John R. Houk
© May 18, 2015
I am about to cross post a Gatestone Institute analysis of Multiculturalism in the United Kingdom that tends to validate the Islamic theopolitical ideology of Sharia Law to be respected alongside the traditional Rule of Law that has evolved a Representative Democratic Constitutional Monarchy in ye old UK.
There are couple of notions in this analysis that relates to thoughts I have written in this blog for a number of years. Those thoughts are two pejorative insinuations casting me in a negative light; viz. Homophobic and Islamophobic.
As a Biblical Christian I often condemn the homosexual lifestyle as an ungodly abomination in the eyes of God Almighty. This often leads to the accusation that I am a bigot that writes hate-speech and should be censured at best or physically accosted at worst by the defenders of homosexuality.
Leftists and homosexual activists often attempt to point out that if I was a true good Christian I would be tolerant and be accepting just as Jesus was tolerant and accepting prior to his Resurrection of tax collectors, sinners, prostitutes, adulteresses, and other godless lifestyles prevalent among Jews, Greek oriented Gentiles, and Roman Gentiles of that day and age. So I have to ask, “Was Jesus Christ the Son of God in the flesh (son of man in humanity/Son of God in Divinity) truly tolerate sinner lifestyles in his three years of active ministry prior to His Crucifixion?
Jesus indeed often forgave many sinning people, but on all most all instances that forgiveness was followed by a heartfelt repentance of sins or a warning from Jesus NOT to enter into sin implying it was a threat to the retention of a forgiveness status. Highlighting the numerous times the numerous times that Jesus forgave sins followed by repentance or a warning not to sin anymore will take up another post theme beyond the purpose of this current thought process. But I can’t help but to give one example.
That is the lady caught in the act of adultery (I’m always mystified about what happened to the man that must have been caught as well). She was dragged through the streets and thrown at Jesus’ feet with the purpose of exposing Jesus of being unbiblically tolerant of blasphemous sinners:
2 Now early[a] in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them. 3 Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, 4 they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught[b] in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses, in the law, commanded[c] us that such should be stoned.[d] But what do You say?”[e] 6 This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.[f] (John 8: 2-6 NKJV)
There is much theological speculation that Jesus was writing down the sins of the accusers. I am in that theological camp.
7 So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up[g] and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” 8 And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9 Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience,[h] went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her,[i] “Woman, where are those accusers of yours?[j] Has no one condemned you?”
11 She said, “No one, Lord.”
And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and[k] sin no more.”
12 Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.” (Bold Text Mine John 8: 7-12 NKJV)
That test was an epic fail by the Pharisees and Scribes. Jesus was and still isn’t tolerant of a sin lifestyle. As to the accusation that Jesus never specifically condemned homosexuality, my sense is that the Jewish religious hypocrites never found the opportunity to through a practicing homosexual at the feet of Jesus. The result undoubtedly would have been the same so lesson learned by the hypocrites. Nonetheless I find a commentary by Lambert Dolphin to be right on concerning Jesus and homosexuality with his utilization of Mathew 15: 1-20 and Mark 7: 21-23 under the subheading of “Jesus and the Wellsprings of the Heart”. I will quote one paragraph under that subheading:
In this passage adultery and fornication are both mentioned. Adultery of course refers to sexual infidelity when one is married. Fornication is usually taken to mean heterosexual intercourse before marriage. However the Greek word translated “fornication,” (porneia, from whence our word “pornography”), is actually a broad word used in the Bible “to denote any form of sexual behavior which is not in accord with Old Testament regulations and the teaching of the apostles…” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1982). Homosexual behavior is without doubt included in the meaning of this word. (Jesus and the homosexual; By Lambert Dolphin; Lambert Dolphin’s Library; Notes and references October 21, 1997. July 9, 2001, August 10, 2001, December 14, 2001. January 15, 2002. March 6, 2002. May 29, 2002. January 1, 2003. June 8, 2003, August 25, 2003. January 15, 2004. November 5, 2004. January 3, 2006. March 1, 2006.)
Dolphin’s entire post is worthy of a critical read.
In wrapping this heading up I state: I do not have an unnatural fear of homosexuals as the term “Homophobia” implies, but rather a huge distaste for the lifestyle practiced by homosexuals.
Thus finishes my Homophobia refutation.
The term “Islamophobia” implies an unnatural fear Islam which I do not have. A better description of my distaste of Islam is that the considered holy writings my by Muslims such as the Quran, Hadith and Sira are directly antichristian and anti-Jewish in its theopolitical ideology. And frankly that bugs me a lot.
The Antichrist Spirit Of Islam
The religion of Islam, more than any other religion, philosophy, or belief system, fulfills the description of the antichrist spirit. The religion of Islam makes it one of its highest priorities to very specifically deny all of the above points regarding Jesus and His relationship to the Father. In fact, it can very fairly be said that Islam literally is a direct polemical response against the above essential Christian doctrines. Regarding the above points however, Muslims will be quick to argue that Islam teaches that Jesus is indeed the Messiah. But this is really just trickery. While it is true that Islam does retain the title of Messiah for Jesus, when one asks a Muslim to define what the title “Messiah” actually means in Islam, the definitions given are always hollow and fall entirely short of containing any truly messianic substance. In Islam, Jesus is merely another prophet in a very long line of prophets. Biblically speaking however, the role of the Messiah, among other things, also entails being a Divine Priestly Savior, a Deliverer and the King of the Jews. As we saw in the earlier chapters about the Muslim Jesus, rather than being a Messiah that saves or delivers Israel and all of his faithful followers in any way, in the Islamic traditions, Jesus instead returns to lead Israel’s enemies against her in battle and to kill or convert all Jews and Christians. This would be the equivalent of calling Adolph Hitler, rather than Moses, Israel’s deliverer. For now, we see that the apostle John informs us that just before the final hour, a very specific “spirit” will dominate the earth. This spirit will deny many of the essential biblical doctrines regarding who Jesus is and what He came to do. Islam epitomizes this spirit perfectly. (Chapter 12 – The Antichrist Spirit Of Islam; By Joel Richardson (Will Islam Be Our Future?); Answering Islam)
The hatred of Jews is sown into the Quran as well. Here is Andrew Bostom exposing Jew-hatred in the Quran:
An additional much larger array of anti-Jewish Qur’anic motifs build to a denouement (as if part of a theological indictment, conviction, and sentencing process) concluding with an elaboration of the “ultimate sin” committed by the Jews (they are among the devil’s minions [Qur’an 4:60], accursed by God [Qur’an 4:47]), and their appropriate punishment: If they do not accept the true faith (i.e., Islam), on the day of judgment, they will burn in the hellfire (Qur’an 4:55). As per, Qur’an 98:7: “The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures”
After presenting a full spectrum of the major anti-Jewish motifs in the Qur’an, additional illustrations demonstrating their persistent influence on Muslim attitudes (and resultant behaviors) towards Jews, are provided. Four themes are considered, and their historical application illustrated, across space and time, through the present: (I) the Jews being associated with Satan and consigned to Hell (Qur’an 4:60, 4:55, 58:14 — 19, and 98:6); (II) the imposition of the Qur’anic poll-tax (jizya; Qur’an 9:29) on Jews, specifically, and (III) the related enforcement of the Qur’anic (2:61) “curse” upon the Jews for killing the Prophets, and other transgressions against Allah’s will, meriting their permanent humiliation and abasement; and, last in connection to this curse, (IV) the Jews’ transformation into apes/swine, as punishment (Qur’an 2:65, 5:60, and 7:166). (Antisemitism in the Qur’an, Part 1; By Andrew Bostom; Gates of Vienna; 3/17/12 [There links to part two through four in this post])
I have a profound dislike for Islam not just because of the transnational violence done in the name of Islamic holy books, but because those considered holy books seek to destroy Christianity NOW in this present time. The destruction of non-Muslims is encoded in those Islamic writings and it is aimed specifically at Jews and Christians. Although there is a consignment to a Muslim hell as a destiny for Jews and Christians refusing to submit to Allah, the Quran, Hadith and Sira want to move that Islamic along by killing Jews and Christians TODAY.
NOW the primary reason I want you to read about the effects of Multiculturalism in UK is because that Leftist concept is slowly destroying the Western culture on those British Isles by allowing Islamic Supremacist to coexist with the rich history that has brought a history of Liberty beginning the with Magna Carter that eventually drove America’s Founding Fathers to revolution because the then American colonies were not receiving adequate representation. Since Americans did not have the same Rights as British citizens in the Mother Country the Founding Fathers built on the British Liberty legacy to make government even more accountable to the people than even Brit citizens experienced.
Just as that Islamic Supremacist ideology is destroying the UK from within, Americans need to pay attention. President Obama and his transformation of America ideology will make the USA susceptible to the very same problems the UK and the rest of Western Europe is experiencing by allowing devout Muslims to immigrate. Muslim immigration has proved to be a cultural death throw for Brits and Europeans in general. Do we really want that kind of idiocy to become as strong here in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave as it is in the United Kingdom and else in Europe?
I GOT ONR SAY NO!
Muslim Rape Gangs, Terrorists as ‘Pop-Idols,’ and the Trafficking of Children
A Month of Islam in Britain: April 2015
By Soeren Kern
May 17, 2015 at 5:00 am
· “The boys want to be like them [jihadists] and the girls want to be with them. That’s what they used to say about the Beatles… [Muslim teenagers] see their own lives as poor by comparison, and don’t realize they are being used.” — Nazir Afzal, Britain’s leading Muslim prosecutor.
· “The extreme views of a ‘racist, homophobe and anti-Semite’ who supports killing non-Muslims and ‘stoning adulterers’ are being made available to prison imams and prisoners…with the blessing of [prison] authorities.” — Newsweek magazine.
· “Mohammed was selling me for £250 to paedophiles from all over the country. They came in, sat down and started touching me… Sometimes, I would be passed from one pervert to another… Mohammed’s defense was laughable… His barrister, a woman, implied I was a racist because all the defendants were Muslim.” — Excerpts from Girl for Sale, by Lara McDonnell.
· “Democracy… violates the rights of Allah. Islam is the only real, working solution for the UK.” — Election posters in Cardiff, Wales.
What follows is a summary of some of Islam and Islam-related issues in Britain during April 2015, categorized into four broad themes: 1) Islamic extremism; 2) British multiculturalism; 3) Muslim integration; and 4) Muslims and the British general elections.
1. Islamic Extremism and Syria-Related Threats
British police believe that about 600 Britons have travelled to Syria and Iraq since the conflict began in early 2011. About half of those are believed to have returned to the UK.
On April 1, police in Turkey detained nine British nationals from Rochdale, Greater Manchester, who were allegedly seeking to join the Islamic State in Syria. The nine — five adults and four children, including a one-year-old baby — were arrested in the Turkish city of Hatay.
One of those arrested was Waheed Ahmed, a student of politics at Manchester University. His father Shakil, a Labour Party councilor in Rochdale, said he thought his son was doing an internship in Birmingham. He said:
“It’s a total mystery to me why he’s there, as I was under the impression he was on a work placement in Birmingham. My son is a good Muslim and his loyalties belong to Britain, so I don’t understand what he’s doing there. If I thought for a second that he was in danger of being radicalized I would have reported him to the authorities.”
Also on April 1, Erol Incedal, 27, a British national of Turkish origin, was jailed for 42 months for possessing a bomb-making manual. His friend, Mounir Rarmoul-Bouhadjar, 26, a British national of Algerian origin, who admitted to having the same manual, was given three years. Both men had been to the Syrian-Turkish border and mixed with jihadists, who taught them about weaponry and explosives.
Meanwhile, it emerged that the father of one of the three teenagers from Brent, northwest London, who were arrested in Turkey in March on suspicion of trying to join the Islamic State in Syria, works for the British Ministry of Defense. The father, who may have had access to the names and addresses of British military personnel at home and overseas, was placed on “compassionate leave.”
On April 2, Yahya Rashid, of Willesden, also in northwest London, was charged with “engaging in conduct in preparation for committing an act of terrorism, and engaging in conduct with the intention of assisting others to commit acts of terrorism, between November 2014 and March 2015.” Rashid, 19, was arrested at Luton Airport after arriving on a flight from Istanbul. The Middlesex University electronics student was allegedly returning from Syria after travelling there via Morocco and Turkey.
On April 3, six Muslims were arrested at the Port of Dover in Kent on suspicion of attempting to leave England to join the Islamic State. The Crown Prosecution Service said that three of the individuals were found in the back of a truck in an apparent attempt to smuggle themselves out of Britain. They were charged with “preparing acts of terrorism.”
On April 5, Abase Hussen, the father of runaway British jihadi schoolgirl Amira Hussen, conceded that his daughter may have become radicalized after he took her to an extremist rally organized by the banned Islamist group Al-Muhajiroun, run by Anjem Choudary, the British-born Muslim hate preacher.
Amira, 15, was one of three girls from Bethnal Green Academy in East London who flew to Turkey in February to become “jihadi brides” in Syria. During a hearing at the Home Affairs Select Committee in March, Abase blamed British authorities for failing to stop his daughter from running off to Syria. Asked by Chairman Keith Vaz if Amira had been exposed to any extremism, Hussen replied: “Not at all. Nothing.” The police eventually issued an apology.
Abase, however, changed his story after a video emerged which unmasked him as an Islamic radical who had marched at an Islamist hate rally alongside Choudary and Michael Adebolajo, the killer of Lee Rigby. Abase, originally from Ethiopia, said he had come to Britain in 1999 “for democracy, for the freedom, for a better life for children, so they could learn English.”
On April 8, Alaa Abdullah Esayed of South London admitted to posting 45,600 tweets in support of the Islamic State in just one year. The tweets included pictures of dead bodies and encouraged children to arm themselves with weapons. Esayed’s tweets also included a poem, “Mother of the Martyr,” which advises parents on how to teach children about jihad. Esayed, 22, faces up to 14 years in prison for encouraging terrorism and disseminating terrorist publications.
On April 9, the families of two teenage boys from Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, who are believed to have traveled to join the Islamic State, said that they were “in a state of profound shock” and deeply worried about the safety of their “ordinary Yorkshire lads.” The 17-year-old boys, Hassan Munshi and Talha Asmal, are believed to have gone to Syria after heading to Turkey on March 31. The boys reportedly told their relatives that they were going on a school trip, but instead used the Easter holidays as a “window of opportunity” to flee Britain.
On April 20, a 14-year-old schoolboy from Blackburn, Lancashire, became Britain’s youngest terror suspect. He was arrested in connection with an Islamic State-inspired terror plot in Melbourne, Australia. Police said messages found on his computer and mobile phone indicated a plan to attack the centenary celebrations of the Anzac landings at Gallipoli during the First World War. (Anzac Day — April 25 — marks the anniversary of the first major military action fought by Australian and New Zealand forces during the First World War.)
Also on April 20, police in Turkey arrested a British couple and their four young children on suspicion of seeking to travel to a part of Syria controlled by the Islamic State. Asif Malik, his wife Sara, and the four children — aged between 11 months and 7 years — were detained at a hotel in Ankara. Turkish officials said the family had crossed into Turkey from Greece on April 16 and that they had been detained after a tip-off from the British police.
On April 24, Hassan Munir of Bradford was jailed for 18 months for posting links to Dabiq, an Islamic State propaganda magazine, on his Facebook page. The court heard that Munir, 27, had ignored repeated warnings by Facebook and by police after he posted jihadist material, including items about beheadings. The judge said magazine posed a serious danger because it incited people to take up arms for the Islamic State.
On April 27, Mohammed Kahar of Sunderland was arrested after being caught disseminating extremist material, including documents such as “The Explosive Course,” “44 Ways To Serve And Participate In Jihad,” “The Book Of Jihad,” and “This Is The Province Of Allah.” Kahar, 37, was also accused of plotting Syria-related terrorism acts, supporting a proscribed organization and financing terrorism — in all, 10 offenses stretching back 18 months.
On April 28, an 18-year-old jihadist, Kazi Jawad Islam, was convicted of “terror grooming” for trying to “brainwash” his friend, Harry Thomas, “a vulnerable young man with learning difficulties,” into attacking British soldiers with a meat cleaver.
The Central Criminal Court of England and Wales (aka Old Bailey) was told that Kazi Islam — allegedly inspired by the beheading of serviceman Lee Rigby in 2013 — befriended the then-19-year-old Thomas in October 2013 after meeting him at college. The court heard how Islam also “ruthlessly exploited” his autistic friend into preparing to make a bomb.
In an interview with the Guardian, Nazir Afzal, Britain’s leading Muslim prosecutor, warned that more British children are at risk of “jihadimania” than previously thought because they see Islamic terrorists as “pop idols.” He said:
“The boys want to be like them and the girls want to be with them. That’s what they used to say about the Beatles and more recently One Direction and Justin Bieber. The propaganda the terrorists put out is akin to marketing, and too many of our teenagers are falling for the image.
“They see their own lives as poor by comparison, and don’t realize they are being used. The extremists treat them in a similar way to sexual groomers — they manipulate them, distance them from their friends and families, and then take them.
“Each one of them, if they go to Syria, is going to be more radicalised when they come back. And if they don’t go, they become a problem — a ticking time bomb — waiting to happen.”
2. British Multiculturalism
In April, officials at the Lostwithiel School in Cornwall publicly humiliated nearly a dozen pupils between the ages of eight and 11 whose parents had refused to allow them to participate in a school trip to a mosque in Exeter. Some parents said they were concerned about the safety of their children, while others said they were opposed to the teaching of Islam in school. But school officials forced the non-compliant pupils individually to give an explanation in the student assembly.
On April 5, Victoria Wasteney, 38, a Christian healthcare worker, launched an appeal against an employment tribunal that found she had “bullied” a Muslim colleague by praying for her and inviting her to church. Wasteney was suspended from her job as a senior occupational therapist at the John Howard Centre, a mental health facility in east London, after her colleague, Enya Nawaz, 25, accused her of trying to convert her to Christianity. Wasteney’s lawyers say that the tribunal broke the law by restricting her freedom of conscience and religion, which is enshrined in Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
On April 8, the Guardian reported that there has been a 60% increase in child sexual abuse reported to the police over the past four years, according to official figures obtained through a Freedom of Information request that make public for the first time the scale of the problem in England and Wales.
The number of offenses of child sexual abuse reported to the police soared from 5,557 cases in 2011 to 8,892 in 2014. At the same time, the number of arrests for child sexual abuse offenses in England and Wales fell from 3,511 in 2011 to 3,208 — a drop of 9%.
The biggest increase in reported cases in a single police force over the past four years took place in South Yorkshire. The force saw an increase of 577% in cases from 74 in 2011 to 501 in 2014, apparently reflecting the exposure of the Muslim sexual abuse scandal in Rotherham.
On April 14, the president of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Lord Neuberger, said in a speech that Muslim women should be allowed to wear veils in court. He added that in order to show fairness to those involved in trials, judges must have “an understanding of different cultural and social habits.” He said:
“Well known examples include how some religions consider it inappropriate to take the oath, how some people consider it rude to look other people in the eye, how some women find it inappropriate to appear in public with their face uncovered, and how some people deem it inappropriate to confront others or to be confronted — for instance with an outright denial.”
Neuberger’s comments came after a judge upheld a ruling allowing Rebekah Dawson, a 22-year-old convert to Islam, to stand trial wearing a niqab, a veil that only leaves the eyes visible.
On April 15, Newsweek magazine reported that the “extreme views of a ‘racist, homophobe and anti-Semite’ who supports killing non-Muslims and ‘stoning adulterers’ are being made available to prison imams and prisoners throughout England and Wales, with the blessing of [prison] authorities.”
The magazine interviewed Haras Rafiq, managing director of the Quilliam Foundation, a counter-extremism think tank, who warned that British prisons have become “incubators for Islamic extremism” because inmates are being allowed to read the works of controversial South Asian cleric Abul Ala Maududi. Rafiq described Maududi, who died in 1979, as the “grandfather of Islamism.”
Newsweek discovered that hundreds of copies of Maududi’s analyses of the Koran were distributed in March at a training event for prison imams and chaplains held at the prison service college in Rugby. The books came from the Markfield Institute for Higher Education, part of the Islamic Foundation, a UK-based organization that is “inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood.”
On April 22, the Daily Mail published excerpts of a new book, Girl for Sale, which describes the shocking ordeal of Lara McDonnell, who became the victim of a Muslim paedophile gang when she was only 13 years old. She wrote:
“Mohammed was selling me for £250 to paedophiles from all over the country. They came in, sat down and started touching me. If I recoiled, Mohammed would feed me more crack so I could close my eyes and drift away. I was a husk, dead on the inside.
“Sometimes, I would be passed from one pervert to another. In Oxford, many of my abusers were of Asian origin; [in London] these men were Mediterranean, black or Arab.
“Then, at the start of 2012 [some five years after the abuse began], Thames Valley Police asked to see me. They had been conducting a long-overdue investigation into sexual exploitation of young girls and wanted a chat. I told them everything, and by the end of March, Mohammed and his gang were in custody. Unbeknown to me, five other girls were telling police the same story.
“Mohammed’s defense was laughable: he claimed I’d forced him to take drugs and have sex with me. His barrister, a woman, implied I was a racist because all the defendants were Muslim.
“Because the defendants were Muslim, the case had opened sensitive issues about race and religion. My view is clear: they behaved that way because of differences in how they viewed women.”
On April 25, the Telegraph reported that British taxpayers are paying the monthly rent for Hani al-Sibai, the Islamist preacher who “mentored” Mohammed Emwazi (aka Jihadi John, the Islamic State executioner). Al-Sibai, 54, a father of five, lives in a £1 million home in Hammersmith, a district in West London. According to the Telegraph:
“The public purse has also paid for a number of legal actions brought by al-Sibai against the British government in his battle to prevent his deportation to Egypt and also attempts to have his name removed from terror sanctions lists.
“From his home, al-Sibai, also known as Hani Youssef, runs an effective al-Qaeda propaganda machine that includes the al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies. In recent months he has used various Internet sites to praise bin Laden and glorify al-Qaeda for waging war against ‘the Crusader-Zionists.'”
Also in April, the Reverend David Robertson, who will soon take over as Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland, wrote a hard-hitting essay on the Christian Today website in which he argued that “fear of Islamophobia is blinding many of our politicians to the threat we face from Islam.” Robertson wrote:
“Christianity is the bedrock and foundation of our secular society. Islam is different. Islam has no doctrine of separation of the spiritual from the political. Islam is, and has always been, a political movement. There can be no such thing as secular Islam. In the Islamic view the world is divided into two houses, Darus Salma, the house of Islam, and Darul Har, the house of war. The former is the actual area controlled by Islam, full political and religious control; the latter is those areas of the world still unsubdued by Islam. Islam means ‘submission,’ not peace.”
“I recently attended a Monday night meeting at a mosque in my city. … I was impressed by what I observed. There were 150 mostly young men on a Monday night at a prayer meeting. This was not Friday prayers. This was only one of five mosques in the city. And there was a community, social and political aspect which was very impressive. But I was also depressed. Because I knew that there was no church in the city that would have 150 men coming to pray. Because I knew that there was no political or social organization in the city that could come remotely near matching what I observed. And this in a city where only 2 per cent of the population are Muslim. Imagine what power they can hold in a town or city where 25 per cent are Muslim?
“It’s not so much the numbers — government is not done by opinion poll. It’s the organization, social cohesion, wealth and internal discipline that brings the political power; if you want it. And Islam does. A survey was released this week which shows that in the UK as a whole Islam will be 11 per cent of the population within a couple of decades.”
3. Muslim Integration
On April 8, the Leicester Crown Court jailed Jafar Adeli, an Afghan asylum seeker, for 27 months after he admitted to attempting to meet “Amy,” an underage girl, after grooming her online. Adeli, 32, who is married, arranged to meet the girl after engaging in sexual conversations online and sending an indecent image of himself. But he was duped by a paedophile vigilante group called Letzgo Hunting. “Amy” was in fact a vigilante named John who was pretending to be a young girl.
Adeli, who has filed an appeal to remain in Britain, was placed on a ten-year sexual offenses prevention order. Judge Philip Head said: “It was your intention to have full sexual activity with someone you believed to be 14 and something you know to be a crime in this country. You were grooming this person for sexual activity.”
On April 10, Abukar Jimale, a 46-year-old father of four who sought asylum in the UK after fleeing war-torn Somalia, walked free after sexually assaulting a female passenger as he drove her across Bristol in his taxi. Although Jimale was found guilty of sexual assault and causing a person to engage in sexual activity without her consent, he had his two-year sentence suspended. The defending counsel said that Jimale, who left Somalia in 2001 because he was being persecuted, was a hard-working father who had lost his job and good name as a result of the offenses.
On April 13, Mohammed Khubaib, a Pakistani-born father of five, was convicted of grooming girls as young as 12 with food, cash, cigarettes and alcohol. The 43-year-old married businessman, who lived in Peterborough with his wife and children, befriended girls in his restaurant and then “hooked” them with alcohol — normally vodka — in an attempt to make them “compliant” to sexual advances.
After a trial at the Old Bailey, Khubaib was found guilty of forcing a 14-year-old girl to perform a sex act on him and nine counts of trafficking for sexual exploitation involving girls aged from 12 to 15 between November 2010 and January 2013.
On April 14, Mohammed Ali Sultan, 28, of Wellington, Telford, was sentenced to five years in prison after having been found guilty of two counts of rape and one count of attempted rape. The sentence is in addition to a seven-year sentence after he pled guilty to two counts of sexual activity with a child and one count of controlling child prostitution in 2012.
On April 22, four Muslim men were charged with sex crimes against children in Rochdale. Hadi Jamel, 33, of Rochdale, Abid Khan, 38, of Liverpool, Mohammed Zahid, 54, of Rochdale, and Raja Abid Khan, 38, of Rochdale, were each been charged with one count of sexual activity with a child. The charges relate to alleged offenses against one girl who was under 16 at the time.
The charges are the latest to be brought following Operation Doublet, a probe by the Major Incident Team of the Greater Manchester Police into allegations of child sexual exploitation in Rochdale. In March 2015, ten men were charged with sex offenses alleged to have been committed against the girl and six others.
On April 23, Britain’s Electoral Court found Lutfur Rahman, the mayor of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, guilty of election fraud and ordered him to vacate his post immediately. The Bangladesh-born Rahman and his supporters were found to have used religious intimidation through local imams, vote-rigging and wrongly branding his Labour rival as a racist to secure his re-election for a second term on May 24, 2014.
Rahman, who has been banned from seeking office again, was also found to have allocated local grants to buy votes. He was ordered to pay immediate costs of £250,000 ($390,000) from a bill expected to reach £1 million.
On April 23, the Birmingham Crown Court sentenced Imran Uddin, 25, a student at the University of Birmingham, to four months in jail for hacking into the university computer system to improve his grades. Uddin used keyboard spying devices to steal staff passwords and then increased his grades on five exams. Uddin is believed to be the first ever British student to be jailed for cheating.
On April 23, a jury at Chester Crown Court heard how Masood Mansouri, 33, from Saltney, Flintshire allegedly kidnapped and raped a 20-year-old woman, from Mochdre, near Colwyn Bay, after pretending to be a taxi driver to a woman trying to hail a cab. Five days later, the woman took a fatal overdose, the court heard. Mansouri denied all the charges.
On April 28, Aftab Ahmed, 44, of Winchcombe Place, Heaton, was charged with threatening to behead David Robinson-Young, a candidate for the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) in Newcastle East.
4. Muslims and the British General Elections
On April 4, the Telegraph reported that a front group for Muslim extremists boasted that it would act as “kingmaker” in the May 7 general election, and that it was “negotiating with the Tory and Labour leadership” to secure its demands.
According to the paper, Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND) built links with both parties after claiming to promote “democratic engagement” by Muslims. However, it was actually “a façade to win political access and influence for individuals holding extreme, bigoted and anti-democratic views.”
During a MEND event on April 3, a man named Abu Eesa Niamatullah, who has called British people “animals,” demanded that women should not work, attacked democracy and said that “the Creator is the one who should decide what the laws should be.”
Meanwhile, Ed Miliband, the Labour Party’s candidate for prime minister, vowed to ban “Islamophobia” if he emerged victorious in the elections. In an interview with The Muslim News, Miliband said:
“We are going to make it [Islamophobia] an aggravated crime. We are going to make sure it is marked on people’s records with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime.
“We are going to change the law on this so we make it absolutely clear of our abhorrence of hate crime and Islamophobia. It will be the first time that the police will record Islamophobic attacks right across the country.”
The move — which one observer called “utterly frightening” because of its implications for free speech in Britain — was widely viewed as part of an effort by Miliband to pander to Muslim voters.
Previously, Home Secretary Theresa May pledged that if the Conservatives win the elections, every police force in England and Wales would be required to record anti-Muslim hate crimes as a separate category, as is already the case with anti-Semitic crimes.
In Derby, Gulzabeen Afsar, a Muslim candidate for the town council, sparked outrage after she referred to Ed Miliband as “the Jew,” in comments made in Arabic.
Meanwhile, the British-born Islamist Anjem Choudary actively discouraged Muslims from voting. In a stream of Twitter messages using the #StayMuslimDontVote hashtag, Choudary argued that voting is a “sin” against Islam because Allah is “the only legislator.” He has also said that Muslims who vote or run for public office are “apostates.”
Other British Islamists followed Choudary’s lead. Bright yellow posters claiming that democracy “violates the right of Allah” were spotted in Cardiff, the capital of Wales, and Leicester, as part of a grassroots campaign called #DontVote4ManMadeLaw.
One such poster stated:
“Democracy is a system whereby man violates the right of Allah and decides what is permissible or impermissible for mankind, based solely on their whims and desires.
“Islam is the only real, working solution for the UK. It is a comprehensive system of governance where the laws of Allah are implemented and justice is observed.”
Destroying Western Culture Destroys USA
John R. Houk
© May 18, 2015
Muslim Rape Gangs, Terrorists as ‘Pop-Idols,’ and the Trafficking of Children
Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.
Copyright © 2015 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved.
Dr. Muhammad Shafiq
John R. Houk
© September 19, 2014
Let’s look at Mohammed Shafiq the CEO of the Muslim British youth group Ramadhan Foundation. I was a bit confused because I read an article about a speaker at St John’s Church on Humboldt Street who had given a speech on ISIS. The St John’s speaker was listed as Dr. Mohammed Shafiq. I suspect the writer was referring to Dr. Muhammad Shafiq a Muslim Professor and Executive Director at Nazareth College with the Center for Interfaith Studies and Dialogue (CISD). I will get to Dr. Shafiq in a moment in relation to the ISIS speech at St John’s.
Now Mohammed Shafiq of the Ramadhan Foundation is considered by Muslim apologists and Left Wing multiculturalists to be a Moderate Muslim that denounces Islamic extremism. Indeed he has the death threats to back up credentials as a Moderate. Evidently the Somalian terrorist group al-Shabaab that was influential in the public beheading of British soldier Lee Rigby on the streets of London in broad daylight issued the death threat to Shafiq via video. Al-Shabaab was perturbed for Mohammed Shafiq condemning the barbarity of Rigby’s beheading.
So that makes Shafiq the image of a good Muslim that we non-Muslim Westerners like to hear about, right? Hmm… Has anyone heard the claim that a good Muslim believes that the pseudo-prophet Mohammed was the perfect man in Islam? In order to be a good Muslim one is to struggle to emulate the perfect man pseudo-prophet Mohammed.
Somehow Muslims seem to be only aware of the tolerant merciful Mohammed in his early days in Mecca prior to fleeing to Medina in what has become known as the hijra. Something seemed to have warped Mo’s mind in Medina because evolved from a monotheistic cult religious leader to a robbing bandit and finally to a vindictive conquering army leader killing and assassinating enemies with a special vengeance reserved for Jews. Thus emulating the perfect man (graphic 22 minute slide show) becomes problematic for me.
I sense that Mohammed Shafiq desires to be a good Moderate Muslim, but when push comes to shove, defending the principles of Islam overrules the Western image of a good Muslim and is replaced by the Islamic image of a good Muslim.
When there was a sex scandal involving numerous Muslim men enslaving young female sex-slaves in Shafiq’s British hometown of Rochdale:
Together Against Grooming (Tag) was organised in the wake of the convictions of Muslim men in British courts for a series of horrific cases, including in Derby, Rochdale, Telford, Bradford and Oxford, where on Thursday five men were jailed for life and two others received long sentences for the sexual abuse of girls. (Muslim youth leader says more must be done to fight grooming; By Haroon Siddique; The Guardian; 9/28/13 15.01 EDT)
The Muslim youth leader in title is Mohammed Shafiq. Shafiq in this article was shown to praising a Muslim sermon that denounced this purist Muslim treatment of young white British sex-slave gals. But at the same time Shafiq takes a walk on the racist side yet not mentioning Islam. From Debbie Schlussel:
At least one Muslim has the guts to tell the truth about his people, though he falsely couches it in purely ethnic, rather than religious terms:
‘There is a particular problem with groups of Pakistani men who think white girls are worthless,’ said Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation. ‘They think they can use and abuse these girls in this abhorrent sort of way and then discard them.’ (UK Muslims Gang Raped White Girls b/c They Weren’t Muslim; Islamic Studies Teacher @ Mosque; By Debbie Schlussel; DebbieSchlussel.com; 5/9/12 2:56 pm)
To get a grasp of the emulation of the pseudo-prophet became a cultural rift in the UK this is a rather horrid description of what these British white sex-slaves went through:
The girls were repeatedly raped, often by groups of men several men at a time, and some were subjected to “torture sex” tortured, the jury heard. The three-and-a-half month trial at the Old Bailey exposed a series of failings by Thames Valley Police and Oxford social services. Despite being told on several occasions by the girls and their parents about their abuse, the two organisations failed to act until 2010.
One of the defendants, Mohammed Karrar – who was accused of branding an 11-year-old, forcing her a girl of 12 to have an abortion when she was 12 and subjecting her to gang rapes – initially refused to come up from his cell.
The mother of Girl C – who told the Guardian she had begged social services staff to rescue her from the gang – said that her daughter’s abusers had threatened to cut the girl’s face off. and promised to slit the throats of her family members. She said that they had been forced to leave their home after the men had threatened to decapitate family members. (Oxford child sex abuse ring ‘threatened to cut off victim’s face’; By Alexandra Topping; The Guardian; 6/26/13 11.50 EDT)
Then to cap it off, Mohammed Shafiq became upset over some quite innocuous comments from fellow Moderate Muslim and fellow British Liberal Democrat member when in an interview/question & answer session flippantly ignored a couple of teen kids portraying Jesus and Mohammed respectively on their T-shirts.
Here’s the scenario:
In 2013, two students from the London School of Economics (LSE), a major UK university in central London, set up their stall at the annual freshers’ fair (an event bringing together representatives of various clubs and societies to advertise to new students) for the LSE Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society to which they belong.
At the fair, Chris Moos and Abishek Phadnis each wore a ‘Jesus and Mo’ t-shirt – shirts featuring a cartoon from the Jesus and Mo series (www.jesusandmo.net) which satirises Jesus and Mohammed.
Chris and Abishek were immediately ordered to remove the shirts because wearing them apparently amounted to “harassment”. When they refused to do so, their stall was surrounded by uniformed security who threatened to remove them from university premises by force.
Later, the university apologised to the two students.
In January of this year, guests on the BBC Sunday morning show “The Big Questions” discussed causing offence to religious sensibilities. Chris and Abishek were invited to offer their views. When presenter Nicky Campbell questioned them on the t-shirt affair, Chris and Abishek opened their jackets to reveal the offending garments. The BBC camera operators made sure we did not get a clear view however.
Also on the programme was Maajid Nawaz. Nawaz is a former Islamist and member of Hizb ut-Tahrir who spent time in an Egyptian jail and now heads the anti-extremism think-tank the Quilliam Foundation, which hit the headlines in 2013 having begun work with the former English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson. Nawaz is also a Parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrat Party.
To demonstrate that he, a believing Muslim, was not offended by the depictions of Mohammed displayed in the Jesus and Mo series, Nawaz tweeted a copy of the cartoon saying that it did not upset him. (Blasphemy returns to Britain; By Anne Marie Waters; Dispatch International; 2/18/14)
Just so we are on the same page here. Maajid Nawaz a former Radical Muslim turned Moderate who has associated with Counterjihad enthusiast Tommy Robinson (who is often accused wrongfully of being a neo-Nazi) tweeted photos of the capricious young college students wearing the Jesus and Mo T-shirt parody. You need to catch that Nawaz operates an “anti-extremism think-tank” called the Quilliam Foundation.
How did the Moderate Muslim Mohammed Shafiq handle Maajid Nawaz tweeting Jesus-Mo caricatures? Shafiq put out the word to fellow Muslims and to crazy Radical Muslims that are terrorists that Nawaz was a blasphemer. And how does Islam handle blaspheming the pseudo-prophet Mohammed? A death sentence is issued. Now that is true Islam.
Mohammed Shafiq has tried to walk back any involvement in the get-even and dump fellow Liberal Democrat Nawaz. I look how Nick Cohen of The Observer puts it:
At the time we went to press, about 20,000 people had signed Shafiq’s petition to Nick Clegg, saying that the tweet had caused an “extreme amount of insult, hurt and anguish”. The Lib Dems must stop Nawaz standing as their candidate in Hampstead and Kilburn at the next general election, they demanded.
Shafiq denies that he is spreading fear and if you had not done the research you might believe him. Certainly, you could think him a man who can snuffle out offence where no one else can find it. You could think that the 20,000 or so who have signed his petition are so desperate for reasons to censor that they will manufacture them. But this is a free country and they are entitled to their hysterias.
But to put it as politely as I can, Shafiq is not your standard Liberal Democrat. He is in charge of the Ramadhan Foundation, which has hosted speakers whose attitudes towards gay people and Jews are anything but liberal. To make sure that Nawaz felt the full force of his critique, Shafiq slipped an aside into his open letter to Nick Clegg. He talked of Nawaz’s “expected, suspected, wanted reaction from the minority of unhinged in those communities”. Nawaz was deliberately soliciting attacks from the “unhinged”, apparently. He expected them. He wanted them. And if the unhinged should assault or kill him – he had no one to blame but himself. Shafiq told me that he did not mean that Nawaz was inciting his own murder, but I struggle see how else his followers can interpret his words.
On Twitter, Shafiq went further and gave a masterclass in double speak. “Ghustaki Rasool Quilliam,” he tweeted. Most of his audience had no idea what he meant. A few knew all too well. “Ghustaki Rasool” is “defamer of the prophet” in Urdu: a charge that incites Islamists to murder. Fanatics took to Twitter to prove the point. “Have spoken to someone in Pakistan,” one of Shafiq’s followers replied. “They will have a surprise for him on his next visit!” Another Twitter user contacted Nawaz to say: “Gustak e rasool is punishable by death anywhere in the world. Btw I’m in the UK not Pakistan.” A third cried that “dogs like Maajid Nawaaz will be punished!” (The Liberal Democrats face a true test of liberty; By Nick Cohen; The Guardian – The Observer; 1/25/14 13.04 EST)
At any rate the leader of the UK’s Liberal Democrat Party must have been doing some arm twisting. In a joint statement signed by both Maajid Nawaz and Mohammed Shafiq they offer a bit of give and take publicly which I doubt makes either one happy privately.
“We recognise that, when it comes to this question, some Muslims of various persuasions may take different views. However, we also recognise that there are many Muslims who have taken offence, and we assert that images of the spiritual leaders of all religions should be deemed to be respectful. We also respect the freedom of every member of the Liberal Democrats on either side of this debate who feels offended by tone or language to make representations to the Liberal Democrats as is their democratic right.
“We are both Liberals and support the principle of freedom of speech. But we also understand the importance of respect for others’ views and of moderation of language. In so far as this second principle of moderate language has been breached in the heat and passion of the current debate, we regret this and call for all those who have differing views to ensure that any debate which continues on this subject should use language and attitudes which conform to Liberal standards of respect and moderation.
“We now call on those on both sides of this argument to return to moderate debate, free of insult and threat and we do so because we believe this is in the interests of our Party, of the wider Muslim community in Britain and of the principles of peace to which Islam is committed.” (Statement by Maajid Nawaz and Mohammed Shafiq; Posted by The Voice; Liberal Democrat Voice; 1/28/14 12:10 pm)
Okay, that was about the good Moderate Muslim Mohammed Shafiq, born and raised in the United Kingdom.
Now let’s look at Dr. Muhammad Shafiq of Pakistani origin and a Muslim inter-faith Professor at a Christian college called Nazareth College located in Rochester, NY. The college’s origins in 1924 derived from Roman Catholic Sisters of St Joseph but there is no mention of Catholicism in the private school’s current curriculum. The college seems to have evolved from a parochial school to a Liberal (and I’m not talking liberal arts here) multicultural diversity slant in its current curriculum.
I have to tell you that Dr. Shafiq’s public character is representative of what an American would call a Moderate Muslim. He is the Executive Director of Rochester College’s interfaith program which seems to me to emphasize Islam more a typical Religious Studies collegiate program that usually examines all the global religions equally. Now granted secular college Religious Studies programs usually de-emphasize the Christian faith; however there is a close examination of the major religions that will include Islam. Dr. Shafiq’s direct connection to the Islamist organization the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) and his seeming promotion of Islamic interfaith understanding with American culture suggests an Islamic emphasis at Nazareth College. This is America and if the privately funded Nazareth College that had its beginning within a NY State Catholic Diocese has no problem with a person at least sympathetic with Radical Islam then who am I to complain. The only criticism I have is that IIIT representation smacks of deception in the portrayal of a peaceful Islam. It might be a good idea to examine the IIIT bona fides.
Clarion Project on IIIT
The decision to establish IIIT was made at a major Islamist conference in Lugano, Switzerland in 1977. A lead organizer was a senior member of the Egyptian Brotherhood that was also the father-in-law of Ahmed Elkadi, the president of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood from 1984 to 1994. Participants included the leaders of other Brotherhood-originated groups like the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Students Association and non-American Brotherhood leaders like Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi.
Swiss police raided Nada’s home in 2001 and discovered a secret 1982 Brotherhood plan called “The Project” that called for infiltrating countries around the world in order to advance the Islamist agenda. A stated goal is supporting jihad for “the establishment of an Islamic State, in parallel with gradual efforts aimed at gaining control of local power centers through institutional action.”
A 1988 FBI file states that IIIT board members Jamal Barzinji and Yaqub Mirza are among those “previously characterized as … members and leaders of the IKHWAN [Muslim Brotherhood].”Another 1988 FBI document states that a source inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network “advised that the IIIT … and all the subsidiary and sponsoring Muslim organizations under the control of the IIIT … are in fact IKHWAN organizations.”
A source told the FBI that IIIT leaders speak of a six-stage plan to “institute the Islamic Revolution in the United States.” The leaders “indicated that in this phase, their organization needs to peacefully get inside the United States government and also American universities.” They “claimed success in infiltrating the United States government with sympathetic of [or] compromised individuals.” The source believed IIIT was only in the first stage.
The FBI source warned that the Brotherhood has “unlimited funds” and has “set up political action front groups with no traceable ties to the IIIT or its various Muslim groups.” In a document made public, the FBI redacted the name of a Brotherhood leader, presumably within IIIT, that the source claims “stated that Muslims in the United States have to be prepared for martyrdom.”
In 1991, a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo stated its “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.” The same memo listed IIIT as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”
In 2002, the headquarters of IIIT was raided as part of a terrorism-financing investigation called Operation Green Quest. The probe continued until at least 2007 when the U.S. government tried to force convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian to testify before a grand jury about his links to the organization. IIIT was the largest donor to Sami al-Arian’s front for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist group, providing at least $50,000. Al-Arian even said in a letter to IIIT’s president in 1992 that the two groups are one.
IIIT employed a founder of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Bashir Musa Nafi, until he was deported in June 1996. Nafi was a close friend of Al-Arian’s.  Another IIIT employee, Tarik Hamdi, gave cell phone batteries to Osama Bin Laden, according to a former U.S. Treasury Department official in 2002. In 2003, IIIT made a donation of $720 to the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation in Oregon. The Foundation was shut down as an Al-Qaeda front the following year.
IIIT has long published and promoted Islamist texts. In 1990, it endorsed the English translation of an Islamist text on Sharia (Islamic) law, Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law by Umdat al-Salik, calling it a “valuable and important” work for “teaching Islamic jurisprudence.” In 2001, it published a book authored by an IIIT official titled Violence that approved of attacks on Israeli civilians as “justified acts of a liberation struggle, not terrorism.”
The organization’s website still lists Islamist books it has published. This includes at least three by Brotherhood spiritual leader Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi. Former IIIT president Taha Jabir Al-Alwani authored one text that complains that there are no academic institutions in the Muslim world that teach “the Islamic vision with the same force and persuasiveness” as Western ideas are taught in the West.
This IIIT profile by Ryan Mauro is just an excerpt. You really should read the entire article. Discover The Networks (DTN) also has an excellent essay on IIIT. Most of the information corroborates The Clarion Project exposé but for brevity’s sake here is an excerpt that adds some extra info.
DTN on IIIT
In the early 1990s, IIIT invented and promoted the term “Islamophobia,” a term which implies that any societal fear associated with Islam is necessarily irrational, even if that fear stems from the fact that Islam’s prophet and its modern-day imams call on believers to kill infidels, or from the fact that the 9/11 attacks were carried out to implement those calls. Moreover, the term suggests that any negative societal reaction to such exhortations to violence reflects a bigotry that itself should be feared.
Former IIIT member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad — who was with that organization when the word was formally created, and who has since rejected IIIT’s ideology and terminated his membership in disgust — now reveals the original intent behind the concept of Islamophobia: “This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.” In short, in its very origins, “Islamophobia” was a term designed as a weapon to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing them. This plan was an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s deceptive “General Strategic Goal for North America.”
Although the term was coined in the early 1990s, “Islamophobia” did not become the focus of an active Brotherhood campaign until after 9/11.
Controlled by the extremist, Saudi-based Wahhabi movement, IIIT maintains that reports about mosques distributing hate-filled literature are untrue, and claims that the concept of jihad in no way condones or connotes violence. As an IIIT public-relations flyer puts it: “Jihad does not mean ‘holy war.’ Literally, jihad in Arabic means to strive, struggle and exert effort. It is a central and broad Islamic concept that includes struggle against evil inclinations within oneself, struggle to improve the quality of life in society, struggle in the battlefield for self-defense or fighting against tyranny or oppression.” …
IIIT is a prominent endorser of the book Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, an authoritative compendium of sharia written by an eminent 14th-century Islamic jurist. By IIIT’s reckoning, the English translation by Umdat al-Salik is “a valuable and important work” that is highly successful in “its aim to imbue the consciousness of the non-Arabic-speaking Muslim with a sound understanding of Sacred Law.” According to Andrew McCarthy, Reliance “denies freedom of conscience, explaining that apostasy from Islam is a death-penalty offense”; contends that “a Muslim apostatizes not only by clearly renouncing Islam but by doing so implicitly — such as by deviating from the ‘consensus of Muslims,’ or making statements that could be taken as insolence toward Allah or the prophet Mohammed”; “approves a legal caste system in which the rights and privileges of Muslims and men are superior to those of non-Muslims and women”; “penalizes extramarital fornication by stoning or scourging”; endorses the death penalty for homosexuals and for people who make interest-bearing loans; venerates jihad; and exhorts Muslims “to strive to establish an Islamic government, ruled by a caliph.” READ ENTIRETY (INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ISLAMIC THOUGHT (IIIT); Determine The Networks)
Muslim apologists will look you in the eyeballs and tell the Reliance of the Traveller is not accepted as authoritative among Sharia scholars. The reality Reliance is authoritative but it is not singular. The Reliance is one of many instructive tools used by Sharia scholars.
The second source text of Islamic jurisprudence used to prepare our summaries is Reliance of the Traveller, compiled and written in the 14th century by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri. Reliance of the Traveller is a systematic codification of the laws of the Shafi‛i school of Sunni Islam. It is based primarily on the writings of Imam Rafi‛i and Imam Nawawi, scholars of Islamic law who lived in the 12th-13th centuries and in the 13th century, respectively. Although it is based on the laws of only one of the Islamic legal schools, Reliance of the Traveller is more comprehensive and detailed in its discussion of Islamic law than The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer is. Therefore, there are a number of places where our summaries refer solely to the Shafi‛i school because certain topics are discussed in Reliance of the Traveller but not in The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer. The English translation of Reliance of the Traveller also includes some sections written by a variety of commentators ranging from the 9th to the 20th centuries. In certain cases, we have cited these other commentators, always clearly noting that these citations are not from the Ibn Naqib’s original 14th century Reliance of the Traveller. On occasion, Keller’s translation of Reliance of the Traveller points out an alternative view of one of the schools other than the Shafi‛i on a particular legal point and we have mentioned these variant interpretations in our summaries. When a footnote on this site designates a source as “RT” without any mention in the text or the footnote of the time from which the comment is taken, that means that the citation is to the translation of the original 14th century text of Ibn Naqib. The full title of the original work is ‛Umdat al-salik wa ‛uddat al-nasik – The Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper. The English translation by Nuh Ha Mim Keller is called: Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law. Our summaries of Reliance of the Traveller are based on the 1994 revised edition of this work published by Amana Publications, Beltsville, Maryland, USA. (Laws of Religion – Source Texts Used for Laws of Islam: Jurisprudence of Schools of Islam; Religion Research Society; Last updated 10/23/12)
Al-Azhar University in Egypt can loosely be described as Sunni Islam’s versions of verified Islamic theology much like the Papacy is the final authority on all things Roman Catholic. Al-Azhar University has given the official stamp of approval to Reliance of the Traveller not only on the original medieval Arabic document but also the English translation by American converted to Islam Nuh Ha Mim Keller (now living in Jordan).
The Revised Edition (published 1991, revised 1994) is “The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ’Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368) in Arabic with Facing English Text, Commentary, and Appendices”, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The publisher is listed as amana publications in Beltsville, Maryland.
This an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam. (A Complete Collapse of Reason; By Baron Bodissey; Right Side News; 6/24/14 06:16)
Counterjihadists point out that Reliance is a manual on how Muslims can become brutal human beings and justified by Islam. For a synopsis of that brutality you really should read Mapping Sharia’s exposé of Reliance. Mapping Sharia also provides a link to the PDF of the full English translation of Reliance. If you want to delve into all 1251 pages in confirmation, knock yourself out HERE.
Dr. Muhammad Shafiq is a proud member of IIIT. As a proud member of IIIT he ironically is actively drawing the picture of one desirous of an interfaith dialogue between Islam and the West. AND YET as a member of IIIT he has to be supportive that organization’s secretive goals of promoting a Radical Islam (a la Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabism) and a stealth infiltration of Western governments and culture to message acceptance of the antichrist religion of Islam.
Okay, I’ve spent a bit of time differentiating two Muslims with the same pronunciation of their names yet with different spelling. First I looked at Mohammed Shafiq and followed that by looking at Nazareth College/IIIT professor Dr. Muhammad Shafiq. Both try to project an image of a Moderate Muslim yet associations and actions expose that moderation as a probable deception.
At this point I intended to cross post Paul Sutliff’s LinkedIn page report entitled “Dr. Shafiq vs. Me”. I do believe I have ran out of time and space if you have actually read this far. So this is what I am going to do. I will first post this Shafiq and Dr. Shafiq examination then in a separate post I will cross post Mr. Sutliff’s report pointing back to my thoughts via a link.
As background it would do well for you to be cognizant of the portion of this post pertaining to Dr. Muhammad Shafiq. This will help you to understand Sutliff’s outrage about the good professor’s ISIS talk at St John’s Church on Humboldt Street in Rochester, NY on the date September 16, 2014.
(Mr. Sutliff actually re-edited his LinkedIn post and got it published at the blog calling itself The Independent Chronicle. I’ll be sticking with the LinkedIn version since that is what inspired me.)
John R. Houk
© June 16, 2014
On June 1st I posted a Shamim Masih submission entitled “New Ideas, New Players”.
Shamim’s report exposed how badly Pakistan Muslims treated Pakistan Christians. Here is a short excerpt from the report to give you a snapshot of the brutality Christians experience at the hands of Muslims:
The worst is that their children, particularly young girls are the targets of their violence. Girls are kidnapped, raped and forced to convert to Islam. Young girls that refuse to convert and marry are beaten, physically tortured and either killed or simply raped and left to die naked in the wilderness. It is unfortunate that Christians do not have access to the legal system in Pakistan. Police arrest them for any crime they are accused of and they are really only accused of one crime: blasphemy, which carries an automatic death sentences. Judges in Pakistan know that if they ever find a Christian innocent of blasphemy that the judge and his family will be murdered. …
I shared this at several Counterjihad exposé groups on Facebook. I wish I could remember a particular group that Dale G. Brown left a very simple link as a comment. I copied the link and emailed it to myself failing to include the Facebook link. Oops.
The link was to a Vimeo video that I tried without luck to find the carbon copy on Youtube. The reasoning is that all the blogs I post on makes Youtube embedding quite easy. At least one of my blogs only allows me to post Youtube but I will give it a shot just in case that blog location on WordPress now allows it. (It may be the case that I don’t know the trick to post Vimeo videos there.)
The Vimeo video is entitled “Dispatches – Unholy War – British Muslims who want to Murder Christians”. The title is fairly self-explanatory. Muslims in Britain have become numerous enough that have demanded the government to recognize Sharia Law and British Muslims have been dodging hate-crime and hate-speech crimes consistently enough that many Brits are beginning to wake up that Multiculturalism has failed in ensuring civil harmony.
American Leftists have not yet learned this lesson. Although Americans still have a greater degree of freedom in our First Amendment Rights then do the Brits or the Europeans for that matter, Leftists in the USA have gone to great lengths to accommodate Islamic apologists and activists in the name of Diverse Multiculturalism. These Islamic Supremacists are demanding government recognition of Sharia Law for Muslims even though that Muslim theopoliticalJurisprudence for the most part is unconstitutional especially under the enforcement of the First Amendment.
I’ll make the attempt to embed this video but if it doesn’t take watch on this link: https://vimeo.com/34627153
Here is the Vimeo summary found underneath the video:
Defend our Freedom! ACT NOW! Join us at Stop Islamization of the world! siotw.org/
When muslims convert to Christianity, muslim cult followers go temporary insane and wish to murder the apostate. Full video report on the dangers and intimidation faced by former Muslims who have converted to Christianity in Britain. Looks at how hundreds of such converts have to worship in secret and how there has been silence on the subject from Muslim and Christian leaders. Conversion is viewed within Islam as apostacy, punishable by death in some Islamic countries and advocated by radical Islamic groups.
Look Out! The Muslim Red Coats are COMING!
John R. Houk
© June 16, 2014
Dispatches – Unholy War – British Muslims who want to Murder Christians
January 5, 2012 3:10 PM
From the SIOTW About IslamPage
Islam is NOT a religion of peace. By its nature Islam is radical, it has no shades.
Most people are simply unaware that Islam is NOT just another religion but a totalitarian political cult-like ideology, which compels its followers into blind obedience, teaches intolerance, brutality and locks all Muslims and non-Muslims in a struggle deriving directly from the 7th century nomadic, predatory, Bedouin culture.
Islam means “submission” to the will of Allah and the teachings as depicted in the Qur’an which include jihad – the genocidal slaughter of infidels by the sword, killing by beheading, intolerance of other religions, as well as forcing submission to Islam. The ultimate goal of jihad is the domination of Islam over the entire world.
In Islam, one is considered “moderate” if one supports the goals of jihad, if not the tactics. Those who totally reject the violent teachings of Islam are considered apostates of Islam and as such, are condemned to death. Moderate Muslims are peaceful “in spite of Islam,” not because of it. The “religion of peace” is a concept the West is eager to embrace – all in the name of political correctness – refusing to believe that a major world religion poses such a devastating threat to humanity.
This site is designed to show you the dark side of Islam, the REAL Islam that the West does not want you to see. The Islam that Western media refuse to show you. The Islam that is slowly but surely changing the West. You may feel uncomfortable looking at this site. You should. You will feel anger and disgust that our leaders do not understand Islam when it comes to the motives that drive our enemies to commit suicide for their ideology.
Look at the photos, watch the videos, most of which come right out of the Muslim world, a world that glorifies death and destruction of all that is not Islamic. Understand that elements of Sharia law are creeping into our daily lives under shelter of religious freedom. Listen and learn about the real Islam, then tell your family and friends.
Do not fear being labeled an ‘Islamophobe.’ Winston Churchill was once accused of being a ‘Naziphobe.’
ACT for America found a British video that was secretly taken in a Sharia Court that is legal in the UK. If the Muslim Brotherhood linked Muslim organizations like CAIR have their way then America could experience Sharia Courts which will act contrarily to the U.S. Constitution rule of law. Regardless of the propaganda that organizations such as CAIR use to deceive the MSM and the non-Muslim American people, the Counterjihad movement promoting American Laws for American Courts (ALAC – See Also HERE) is an imperative to make sure Constitutional Law trumps religious and foreign laws if those laws are not a part of Constitutional Law in the USA.
Sharia courts in Britain:
A hidden camera report
Sent by ACT for America
Sent: 15 Jul 2013 09:27:40 -0700 (PDT)
This stunning, disturbing, eye-opening hidden camera investigative report is a MUST SEE!
Go inside a sharia court in Britain and ask yourself: Do we want this in the United States???
Hamas-connected CAIR claims that American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) legislation is “anti-Muslim.”
When you watch this must see video below, you’ll see how dishonest that CAIR claim is. That’s because the Muslim women abused by the sharia court system in Britain would be protected under ALAC.
Editor: The Bold Emphasis in the ACT email is arranged by me. Originally ACT emails are delivered in Bold Print.
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
Before I get to that email here is Liz Trotta of Fox News editorializing on BHO’s timing on declaring the war on terror over:
Now below is the ACT for America email which includes an editorial from the Wall Street Journal by Douglas Murray.
The lesson from London
Sent by ACT for America
Sent: 5/28/2013 1:35 PM
“How many ignored warnings does it take?”
Douglas Murray of the London-based Henry Jackson society wrote an excellent column last week for The Wall Street Journal (see below).
The subtitle states, “Britain has been in denial about the Islamist threat.”
So true. It’s very disturbing that this same denial permeates the thinking of far too many of America’s political, academic, media, counterterrorism and law enforcement leadership.
An Associated Press story over the weekend, referring to President Obama’s national security speech late last week, began this way:
“Some call it wishful thinking, but President Barack Obama has all but declared an end to the global war on terror.”
The reason Obama has done so is because he sees only al Qaida and its affiliates as a threat. Doing so misses the point.
The point is the “war on terror” is not confined to one organization and is not limited by geography, but is defined by those who subscribe to jihadist ideology. Denial won’t change this fact.
Our federal government continues to lead us down the very same path that has failed so miserably in Great Britain and much of Europe.
The London Terror Attack Was More Than ‘Unforgivable’
Britain has been in denial about the Islamist threat. Time to face it down.
How many ignored warnings does it take? That is one question that should hang over Britain after the horror of the daytime murder of a British soldier on the streets of south London. On Wednesday afternoon, Drummer Lee Rigby was killed in Woolwich by two men wielding large knives and shouting “Allahu akbar”—God is great.
Islamists have been saying for years they would do this. They have planned to do it. And now they have done it.
WSJ Europe editorial writer Ray Zhong on the alleged terror attack in London Wednesday, and what it says about the wider war on terrorism. Photo: Getty Images
The attack itself is not surprising. What is surprising is that British society remains so utterly unwilling not just to deal with this threat, but even to admit its existence. Politicians have called the Woolwich killing “unforgivable” and “barbarous.” But expressions of anger should not really be enough.
Attempts to attack military targets in Britain go back to before the millennium and even before, it is important to note, the war on terror. In 1998 Amer Mirza, a member of the now-banned extremist group al Muhajiroun, attempted to petrol-bomb British army barracks. In 2007, a cell of Muslim men was found guilty of plotting to kidnap and behead a British soldier in Birmingham. The plan had been to take the soldier to a lock-up garage and cut off his head “like a pig.” They wanted to film this act on camera and send it around the world to cause maximum terror.
In 2009, al Muhajiroun protested at a homecoming parade in Luton for British troops returning from Afghanistan. Carrying banners saying “go to hell,” “butchers” and “terrorists,” the group was protected by British police officers from an increasingly irate crowd of locals. The resulting outrage toward the police gave rise to the deeply troubling English Defence League, a street protest movement that often turns violent.
Police in Woolwich, south London, after Wednesday’s attack.
Now comes the attack in Woolwich, which the perpetrators—as with the earlier cell—wished to be observed and even filmed. Reports suggest that they invited people to capture their actions on video. The perpetrators gave interviews, machetes in hand, to bystanders with cameras. This horrific scene is something that will stick in the memory.
But it should also have been foreseen. Instead we entered the stage of denial. For there is already, in the reaction to events, more than a hint of what I have previously termed “Toulouse syndrome.” The term is named after the attacks last year carried out by a jihadist called Mohammed Merah, who killed three French soldiers in a rampage that concluded with the murders of four French Jews at a school in Toulouse.
In the early stages of the attacks, when little was known, there was significant speculation that the culprit was a far-right extremist. At that stage everybody knew what they were going to say. But once the culprit turned out to be an Islamist, the gaze nearly fell away completely. “Nothing to see here, please move on” was the order of the day.
“Toulouse syndrome” also touched Boston last month. After the bombing at the marathon, media and politicians waited, hoping—some even said as much—that the attackers would be tea-party types. Then everybody would know what to say. But when it turned out to be Islamists?
So it is with the Woolwich killing, which British officials have lined up to denounce. Yes it is sickening. Of course it is barbaric. But what of it? Even all these years after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2011, our societies remain unfit for purpose in facing up to—and facing down—Islamic extremism.
Too many still seek refuge in ignorance and denial that was so memorably displayed by U.S. officials after the Fort Hood shooting in 2009. A man who was a member of the American armed forces, Maj. Nidal Hasan, gunned down his colleagues while shouting “Allahu akbar.” On that occasion the American government, like the French government before it and the British government this week, decided to focus on everything about the attack other than what really mattered: the motive. Fort Hood was put down to a case of workplace violence.
There will be many angles to the events in London that must be addressed in the coming days, and we can hope many will receive the appropriate level of public attention. Among them will be one particularly unpleasant irony.
Most of the extremists who have repeatedly expressed their hatred of British soldiers are themselves supported by the British state. A prominent hate-preacher—Anjem Choudary, a leader of the disbanded al Muhajiroun—was even caught on video earlier this year extolling Britain’s “jihad-seekers’ allowance.” As he explained to his followers, “The normal situation, really, is to take money from the kafir”—a slur for non-Muslims. “Allahu akbar. We take the money.”
After the video showed up online, a BBC reporter asked Mr. Choudary to clarify how much he’s taking—the press has long reported a sum of £25,000 ($37,770) per year. “It’s irrelevant,” Mr. Choudary replied.
This would not be the first time a country has paid both sides in a conflict. But if the reported figure is anywhere near accurate, it would surely be the first time in human history that a society has paid its opponents better than it pays its own. A British soldier can expect to start in the army on a salary of around £16,000 ($24,172).
The events in south London must cause a re-evaluation by British society of the insanity we have been permitting. The question is not how sad we feel. The only question should be what we do about it.
Mr. Murray is associate director of the Henry Jackson Society, a London-based think tank.
The lesson from London
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
The London Terror Attack Was More Than ‘Unforgivable’
A version of this article appeared May 24, 2013, on page A13 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The London Terror Attack Was More Than ‘Unforgivable’.
Copyright ©2013 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Not to long ago Caroline Glick and Danny Dayan were debating Daniel Levy and William Sieghart. Glick and Dayan took the pro-Israel stand and Levy and Sieghart took the pro-Palestinian statehood stand.
Levy became so incensed at Glick that an article by Douglas Murray said he had to be physically restrained. Apparently Levy took umbrage to Glick’s argument that a lack of solution about statehood was Palestinian rejectionism more than Israeli Settlements in Judea/Samaria (aka West Bank).
Glick came away from this debate writing that she sees no future for Jews in the United Kingdom. The implication being that antisemitism has become ingrained into the UK public that they would rather allow the practice of unwestern Sharia Law than remember the treatment of Jews in Europe during WWII which was the Holocaust that killed about six million Jews.
Below is that Murray article which I will follow with a one hour and 45 minute Youtube video of the debate.
JRH 2/7/13 (Hat Tip: Danny Jeffrey)
Should Jews leave Britain?
29 January 2013 15:39
Should Jews leave Britain? The question is prompted by this piece written by the Israeli journalist Caroline Glick.
Glick recently came to London to take part in an Intelligence Squared debate. The debate was about Israeli settlements. Glick and Danny Dayan attempted to explain to the London audience that Palestinian rejection rather than Jewish settlement in the West Bank is the primary reason there is still no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. The debate is now available on Youtube and there you can see the deeply rancorous tone of the discussion. At one point Lord Levy’s son, Daniel Levy, (arguing against Glick and Dayan) has to be almost physically restrained by his own co-debater (William Sieghart). Levy’s frustration appears to come from being pulled up on an allegation he casually makes against Israel for which he turns out to have absolutely no evidence.
But the audience go with him, and go against Glick and Dayan in the final vote by a factor of 5 to 1. As Glick notes in her bitter farewell to London, the audience was so hostile towards her argument that when she even mentioned the matter of Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini and his involvement with the Nazis during World War II she was booed down by the audience. They – having been presented to her as open-minded – turned out to be so close-minded and partial that they would not even hear a historical fact about a Palestinian figure who was an actual Nazi. Glick writes:
‘I was prepared to conduct a civilized debate based on facts and reasoned argumentation. I expected it to be a difficult experience. I was not expecting to be greeted by a well-dressed mob.’
I suppose that there will be those who think Glick’s recommendation to Jews to be over-statement:
‘There is no future for Jews in England.’
But after the events of the last week you do have to wonder.
After all it was a week in which David Ward, the Liberal Democrat MP for Bradford East, used the opportunity provided by Holocaust Memorial Day to punish the Jews for the Holocaust:
‘Having visited Auschwitz twice – once with my family and once with local schools – I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.’
And on the day itself the Sunday Times saw fit to publish a cartoon by the witless Gerald Scarfe showing the Prime Minister of the Jewish state building a wall consisting of bloodied and dying Palestinians.
Much of the comment on these latter cases has focussed on the ‘inappropriateness’ of running an anti-Semitic cartoon or making an anti-Semitic comment so close to Holocaust Memorial Day. I cannot help thinking that this is missing the point. Ward and Scarfe should be excoriated not for their sense of timing but for the fact that they are wrong. Wholly, completely and outright wrong. There is absolutely no connection between, for instance, the liquidation of hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto and the treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank. There is absolutely no connection between the situation in Gaza and the herding of six million Jews into concentration camps. The wonder then is not over Scarfe or Ward’s sense of timing, but why at any point in any year they would be so keen to spread lies and to bait Jews by comparing the actions of the Jewish state with those of a genocidal doctrine of Nazism which sought to annihilate the Jews.
Rupert Murdoch has apologised for the Scarfe cartoon and Ward now seems to be reluctantly towing what Liberal Democrat party line can be held. But Glick’s question returns. What sort of future is there in Britain for Jews? I would submit that there is a future. But what is becoming increasingly clear is that the price of that future is that Jews will increasingly be expected to distance themselves from Israel. There is a fair amount of evidence from the Jewish community suggesting that this process is already underway. Once it is complete then those ‘good’ anti-Israel Jews will be able to proclaim victory. But the same force that they encouraged to come for their co-religionists will then just as surely come for them. And then where will they hide?
The Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All articles and content Copyright © 2012 The Spectator (1828) Ltd | All rights reserved
Is it not interesting that terrorism trumps Free Speech in Europe? The British television Channel 4 televised a documentary by Tom Holland “Islam: The Untold Story”. Channel 4 was preparing to show an encore of the documentary when the Islamic threats began pouring in. The threat of terrorism proved too much for Channel 4 for they pulled the encore presentation of the documentary.
Here is the email that notified me how Islam is warping European culture with dhimmitude to Islamic Supremacy.
Islam must be scrutinised
By Maryam Namazie
Sent: September 14, 2012 10:12 AM
Sent by: Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain (CEMB)
The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain would like to make public its support for Tom Holland’s Channel 4 documentary ‘Islam: The Untold Story’ (http://www.channel4.com/programmes/islam-the-untold-story/4od). We are indignant to learn that due to threats made on Holland, Channel 4 has cancelled a repeat screening of the historical inquiry into the origins of Islam similar to the kind of inquiry that has been applied to other religions and histories in Britain for many years.
The threats and concerted attempt to stigmatise the documentary and its producers by attacking its credibility and even legitimacy as a field of inquiry is nothing less than an attempt to impose a blasphemy taboo by stealth and coercion against programming that scrutinises Islam.
Caving in to the coercive pressure of Islamists will have catastrophic effects on free inquiry and expression where it pertains to Islam. It would not only further silence academic, historical and theological scrutiny of Islam but would also have the chilling effect of exerting added pressure on Muslims and ex-Muslims who wish to dissent from and question Islam.
CEMB spokesperson Maryam Namazie says:
“Here’s my question to Channel 4: what about the threats on our lives for being apostates, ex-Muslims, atheists, freethinkers, secularists, 21st century human beings?
“What part of our thoughts, lives, and bodies do you recommend we cancel to appease the Islamists?
“If only there was such an ‘easy’ ‘solution’ for those who are languishing under Islam’s rules.
“You may accept censorship and cowardly silence in the face of Islamist threats and intimidation but we cannot afford to do so. And we never will.”
The CEMB urges you to view the documentary
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm8xKh8eQqU [SlantRight Editor: Unfortunately not available in the USA] or http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=578_1347455615&comments=1) and write to Channel 4 and Ofcom (contact information below) calling for a repeat screening.
LiveLeak VIDEO: Islam: The Untold Story
We look forward to your support.
1. If you’d like to donate to our work, please send a cheque made payable to CEMB to BM Box 1919, London WC1N 3XX, UK or give via Worldpay or Paypal: http://ex-muslim.org.uk/donate/.
2. If you’d like to join a new coffee morning for ex-Muslim women, please email the CEMB at email@example.com.
3. See Maryam Namazie’s speech at the 5th anniversary celebration of the CEMB: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uQrBA9Gyeg&feature=player_embedded.
4. Join the active CEMB forum: http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/
5. Addresses for Channel 4 and Ofcom:
Lord Burns, Channel 4 Chairperson, Channel 4 Television Corporation, 124 Horseferry Road, London SW1P 2TX
Avi Grewal, Programme Coordinator, Arts & Religion, firstname.lastname@example.org
Mark Raphael, Emma Cooper, Lina Prestwood, Anna Miralis, Commissioning Editors, Documentaries, KHall@channel4.co.uk
Ed Richards, Chief Executive of Ofcom, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA, email@example.com
6. For further information contact:
Spokesperson Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain
We, non-believers, atheists, and ex-Muslims, are establishing or joining the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain to insist that no one be pigeonholed as Muslims with culturally relative rights nor deemed to be represented by regressive Islamic organisations and ‘Muslim community leaders’.
Those of us who have come forward with our names and photographs represent countless others who are unable or unwilling to do so because of the threats faced by those considered ‘apostates’ – punishable by death in countries under Islamic law.
By doing so, we are breaking the taboo that comes with renouncing Islam but also taking a stand for reason, universal rights and values, and secularism.
Whilst religion or the lack thereof is a private affair, the increasing intervention of and devastation caused by religion and particularly Islam in contemporary society has necessitated our public renunciation and declaration. We represent a … READ THE REST
Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain
BM Box 1919
London WC1N 3XX
David Icke talks about Illuminati and Freemason involvement in the shadows of world politics and the U.S. Government. Although it is not a huge theme by Icke here, he implies he is a Truther meaning that the 911 Islamic Terrorist attack was actually an inside job rather than coordinated by al Qaida. I personally think that is a load of manure.
Here is the fourth section of Global Watch Special Report 2011.
John R. Houk
© August 1, 2012
If Obama is reelected YOU can look forward to the criminalization of Christianity as it nearly is now in the United Kingdom.
Check out this video about British Christians who are actually penalized by courts or job place for their faith.
Wake-up and look out America!
JRH 8/1/12 (Hat Tip: Vicki)
John R. Houk
© May 25, 2012
The Capital city of Israel is Jerusalem. Unfortunately a huge majority of nations refuse to recognize Jerusalem as the Capital city because of the Arabs that have designated themselves as Palestinians claim Jerusalem is a Muslim city and will be the Capital of a sovereign Palestinian state.
1. The seat of government as stated by the Israeli government is Jerusalem.
2. During Israel’s war of Independence and national survival in 1948 invading armies representative of Islamic culture and Islamic Supremacism tried to wipe Israel off the map. Israel successfully beat back all the invading armies except Transjordan’s Arab Legion. The Arab Legion in 1948 was under the command of British Officers that alongside the Bedouin army of the Hashemite Monarchy of Transjordan. The Arab Legion pushed the Jewish forces of Israel back to Israel and ended up usurping the Eastern half of Jerusalem aka the Old City in which the ancient Jewish Quarter had resided for over a thousand years. In 1967 Israel took the land back from had then became Jordan.
3. After the Oslo Accords the Palestine Liberation Organization (an Islamic terrorist organization – PLO) became the backbone and ruling elite of the Accords’ semi-autonomous Palestinian Authority (PA) that would have administrative duties of Arab dominated portions of Judea-Samaria (termed as the West Bank after Jordan’s unilateral annexation shortly after the 1948 war). The PA demanded a Jerusalem Capital but Israel did not accede to that point; nevertheless other points of the Oslo Accords proceeded.
4. The Jewish heritage to all of Jerusalem is longer and so much more historical than any claim by a group of people that did not even existed as an entity until after 1967.
5. Therefore Jerusalem as the Capital City is a valid Israel designation and the International Community should respect Israel’s designation rather than fall prey to Islamic Supremacism.
And yet the United Kingdom’s subservience to oil producing Muslim nations is evident by refusing to honor Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital City. The so-called Free Press of the UK has shown its disdain for Israel by apologizing for initially calling Jerusalem Israel’s Capital when they believe that the Press should termed Tel Aviv as Israel’s Capital.
Here is the story from Honest Reporting.
The British Empire Strikes Back: UK Body Rules Tel Aviv is Israel’s Capital
May 21, 2012 15:12
Nearly a month ago, The Guardian posted a photo of passengers on Jerusalem’s light rail observing a minute’s silence for Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day. The caption, however, prompted a correction from The Guardian, which had originally (and correctly) referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital:
The caption on a photograph featuring passengers on a tram in Jerusalem observing a two-minute silence for Yom HaShoah, a day of remembrance for the 6 million Jews who died in the Holocaust, wrongly referred to the city as the Israeli capital. The Guardian style guide states: “Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel; Tel Aviv is” (Eyewitness, 20 April, page 24).
Further resources: The Status of Jerusalem
Irrespective of whether the international community recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it is simply inaccurate to unilaterally confer capital city status on Tel Aviv. Believing The Guardian to be in clear breach of the UK Press Complaints Commission clause on accuracy, HonestReporting submitted an official complaint.
Ironically received on Jerusalem Day, this was the outrageous PCC ruling:
The terms of Clause 1 (i) of the Code make clear that newspapers “must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information”, and the terms of Clause 1 (ii) state that “a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected promptly and with due prominence”.
In this instance, the Commission noted that the correction published had been a clarification of the newspaper’s earlier claim that Jerusalem was the Israeli capital. The Commission was mindful that while it is correct to say that Israel classes Jerusalem as her capital city, this is not recognised by many countries and those nations enjoying diplomatic relations with Israel have their embassies in Tel Aviv. As such, the Commission was of the view that the newspaper was entitled to refer to Tel Aviv as the capital of Israel. There was no breach of the Code in this instance.
This is astonishing and outrageous. Aside from a sovereign state’s right to determine its own capital, international convention maintains that a capital city is usually where a state’s central political institutions reside. The UK Foreign Office itself states:
Capital City: Israel maintains that Jerusalem is its capital city, a claim not recognised by the UK and the international community. The UK locates its embassy in Tel Aviv.
Unlike The Guardian and the PCC, it does not designate Tel Aviv as the capital.
Related content: BBC Sorry For Calling Jerusalem Israel’s Capital
We believe that this flawed ruling has the potential to further delegitimize Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital, giving the British media a carte blanche to follow The Guardian’s lead. And furthermore, the PCC accepts no appeals or complaints on the substance of its rulings, effectively slamming the door in our face. HonestReporting CEO Joe Hyams said in response:
64 years after the end of the British Mandate, it appears that imperialism is alive and well. This ruling is an absolute outrage. The PCC’s role is to maintain standards of media accuracy, not to make political and politicized rulings. That this has been released on Jerusalem Day adds insult to injury and is yet another example of how contaminated with anti-Israel bias, British officialdom has become.
Convention has it that the location of national legislatures, judiciaries and other formal institutions of state make a capital city. What mandate does the PCC, or Britain for that matter, have in deciding that the location of foreign embassies determines a host nation’s capital status?
We will continue to work behind the scenes to bring pressure to bear on this issue. This is certainly not the end of the matter as far as HonestReporting is concerned.
Jerusalem the Capital of Israel
John R. Houk
© May 25, 2012
The British Empire Strikes Back: UK Body Rules Tel Aviv is Israel’s Capital
© 2012 HonestReporting All rights reserved.
Israel is in the midst of a battle for public opinion – waged primarily via the media. To ensure Israel is represented fairly and accurately “‘HonestReporting'” monitors the media, exposes cases of bias, promotes balance, and effects change through education and action. Read more