Quite right too

A MUSLIM fanatic who torched a wreath of poppies on Armistice Day was given a police guard to protect his home, The Sun can reveal.

Taxpayers paid to cover the cost of placing two officers and a patrol car outside the house of Abu Rahin Aziz.

The zealot was part of a 40-strong mob who insulted Britain\’s war dead on November 11.

We can reveal that the car was sent to his flat in Luton, Beds, last Sunday night and stayed at least 48 hours.

Because yes, even scum get the protection of the State from the mob.

16 comments on “Quite right too

  1. Not so much protection of this scumbag, I trust, as maintenance of the Queen’s Peace (ie maintaining the state’s monopoly on the use of violence) and the rule of law.

  2. Of course he should be protected, although ideally by policeman who call Mo a pedophile.
    However I also think he should be locked up for burning poppies.

  3. I sincerely hope the swine is locked up.

    Bias or negligence by the Police is deplorable; but the principle still stands.

  4. So, burn a book, get arrested. Burn a poppy wreath at the cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday, get police protection.

    If we have to pay for protection for this c**t would it be unreasonable to ask for the law, whatever the f*ck it happens to be at any given point, to be applied regardless of whether they are part of the State’s favourite minority or not?

  5. Tim – spot on.

    G Orwell – I’m fairly sure that your namesake would happily kick the arse of anyone who suggested that poppy-burners should go to jail.

    Everyone else – we have laws against incitement to racial hatred. Perhaps we shouldn’t. Maybe ask an elderly Jew what he reckons before you come to a decision. But that’s very different from the poppy-burning thing, which is merely a bullshit childish desire to shock.

    By the way, before responding, note that more than half the people found guilty under incitement to racial hatred laws have been Muslim extremists ranting about Jews and the blood libel. The point isn’t that Muslims get special protection, it’s that the majority culture doesn’t need special protection, because it’s the majority culture.

  6. Just as I agree that he should be protected by the State, I hope that the laws of the State which he has broken or infracted are enforced rigorously as are the conditions for him to continue to receive any and all of his State benefits at their current level.

  7. “…we have laws against incitement to racial hatred. Perhaps we shouldn’t. Maybe ask an elderly Jew what he reckons before you come to a decision.”

    Bit cheeky, isn’t it, when someone with YOUR blogging history trots out that one..?

  8. “But that’s very different from the poppy-burning thing, which is merely a bullshit childish desire to shock.”

    Actually, haven’t we been told time and time and time again that an incident is considered ‘racial’ is the victim considers it to be so, rather than ant objective standard being met?

  9. The point isn’t that Muslims get special protection, it’s that the majority culture doesn’t need special protection, because it’s the majority culture

    But minority cultures don’t need special protection either.

  10. “Surely the deliberate setting of fires in the street is an offence?”

    I was thinking more along the lines of property damage but you might be on the right track, Monty, there is probably an anti-global warming law he can be charged under, and being crimes against humanity, they should carry the harshest penalty.

  11. What is wrong with action likely to cause a breach of the peace or incitement to riot? Of course one should be able to introduce a racial element.

  12. I agree that it’s right the police should protect this bastard, but this is the same police who will “investigate” you for the “crime” of saying minorities get special treatment. If everyone had been equal before the law the last few years the way we’re supposed to be, I doubt this story would be generating much outrage.

    John B,

    > Maybe ask an elderly Jew what he reckons before you come to a decision.

    What a pitiful cliche. But OK, I’ll ask my dad. Oh, turns out he’s all for freedom of speech and against hate-crime laws. Amazing.

    And let’s just remember too, shall we, that the Weimar Republic introduced hate-crime legislation, which was a huge help to the Nazis in their attempts to garner support by portraying themselves as victims. Thank you, hate-crime laws!

    > The point isn’t that Muslims get special protection, it’s that the majority culture doesn’t need special protection, because it’s the majority culture.

    No, the point is that a civilised nation should operate with the consent of the governed, and equality before the law has proven through history to be one of the key ways of ensuring that. The law shouldn’t be giving anyone special protection. It should in fact be giving everyone the same level of protection it’s giving this bastard. But it doesn’t.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.