Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Thursday 14 March 2013

British Muslim Peer Allegedly Blames A Jewish Conspiracy

It's reported in the Times and Daily Telegraph (and now elsewhere) that, in an Urdu-language broadcast in his native Pakistan, British Muslim life peer Lord Ahmed has blamed his 12-week prison sentence (he was freed after serving 16 days) in 2008 for a fatal driving offence in 2007 on da Joos:
“My case became more critical because I went to Gaza to support Palestinians. My Jewish friends who own newspapers and TV channels opposed this.”
As a result of this alleged statement he's been suspended from the Labour Party:
"The Labour Party deplores and does not tolerate any sort of racism or anti-Semitism...we are suspending Lord Ahmed pending an investigation." 
Read the Telegraph report here


  1. I have seen a picture of this creep and read about his antics - and this guy is a "peer"? In "the House of Lords"?? Wasn't there a time when the English had a little more class? (Although, the way they behaved towards the Jewish people after WWII makes me wonder when that (the having a little more class) might have been.

  2. Well, well, well!

  3. Ahmed was a PC appointment by the Labour party, and he is what you get when you lower the bar as low as it can go.

    He was driving from Dewsbury in West Yorkshire to his home in Rotherham South Yorkshire via the M1 motorway on Christmas day 2007 in his Jaguar.

    His car ran into another that had previously been in an accident killing the other driver. When his mobile phone was forensically examined it was found that he had been making calls and sending texts all of this 60 min's journey.

    He was lucky that he was only charged with careless driving and not causing death by dangerous driving, a charge with a much greater prison sentence. I understand the other driver is still dead.

    Ahmed has form, he threatened a 100,000 MAN( no ladies ) march on the house of lords if they dare show the film Fitna, and performed when Salman Rushdie was knighted.

    It makes you wonder what else is said about the Jews when he thinks he is out of earshot in Pakistan or his local mosque.

  4. But the court noted that he had last texted 2 minutes before the crash, and they could find no causal between the texting and the crash. If they had, he's have been charged with causing death by dangerous driving. Which carries penalties measured in years.

    In other words, they know he did it, but the evidence wasn't there. And if we are to have the rule of law, the evidence must rule.

    What's really wrong in this story is the tale he told on Pakistani television as to how is all the Jews fault. The story was broken by The Times of London, which has an honourable record in fighting antisemitism. It's their article which are heavily quoted on engage and linked to elsewhere.

    This story can also be followed (with comments) on;; anne's opinions at among others

    1. The M1 in south yorkshire where the collision took place is long and straight. The prosecution could prove the phone had been used for the full 60 minutes of the journey. What it couldn't do was prove that he was actually sending a text at the point of impact, but I bet he was in the process of composing a text and his eyes were on the phone and not the road. Why else would he ram into a stationary car on such a road.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.