The Plight of a Muslim Convert to Christianity Who Lives Under Sharia in Britain

Nissar Hussain is a British-born man of Pakistani heritage who is not just an apostate from Islam, but also a convert to Christianity. I don’t know which Muslims hate more, one of their fellows who converts to another religion, or one who becomes an atheist. But judging by the way they treated Mr. Hussain, they have a great deal of antipathy towards Christian converts.

In 2015 Nissar Hussain was badly beaten by Muslims on the street in front of his house. A year later he and his family were forced to leave Bradford — a.k.a. Islamabad West — because the police could no longer protect them. To add insult to injury, he took his case to three successive bishops of the Church of England — who swore an oath before God to care for members of their flock — and was brushed off. Even the Archbishop of Canterbury showed antipathy towards Mr. Hussain, presumably because the convert’s plight was an inconvenient interference with Christian establishment’s worship of their new golden calf: Ecumenism.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for improving the audio in this video. Some of it is still difficult to hear, but you’ll be able to make most of it out:

15 thoughts on “The Plight of a Muslim Convert to Christianity Who Lives Under Sharia in Britain

  1. Here in England, our swamp state is more concerned with graffiti on the wall of a mosque than the real threats to the life and liberty of Christians. While attacks on Christians and Christian churches go unreported, every minor grievance that muslims have is turned into a major incident. And of course, this nebulous thing called a hate crime is used to punish anyone caught being critical of muslims.

  2. What we heard in the video is that the British police are totally uninterested in preventing or punishing life-threatening attacks on ex-Muslims. The British political leaders aggressively ignore threats and violence against ex-Muslims. The British religious leaders are expert politicians, police and publicists for the purpose of preventing any mention by ex-Muslim Christians about their persecution by Muslims.


    And how did the British, former terrors of the sea, colonizers of the world, winners of World War 2, and buccaneers extraordinaire come to this sad state of pultroonery?

    The British have been socialized and bureaucratized for a long time. Socialism takes away the incentive for risk, takes away the independence of an individual to act with the knowledge he can earn a living for himself. Under the socialist state, everything depends on pleasing the people in charge of disbursing money. The British mega-state controls and supports communication, religious hierarchies, education, housing, security and transportation. All rough edges are smoothed out, individuals are not welcome and indeed, make the bureaucratic drones quite uncomfortable.

    The Anglican Bishops receive their promotions and pay through the government. Any individual of integrity was long ago filtered out, and the bishops are now free to cry about the plight of Syrian and Iraqi refugees.

    The destruction of the individual was completed through the laws banning any sort of individual protection. Your security consists of waiting for the police who never come; meantime, you’re subjected to the actions of a gang, who always work together and who are confident you will never have anything to help equal the odds.

    This, by the way, is exactly where the Democrats, aks, Democratic Socialists, are taking us in the US.

  3. Ronald B says: “And how did the British, former terrors of the sea, colonizers of the world, winners of World War 2, and buccaneers extraordinaire come to this sad state of pultroonery?”

    This is a question that will have historians, philisophers and psychologists scratching their heads hundreds of years from now (if we get that far.) The capitulation of the English and other Europeans to that “confluence of deviant intentions and perverted aspirations” is an astounding, gob-smacking phenemenon that cannot be simply put down to socialism. It’s complicated, multi-faceted and we’re probaby not going to get to the bottom of it for a long while.

    But, there is a whiff of sulphur about it methinks………

    • But since we have learned from all-vaporing France
      To eat their ragouts as well as to dance,
      We’re filled up with nothing but vain complaisance!
      Oh! The roast beef of old England,
      And old English roast beef!

      Frankly, I’m also bewildered by what had happened to Britain.

  4. Sorry, but this recording is unlistenable. There are a male voice and female voice talking loudly (in English?) in the background. In person? On TV? Where is this talk taking place? In a residence? In a church? Why don’t the audience tell these annoying talkers to shut up?

  5. Please note that ecumenism is dialogue and outreach among Christian communions. Interfaith dialogue is the term for conversations among people of differing religious faiths.

    Ecumenical progress among the varying Christian communions has the potential to strengthen the body of Christ. In a time when the West is seeing the rise of Islam in its midst, the value of genuine ecumenical progress can scarcely be overstated.

  6. Who are the rude bastards talking in the background? He seems to be talking in some kind of class, so the teacher should hush them. Or if it’s some kind of restaurant, they should’ve booked a salon for the recording or at least use a good microphone. Not sure I have the nerves to pain myself through thirty minutes of a mishmash of important talk, disturbing chumps and white noise…

Comments are closed.