Daily Mail Article on Luton anti-Muslim Violence

The Daily Mail has a background piece on last week’s debacle in Luton, during which a large number of yobs (some in gimp-like black balaclavas) supposedly showed their objections to Islamic extremism by rampaging through the town, attacking Asian-owned businesses, assaulting an Asian man, and informing the police that they are “fucking left-wing fucking cunts”.

The Mail takes a sceptical look at Dave Smeeton, the leader of March for England. MfE, which I blogged here, did not organise this particular event, but Smeeton did play a role in an unofficial capacity:

‘I was very disappointed about what happened,’ Smeeton claimed. ‘Our members were not involved in the trouble. That sort of thing couldn’t have been further from our minds.’

It would be easier to believe Dave Smeeton if it were not for his unsavoury past.

It is encapsulated in a spoof advert for Dr Martens on his Facebook page, in which three skinheads are kicking a man on the floor in the head. The caption reads: ‘Kicking the f*** out of you since 1960.’

Smeeton has added, for good measure: ‘Those were the days.’ He is, after all, a former skinhead himself. He used to belong to the ‘6.57 Crew’, one of the country’s most notorious gangs of football hooligans.

I pointed this out a few weeks ago here and here; Smeeton has left a number of comments disassociating himself from violence and claiming that to draw a negative inference from his choice of Facebook images is unwarranted. He also (genuinely, in my opinion) says he is against racism. The Mail also repeats a claim that elements of the “6.57 Crew” have had links with the violently neo-Nazi Combat 18, although there is no suggestion that Smeeton would approve of such a thing.

A couple of other characters also make an appearance in the story:

Guess which organisation Paul Ray belongs to? Yes, that’s right, March for England. He took part in Sunday’s demonstration, but says he was not involved in any of the trouble. Ray calls Smeeton a ‘very good friend.’

Another link between the men is Glen Jenvey, accused by several newspapers of fabricating stories about Islamic extremism. Jenvey has eight ‘friends’ on his Facebook site; two of them are Ray and Smeeton.

Paul Ray, of course, is the local anti-Muslim blogger “Lionheart” – I’ve blogged on him several times. In days leading up to the “protest”, Ray tried to whip up support with a bogus claim that “coachloads” of Muslims were coming into the area to oppose the event. On his blog, Ray is currently defending the protestors’ behaviour (although not the assault), and he claims that a particular Asian business was attacked because of an illegal activity he alleges it is involved in. Ray, who has made statements offering qualified support for the BNP, achieved fame for a short time last year when right-wing “anti-Jihadists” in the USA decided that a police investigation into whether Ray was stirring up racial hatred meant that he was was “free speech martyr”; however, when his pro-BNP views were noticed he was quickly dropped. This led to a feud between Ray and Little Green Footballs, with Ray describing Charles Johnson as “the equivalent of a Second World War Nazi collaborator who would have been shot because of his treason”.

The Mail adds that the Luton mosque which was recently firebombed had received a threatening letter before the arson signed by “Reynold de Chatillon”; because Ray like to identify with Christian Crusaders, he claims that “The Muslims must be trying to pin the firebombing on me”.

And as for Glen Jenvey: it’s a long story, but the guts of it are here. In fact, there is overwhelming circumstantial evidence that Jenvey (a pundit on the controversial Obsession DVD) has indeed fabricated stories which he then sold to newspapers, as has been investigated extensively by Tim Ireland (with a bit of assistance from  me). Alas, though, rather fewer than “several newspapers” have so far taken up the investigation; all we’ve had are two short pieces, one in the media section of  the Guardian and the other in Private Eye. Ray denounced the evidence against Jenvey as “propaganda”, although he’s been silent on the subject more recently. Of course, there is no reason to suppose that just because he’s a Facebook contact of Smeeton that Smeeton knows much about him; Jenvey may have few Facebook links, but Smeeton has many more. Some clarification would be nice, though.

And also alas – the Daily Mail continues to use the wrong picture to illustrate the extremist Muslims who gave Ray just want he wanted (just as he has now returned the favour).

Incidentally, last month Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs praised an earlier anti-Muslim protest in Luton of the same sort as a “Pushback against Muslim Extremists in the UK”; this led to a spat with LGF. Geller has not made any comment on last weekend’s violence. She did, however, recently opine that the Mail (a conservative paper) is the “DHIMMI PRESS IN BED WITH THE ISLAMIC SUPREMACISTS”.

(Hat tip: Bloggerheads)

Christian Right Party Plays on BNP Fear

Pentecostal minister George Hargreaves has posters in South London explaining why voters should choose him on 4 June:

christianpartyjpg

MediaWatchWatch has some fun with the dodgy sentence structure (I suggest an en rule after “BNP); Harry’s Place scoffs at the claim, and notes Hargreaves’ Christian Right agenda – I blogged his anti-gay views here. He also once famously declared that environmental protections against overfishing should be scrapped because there is “a supernatural element in the restoration of fish to our seas”.

Back in the 1980s, before his Pentecostal days, Hargreaves wrote campy songs for a singer called Sinitta. Here are his most famous opuses:

Conspiracy Theories Mocked on WND

A t WorldNetDaily, a conservative US Radio host (Rusty Humphries) on the receiving end of an Islamist death threat mocks the reasoning abilities of Muslim fanatics:

He…told WND the threat highlights the Islamic fundamentalist penchant for promoting the idea of grand conspiracies.

“Everything is a huge conspiracy to the terrorists,” said Humphries. “On my many travels to the Mideast, I’ve been told by Muslims it was the Jews who sent Monica Lewinsky to Bill Clinton so the Jews could rule the U.S. The terrorists believe the West is plotting the extermination of Islam.”

Here are two books that WND is currently heavily promoting:

WND Conspiracy Theory

The former book, WND tells us, is the “incredible but true publication how the secret societies direct the courses of civilization and affect your life”, while in the latter,

Hundreds of pages, photographs and footnotes document the convergence of multinational corporations, foundations and political and social instruments to assemble a one-world government and the “New World Order.”

And let’s not get started on some of the many conspiracy theories that WND has promoted: as well as regular NWO “militia media” paranoia, particularly risible classics include one article that begins by asking “Could the Roman Catholic Church’s sex abuse crisis be tied to embedded Satanic and occultic imagery in its artwork – some of it hundreds of years old?”, and another which promotes the idea that a race of giants created the Pyramids.

French Government Consulted Biblical Studies Prof. Over Bush’s Views on “Gog and Magog”

In September 2007, a magazine published by the University of Lausanne (UNIL), Allez Savoir, ran an article by Jocelyn Rochat entitled “George W. Bush et le Code Ezéchiel”. It can be seen here; it begins:

Quand il évoque la situation politique au Proche-Orient, le président des Etats-Unis voit Gog et Magog à l’oeuvre. Deux créatures qui apparaissent dans une vision apocalyptique de l’Ancien Testament! Les explications de Thomas Römer, un expert de l’UNIL qui a été contacté par l’Elysée en 2003, quand Jacques Chirac cherchait à élucider les références troublantes de George W. Bush.

The story explains how Thomas Römer, a Biblical scholar at the university (and now at the Collège de France), had been contacted by the Elysée in 2003 to explain the significance of “Gog and Magog”, two Biblical names that had been mentioned by George Bush in conversation with Jacques Chirac during Bush’s efforts to persuade France to support the Iraq war. The book of Ezekiel uses these names to signify Israel’s enemies in an apocalyptic battle. A journalist for La Liberté wrote a short piece based on the article; this was translated into English and posted to a few fringe websites, but didn’t receive a great deal of attention. Now, however, the story has come to fresh attention with the publication of a new book, written by Jean-Claude Maurice and entitled Si vous le répétez, je démentirai…: Chirac, Sarkozy, Villepin. An extract can be seen here:

George Bush Jr. a utilisé un argument singulier, affirmant que… «Gog et Magog sont à l’oeuvre au Proche-Orient» et que «les prophéties bibliques sont sur le point de s’accomplir»

Apparently, Chirac was “stupéfait”, and the author claims that the enquiry was made to Lausanne, in Switzerland, to prevent any leak. According to an article about the story on Counterpunch, Chirac “wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs”. Counterpunch  adds that Bush is also reported to have said

 This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.

However, that line does not appear in the extract; it would have been nice to have had a specific page number for something so dramatic.

GQ recently ran a story showing that Bush had at one stage been provided with briefing papers on Iraq containing Biblical verses (general exhortations rather than prophecies); conversely, however, a new book by John Mickelthwait and Adrian Wooldridge entitled God Is Back includes the claim that in 2000 Bush characterised Christian conservatives “those whackos”, when asked whether his promotion of free trade with China might cost him the religious vote. It’s not necessarily a contradiction – he may have meant arch-conservatives who were likely to vote third-party, and he may not consider relating Biblical prophecy to current events as belonging to  the “whacko” category.

Ronald Reagan is famously said to have seen conflict with the USSR in Biblical and apocalyptic terms, based mainly on a reported private remark made in 1971. However, it seems that this was more of a “pop belief” than a serious theological conviction; during his terms of office he rejected the idea of an inevitable nuclear holocaust, despite the popularity of such a belief among American Christian premillennialists.

saddam-antichrist1

Luton Violence Update

Two blogs have further eyewitness accounts – including some corrective material – about Sunday’s events in Luton. They are Three Counties Unity and Reconciliationtalk.

Meanwhile, the Daily Mail continues to use the wrong photo to illustrate the March Islamist anti-military protest; several people have suggested to me that the photo in fact shows a birthday parade for Muhammad. I emailed the site yesterday about this mistake, and one of my readers sent in a message as well. Presumably with Monday being a Bank Holiday the Mail didn’t have anyone to hand who could  fix an error that is currently libelling a couple of dozen people and stoking anti-Muslim sentiment – the picture has now been reproduced on a couple of extreme anti-Islam sites. However, it is now after 9.00am on a working day, so even that lame excuse can no longer be used.

Daily Mail Uses Wrong Photo to Illustrate Islamist Luton Protest

In my previous blog entry I quoted the Daily Mail, but I didn’t scroll down to the end of the page. Consequently, I missed this:

Daily Mail Muslims

The caption says “Catalyst: Anti-war Islamists protested during an Army march in Luton earlier this year – partly sparking yesterday’s response”.

However, the “anti-war Islamists” who provoked outrage in March looked like this:

Anglian Protest

Footage of that protest shows no more than ten or so protestors, all young adults dressed in dark clothing.

Unfortunately, I do not read Arabic, so I don’t know why the marchers in the first picture have taken to the streets. However, it is clearly a completely different event from the anti-Anglian protest, and it shows none of the aggravating factors which caused such anger and offence in March. Whatever its purpose, the event in the Mail‘s photo was not the “catalyst” for yesterday’s mayhem.

Violence at “Anti-Extremist” Rally in Luton

More strife in Luton; the Times reports:

Nine people were arrested yesterday after trouble flared during a protest march against supposed Muslim extremists.

…Yesterday there were about 500 protesters, some carrying banners with slogans such as “No Sharia Law in the UK” and “Respect our Troops”. Several cars were damaged after a small group split off from the march. An Asian-owned business had its windows smashed.

The Sun adds:

Banner-waving drunks, some disguised under balaclavas, trapped terrified Asian staff inside a restaurant.

While the Daily Mail tells us that:

There were reports of violence, with onlookers claiming that an Asian man was hit across the face with a banner and left with a bloody nose.

Apparently the trouble flaired up when the protestors left the march route. The reports also tell us that March for England (a group which I blogged  on here and here) had pulled out from the event, and that  United People of Luton was the organiser.

This will of course  serve the purposes of hate-mongers on both sides in Luton: namely, the handful of Islamist extremists who protested a military parade in March, and Paul Ray, the local anti-Muslim blogger known as “Lionheart”. Ray, who rants on American Christian radio about “Paki Muslims” and who opines that “you should not judge [the BNP,] who God is doing a work with and through”, makes no distinction between ordinary Muslims and extremists, and he has been quick to capitalise on the Islamist provocation. In a video advertising the 24 May event, Ray warned that (see here, at 3.00):

The rumour is that coach loads of Moslems are travelling down from Bradford to counter this peaceful legal demonstration

We all know what happened in Bradford in 2001

The video was made in the name of “United People of Luton”, but it is unclear what role he plays in the group, if any [UPDATE: His blog now carries details of a speech “that was to be presented by UPL’s guest speaker at the end of yesterdays planned protest before it turned into the debacle which it did”. This is not published elsewhere, so it must mean that Ray is close to the group’s organisers, and is perhaps one of them himself].

There is no evidence that any Muslims came into the area from outside, although one Muslim website tells us that

a few hundred brothers gathered to defend their families,homes and community against these racists and marched together only to be stopped by riot police when they prepared to confront the racist thugs.

The majority of Muslims  in Luton have repudiated the extremists who protested the soldiers, and according to one tabloid story the extremists’ ringleader, Sayful Islam, was recently assaulted by Muslims upset over the trouble he’s caused.

A local mosque was firebombed earlier this month; although the police don’t appear to have made much headway, they have said they don’t think far-right extremists were the culprits. Local Christian and Muslim groups have been working together to try to defuse the situation.

Yesterday’s disorder  in Luton follows a protest held in April, which enjoyed sympathetic coverage from some “anti-jihadists” in the USA, particularly Pamela Geller. I blogged on this here.

Ray has now posted a blog entry on the subject, including links to a series of videos (these can be seen here). He tells us that:

I was there yesterday and March for England did not participate in the days event because “this is not what they are about”.

They offered to assit and support, aslong as it was an orderly protest, but as soon as it turned into chaos they walked away.

A report in Luton Today from a couple of days ago added:

And Luton Borough Council, which had initially given permission for the event to go ahead, yesterday said the event did not have an official go-ahead because the original organisers, March for England, had pulled out.

…Mikey Birch, 22, now in charge of the event, said: “We want to warn any right-wing organisations they won’t be welcome at the march. They won’t be allowed to come in with us.

“Anyone wearing bomber jackets or skinheads will be turned away. They’re not part of Luton and we don’t want them to turn up thinking they can take part. If you’re a racist, don’t turn up.

Judging from the footage posted on-line, it seems that, as before, the protestors were mainly drawn from football supporters’ clubs. The videos include scenes of the police being goaded in the most vulgar way;  in video 2 at 00.47 one person waves a plank of wood around [UPDATE: Actually, on closer inspection I think it’s just the base of a placard]  from a safe distance while calling out to the police his opinion that they are “fucking left-wing fucking cunts”.

UPDATE: Paul Ray tells a commentator:

No one thinks that removing the militant wing of Islam from our land is going to be easy, and if the government will not do it then the people will, and they will quite obviously be wearing balaclavas to do that, because the government will come down on them for defending their community.

The people of the British isles cannot win!!!

So decide where you stand and who you stand with.

Bring out the gimps!

Bring out the gimps

Free Speech Withers: Libel Threat Against ISP Used to Pull Tory MP’s Blog

Tory MP Nadine Dorries is currently in the news due to comments on her blog complaining that MPs were the victims of a “McCarthyite witchhunt” over their expenses: an opinion which has embarrassed David Cameron. She has also attacked the motives of the Telegraph‘s owners, David and Frederick and Barclay, despite the fact that the Barclays (invariably described by Private Eye as the “weirdo Barclay twins”) are notoriously aggressive in using libel law to protect their reputations, and true to form, Dorries’ blog has now been removed. The Guardian reports:

Nadine Dorries, the Conservative frontbencher who claimed the Daily Telegraph’s revelations on expenses could drive MPs to suicide, has had her blog shut down by lawyers acting for the newspaper…The newspaper is understood to have acted after she made further allegations concerning the motivation of the newspaper’s proprietors, Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay. Withers, the lawyers acting for the Barclay brothers, are understood to have instructed the takedown, invoking the acceptable user policy used by internet service providers to protect themselves against libel action provoked by comments on websites they host.

Tory blogger Iain Dale is on the case:

Can it really now be illegal or libellous to question a newspaper’s agenda and motives, or those of its owners? Is it really illegal to accuse someone of a witchhunt? I don’t happen to think that the Telegraph is undertaking a witchhunt, but I can quite see why some MPs do. Those who believe Nadine’s main accusation, which is that the Telegraph has an agenda to boost UKIP and the BNP, may, at first sight, have their views reinforced by this morning’s edition which has a lengthy profile of UKIP leader Nigel Farage. Reading it, however, it’s not quite the paen of praise it might first appear.

Internet Service Providers needs to develop some cojones in the face of legal threats from big companies. If this had been an American ISP they would have probably laughed at the letter sent by the Telegraph.

Alas, this is an obtuse reaction: an accusation that the Telegraph‘s owners want to boost UKIP merely imputes political bias, but to suggest support for the rascist BNP is in a different order. And if American ISPs are more robust, it’s because American libel law allows them to be so, not because they have more “cojones”.

Despite this, though, I do agree that the forced removal of Dorries blog is unacceptable, and Telegraph-hosted bloggers ought to feel embarrassed at having the paper’s masthead on their sites. If someone has just cause to complain they have been libelled, they should see the author in court, not threaten the ISP to have critical material removed.

Further, it seems to me that we need a “public figure” provision in British libel law, along American lines. If someone thrusts themselves into a public controversy, it should be allowable to discuss their backgrounds and to speculate on their possible motives freely, short of “actual malice”. Dorries did not suggest she has any real evidence of a BNP link, which could be disputed in a court – she was simply sounding off about the facts in the public domain about a matter of public interest, and any reasonable reader can judge for themselves whether her analysis deserves to be taken seriously. It’s annoying when reprehensible motives are unfairly imputed to a person’s writings or actions (in particular, the charge of “racism” is bandied about on-line immoderately), but the bar for a libel action should be considerably higher than this.

Incidentally, if Dale really wants to protect free speech, he could have a word with some of his Tory libertarian friends – often they are most enthusiastic users of libel law to suppress public discussion.

(Hat tip: Harry’s Place)

WorldNetDaily Describes Kahanist As “Self-Defense” Teacher

Here’s one I missed from a couple of weeks ago – a report for WorldNetDaily by Aaron Klein (who currently glowers strangely at readers from a advert for his new book) attacking Jacqui Smith tags a paragraph on the end about Mike Guzofsky, the far-right Israeli activist ncluded on Smith’s exclusion list:

Making the list was well is Mike Guzofsky, a leader of the ultra-nationalist Kahane movement, which seeks to ensure that Israel retains biblically-rich territories, such as the West Bank and Jerusalem. A BBC profile falsely claims Guzofsky is “actively involved with military training camps.” The only camps Guzofsky currently runs are to train dogs to protect Jewish communities in the West Bank. Dogs trained at Guzofky’s northern West Bank kennels recently prevented several terrorist attacks. Guzofsky previously was involved in leading workshops to teach self-defense to Jews. He has also pushed for Jews in the West Bank to cede from Israel and create their own state in the event the Israeli government seeks to evacuate that territory in a deal with the Palestinians.

As Terry Krepel noticed recently, a WND story by another author which referred in passing to Guzofsky as an “extremist” (a description lifted from other reports) was quickly amended to “nationalist”. I’ve chronicled Klein’s support for Guzofsky since 2006; usually Klein refers to him by his Israeli name of Yekutel Ben Yaacov, which obscures his Kahanist background. Klein doesn’t tell his readers that Kahanists want to see Palestinians expelled, and that Guzofsky has some sanguinary views which have been documented by the ADL. Early in in 1994 Guzofsky suggested that  Yitzhak Rabin was a traitor and suggested that violence might be needed to get rid of him; he has also opined that the mass murderer Baruch Goldstein had acted out of “love”, and he gave implicit support for bombs targeting progressive Jewish groups in the USA. If a Palestinian radical had made similar comments there would be an outcry against such barbarism; yet WND is more than happy for the Israeli far-right to declare war on civil society in the USA and in Israel.

WND‘s target audience, of course, consists of right-wing Christian Zionists; many adherents of this doctrine love to wrap themselves in the Israeli flag and to identify vicariously with God’s Chosen People at war against the Muslims, but there is less willingness to engage with the socio-political complexities of life in Israel. Instead, they end up giving support to extremist fringe groups who hate Israeli modernity but who promise to create the revived Biblical Israel of Christian Zionist fantasy. Klein’s whitewash is not the only example of this; Hal Lindsey, for instance, has used WND to promote the far-right and theocratic self-styled “Sanhedrin”.

Meanwhile, Max Blumenthal has just posted two parts of a video he made while in the West Bank; they include details of settler violence.

Rick Warren-linked Ugandan Pastor Interrogated over “Sodomy” Allegations Against Rival Pastor

Ssempa on Kayanja: “I have no problem with Kayanja. He has never sodomised me.”

The current anti-gay obsession in Uganda appears to be taking on the characteristics of  a seventeenth-century witch hysteria; Box Turtle Bulletin has a useful round-up:

This latest campaign began nearly two and a half months ago when three American anti-gay activists spoke at a conference in Kampala organized by Pastor Stephen Langa’s Family Life Network. That conference featured Exodus board president Don Schmierer, Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, and purported raiser-of-the-dead and Richard Cohen protegé Caleb Lee Brundidge.

The March 3-5 conference called for Uganda’s laws against homosexuality — which currently call for a life sentence — to be “strengthened” with an option to force those convicted into ex-gay therapy. Exodus International “applauded” Schmierer’s role at the conference, but Exodus President Alan Chambers later tried to wash his hands of responsibility for it as the repercussions of the conference unfolded.

These repurcussions have included a campaign of “outings” by a local newspaper, and there are claims that now even non-gay men are being imprisoned on suspicion. Lively is described as a “Holocaust revisionist” due to his book The Pink Swastika, which claims that homosexuals were perpretators of the Holocaust, not its victims.

Futher, a number of high-profile pastors are now accusing each other.  Recently, a “saved ex-gay” named George Oundo appeared at a press conference organised by Langa:

Oundo named a popular Catholic priest, Fr. Anthony Musaala, as a homosexual. Musaala, whose Charismatic Renewal Movement has a huge youth following, just happens to be a longtime rival of Ssempa.

Other pastors are jumping onto the “outing” bandwagon to settle scores as well, and the rivalries are so complex that it takes some diagramming to keep it all straight. Here goes: Pastor Solomon Male of Arise for Christ Ministry accused Pastor Robert Kayanja of the Rubaga Miracle Center Cathedral of being a homosexual, along with “a group of other pastors.” Kayanja’s Rubaga Miracle Center is a very large and prosperous megachurch in Kampala…

Kayanja’s personal aide, Chris Muwonge, was allegedly kidnapped and tortured by armed men and held for five days. His captors allegedly wanted him to make a video statement accusing Kayanja of molesting young boys. Kayanja accused his rival, Pastor Michael Kyazze of the Omega Healing Center of being behind the plot. Kyazze’s assistant, Pastor Robert Kayiira was arrested earlier for trying to sneak a laptop computer into Kayanja’s Miracle Center. His close friend? Pastor Solomon Male. Kayanja reportedly believes that Martin Ssempa is involved in the allegations against him as well.

I blogged on Kayanja here; he has long-standing links with Benny Hinn. Pastor Martin Ssempa held a high-profile anti-gay rally in 2007, and he works closely with Rick Warren; Warren’s wife has gushed over him as her “brother”. Oundo was apparently “saved” at Ssempa’s church.

Six statements against Kayanja have now been retracted, and police have dropped their investigation, calling the claims “unbelievable”. Instead, the rival pastors are being themselves investigated for allegedly setting him up; the New Vision reported on this on Monday, including a quote from Ssempa:

Ssempa said for years he had assisted victims of homosexuality, a job he described as tough. “I pray that the country will not forget the boys. There should be justice for boys who have been abused sexually just like for girls,” he stated.

“I have no problem with Kayanja. He has never sodomised me,” Ssempa said. “It is the children who came to us and confessed. It is those who are seeking justice.”

Ssempa said he was concerned that some people in Kayanja’s church were highly-placed in the Police force. “But we have faith in democracy and justice,” he added.

The police have now warned the pastors under investigation not to make any further public comments on the matter, and in a new twist one alleged victim who retracted his is now saying he only did so under duress. Bizarrely, he is also complaining that a certain woman is falsely claiming to be his mother.

Kayanja enjoys the support of Uganda’s risible Minister for Ethics and Integrity, Dr. James Nsaba Buturo; a few days ago it was reported that he

has warned pastor Solomon Male of Arising for Christ ministries on false allegations the pastor is making on fellow pastors causing divisionism among Ugandans.

Dr. Buturo says that Male over the years has been pointing fingers at fellow pastors accusing them even when he had no facts. The minister says that an example is the recent incident where Male accused Pastor Robert Kayanja of sodomy. Buturo says this did not only tarnish the name on Kayanja but also the whole country.

A letter to a newspaper in response to this expresses some scepticism:

I would like to challenge Nsaba Buturo as to why he comes out only when allegations are made against Pastor Kayanja. Similar allegations have been made against many men of God before but he did not comment. The most recent example is that of Catholic Priest, Fr. Anthony Musaala against whom similar allegations were made by a former homosexual who is now an associate of Pastor Male.

Is Pastor Male trying to use sodomy as a tool against his colleagues in order to pull them down? And why is Nsaba Buturo only defending Pastor Kayanja? Is it because he goes to the Pentecostal churches and not the Catholic churches? Why the double standards?

Just yesterday, the South Africa Times ran a piece lamenting the extravagence and corruption of Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni (another close associate of Rick Warren). Doubtless he’s quite content to have his people fretting over gays under the bed rather than subjecting him to critical scrutiny.