Daily Mail article removed

As most visitors to this blog will be aware, there was a Daily Mail article published in Saturday May 30th newspaper featuring a picture of me with wording that suggested that I was to blame for the firebombing of the Islamic Centre in Bury Park Luton. This allegation was based upon crests and shields on my blog, and letters the Islamic centre supposedly received before the attack.

I wrote this post late last night (Luton moderates), and first thing this morning the Daily Mail article had been removed from the internet.

I wonder what I said for the Daily Mail to decide to remove their article?

Here is the wording of the article regarding myself:

Shortly before the Islamic Centre, which houses a mosque and school, was set alight, staff received a string of threatening anonymous letters. One warned: 'We know who you are ... we have plenty of pictures of you ... we are watching you ... we will certainly have you for what you did this week' [a reference to the homecoming parade].

A second was littered with references to the crusades, including the name of Reynold de Chatillon, whose brutality towards Muslims in the holy land was infamous.

'Saladdin once preached Jihad against the Christian kingdom, so now we preach our Jihad against Islam!!', ranted the letter, which described Muslims as 'parasites' and 'Allah's vomit'.

A similar coat of arms and Crusader imagery is featured in a notorious anti-Islamic website penned by someone calling himself Lionheart.

Lionheart, we discovered, is Paul Ray, 32. Ray used to run a computer repair shop in nearby Dunstable, but is now unemployed. Last year, he was arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred and is still on bail. Asked if he sent the poisonous letter to the Islamic Centre weeks before it was torched, Ray replied: This is the first I've heard about the letter. The Muslims must be trying to pin the firebombing on me.'

When Tim Stewart, the Daily Mail journalist, spoke to me on the phone about these letters and the link between the shields and crests on them and those on this blog, I said to him that if the Islamic centre had been sent the letters, and there was a direct link to my blog, then why have the police not pulled me in for questioning over it? To this he replied that he didnt know whether they had given the letters to the police or not.

What would be the first thing you gave to the police after this type of attack?

Considering the Daily Mail have printed my name over such a very serious crime, subtly linking me to the attack on a religious building based upon some supposed letters that they dont even know exist, or whether the the police have them or not, isnt it only fair that the authenticity of the letters in question was validated before printing the story, linking me to it, and then allowing millions of people to read it?

It is not very nice, is very dangerous for me, and is extremly damaging in many ways to be linked to such a serious crime, based upon no evidence, and then printed in a national newspaper for the whole country to read.

Do the police have these letters? Or has the knowledge of these letters only come about recently for the Daily Mail article so that they can try and link the fire bombing to me?

I think the investigating officer Detective Inspector Mark Upex has a responsibility to talk to Tim Stewart about what he knows about the letters in question. If they are genuine then how stupid to release such an important piece of evidence into the public domain, and how dare he link me to them. If they are not, then why is Tim Stewart writing about them in the first place, and the Daily Mail editor clearing it for print?

If they are genuine then I have absolutely no qualms about talking to the police so they can eliminate me from their enquiries, and my email is on the side bar of this blog for them to contact me.

Who has ever seen me make mention of Moslems being 'allah's vomit' or 'parasites'?

If these letters are not in the hands of the police then don't you think they should be, and why are they not?

There should also be a criminal investigation over the Daily Mail article to get to the bottom of why the Daily Mail printed their story based upon them, and why I was personally linked to the the arson attack of a religious building in a national newspaper, with criminal charges brought against those who wrote the article.

It is an extremly damaging article, that has very serious implications to me.

How would you like to be the one blamed for bombing a Mosque in Luton considering the tensions on the ground, not just in Luton but across the country?

Tim Stewart and Paul Bracch have made a very serious mistake with their article and the Daily Mail editor who cleared it is accountable for allowing something so damaging to go to print.

There must be something legally wrong with the article for them to have removed it so quickly from the internet after my post yesterday.

I wonder what the reason is?

It still went out in print across the country and around the World though.

I hope the journalists in question have 'perverted the course of justice' by their actions, and that they will be charged over it, or if not this charge, then some other charge.

I know Glen Jenvey has his own case against the Daily Mail for linking him to the article for absolutely no reason at all.

..............................................

^{Isaiah 54:17} No weapon formed against you shall prosper, And every tongue which rises against you in judgment You shall condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, And their righteousness is from Me,” Says the LORD.