In the wake of the London bombings, Sheik Omar Bakri Mohammed is getting some press again. Bakri is the 47 year old Syrian born cleric living in London described in a recent NYT article (free reg. req. blah, blah) as “a political refugee who was given asylum 19 years ago and is supported by public assistance. Asked in an interview in May how he felt about being barred from obtaining British citizenship, he replied, “I don’t want to become a citizen of hell.” According to wikipedia, it is generally thought that Bakri has been working to revive the global Islamic state through global jihad and that he supports various jihadist organisations. The British, world renowned for their liberal policies and refusal to (at least not swiftly) extradite foreign nationals have ended up in the uncomfortable position of protecting Bakri while he plots their downfall. The Sheik is allegedly a spokesman for Al Quaeda and Osama himself.In a very interesting interview with Shiek Omar by Christianity Today he paints a picture of the 9/11 attack as ‘retaliation’ for what amounted to a US invasion of the middle east after WWII (replacing the english and the french occupiers) which may not sit well with many who have bought into the Bush administration’s line that 9/11 was an unprovoked attack on the order of Pearl Harbor.

I always have a tough time trying to figure out why I hate these guys so much when they are so much like our own national heros. We’re the British and we’ve landed in North America to subdue a continent with the most powerful fighting force in the world. These guys are the Americans, the rebels - fighting a cowardly war of sneak attacks from behind bushes, not standing in rows like men in red coats to be shot at.

They want us to leave, as the Shiek says: “Peace could come if America withdrew its forces from the Muslim world, stopped exploiting Muslim resources such as oil, have decent relationships with Muslims, and stopped supporting the Zionist aggressors and Muslim puppet governments. In other words, “Hands off Muslim lands!” Muslims did not attack the USA—the reverse is true. 9/11 was an act of retaliation. As Bin Laden said, peace will come when the U.S. withdraws from the Muslim world”

But then I think back to right after 9/11 and I watched that interview with the Taliban they replayed. There was that ass who blew up the ancient Buddhist rock carvings several months before trying to explain to the interviewer why they use the sports stadium the US had built there in Afghanistan to do pubic executions instead of sporting events. The analogy to our own American revolution is not valid. The Americans were Englishmen who wanted to be treated as equals with their brethren. The Americans were literate and learned (more so than the Brits at the time), but were second class citizens. The Islamic revolution is not about equal rights, its about exploitation. What a sad state of affairs when what was once the greatest, most scientifically forward thinking nation on the face of the planet, is reduced to being led around by a bunch of priests in robes, citing 1300 year old law that is no longer relevant at all in today’s global economy.

Unfortunately, some of what the Shiek says is true. We have allowed our leaders to con us into believing that Iraq was somehow connected to 9/11 and we have created a new Afghanistan for the murderous thugs to roost in. We have supported corrupt monarchies in the middle east when we could have supported democracy. Now we claim to support democracy while we occupy a nation. We’re almost as hypocritical as they are!

Right now though I’ll bet there’s a lot of Brits thinking about removing one man in robes from the dole.