist may look like an accident, to keep on letting them in and even letting them back in after they have been kicked out can only be sheer effing incompetence. Cock up theory is exemplified by the total inability of two departments to communicate with each other, even when those two departments are represented by people sitting at adjacent desks.

Along with that consider the extreme reaction of government to any public criticism of Islam, the enthusiasm of UK government departments including the police to “cracking down” on any criticism, no matter how justifiable and to preventing any critic of Islam, no matter how well documented the crimes they of which accuse “the religion of peace” may be (taking Yazidi, Druze, Syriac Christian and Jewish girls as sex slaves in Syria for example, and the the UK government’s sucking up to Islamic extremism begins to look like a policy.

More on Islam
RELATED POSTS:
I’m back from Syria — the media are lying to you — Eva Bartlett
 German Feminist Says Authorities Covered Up Muslim Sex Crime For Twenty Years
ISIS a US creation
Peccavimus (poem)

MORE IAN THORPE
biography & links to other works