It really is a pity that the BBC does not allow embedding – because this video MUST GO VIRAL.
If you’re not familiar with Baroness Warsi of Dewsbury (a.k.a. Sayeeda Warsi), she is Conservative Member of the British House of Lords and a member of David Cameron’s “shadow cabinet”. She is also recognized by the Equality and Human Rights Comission as Britain’s most influential Muslim Woman – which makes her stand against jihadis today all the more powerful.
Earlier today, the Baroness was pelted with eggs by protesters who accused her of unfaithfulness to Islam as a result of her support for the War in Afghanistan and her lack of support for Sharia Law. Instead of doing what most politicians would do (hide behind bodyguards and run away) she immediately confronted the jihadi thugs who threw the eggs and engaged them in a shouting match. After dispensing with the egg throwing lowlifes, and while still wiping the egg out of her hair, she turned her attention to the rolling BBC cameras and blasted the radicals and their ideology on behalf of all sane British Muslims:
Baroness Warsi told the BBC that the men were “idiots who did not represent the majority of British Muslims”.
She said these type of protesters “bring Muslims into huge disrepute”.
“I stood up to this group and said I challenge your views,” she told BBC News.
“They just weren’t prepared to listen. They shouted. I said if you want to have this debate, listen.”
She continued her walkabout with a police escort.
If only more Muslims had the Baroness’ courage, pehaps fewer Nidal Hasans would slip thorugh the cracks. If you haven’t watched the video linked above, please do so, and then send it out to your email list, tweet it out to your tweeps, and link it up on Facebook.
Baroness Warsi of Dewsbury is a heroine and deserves to be lauded as such.
This is definitely a great day for international news – two posts already and I haven’t even gotten to my planned column for today (which will be on Uruguay and Honduras).
November 30th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
question rumor I heard obama is going to hawaii with family for christmas must be nice to go on vacation…. anyway was wondering Does he have to make a fuel stop on air force one?
November 30th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Frankly, the thugs were more convincing. They DO represent Islam more than she does.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Also, the fact that we haven’t seen more “moderate” Muslims speaking out in the last 8 years, speaks volumes in and of itself.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Warsi is not a practising Muslim – you can see that by her clothing.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
#4 Now those who would enslave us or kill us are invading this website.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
2 – You’re missing the point. Even if you are correct, you are talking in terms of Islam (a religion) and Baroness Warsi is talking in terms of Muslims (people who claim adherance to said religion). Whether one or another practices a purer form of the religion is immaterial – the Baroness’ point that she (rather than the above-mentioned thugs) represents the majority of British Muslims still stands.
Just as we are deluding ourselves if we assume there is not a significant radicalized minority among Muslims (See: Nidal Hasan, egg-throwing thugs), so too are we deluding ourselves if we claim that all or most Muslims pactice that sort of violent, puritanical strain of Islam. At most we might be talking 10-15% of the Muslim population, especially in a Western immigrant community such as Britiish Muslims (who are more inclined to Westernize and assimilate).
You can no more say that the thugs speak for all professed Muslims than you can say Pat Robertson speaks for all professed Christians.
Who practices the purer form of Islam is an interesting philosophical argument (and a debatable on depending on how one weights strict observance of he text of the Koran against how much they weight traditional interpretation and commentary on the Koran). However, it really has no bearing on the argument over who represents a majority of Muslims – that is a numerical argument not a doctrinal one.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
-6
You too miss the point. There is no ‘purer form’ of Islam. You either follow the Holy Quran – or you don’t. Islam, as you may know, means ’submission’ and this ’submission’ is to the Will of Allah.
Thus someone who follows Islam either submits to the will of Allah – or is not (during the time of non-submission) a practising Muslim. Clearly by her clothing and by the fact she supports civil partnerships, she is not a practising Muslim.
She is a divorcee from an arranged marriage so has hardly been brought up in the Islamic way. She lives in a democracy that does not follow Shariah Law and is thus consorting with infidels (taking Christians as friends) and is thus not even an ‘innocent’. As she is not an ‘innocent’ she (along with the non-Muslim population except children, is a legitimate target.
-5
You misunderstand our role. We have successfully colonised the UK and numerically will be the dominant force in Europe by 2050. This is not enslaving or killing. We hope to convert (revert) but failing that we simply use your system to rule you.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
#7: Jesus F’ing Christ. Wake up, people!
November 30th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
On behalf of Race42012 – I would like to welcome our new readers in the intelligence community – especially those at the CIA. I hope that you will continue reading after you have tracked the troll’s IP address.
December 1st, 2009 at 2:59 am
7, Please do not address the men on this site like a common whore. Thank you and PBUH.
December 1st, 2009 at 5:47 am
I did not really want to comment—but then MetroIndependent mentioned moderate Muslims don’t speak up–so here I am….(By the way–Muslims have been speaking up—simply because the Western media does not pick up our voices does not mean we havn’t spoken up) In my opinion, Ayeesha Ali has more or less copy/pasted stuff from Islamophobic sites—I doubt this poster knows anything about Islam or Quran—
1.”No purer form of Islam”—That may be technically correct–but–there are Muslims whom one might refer to as “Puritans” because according to their understanding (which other Muslims may disagree with) they follow a more “purer form of Islam”.
2.Practicing Muslim—To be a Muslim, by accepted definition–one needs to accept the “Shahada”–to be a practicing Muslim, one needs to folllow the five pillars—the higher category of Muslim (one who submits) is “momeneen”.(Quran)
3.Divorce–Laws of divorce are in the Quran
4.Democracy—The 4 rightfully guided Caliphs were ELECTED (not quite the full democracy we know today)
5.Christians—are not “infidels” but “People of the book”. “Unbeleiver” has a specific meaning in the Quran and should not be randomly applied to anyone with a different opinion.
6.Sharia—there are 4/5 schools of Sharia within Islam—the aspect of “Sharia” dealing with Law/Jurisprudence—is called Fiqh.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:57 am
#11 –
3 – And?
4 – They were “elected”? By what definition are you using?
5 – This is true, but you are still obscuring things. The People of the Book still do not receive the same rights as Muslims under sharia law.
6 – But none support liberal democracy.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:49 am
“She is a divorcee from an arranged marriage so has hardly been brought up in the Islamic way.”—”Divorce laws are in Quran”– was a response to this statement.
elected=chosen—not in the sense of our understanding of “democracy” today—but the seeds were there. There were two “parties”(during the time of the 1st 4 rightfully guided caliphs)—the majority won.(—unfortunately, this experiment did not last for long.)
Sharia law—has 2 parts, the aspect that governs ritual/prayer etc and the other that is about Jurisprudence/fiqh. Jurisprudence is not static and was never meant to be static.
Islam is not against “democracy” or “monarchy” or any other form of government a people choose for themselves—but it does strongly advocate responsible government and strongly opposes oppression.
December 1st, 2009 at 1:32 pm
How interesting. I am attacked and criticised by Muslim and non-Muslim alike.
Let me correct what ‘anon’ says because it is important that the correct form of Islam is shown here. Clearly anon wishes to misrepresent Islam, though I cannot speculate as to why.
I doubt this poster has ever tried to actually think about the Holy Quran or the hadiths etc.
1. anon says I am technically correct. I know.
2. A muslim who supports homosexual ‘partnerships’ and/or who refuses to follow the Islamic dress code is NOT a practising Muslim.
3. I said: “She is a divorcee from an arranged marriage so has hardly been brought up in the Islamic way.” That is correct. Arranged marriages are NOT the ‘Islamic way’.
4. Taking Christians as friends…People of the Book, yes. I wonder if ‘anon’ really knows what that means? Christians who marry Muslims are NOT allowed to drink alcohol, have a Xmas tree etc. Anyway who are these ‘Christians’? Mormons? Jehovah Witnesses? No. The People of the Book are those who see Jesus NOT as the Son of God but a s aprophet because God does NOT have partners.
5. “We have successfully colonised the UK and numerically will be the dominant force in Europe by 2050. ” FACT.
Please do not misrepresent Islam again.
Trace my IP by all means – I have absolutely nothing to fear as I speak the TRUTH.
If you want my email address I’ll post it ‘anon’.
Go and look me up on Facebook.
December 1st, 2009 at 4:15 pm
14 – Anon follows a different school of Islam than you do. Accept it or don’t accept it – but there are multiple thought currents within Islam. You may WISH to dismiss anyone who disagrees with your particular interpretation of the Koran as a non-Muslim, but I happen to own a (translated) copy of the Koran and I can tell you that it is a very ambiguous book that can be interpreted in multiple ways.
Your claims that your particular sect is the only form of Islam is hogwash and demonstrably false (would be interested in your thoughts on the Shia/Sunni division). You may think it is the only CORRECT strain of Islam – but there are multiple viewpoints within the religion – pretending that they don’t exist only makes you look like a fool.
People can disagree with your view and still be labelled as Muslims (or even practicing Muslims) – they merely don’t parcitice or interpret the Koran the same way you do. You’re free to think that they will burn in hell, but to act as if they don’t exist is just silly. Grow up and deal with it.
December 1st, 2009 at 5:15 pm
15 – You say Anon follows a different school than I do. You have no evidence of that.
– you say that I claim my ’sect’ (sects are against Islam by the way) is the only form of Islam. Nowhere have I said that.
- you say people can disagree with your view and still be labelled as practicing Muslims. Where is your evidence for that statement?
- have you any idea as to what ‘makes’ a Muslim?
- 2 MetroIndependent’s post is absolutely correct.
December 1st, 2009 at 5:47 pm
16 –
1. You claim that people who take actions that are gainst your interpretation of Islam are not Muslims or not prcticing Muslims when the claim to be. Note that Warsi attempted to quote the Koran.
2-3: I already defined the term “Muslim” – one who claims adherance to Islam. If they do not fully adhere to Islam that makes them bad Muslims not non-Muslims – at least when we’re talking in terms of demographics. If were talking in theological terms, then maybe we can debate the esoteric question of what it takes to be fully Muslim and where the mine between Muslim and non-Muslim is. I’m a practitioner or Messianic Judaism – so I really don’t care – I’m talking about demographics not theology. Many people practice non-Puritan forms of Islam (for example – Sufism) – an orthodox Sufi certainly would not fit into a Wahabist definition of a “Muslim” but demographically speaking both are not only counted as Muslims but practicing Muslims (they just practice radically different forms of Islam).
You also never address my point about the Shia/Sunni divide. I don’t know which you are (guessing Sunni by your rhetoric but could be wrong), but are the people on the opposire side of that divide Muslims or not?
December 1st, 2009 at 5:56 pm
17 –
You have managed to avoid the majority of my points.
I will deal with all of yours.
1. Quoting the Holy Quran does not make you a Muslim. This links to 2-3:
A Muslim is someone who submits to Allah’s will. A person upon true monotheism, who worships God alone without associating any partners with him. A Muslim is someone who Bears witness that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. A Muslim can be of any background, race, country and gender
This is cut and pasted from: http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2426
Where someone does not practice Islam i.e. submit to Allah’s will then by definition they are not ‘practicing Islam’.
Having defined a Muslim the question as to whether Sunnis/Shias are Muslims is redundant.
Allah knows best.
- 2 MetroIndependent’s post is absolutely correct.
December 1st, 2009 at 6:08 pm
You have avoided a majority of MY points as well. You as a human being cannot determine the will of a diety conclusively and label people non-Muslims. Theorectically, the Koran wuld be Allah’s will – but having read it (at least the English – and yes I know translations don’t count but you get the gist of the writing) it is entirely possible for two people to read the same book and make different conclusions.
Let’s try this again. Are Shi’ites Muslims or not?
December 1st, 2009 at 6:34 pm
I have avoided nothing.
I have explained to you what a Muslim is. You ask if Shias are Muslims. I repeat I have explained to you what a Muslim is. If Shias fit that explanation then they are Muslims.
It really is that simple.
If someone behaves as, believes as, thinks as etc the definition/explanation of what a Muslim is then they are a Muslim. If they do not then – I would have thought this was clear – they are not a Muslim.
You do not seem to understand that.
I also said ‘Allah knows best’.
So, yet again, I have avoided nothing you say. You continue to avoid my points.
The key thing – I would have thought – from your point of view is that like it or not on a numerical basis, Muslims will dominate your country in the near future. There is absolutely nothing you can do to stop that except – somehow – destroy your own country. This seems unlikely. Therefore I strongly suggest you learn about Islam, turn to Islam and join us instead of trying to create divisions, to oppose and obstruct.
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
Since 911 the rate of conversion to Islam in the USA has tripled.
Shariah law has already arrived to some extent in the UK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_zmXa_830M&feature=related
December 1st, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Criticism—It is frustrating enough that “myths” about Islam are everywhere—but it is sad when we Muslims end up buying into these myths. (2050 “myth” debunked on utube)
There is only ONE Quran—All Muslims read that exact same Quran, We all know and understand the 5 pillars—within this greater unified framework—there exists a rich heritage of diverse thoughts and “traditions”—one need only look up Kalam, Falsafa, Tafsir, and other such works.
Legal issues concerning homosexuality are not as “fixed” as one might imagine—different “Islamic” countries handle these legal issues differently.(Though there is still much room for improvement in this area)
People of the book–”The People of the Book are those who see Jesus NOT as the Son of God but as a prophet”—I’m afraid this definition is inaccurate both in terms of how the Quran defines the term and how Muslim Jurists have historically defined it.
….If one looks for it, much wisdom and a rich spirituality can be found in Islam—all it requires is the effort to look……
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:27 am
With all due respect, Ayeesha – you have agains failed to answer. You say Muslims aer those who follow the will of your deity – but you have said nothing about what that will is or how it is defined (nor will you address the idea of whether those who define it differently than you are Muslims).
So – are Shi’ites Muslims in your opinion or not?
Even better question (becasue I think you will answer that they are not) – are Sufis Muslims? They certainly think they are and tend to be extremely devoted.
Answer the questions – Yes or no please.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:20 am
As a fairly liberal UK national, I am personally appalled by the notion that when my children have their own children, we may exist in a state of “civil war” with our Muslim community. Opening the doors into our country to people of different faiths and beliefs is acceptable; allowing those entry who would harm us, let alone allowing them to breed and perpetrate feelings and acts of hate towards our nation, is totally unacceptable.
As a nation, we are paying the price of having a vast empire in the past, not to mention a recent spate of political correctness (largely due to the Labour party’s power since 1997), which has frightened our politicians and civil servants into saying “Yes” to anyone who cares to ask for asylum or residency, not to mention excersising lax controls over geographical points of illegal entry into our realm.
It is simple: anyone who is guilty of extreme acts of “faith” should be kicked out of our country, for good – whatever their race or creed. For that we need decisive, right-thinking politicians: roll on the general election next year. I believe that the “Islamic Council of Britain” was formed after a previous group “Al Majaroun” was banned because of how extreme it was.
p.s. anyone who wants to listen to the dangerous beliefs of the ringleader of the egg throwers, here is a link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8390000/8390194.stm