LABOUR life peer Lord Ahmed, who threatened to muster 10, 000 Muslims to protest against Geert Wilders if the Dutch politician was allowed into the House of Lords to attend a screening of his film Fitna, has been jailed for 12 weeks for dangerous driving.
Life peer Lord Ahmed
Ahmed pleaded guilty to the charge at Sheffield Crown Court. His appearance before Mr Justice Wilkie followed an accident which left a man dead on the M1 near Rotherham, South Yorkshire, on Christmas Day 2007, according to this report.
The judge said:
I have come to the conclusion that by reason of the prolonged, deliberate, repeated and highly dangerous driving for which you have pleaded guilty, only an immediate custodial sentence can be justified.
After jailing him for 12 weeks, the judge also imposed a one-year driving ban and ordered the peer to pay £500 prosecution costs.
Earlier, Jeremy Baker QC, defending, put a series of points of mitigation to the judge – including Ahmed’s years of service to the community and the country. He said his client provided an important function for the country both nationally and internationally, particularly in the field of inter-faith relations.
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
February 25th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Does inter-faith relations include killing people while driving recklessly? Or threatening with a 10.000 Muslim protest-march if a Geert Wilders were allowed to show his Fitna block-buster?
February 25th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I wonder if he’ll have homosexual sex whilst inside?
February 25th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I think the very name “Lord Ahmed” sums up one reason I don’t live in Britain these days.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
And what pisses me off is the derisory sentencing for what amounts to manslaughter.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
How long will it be before he is claiming the food inside is not halal and that there is no space in his cell for his prayer rug
February 25th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
“…..Amhed provided an important function…….” Like inciting a riot and manslaughter. Shame he is not being deported after his joke of a sentence. He should at least lose his peerage.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Can you believe he’s an ex-JP and still President of South Yorkshire Victim Support! At least if he texts in his resignation he won’t be behind the wheel of a car.
By the way, he hosted a book launch a year or two back for one of those nutters who think Jews run the international media and so on – in the House of Lords!
Guess the same standards don’t apply to folk criticising Muslims who are invited to speak there.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Its not even 12 weeks – its 6 weeks prison 6 weeks out on license. i haven’t been able to find out where he will serve it i’m thinking a couple of days in one of the proper prisons before being tranferred to an open prison
i think the maximum he could have got was 2 years as it was for dangerous driving and not causing death by… as its claimed he had stop texting a whole 2 mins before, as if it can proved when he was reading a recieved text or if he was in the act of writing one
February 25th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
In prison I hope he’s forced to wear an orange boiler suit and share his cell with a skinhead.
Better lose the beard as well. Makes his face look too much like a c**t.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Well, the best outcome of this whole story is that he will be out of the House of Lords because, according to a BBC news report, it is the Labour Party’s policy to ban erring peers from sitting.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
12 weeks?! Thats it?!
Well I guess that if he had gotten the full time, like any other murderer the muslims would be so pissed off that they would start protests… then again, they are always pissed off…
but come on! 12 weeks?!?! he deserved to spend a good decade and pay the family for a long time!
February 25th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Nice point necrowulf. Are there rules laid down in sharia law that compel Ahmed to make reparations? Or are infidels/kaffirs excluded from this?
Sorry mate, I didn’t see you!
February 26th, 2009 at 4:30 am
Is this freethinkers or the BNP website?
February 26th, 2009 at 8:53 am
“Is this freethinkers or the BNP website?”
I’ll admit my own comment might have seemed ambiguous to those who don’t know me, but what I meant by “the very name Lord Ahmed” was:
Even in the 21st century, Britain still maintains the ludicrously ant-democratic House of Lords, and a half-baked Labor Party thinks it can “update” this anachronistic institution by doling out a peerage to someone whose attitudes can, if anything, be expected to be even further removed from liberal democratic ideals than the traditional Lordies.
I do, of course, have nothing against people called “Ahmed” per se.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Damn does that mean I’m the only one here with a BNP card??
Relax…
Banque Nationale de Paris I meant.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:06 am
Max, if it were an unelected Catholic politician in the same situation, similar comments would ensue.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Max,
This is the Freethinkers website, that’s why people are able to say what they think. Accusing people of being racist because they hold the opinions expressed above is not allowing freethinking which is exactly what this website is against: suppressing free speech.
Ask Lord Ahmed and his hoardes what they think of free speech. Then, when they tell you that it should be banned, try protesting. It won’t be long before you yourself are branded as a racist for trying to defend what should be a basic human right.
This guy got away with it because he is a muslim. If he’d been given a proper sentence he and his hoardes would have screamed about racism. It will be interesting to see if he IS banned from the house of lords as Rosemarie suggests might be the case. Will the labour party do the right thing or will they simply obey orders from their headquarters in saudi arabia?
Alun,
As far as I am aware, non muslims cannot give evidence or bring prosecutions against muslims. The dead infidel’s family would be more likely to be given a bill for damage to a muslim’s car.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
“Is this freethinkers or the BNP website?”
Max, Just because you may not be racist doesn’t mean your not a bigot, I think some of your previous posts prove that that is exactly what you are and yet you have the cheek to come here and point the finger at us when you so obviously have far more in common with the BNP than anybody here.
Persecution, driven by irrational belief, sound familiar? Most of us here are free thinkers, you have shown yourself to be barely a thinker let alone free!
TWAT! ( No I don’t consider rudeness part of natural selection, its just fun. )
February 26th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
There was an article about this guy on the radio today. Apparently you cannot be banned from the House of Lords. It is run like a nineteenth century gentlemans club and there is no mechanism for punishing wrongdoers. Peerages are honours given by the state and if you accept one there is no going back. You cannot voluntarily renounce it and you can’t get booted out regardless of how outrageously you behave.
Look at perjurer (Lord) Jeffrey Archer for example.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Somethings rotten in the UK..
I want to first point out i) I’m not a racist and ii) I don’t have a BNP Card and iii) I’m English but escaped from the UK.
He should have got ten years at least and should be banned from the Lords. He’s a criminal who killed someone by reckless driving and any normal Englishperson (ie not a muslim with 10000 of his screaming rug-butters behind him and a contributor to Labour party funds) would have got a bigger fine and done more time. This is a disgrace.
Now for the rest..his bigoted anti-gay sharia-focused anti-free speach antics… lets just hope that for those faults of his he has to share a cell with someone from the BNP ..
February 26th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Why dont people read the full story? Lord Ahmed didn’t kill anyone – his last text was 2-3 minutes before the accident – that’s at least 2 miles. The guy dies because he was over the limit and crashed into the central reservation, and then went back to collect his mobile phone from his stationary car in the dark! The events are very sad but he died because of his own actions not this peer’s.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
#Alun
There was an article about this guy on the radio today. Apparently you cannot be banned from the House of Lords.#
The ruling is, anyone who serves time in the nick, is automatically kicked out of the labour party.
#Steve#
Your comment makes no sense at all, are you saying the guy commited suicide because he went back for his phone?
The Muslim bigot should have got 10 years.
February 26th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Alan C
You’re right, he may be kicked out of the Labour Party but that doesn’t affect his peerage. He may even be prevented from sitting in the Upper Chamber but he shall always be Lord Ahmed.
Pity really. I’m sure to be called lord anything is an advantage. Even Lord Vader.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Steve,
How is it possible to determine the time of the accident to that degree of accuracy? Does ahmeds car not have lights? Was he not able to see a crashed car on the road because it was dark?
At the very least, he not paying attention. The chances are though, he was texting whilst driving. There are no excuses. He killed someone by careless or reckless driving and should have been sentenced accordingly.
I notice you don’t jump to the defence of the guy who was killed. You are basically blaming him. What is so wrong with him going to get his mobile phone? Since he was killed, how do you know what he did, when and why?
February 26th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
GNG
If my car runs into your rear bumper at the very least it’s driving without due care and attention.
When my business was going through a bad patch in the mid 90′s I took a weekend job in telesales flogging car insurance. I used to hear so many sob stories from people that had been prosecuted for ploughing into the car in front. I had little sympathy them. They should not chat to passengers, smoke, shout at their kids or USE A MOBY. At the flipside of their stories were victims.
Ahmeds’ phone may not have have been transmitting at the time of the crash so there is no log at the phone company to incriminate him.
Bet he was composing a text thought.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
I wonder if Ahmed sang, “Allaaaaaaaaaaaahhh!” as he smashed into the traffic? Bit of a damp squib though, he should have had a full tank of petrol.
February 26th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Alun,
I agree with you entirely. The point I was making about the time of the accident and whether or not the phone was in use was, how do we know to that degree of accuracy when the crash happened. Are there witnesses to say that the accident took place at a specific time and not 2mins earlier or later? Steve states that the last text was sent 2-3mins before the accident. Unless there were independant witnesses or some other reliable method of determining the EXACT time of the accident within a minute, we only have ahmeds testimony. Still, he wouldn’t lie. Would he? What does it mater. The dead guy was obviously only an infidel.
I accept what you are saying though about his phone possibly not transmitting at the alleged time of the accident. What was the last text though. Was it incoming or outgoing? He may have been reading a reply or, as you suggest, typing one.
Either way, Steves suggestion that it was the victims fault because he was over the limit, had crashed his car and then went back for his phone is just not on as far as I’m concerned. The guy being over the limit (if this was the case) and crashing his car is completely irrelevant. This does not make him invisible, even, as Steve pointed out, in the dark. If ahmed had been paying attention, this would have been avoided.
Actually, if the guy had been invisible, that might have helped since ahmed and his type seem to like giving lots of attention to invisible things.
February 27th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Peter T…If he landed up sharing a cell with me he’d be subjected to nothing more than a severe but restrained lambasting for being such a brainless, gullible, non-individual human sheep. My arguments would be based on long-considered opinions, common sense, reality and just might plagiarize a little the one and only Pat Condell. (Anybody unfamiliar with Pat really should check him out on youtube)
So, Peter T…there would be no knuckle-dragging, no swastikas, no heavy boots…just a little truly-meant persuasion from a reasonably intelligent guy typical of the New Right.