Terror Networks |
NOW will the world wake up to the Islamist war against Christianity? |
2013-09-23 |
[BLOGS.TELEGRAPH.CO.UK] Can we go easy on the phrase "religion of peace" today? Of course most Mohammedans are horrified what may be the biggest slaughter of Christians by Islamists in modern times: at the time of writing, estimates of the number of dead at All Saints' Beautiful Downtown Peshawar ...capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (formerly known as the North-West Frontier Province), administrative and economic hub for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. Peshawar is situated near the eastern end of the Khyber Pass, convenient to the Pak-Afghan border. Peshawar has evolved into one of Pakistan's most ethnically and linguistically diverse cities, which means lots of gunfire. are ranging from 60 to 200. These faithful worshippers are the victims, first and foremost, of Islamic fanatics whose psychotic creed is held by a small minority of the world's Mohammedans. But... they are ALSO the victims of our "ally" Pakistain's failure to protect Christians who have pleaded for protection against the religious cleansing that led to over 100 homes being torched in a Christian enclave of the city of Lahore in March by a mob furious at reports of alleged blasphemy. Don't tell me that every member of that mob was a paid-up, al-Qaeda jihadist: this is also tribal violence inspired by an extreme interpretation of Islamic teachings that is gaining traction in the developing world. What has the Pakistain government done to stop it? Not enough (if anything). Come to that, how much have Mohammedan community leaders around the world done to condemn this sort of slaughter by their co-religionists? Not enough. Let's see if they manage more than their usual regretful throat-clearing today. And HM Government? Not enough. I have a friend in the House of Lords who tries to persuade ministers to say more about the persecution of Christians. It's uphill work. And the Churches? Yes, they have spoken out... once they've finished burbling about climate change. No wonder Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali had to resign his see before he felt he could speak freely about these crimes, unhampered by multicultural collegiality. |
Link |
India-Pakistan | |
Threats to Pakistan are threats to the world | |
2009-04-15 | |
By Michael Nazir-Ali The President of Pakistan has warned that a "cancer" is eating away at his country, one which requires radical surgery. In fact, the patient needs three separate operations, each as risky as the next. The Islamist political parties, which have hardly ever been strong at the ballot box, sense victory through street-power and guns. The Pakistani Taliban and its Afghan and al‑Qaeda allies wish to destroy the state as part of their war against the infidel West. And the so-called Kashmir liberation groups are slowly widening their field of operations, as shown by recent attacks in Mumbai and on the Sri Lanka cricket team in Lahore.
Those of us who thought that it was possible to have a Pakistani national identity without ideological extremism have been disappointed again and again. It seems, in retrospect, that there was an inherent instability in pulling together the outer and more ungovernable regions of British India simply on the basis of religion. Throughout its history, Pakistan has been vulnerable to religious extremism. Unless co‑ordinated international action is taken as a matter of urgency, Pakistan may not survive. So what needs to be done? First, it is absolutely vital that the international community assists in the rebuilding of confidence between India and Pakistan. This must include a guarantee from both sides, but particularly Pakistan, that all cross-border terrorism will cease and those planning it will be neutralised. It is said that the previous President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, was close to a deal with the Indians on Kashmir, but could not sell it to the army. The files must be dusted off in fact, it must be part of any agreement on military and economic aid that the army co-operates with its political masters in bringing peace and stability to Pakistan. On the western and northern borders, as well, there must be assurance for any incoming regime in Afghanistan that Pakistan will not be host to any forces that seek to destabilise that country. This is also of huge interest to Nato forces operating inside Afghanistan. No solution to the conflict, however, can be morally acceptable if it protects Western interests from extremist attack but leaves women, children and minorities at the mercy of the Taliban's barbarity. If Pakistan is to avoid playing host to a proxy war between Nato and the Taliban, it needs to take its security into its own hands. To do this, the role of the armed forces has to be re-oriented. Instead of structuring the military around Kashmir, and seeing India as the main enemy, counter-insurgency must have a much higher profile. It is good that a dedicated paramilitary force is being strengthened, with British assistance, in the North-Western Frontier Province, to resist Taliban advances and perhaps even pacify parts of the tribal areas. But the armed forces, as a whole, need to develop a security strategy that is coherent and national. Local terrorism, such as the recent raid on a police college, cannot be left to local forces alone. This brings us to military intelligence. The Inter Services Intelligence agency was used by the West in the 1980s to channel large amounts of assistance to the mujahidin; as a result, elements within it have a significant relationship with Taliban leaders, and also Kashmiri militants whose organisations they helped to establish. But whatever the history, the ISI should be brought under control and the armed forces made accountable to the civilian government. Such reforms must be part of any agreement to enable Pakistan to deal with internal and external threats, not least in terms of safeguarding its nuclear facilities. Yet it is not only military and diplomatic measures that are needed. One of the most significant failures of President Musharraf's time in office was the Council of Madrassas' refusal to co-operate with the government's programme of curriculum reform. This cannot be allowed to continue. An integrated education strategy is as important as a security one: generations of the poor cannot be allowed to become fodder for Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. A revision of textbooks is also needed to root out teachings of hate against Christianity, Judaism, India and the West. And while some of the harsh Islamic laws that affect women and religious minorities have been modified, others are still on the statute book. The notorious "Blasphemy Law" prescribes a mandatory death penalty for insulting the Prophet of Islam. It has been used to terrorise religious minorities and to curb even modest freedoms of expression and of belief. Those who declare themselves friends of Pakistan must help to get this law repealed. Many decent and devout Pakistani Muslims are already ashamed of it. A moment of threat can also be a time of opportunity. It is time for Pakistan and its friends to grasp the opportunity, and deal comprehensively with the threats to its security that have bedevilled much of the country's 62-year history. These threats to Pakistan are now also threats to world order. It is in all of our interests that they are dealt with quickly and comprehensively. Michael Nazir-Ali is Bishop of Rochester, was born and raised in Pakistan and was Bishop of Raiwind there. | |
Link |
Britain |
Church of England to debate whether Christians should try to convert Muslims |
2008-12-17 |
A discussion on the sensitive topic has been tabled for the next meeting of the Church of England's governing body amid fears that some clergy are ignoring their traditional missionary role. Some members of the General Synod believe Christ ordered all Christians to recruit nonbelievers and followers of other faiths, and they want to see how many bishops and vicars agree with this view. Among the speakers is likely to be the Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, who earlier this year warned that Church leaders had "gone too far" in their sensitivity towards Muslims and were not doing enough to spread the word of God. At the end of the debate at next February's Synod meeting in London, bishops, clergy and lay members will vote on whether bishops should report to the Synod on "their understanding of the uniqueness of Christ in multi-faith Britain", and give examples of how the gospel should be shared. Paul Eddy, a lay member of the Synod, started the Private Members' Motion and accused the Church of censorship earlier this year when it was taken off the agenda of the July meeting at the last minute. He believed it was shelved because it would have shown up deep divisions in the Church over its attitude to converting believers in other faiths. Mr Eddy said today that he was delighted the discussion will now be heard. He told The Daily Telegraph: "I'm looking forward to what I think will be a very positive debate. I'm hoping that the Church will affirm the historic tenets of our faith. "We have a huge responsibility to share our faith with everyone in the UK including those of other faiths." The Synod meeting will also debate whether clergy should be banned from being members of the far-right British National Party, following another Private Members' Motion. There will be a presentation on "the implications of the financial crisis and recession", triggered by fears that the economic downturn could damage the Church's billion-pound stock market investments as well as takings in the collection plate. |
Link |
Britain |
Archdruid: 'Christian doctrine is offensive to Muslims' |
2008-07-21 |
![]() Appears the doc has stepped in it again... Christian doctrine is offensive to Muslims, the Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday. Dr Rowan Williams also criticised Christianity's history for its violence, its use of harsh punishments and its betrayal of its peaceful principles. His comments came in a highly conciliatory letter to Islamic leaders calling for an alliance between the two faiths for 'the common good'. Maybe they'll autograph his kneepads? Or pay for the Vaseline? But it risked fresh controversy for the Archbishop in the wake of his pronouncement earlier this year that a place should be found for Islamic sharia law in the British legal system. Dr Williams is also facing immense pressures from inside his own Church of England and Anglican Communion. A gathering of Anglican bishops from around the world, which begins today, is on the brink of a devastating split over whether homosexuality and gay clergy should win their approval. Looks like Trouble in Druid City... I'm waiting for the gay imams to show up in Islam. And the ruling that devout Muslims can have up to four gay concubines at a time. I'm waiting for the ordination of female imans. The Archbishop's letter is a reply to feelers to Christians put out by Islamic leaders from 43 countries last autumn. In it, Dr Williams said violence is incompatible with the beliefs of either faith and that, once that principle is accepted, both can work together against poverty and prejudice and to help the environment. ...and everyone can have cake and ice cream. He also said the Christian belief in the Trinity - that God is Father, Son and Holy Ghost at the same time - 'is difficult, sometimes offensive, to Muslims'. Trinitarian doctrine conflicts with the Islamic view that there is just one all-powerful God. Oh, well. Guess we'd better junk it then. Dr Williams added: 'It is all the more important for the sake of open and careful dialogue that we try to clarify what we do and do not mean by it, and so I trust that what follows will be read in this spirit.' He told Muslim leaders that faith has no connection with political power or force, and that Christians have in the past betrayed this idea. 'Christianity has been promoted at the point of the sword and legally supported by extreme sanctions,' Dr Williams said. Yeah. We're lucky Islam ain't like that. Probably get a lotta people killed. Oh, wait... I was thinking the same thing last week as I was forcibly converting some Egyptian Muslims. Islam, he continued, has been supported in the same way and 'there is no religious tradition whose history is exempt from such temptation and such failure.' INFIDEL! Take it back or we'll kill you! The Archbishop appeared to rebuke his colleague, Bishop of Rochester Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, who criticised his sharia lecture and who maintains that Christianity is central to British law, politics and society. 'Religious identity has often been confused with cultural or national integrity, with structures of social control, with class and regional identities, with empire: and it has been imposed in the interest of all these and other forms of power,' he said. The Archbishop said that faiths which reject the use of violence should learn to defend each other in their mutual interest. 'If we are in the habit of defending each other, we ought to be able to learn to defend other groups and communities as well,' he said. We can together speak for those who have no voice or leverage in society - for the poorest, the most despised, the least powerful, for women and children, for migrants and minorities; and even to speak together for the great encompassing reality that has no voice of its own, our injured and abused material environment.' Can't we all just...get along. He's saying that his brand of Christianity lacks testosterone, to the point where it's unwilling to compete with the Profit's evil henchmen, so the henchmen should protect him. This is a position known as dhimmitude and I've no doubt the Archdruid will be quite happy to pay his jizya. The Archbishop did not mention sharia at all in his closely-argued 18-page letter. Dr Williams was heavily criticised by MPs and Downing Street after he suggested sharia law could have an established place in British life. But his letter in reply to last year's Islamic approach, A Common Word for the Common Good, chimes with his view expressed in February that people of faith should be able to work together against secularism despite their differences. Lambeth Palace hinted that Christians as well as Muslims should listen to Dr Williams' message. Officials pointed to the Archbishop's call for 'religious plurality' to turn to serving the common good and added: 'This is true even where truth claims may seem irreconcilable'. |
Link |
Britain | |
UK: Christian preachers face arrest in Birmingham | |
2008-06-01 | |
A police community support officer ordered two Christian preachers to stop handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham. The evangelists say they were threatened with arrest for committing a "hate crime" and were told they risked being beaten up if they returned. The incident will fuel fears that "no-go areas" for Christians are emerging in British towns and cities, as the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, claimed in The Sunday Telegraph this year. Arthur Cunningham, 48, and Joseph Abraham, 65, both full-time evangelical ministers, have launched legal action against West Midlands Police, claiming the officer infringed their right to profess their religion.
Last night, Christian campaigners described the officer's behaviour as "deeply alarming". The preachers, both ministers in Birmingham, were handing out leaflets on Alum Rock Road in February when they started talking to four Asian youths. A police community support officer (PCSO) interrupted the conversation and began questioning the ministers about their beliefs. They said when the officer realised they were American, although both have lived in Britain for many years, he launched a tirade against President Bush and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr Cunningham said: "I told him that this had nothing to do with the gospel we were preaching but he became very aggressive. "He said we were in a Muslim area and were not allowed to spread our Christian message. He said we were committing a hate crime by telling the youths to leave Islam and said that he was going to take us to the police station." The preacher refused to give the PCSO his address because he felt the officer's manner was "threatening and intimidating". The ministers claim he also advised them not to return to the area. As he walked away, the PCSO said: "You have been warned. If you come back here and get beaten up, well you have been warned". West Midlands Police, who refused to apologise, said the incident had been "fully investigated" and the officer would be given training in understanding hate crime and communication. | |
Link |
Britain |
Cardinal urges Muslim leaders to oppose violent jihad |
2008-06-01 |
Muslim leaders must be more outspoken about violence in the name of religion, a senior Vatican official urged yesterday. How about if they just say something? Anything would be nice. The current silence is deafening Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, the Pope's principal adviser on Islam, said that while the majority of Muslim clerics condemned acts of terrorism, they needed to be more vocal about jihad, especially because of its frequent appearances in the Qur'an. The cardinal made the remarks after a lecture, given in London to an audience of students, Catholic clerics and figures from other religions. It was one of several public appearances during a rare visit to the UK. He said: "In the Qur'an you have several interpretations of jihad - violent and holy. Most Muslims are condemning war made in the name of religion. The problem is that in the Qur'an you have good and bad jihad, so you choose. "There is no worldwide authority who can interpret the Qur'an, so it depends on the person you have in front of you. Sometimes you should like religious authorities to be more outspoken about violence in the name of religion. But Muslims believe the Qur'an is the divine word of God, so it is a problem." He said it would be "easier" if there were a single Islamic authority to negotiate with. "It's a great difficulty there are many voices of living Islam." Smack! The cardinal is president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and has been tasked with improving relations between the Vatican and Islam. Tauran, the former Vatican foreign minister, has not shied away from difficult issues since his 2007 appointment. He has criticised countries, notably Saudi Arabia, which do not allow freedom of religion. He expressed hope, however, that a summit of Islamic scholars and Catholic officials, to be held in November, would yield positive results. The meeting, organised following an appeal from hundreds of Muslim scholars for closer ties with Christianity, will not be attended by representatives from Saudi Arabia or Iran, two regimes that place severe restrictions on religious freedom. "Of course we would like to see someone from Saudi Arabia. But we will meet them in another context. We talk to the interlocutors who come, we do not choose them." His remarks came as the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, said that radical Islam threatened to fill a "moral vacuum" in Britain arisen as a result of a decline of Christian values. Writing in the newly launched political and cultural magazine Standpoint, the bishop claims that the church dissolved its influence over the country's morals during the social and sexual revolution of the 1960s. |
Link |
Britain |
Bishop says collapse of Christianity is wrecking British society - and Islam |
2008-05-29 |
In a lacerating attack on liberal values, the Right Reverend Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, said the country was mired in a doctrine of 'endless self-indulgence' that had brought an explosion in public violence and binge-drinking. In a blow to Gordon Brown, he mocked the 'scramblings and scratchings' of politicians who try to cast new British values such as respect and tolerance. The Pakistani-born bishop dated the downfall of Christianity from the 'social and sexual revolution' of the 1960s. He said Church leaders had capitulated to Marxist revolutionary thinking and quoted an academic who blames the loss of 'faith and piety among women' for the steep decline in Christian worship. |
Link |
Britain | ||
Church of England row over Muslim conversion | ||
2008-05-26 | ||
![]() However, his comments were condemned by senior figures within the Church. The Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, the former Bishop of Hulme and the newly appointed Bishop of Urban Life and Faith, said: "Both the Bishop of Rochester's reported comments and the synod private members' motion show no sensitivity to the need for good inter-faith relations.
A Church of England spokesman added: "We have a mission-focused Christian presence in every community, including those where there are a large number of Muslims. That engagement is based on the provisions of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for freedom of thought, conscience and religion." Brave, brave unnamed CoE spokesman /s And that work of Man, the European Convention on Human Rights, takes precedence over Christ's commission to his Apostles, that they should go into all the world and preach to the whole creation (Mark 14)? Alas, it is forgotten amongst the clamor and alarums raised by gays, intransigent women priests, and apostates. The spokesman played down the likelihood of the synod agenda being hijacked by those whose priority was a perceived ! threat from Islam: "The agenda has not yet been confirmed."
Britain's only Asian bishop, he was tipped to become Archbishop of Canterbury before Dr Rowan Williams's appointment in 2002. Since he was passed over, he has felt able to speak more freely about his inter-faith views and has become a talisman for hard-line evangelicals who see Islam as a threat to culture and religion. In January, he drew criticism for declaring that some parts of Britain were "no-go areas" for non-Muslims. | ||
Link |
Britain |
Britain: Bishop of Rochester reasserts 'no-go' claim |
2008-02-24 |
Page One of a three-page article. The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, who received death threats for airing his views on Islamic issues, has vowed that he will continue to speak out. His claim that Islamic extremism has turned some parts of Britain into "no-go" areas for non-Muslims led to fierce rows between political and religious leaders over the impact of multiculturalism on this country. Those comments were followed soon after by the Archbishop of Canterbury's suggestion that the adoption of aspects of sharia law in Britain was "unavoidable". The bishops' views in The Sunday Telegraph sparked a storm of criticism and raised questions over the role of the Church in society but, most seriously for Dr Nazir-Ali, led to threats that he and his family would be harmed. Yet, in his first interview since the sinister calls were made to his home, the Bishop of Rochester remains steadfastly defiant. He will not be silenced. "I believe people should not be prevented from speaking out," he says. "The issue had to be raised. There are times when Christian leaders have to speak out." He arrived in Britain in the 1980s and seems to have taken up the mantle for defending the country's values he fears are being threatened by a loss of its Christian heritage. Dressed casually in a roll-neck jumper and sports jacket, he seems relaxed now as he walks around his study in Bishopscourt, but it has clearly been a stressful time. Threats were made warning that he would not "live long" and would be "sorted out" if he continued to criticise Islam. "If you disagree, that must be met by counter-arguments, not by trying to silence people. It was a threat not just to me, but to my family. I took it seriously, so did the police. It gave me sleepless nights." However, it's not the first time that his life has been endangered. Shortly after being made a bishop in Pakistan - at 35 he was the youngest in the Anglican Church - he was forced to flee to Britain to seek refuge from Muslims who wanted to kill him. He says that he never expected to suffer the same treatment in Britain and expresses concerns over recent social developments. "The real danger to Britain today is the spiritual and moral vacuum that has occurred for the last 40 or 50 years. When you have such a vacuum something will fill it. "If people are not given a fresh way of understanding what it means to be a Christian and what it means to be a Christian-based society then something else may well take the place of all that we're used to and that could be Islam." A highly-respected academic - he studied at Cambridge and Oxford - he speaks calmly and with a measured deliberation. |
Link |
Britain | ||||
Backlash hits ArchDruid | ||||
2008-02-09 | ||||
![]() With the Church of England plunged into crisis, senior figures were said to be discussing the archbishop's future. One member of the church's "Cabinet", the Archbishop's Council, was reported as saying: "There have been a lot of calls for him to resign. I don't suppose he will take any notice, but, yes, he should resign." Officials at Lambeth Palace told the BBC Dr Williams was in a "state of shock" and "completely overwhelmed" by the scale of the row. It was said that he could not believe the fury of the reaction. The most damaging attack came from the Pakistan-born Bishop of Rochester, the Right Reverend Michael Nazir-Ali. He said it would be "simply impossible" to bring sharia law into British law "without fundamentally affecting its integrity". Sharia "would be in tension with the English legal tradition on questions like monogamy, provisions for divorce, the rights of women, custody of children, laws of inheritance and of evidence. This is not to mention the relation of freedom of belief and of expression to provisions for blasphemy and apostasy." The church's second most senior leader, Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu, refused to discuss the matter. But he has said sharia law "would never happen" in Britain. Politicians joined the chorus of condemnation, with Downing Street saying British law should be based on British values. Tory and LibDem leaders also voiced strong criticism. Even prominent Muslims were rounding on Dr Williams. Shahid Malik, Labour MP for Dewsbury, said: "I haven't experienced any clamour or fervent desire for sharia law in this country. If there are people who prefer sharia law there are always countries where they could go and live." Khalid Mahmood, Labour MP for Birmingham Perry Bar, rejected the idea that British law forces Muslims to choose between their religion and their society. He said: "This will alienate people from other communities because they will think it is what Muslims want - and it is not." The Muslim Council of Britain came to Dr Williams's aid, however, describing his comments in a lecture to lawyers and a BBC interview as "thoughtful".
The archbishop is likely to come under heavy fire next week at a meeting of the Church's General Synod. Liberal and feminist critics have been appalled by the thought of sharia law while evangelical opponents believe Dr Williams has failed to defend Christianity.
Dr Williams defended himself in a Lambeth Palace statement saying he had been trying to "tease out" the issue. The archbishop had said it could help build a better and more cohesive society if Muslims were able to choose to have marital disputes or financial matters, for example, dealt with in a sharia court. The adoption of some elements of sharia law "seems unavoidable".
Even fellow bishops, however, think this is precisely what Dr Williams did say. Bishop of Southwark Tom Butler, a liberal who would normally be expected to defend Dr Williams, said the archbishop had been entering a minefield and added: "It will take a great deal of thought and work before I think it is a good idea." He was more blunt in a circular to clergy in his diocese, saying he had yet to be convinced of the feasibility of incorporating any non-Christian religious law into the English legal system. | ||||
Link |
Britain | |||||||||||
Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable' | |||||||||||
2008-02-07 | |||||||||||
![]()
His comments are likely to fuel the debate over multiculturalism in the UK.
| |||||||||||
Link |
Britain | ||||
British bishop gets police protection after Islamist death threats | ||||
2008-02-02 | ||||
Speaking to The Times, Dr Nazir-Ali, who is Britain's only Asian bishop, said: "The irony is that I had similar threats when I was a bishop in Pakistan, but I never thought I would have them here. My point in saying what I did was that Britain had lost its Christian vision, which would have provided the resources to offer hospitality to others." This absence of a Christian vision had led to multiculturalism in Britain claimed the bishop. He added: "Everyone agrees that multiculturalism has had disastrous consequences, and that segregation and extremism have arisen from this." Following his comment, the bishop says he has received overwhelming support. He said: "I have had 1,000 letters, and 95 per cent have been supportive. There is no point in being in denial. We have to face the consequences." Speaking earlier this week, Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, said Christian Muslim relations in Britain are currently in a "very good place".
| ||||
Link |