The usual suspects attack Muslims

Trevor Kavanagh's latest blather in The Sun doesn't really read much different to the latest from Littlejohn. Or Gaunt. Or Melanie Phillips. Typical 'them-and-us', label all Muslims in Britain the same as the dozen Luton protestors, they're all up to no good aren't they, nudge nudge, wink wink.

Littlejohn's column had the headline: 'Put these Toytown Talibandits on the first flight home', which I guess means an Easyjet ride from Luton to Newcastle. He accuses one of the demonstrators, Jalal Ahmed, of plotting to blow up airplanes because he's a Luton airport baggage handler and suggests he should be sent to Guantanamo Bay ('the kind of 'supervised environment' most of us would like to see him in....would involve orange jumpsuits, armed guards, razor-wire and large dogs.')

He also points out 'the July 7 gang, who coincidentally boarded a train at Luton', just in case you hadn't worked out they were definitely all scheming terrorists, rather than anti-war protestors.

And he voices support for the parading troops to have killed them where they protested in Luton:

'The Royal Anglians would have been forgiven had they fixed bayonets and charged.'

As always with Littlejohn, he chucks in a bit of 'PC gone mad' for good measure, having a go at the police for arresting to white anti-protestor protestors but none of the Muslims. What he doesn't seem to grasp (or does, but chooses to ignore becasue it doesn't fit his agenda) is that however distasteful, the Muslim demonstrators had slogans such as 'Anglian soldiers: Butchers of Basra', 'Criminals murders and terrorists', 'British goverment, terrorist government' which, while inflammatory, are not illegal.

Says the BBC:

Bedfordshire Police said an 18-year-old man from Luton had been charged with racially aggravated harassment in connection with clashes during the parade and will appear before Luton Magistrates' Court next week. A second man, aged in his 40s, was issued with a Fixed Penalty Notice.

Does Littlejohn condemn the 'racially aggravated harrassment'? Of course not. They were just 'provoked beyond outrage'. So that's OK then.

Indeed, this:

'prove[s] the police's even-handedness. Another diversity box ticked for the annual report'.

How nice it must be to see the world in such a simplistic way.

Kavanagh's main point seems to be that while thousands turned out in mass rally's following the latest killings in Ireland, he doesn't think Muslims will turn out in the same way after the 'next Islamist outrage.' Ignoring the presumptiousness of that, he goes on:

'Yet, if they fail to join other British citizens in publicly expressing disgust, they risk being seen as silent sympathisers'.

Quite apart from the fact the two situations are in no way comparable and someone with even the slightest grasp of history would know that, his memory is short. There was plenty of condemnation of the 7/7 bombings from the Muslim community - even if he doesn't want to do proper journalistsic research, a quick Google would prove it.

Within a few minutes, it's easy to find Manchester's Muslim mayor leading a peace rally, this picture from the Trafalgar Square vigil and condemnations from the Islamic Human Rights Commission and the Muslim Council of Britain. So what is Kavanagh trying to prove? I think we all know. And he has a pop at Binyam Mohamed too, claiming he's lying about being tortured (evidence: he's a Muslim). 'Our boys' in the British Secret Service would never lie, he says, seemingly misunderstanding what spies actually do...

The Mail moved the Luton story on with its Fury as Islamic extremist who abused British troops is given 24-hour police protection, which reveals that protestor Yousaf Bashir was getting police protection after: Two downstairs windows and the glass in the front door were smashed, and the rear windows of two cars parked in the driveway were shattered. The Mail and its readers have no sympathy with a man having his home attacked - you can read a great dissection of the story at Angry Mob.