Baroness Warsi told by David Cameron not to appear at Islamic conference
The Conservative party chair, Baroness Warsi, has been banned by David Cameron from attending a major Islamic conference today, igniting a bitter internal row over how the government tackles Islamist extremism.
Warsi, Britain's first female Mohammedan cabinet minister, was told by the prime minister to cancel her appearance at the Global Peace and Unity Event, which is being billed as the largest multicultural gathering in Europe.
The London-based conference is aimed at improving community relations, yet critics have pointed out that a number of speakers who are due to appear have justified suicide kabooms and promoted al-Qaeda, homophobia and terrorism.
An influential voice among the international Mohammedan community, Warsi believes that confronting gun-hung tough guys at public events is a more effective way to tackle fundamentalism than a refusal to engage with them. A Whitehall source said: "She had hoped to attend, but there is a conflict of opinion on how gun-hung tough guys should be dealt with and the prime minister, supported by Theresa May [the home secretary], were adamant no Tories should attend."
Paul Goodman, the former Tory communities minister, said: "The aim of the organisers is to exploit politicians by using their presence to gain muscle, influence and credibility among British Mohammedans. Politicians shouldn't play their game." ...
Critics say there are more hardline speakers at the event than in previous years. Controversial figures include a former Pak government minister, Muhammad Ijaz-ul-Haq, who has been quoted as saying that the award of a knighthood to the author Salman Rushdie in 2007 justifies suicide kabooms.
Another is Sheikh Shady al-Suleiman, from Sydney, who was in charge of youth events at an Australian mosque when it invited Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical al-Qaeda preacher linked to two of the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit plane bomber, to speak. Al-Suleiman has also supported the stoning of adulterers.
Speakers also include Abdur Rashid Turabi, head of Pakistain's Islamic exemplar Jamaat-e-Islami party, whose former leader, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, said he saluted a boomer for killing five American soldiers and earlier this month had his UK visa revoked by the Home Office. Sheikh Yasir Qadhi, who has said that homosexuality is an "aberration against God", is also due to attend.
#1
Given that the Baroness is a 'moderate', I don't see how banning her from appearing at the conference will help the 'moderate' muslims at the conference.
Posted by: lord garth ||
10/25/2010 10:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I don't see how banning her from appearing at the conference will help the 'moderate' muslims
A fair point, lord garth. This was the last thing I posted before my nap, and clearly I should have thought through the organization a bit better. The PM and the Conservatives don't want to confront the radicals in public, because it gives them attention. But their junior partners in the government, the Lib. Dems, believe confrontation is important on this subject, so they will be sending on the Communities minister to make a speech. Labour also will send someone to speak, but one assumes he won't be confrontational.
#3
What a shocker the more extreme speakers are from Pakistan!
There needs to be moderate scholars out there who can confront the extremist with their Islamic Knowledge or is that the problem ie true followers of the Koran espouse violence!
#5
The other post today about violent muslim gangs getting off without any prison time puts the laugh to both parties attempts to stand up to extremism.
I suspect that Baroness Warsi could go and everyone in the west thing she won some very good points and then a year later find out that her presence sent jihadi recruitment through the roof. They do seem to have a problem with strong women after all, and an even bigger problem with not taking advantage of weakness when they spot it.
#6
I'll believe in a 'moderate muslim' when they actively take a stand to stop the Ground Zero mosque. Until then, i think they belong in the same category as the Easter Bunny, the Great Pumpkin and the Tooth Fairy.( might even give them proper noun status, complete with upper case letters and everything)
A DEMOCRATS candidate has told President Barack B.O. Obama to "shove it" after learning he would not be receiving the presidents endorsement when the commander-in-chief travels to the Ocean State today.
Rhode Island State general treasurer Frank T. Caprio - who is locked in a tight two-way race with former senator and Independent candidate Lincoln Chafee - learned the news through the press.
Mr Caprio pulled no punches when asked for his reaction to the news during a radio interview yesterday morning.
"I never asked for president Obama's endorsement. He can take his endorsement and really shove it as far as I'm concerned", he said on WPRO-Radio.
(KUNA) -- Heads of the Democratic and the Republican parties expressed on Sunday confidence in winning the midterm election scheduled for November 2.
Tim Kaine, the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, told "This Week" on ABC NEWS that "Democrats would maintain control of the House in the midterm elections nine days from now." When asked does he think Democrats will keep the House of Representatives in their control? he said, "I do, I do. I think it's going to be close," adding "these races are very close, but from this point forward, it is all about turnout and ground game.
Not to mention unliving Americans, illegal Americans and imaginary Americans, all of whom have been properly registered by ACORN and its descendants.
And we're seeing good early voting trends and we have got work to do, but we think we can do it." Kaine insisted that Nancy San Fran Nan Pelosi would remain Speaker of the House. "She has done a marvelous job, in a town where it is hard to do heavy lifts," he said.
On the other side, speaking Sunday on "Meet the Press," on NBC, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said that ideas put on the table by Republicans about health care, economy and budget have been "summarily rejected" by the Democrats.
Steele says that Republican leaders "could not even get a meeting with the president." He also believes voters are tired of the way Democrats, who control the White House and Congress, are running the federal government. Steele predicted huge victory for the Republicans and voter dissatisfaction will give his party control of the House, and possibly the Senate.
Steele stressed that Republicans will be ready to work with Obama on issues ranging from the economy to health care to the environment.
So long as the president doesn't try to do anything the Republicans don't like. Not that the Republicans are likely to say anything so crass as, "We won. Get over it."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/25/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What I'm afraid of is that if the Pubs get either side of Congress they will play the same-ole play-along-to-get-along bullshit they've been doing for the last couple of decades.
#5
At this time I'm not sure whether winning the House (the Senate seems to be out of reach) isn't a poisoned gift for Republicans.
They won't get anything passed, and Democrats will introduce lots of feelgood-stuff which will be voted down but will inflame the believers of Zero.
If Democrats keep both houses by a very narrow margin they won't accomplish anything but won't be able to blame it on the Republicans.
Which will give the Republicans a much better start into the next Presidential elections.
Also watch discontent of the Democratic base with Obama. It will rise when there are no Republicans to blame for things tanking (and they will). Obama looks like a quitter for me when the getting gets tough. Hillary is waiting.
For God's sake, the Republicans NEED to start building up a real good candidate pretty soon.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/25/2010 1:10 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The Israelis are concerned that the White House is only restrained in order not to inflame the Israel-loving American electorate before the election, and will then take revenge afterward. The logic goes, if the Republicans maximize their gains, President Obama will do what damage he can before the new Congress is sworn in; if the Democrats keep control, by however slim a margin, he will have until the end of his term to wreak damage on those Juices he believes humiliated him.
The Palestinians on the other hand, hope that an unhappy President Obama -- because he won't be happy regardless the outcome, now he isn't riding high as the messiah any more -- will force Israel to do Palestinian bidding.
#7
I believe G Bush may have been correct. When you get to Washington the information you get limits your options. Fear of the making the tough decision will buckle the knees of most. 60% of the American people want this circus ride to stop.
#9
eLarson is right. The 2012 campaign will begin November 3 and there will be lots of TEA Partiers letting the trunks in wonderland know they will face primary challengers if they don't toe the line. The TEA Partiers, now roused, will not go home and think the folks they sent will do the job without routine spinal supplements.
#10
Look for the Republican establishment, coming out of the gates, to introduce a number of bills to satisfy their Tea Party members and constituents. Reality suggests they will be mostly symbolic. Quite possibly, some of the bills will pass in the House but many will then most assuredly languish in the Senate. Moreover, any bill of consequence will face the specter of a Presidential veto. The biggest impending decision facing Republicans (Should they gain control.) is what to do about raising the Debt Ceiling in 2011. If they stand on principle and hold tight they need to be prepared for the monumental consequences. Either way they will be forced to cooperate with Democrats on this issue. So some of you purists out there might want to get prepared...cause it ain't gonna be pretty.
#11
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has warned Foreign Ministry planners that they must prepare for the possibility that a U. N. Resolution declaring a Palestinian State, based on the 1967 borders, and encompassing the entirety of the West Bank, may be neither opposed nor vetoed by the Obama Administration.
#12
UN General Assembly resolutions aren't even worth a bucket of warm spittle.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/25/2010 11:54 Comments ||
Top||
#13
One big element in this election is the unemployment rate. I don't imagine that whatever the GOP might do between taking office in the next Congressional term & the next election in 2012 will have much of an effect on that key rate. They will get the blame for not improving that. The Dems can use it as an election slogan 2 years from now.
#14
If the Republicans get a clear majority in the House, by far the most important thing they can do is right at the start, with the House Rules Committee, to split the budget into manageable pieces, segregating parts to fund, from those parts to starve.
That is, when the Republicans tried to slash the budget under Clinton, because so many appropriations were lumped together, he vetoed the bills, then accused them of shutting down the government.
But if they had been able to segregate just, say, the Department of Education, and slash its funding, he could veto their bill if he liked, but Education would still be over. It wouldn't *matter* if it was shut down. The Republicans would still win. It wouldn't affect the rest of the government.
#15
All spending bills must originate in the House. I'd look for the first bill to pass to be the one for Interior(NPS). And then all the other motherhood appropriations, department by department. Then they can take on Education and Barry can't shut down the parks. If they go the omnibus route, they'll get stuffed as in the past. But if they sequence things correctly, they can prevent a shutdown and make all the sticky ones land on Barry's desk just as the 12 campaign is starting. The Senate will be the problem. If the trunks don't try it, the TEA Party will be all over them.
#17
EC #5 Yep!;
"For God's sake, the Republicans NEED to start building up a real good candidate pretty soon".
This is the observation of someone outside this circus. He or she is correct. Reminds me of the old of a dreamer who saw a head of gold, shoulders of silver, upper body of bronze, then stone or brick then finally to a base or foundation of clay. I'm certain that others can see something is missing big time.
#18
That is one of my fears with the current batch of tea party republicans coming in. If they don't act like economic conservatives, this nation will be in serious trouble by 2012, if not outright fragmenting.
On the night before we are scheduled to address this conference, the Tea Party experts are treated to a meal at the Faculty Club. It sounds fancy, and it is, with the feel and décor of a Sundance ski lodge. Over craft beers, wine, and cheese, we discuss that favorite topic of liberal academics: What the hell happened to Barack Obama? Why does the right have all the energy that he and the left used to own?
But the focus is going to be on the academics and the activists, on and off the stage. They want to know what the hell is going on. They are in Berkeley, where they are used to venerating left-wing activism and putting up sandbags against the once-a-decade conservative wave--Reagan (twice), Proposition 13 (about property taxes), Proposition 209 (about affirmative action), George W. Bush. The Tea Party, though? A bunch of people who reverse-engineer Saul Alinsky and yell "Keep the government out of Medicare" and have conservatives shouting down politicians and filling street corners?
The rest of the piece demonstrates how resolutely the left insists on thinking within the box. These people aren't progressive, they're staunchly reactionary, standing four-square against the flow of history. They're using axes and bow saws and a schematic of a Franklin stove to understand the nuclear power plant in front of them, poor dears.
It's just so easy to ridicule the left these days. As Glenn Reynolds says, they're credentialed, not competent.
From the article: "I wonder if we're likely to see a Timothy McVeigh situation," says Nicholas Robert, an attendee originally from Australia, who basically wonders if any Tea Partiers can be arrested. "It seems to be that we're being very polite. I wonder if there are any legal mechanismsone that comes to mind are the provisions used to crush the Wobblies."
Wow. Please stop calling them liberals.
Posted by: Black Charlie Chinemble5313 ||
10/25/2010 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yes indeed. They aren't liberals. They are fascists.
That's not a drive, John - that's a two-inch putt.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/25/2010 14:36 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Children and people in Berkley say the darndest things! I lived there for years, and I have a simple question for these pinheads: do you feel safe walking around the Berkley/Emeryville/Oakland "no man's land" at night?
Didn't think so. Why don't you study THAT problem and stop worrying about whether or not "you" can arrest someone in Peoria for having political views you don't like.
#10
Perlstein moves around the question. "The thing that makes America different, and this is a very dialectical, paradoxical concept, is that we have a lot of democracy," he says. "The idea that everyone has an opinion of about what they're hearing is both the glory and the tragedy of American democracy."
Oh you poor little post-modernist moth why are so drawn to your paradoxical flame? Perchance there is no tragedy in the concept of individual liberty at all. Maybe the only tragedy is when Progressive eggheads, such as yourself, contemplate replacing a "lot of democracy" with "selective democracy". In fact, that just might be the answer to your whole Tea Party conundrum - eh?
#11
But America is a Republic with a lot of selective democracy. It's VERY hard to change the constitution and that protects people against the state and thus those who benefit from a rent seeking government.
Obviously sociopaths want the state to do their bidding, so they can use other people.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
