“Lord Ahmed”, the Paki sewer rat on whom the unhinged Labour f*kcwits bestowed the title of “lord”, where is he now? Â Will he incite 10.000 Muselmanic Â headbangers to riot while Geert Wilders Â shows ‘Fitna’ in parliament?
By calling for the release of ‘Lady Al-Qaeda’, Lord Ahmed has brought the Upper House into disrepute
The popular Dutch MP Geert Wilders is in town again today. And once again the Labour peer Lord Ahmed has objected to this Dutch Parliamentarian appearing in the British Parliament.
Lord Ahmed appears to have a very warped idea of what brings the Upper House into disrepute and what does not. What does not bring the House into disrepute is the possible future Prime Minister of an allied country appearing therein.
What certainly does bring the House into disrepute is a peer using the facilities of the House to throw a meeting calling for the immediate release of the convicted al-Qaeda terrorist Aafia Siddiqui, otherwise known as ‘Lady Al-Qaeda’.
Who did this? Why Lord Ahmed of course. As reported by Associated Press Pakistan last month Lord Ahmed said : Read it all>> (rest of article beneath the fold)
Lord Ahmed jailed for sending texts while driving before fatal crash
Labour peer gets 12-week sentence for dangerous driving
â€¢ Messages to journalist not directly linked to collision on M1
The prominent Labour peer Lord Ahmed of Rotherham was jailed for 12 weeks today after admitting sending texts while driving shortly before his Jaguar ploughed into a stationary car on the M1, killing its driver.
He was sent straight to the cells from Sheffield crown court after a judge described his texting as “prolonged, deliberate, repeated and highly dangerous”, even though it was not directly linked to the accident.
Ahmed, 51, will serve half the sentence behind bars and the rest on licence. His solicitor said he would appeal against the sentence, claiming the peer was being made a “scapegoat” because of his profile.
His position in theÂ House of Lords will not be affected. Peers such as Lord Archer have served much longer terms. But Mr Justice Wilkie’s comments will add to the political damage suffered by the peer, who has been an outspoken and sometimes controversial figure since he joined the Lords in 1998 as one of its youngest members and only the second Muslim member.
Ahmed has been left shaken by the tragedy, saying recently that the death of the other driver remained “at the forefront of my mind”.
The court heard that Ahmed, a property developer and JP, sent and received five texts as he drove his wife and elderly mother down the M1 from Dewsbury to their home in Rotherham in the early evening of Christmas Day 2007. The judge said the exchanges with a journalist “amounted to a conversation” that took place as the peer travelled at an average of 60mph along nearly 18 miles of the motorway.
The last message was sent two minutes and 1.86 miles before the Jaguar smashed into an Audi that had clipped the central barrier shortly beforehand and ended up facing the wrong way in the outside lane. Its driver, Martyn Gombar, 28, a Slovakian father of two living in Manchester, who had been drinking, was trying to retrieve his own mobile phone at the time of the collision.
Ahmed, who suffered facial cuts and shock, admitted dangerous dangerous driving at Sheffield magistrates court in December. The case was sent to the crown court for sentencing because the JPs decided their own powers were inadequate in the circumstances.
Today Mr Justice Wilkie told Lord Ahmed: “Only an immediate custodial sentence can be justified. It is of the greatest importance that people realise what a serious offence dangerous driving of this type is.” He imposed a 12-month driving ban and Â£500 prosecution costs on the peer, who has not been allowed to drive since the accident.
After the hearing, Gombar’s cousin, David Cicak, said the family had hoped for a longer prison term. He said: “He could be out in six weeks, that’s nothing. Martyn left behind two small kids with only their mother.”
Chief Inspector Andy Male, head of the South Yorkshire police road team, said the peer’s sentence “reflects the seriousness with which the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service and the police view this offence”.
Lord Ahmed’s solicitor, Steve Smith, said the peer was “very philosophical and approaching it with great dignity”, but the lawyer said he himself was “extremely disappointed with the sentence … he’s been used as a scapegoat”.
In mitigation, Ahmed’s barrister, Jeremy Baker QC, said the peer had given years of service to the community and played a significant role in interfaith relations and Britain’s overseas affairs. Ahmed came to Britain as a child from Mirpur, in Pakistani Kashmir, and played a prominent part in South Yorkshire’s local politics after graduating in public administration from Sheffield Hallam University. He has three children and two grandchildren and lives in Rotherham and east London.
He has been a frequent critic of Muslim extremism and played a part in the release of the teacher Gillian Gibbons who was jailed in the Sudan in November 2007 for naming a school teddy bear Mohammed. He fiercely condemned the award of a knighthood to Sir Salman Rushdie and was much criticised when he hosted a reception at the House of Lords for the anti-Semitic writer Israel Shamir, who used the occasion to accuse Jews of wanting to set up a world empire.
“Lord” Ahmed, the sewer rat, continued:
He would be writing a letter to the US President Barack Obama carrying signatures of other British MPs calling for Dr.Siddiqui’s repatriation to Pakistan and withdrawal of case [sic].
The Labour Peer further said he would also raise this question in the Parliament to ascertain how the British Government could help in this regard.
According to Lord Nazir, the conviction of Dr.Siddiqui has been received with great dismay in Pakistan which would further fuel anti-American feeling in the south Asian country.
“If US wants to create a good impression of itself in Pakistan, it should release Dr.Siddiqui and send her back to Pakistan,” he asserted.
He said no credible independent evidence was presented at the New York court and in the words of defence lawyers the decision of the jury was based on fear rather than facts.
Lord Ahmed may have his own reasons for disliking courts. But to use the House of Lords in this way strikes me, at any rate, as another reason why Lord Ahmed remains â€“ amid some fairly stiff competition â€“ the most persuasive single argument for reform of the Upper House.