Child sex scandal council hires ‘mentors’ linked to hard-liners

Street UK's founder, Abdul Haqq Baker, pictured outside Brixton Mosque in 2001 Photo: Geoff Pugh/The Telegraph

Street UK’s founder, Abdul Haqq Baker, pictured outside Brixton Mosque in 2001 Photo: Geoff Pugh/The Telegraph

Council which failed dozens of girls abused by a sex grooming ring has hired a radical Islamic group with links to the Trojan Horse plot to “mentor” potential abusers from the Muslim community.

Telegraph, By Andrew Gilligan, Feb. 22, 2015:

The council which failed scores of girls abused by a sex grooming ring has hired a radical Islamic group to “mentor” potential abusers from the Muslim community.

The group, Street UK, also has links to the Trojan Horse plot, in which hard-line Muslims sought to Islamise state schools and push out secular head teachers.

The contract is part of Oxfordshire County Council’s response to Operation Bullfinch, which saw seven men convicted of 59 sex crimes against children and sentenced to a total of 95 years in prison. Five were of Pakistani origin and two were North African.

The council is braced for fierce criticism next week in a “serious case review” into the scandal. All the victims were known to Oxfordshire social services and five were living in council care, but for years officials and police ignored complaints from their parents and other warnings that the children were being raped and sold for sex.

In an effort to answer the attacks, the council has engaged Street UK, which it describes as a “national youth charity,” for a “pilot mentoring programme” in Oxfordshire’s Muslim communities to “work closely with those at risk of perpetrating child sexual exploitation and divert them away from such activity.” Street UK is in fact a group which had its government grant cancelled in 2011 after paying for the publication of a booklet by Salafi Manhaj, which issues regular fatwas enforcing a Salafist, or ultra-literal and conservative, view of Islam.

The fatwas call participation in parliament a “sin”, oppose “man-made laws”, such as British law, describe “those who speak in the name of ‘freedom of religion’ ” as “enemies of Islam” and forbid “a man and woman to be alone together under all circumstances”, unless married.

Salafi Manhaj condemns football as “impermissible” because players wear shorts and spectators “turn away from the remembrance of Allah” in a spirit of “repugnant bias and partisanship towards different teams”.

Street UK’s website published advice on clothing and music from anti-Semitic and extremist Salafi clerics. Its founder, Abdul Haqq Baker, an ultra-conservative Salafist, was chairman of Brixton Mosque, attended by Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, and Zacharias Moussaoui, 9/11’s “twentieth hijacker”. He says he tried to warn the authorities about them and opposes violence.

“This form of Salafism is strongly opposed to terrorism but promotes an extreme and separatist view of Islam,” said Haras Rafiq, director of Quilliam, an anti-extremism think tank. “They are not the right people to be working with potential abusers – or anyone else.” Despite this, Oxfordshire is far from the only public authority to employ the group. The Sunday Telegraph has established that Street UK has secured work to prevent child abuse from at least three other local safeguarding boards: Staffordshire, North Yorkshire and the east London borough of Havering.

It has also worked in at least four prisons, including “intensive mentoring of high-risk individuals” at Wormwood Scrubs in London, mentoring female offenders at Holloway, and young offender work at Rochester and Cookham Wood prisons. It has worked in schools in East Lancashire and West Yorkshire, and carried out other publicly-funded projects in London, Birmingham and Blackburn.

However, it is not clear where the money paid to the group has gone. Street UK does not appear to be a charity and has no connection to the charity of the same name, which deals with financial services. It was a company, but published its last accounts in 2010 and has now been dissolved. Its website is no longer operational.

Read more

One Million Child Victims of Muslim Rape Gangs in the U.K.?

Mr-450x299Frontpage,  by Arnold Ahlert, Feb. 9, 2015:

In a gut-wrenching development, it may turn out that last year’s report detailing a decade-and-a-half of sexual exploitation inflicted on at least 1,400 children from Rotherham, England—and the PC-driven effort to cover it up–may represent the proverbial tip of the iceberg. The city’s Labor MP Sarah Champion believes as many as one million children may have been victimized, describing it as a “national disaster” that requires the establishment of a task force to deal with the “horror.”

Champion picks up the story following the release of a report, titled “The Independent Inquiry Into Child Exploitation in Rotherham, 1997-2013.” “The day after the first report broke the victims started coming to me,” she told the Daily Mirror. “They couldn’t go to the police, they couldn’t go to the (Rotherham Borough) Council. So who do you go to?”

“For the first three weeks I generally thought I was losing my mind. I nearly lost my mind because of the level of depravity and horror,” she continued. “Listening to what these, now women, had gone through and how they were just left discarded, to flounder on their own. It was utterly mind-blowing and then the problem I had was that I was getting new cases coming to me, ones that hadn’t been reported which they wanted me to report. But I didn’t know who I could trust in the police to report it.”

“There was this parallel universe going on and it is mind-blowing,” she added, revealing that an average of 10 victims per week are seeking her help. Furthermore, it seems her concerns about the police were well-founded: a month after the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) began its investigation, 14 officers were suspended.

Last week a subsequent inspection report written by former Victims’ Commissioner Louise Casey was released, following allegations two councillors and a police officer had engaged in sex with minors. It hammered the Council for being “in denial” and failing to protect children because of “misplaced political correctness.” Minutes after the report’s findings were published, the entire Labor Cabinet of Rotherham Council, along with leader Paul Lakin, resigned. Five senior Whitehall officials, including a children’s services specialist, will assume control of the authority.

Communities and Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles announced new elections aimed at replacing the council’s “wholly dysfunctional” political leadership. “It is because the council is so seriously failing the people of Rotherham, and particularly some of the most vulnerable in that borough, that I am proposing to take this truly exceptional step,” he explained. “My aim will be to return these responsibilities to local democratic control as rapidly as possible.”

Cases contained in Casey’s report are highly disturbing. One concerns an alleged rape with a broken bottle, and girls being ordered to kiss the feet of a perpetrator at gunpoint. A mind-numbing 61 pregnancies were attributed to rapes. “Children were sexually exploited by men who came largely from the ­Pakistani heritage ­community,” the report stated. “Not enough was done to acknowledge this, to stop it happening, to protect children, to support victims and to apprehend perpetrators.” Inspectors further noted that council members bullied victims, with a witness insisting the council viewed those victims as “little slags.”

The police weren’t any better, refusing to believe accusations made by young girls on numerous occasions. “They were threatened with wasting police time, they were told they had consented to sex and, on occasion, they were arrested at the scene of a crime, rather than the perpetrators,” the report reveals.

Adding insult to injury, whistleblowers who raised concerns lost their jobs. “I stepped forward on behalf of young people – it cost me my job and my career,” one ex-staff member revealed.

A local police officer aptly illuminated the reasons for the coverup. “They were running scared of the race issue… there is no doubt that in Rotherham, this has been a problem with Pakistani men for years and years,” the officer explained. “People were scared of being called racist.”

Following the second report’s release, the National Crime Agency said it was looking into what were described as “potentially criminal matters.”

Last Wednesday an independent inquiry into the Rotherham scandal, along with the Westminster VIP pedophile ring that allegedly consisted of high-ranking members of Britain’s establishment abusing young boys in the 1970s and 1980s, was initiated. UK Home Secretary Theresa May appointed New Zealand High Court judge Lowell Goddard to lead the investigation that may last until 2018. In addition to investigating the two scandals, Goddard’s inquiry will also determine whether other public bodies, including government entities, charitable organizations, the Church and the BBC, also failed to step up and protect children.

The probe was initially set up last July to deal with the Westminster case, but failed to move forward due to a series of scandals that included the disappearance of a 40-page dossier on suspected establishment pedophiles compiled in 1983, raising suspicions of a government cover-up. May reached overseas for her investigator because the inquiry lost its first two chairs due to questions about their possible links with establishment figures.

Goddard promised the latest effort would put survivors “at the forefront and the whole center” of her inquiry. She will travel to the UK to meet Secretary May and discuss the investigation’s scope. The National Crime Agency told the Daily Mail Goddard’s probe would not slow down their own investigation.

A victim of the Rotherham scandal was overjoyed at the latest turn of events. “Finally somebody has listened to us,” said a mother whose daughter had been sexually exploited for five years—beginning at age 11. “Thank god my children will be safe now.”

Perhaps. “There are hundreds of thousands and I think there could be up to a million victims of exploitation nationwide, including right now, Champion warned. “Girls in the process of being groomed.” She explained her calculations “If you just think we know at least four big cases each with a couple of thousand each in smallest towns. It’s extraordinary,” she said.

Not really. It’s a very ordinary and predictable reflex born of decades of infatuation with political correctness and multiculturalism. Better to allow children as young as 11 to be systematically abused in Rotherham for more than 16 years, chiefly by men of Pakistani descent, than be labeled a bigot, racist or Islamophobe. Better to fire whistleblowers and better to bully the victims and/or dismiss them as low-lifes who deserve it.

This expanding investigation is now about far more than sexual abuse. The character of the entire UK is on trial. Soon the world will know whether their surrender to multiculturalism and political correctness is completely abject—and irreversible.

Also see:

How the Muslim Brotherhood fits into a network of extremism

Essam Mustafa, from Interpal, with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh

Essam Mustafa, from Interpal, with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh

The Telegraph, By Andrew Gilligan, Feb. 8, 2015:

The Government is preparing a major clampdown on organisations linked to the terror group Hamas after the long-awaited publication of its review into the Muslim Brotherhood.

The review, by the former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Sir John Jenkins, has been delayed for months amid disputes about how strongly it should say the Brotherhood is linked to terrorism.

It is expected to say that the Brotherhood, a multifaceted organisation, is not itself a terrorist group and should not be banned, a verdict most analysts agree with.

However, the report will dismiss claims by the Brotherhood that there is “no evidence” of links between it and terrorism. “There are clear links and Jenkins will trigger further action against some Brotherhood and Hamas-linked groups,” said one official source. Many of the groups have already been squeezed by removing their bank accounts.

Only a summary of the Jenkins report will be published. However, a separate investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has found a number of clear overlaps between the Brotherhood’s UK operations and those of organisations linked to Hamas, which is banned as a terrorist organisation throughout the Western world. In particular, it is striking how often they appear to share premises.

One person involved in counter-extremism said: “When you start forensically going through the names and locations, there’s no way the Brotherhood can keep up the denials.”

The Sunday Telegraph has established that the main hubs for the Brotherhood’s operations in Europe are Westgate House, a serviced office block at the Hangar Lane roundabout in Ealing, west London, and Crown House, about half a mile north of it on the North Circular Road.

The two buildings contain at least 25 organisations linked to the Brotherhood, or to Hamas. A third building very close by – Pinnacle House on Old Oak Common Lane – houses Interpal, another major charity which has had close links to the Brotherhood and Hamas. Interpal is banned by the US government as a terrorist organisation.

Muslim_Brotherhood_3191823c

Crown House, above, and, below, Westgate House, both in London, are the Muslim Brotherhood’s main hubs in Europe

Muslim_Brotherhood_3191822c

Interpal is allowed to operate in the UK after claiming it has broken its links with Hamas, a claim accepted by the Charity Commission.

However, its managing trustee, Essam Mustafa, was pictured just over a year ago accompanying the Hamas leader, Ismail Haniyeh, on an official visit in Gaza. The two were later filmed clapping and singing together. Mr Mustafa is a former member of Hamas’s executive committee.

The organisations based at Westgate House include the Cordoba Foundation, described by David Cameron as a “political front for the Muslim Brotherhood” and run by Anas al-Tikriti, the key spokesman and lobbyist for the Brotherhood in Britain, though he claims not to be a member himself. The Cordoba Foundation’s office is on the seventh floor of the building.

Mr al-Tikriti states openly that “the Brotherhood supports Hamas. I believe that if you are occupied you need to fight back.” Mr al-Tikriti co-founded a group called the British Muslim Initiative with a senior commander in Hamas, Mohammed Sawalha, and a Hamas “special envoy,” Azzam Tamimi.

The seventh floor of Westgate House also houses the Muslim Charities Forum, an umbrella body for 10 British charities, at least six of which have funded Hamas organisations and most of which can also be linked to the Brotherhood.

The Muslim Charities Forum was stripped of £250,000 in Government grants in December in what the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, described as a decision to “cease funding any organisation that supports or is linked to individuals who fuel hatred, division and violence.” More than £100,000 of the grant has already been paid, however.

Six of the Muslim Charities Forum’s 10 members are or were members of the Union of Good, also known as the 101 Days Campaign. The Union of Good is designated by the US Treasury Department as a terrorist organisation created by the Hamas leadership “in order to facilitate the transfer of funds to Hamas”.

The Union of Good is chaired by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a key intellectual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who has twice turned down offers to become its political leader.

Mr Al-Qaradawi, who is banned from the UK, is a strong supporter of suicide bombings, describing Israeli civilians as legitimate targets. The Union of Good’s founder and general secretary was Essam Mustafa, the managing trustee of the British charity Interpal.

Members of the Muslim Charities Forum include Muslim Aid, which has admitted funding organisations run by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad; Islamic Help, which works closely with a Hamas front organisation in Gaza; Muslim Hands, which also funds Hamas front bodies; and Human Appeal International, accused by the FBI, CIA and in the leaked US diplomatic telegrams of funding Hamas and of other terrorist links.

The Cordoba Foundation’s Anas al-Tikriti

The Cordoba Foundation’s Anas al-Tikriti

The Brotherhood’s objective is to replace secular democratic government with an Islamic caliphate under sharia law. Members swear an oath of allegiance declaring that “the Quran is our constitution” and “to die for the sake of God is our greatest objective”.

The Brotherhood’s leaders insist that it works democratically – albeit to secure the replacement of democracy – and says the British Government review is a form of “pandering” by Britain to Gulf dictatorships.

Hamas’s 1988 founding charter states that it is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine”, but the British government has tended to treat Hamas and the Brotherhood as unconnected.

The organisations based at Crown House comprise broadly the Brotherhood’s UK outreach wing. They include the Palestinian Return Centre, the Brotherhood campaign group with the closest links to mainstream politics.

The PRC last month met David Quarrey, director for the Middle East at the Foreign Office, according to its website, and was also present at the Labour Friends of Palestine annual dinner in November, addressed by the Labour leader, Ed Miliband. Many MPs have spoken at its events.

The PRC has close links to the Brotherhood, sharing directors with the Muslim Association of Britain, the Brotherhood’s main declared British affiliate.

However, it is also claimed by the Israeli government to be “Hamas’s organisational branch in Europe” whose members are “senior Hamas leaders who promote the movement’s agenda in Europe”.

The PRC denies these claims. However, it has regularly hosted Hamas leaders, including Mr Haniyeh, at its annual conferences.

Other organisations at Crown House are Middle East Monitor (Memo), a news site which promotes a strongly pro-Brotherhood and pro-Hamas view of the region. Memo’s director, Daud Abdullah, is also a leader of the Brotherhood-linked British Muslim Initiative, set up and run by the Brotherhood activist Anas al-Tikriti and two senior figures in Hamas.

Memo’s “senior editor”, Ibrahim Hewitt, is chairman of Interpal, the Hamas and Brotherhood-linked charity.

Another organisation at Crown House is the Emirates Centre for Human Rights (ECHR), also set up by Anas al-Tikriti. Its website was registered to his wife, Malath Shakir. Its founding director, Abdus Salam, is the husband of Mr al-Tikriti’s sister.

The ECHR has co-organised at least two meetings at the House of Commons with the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Human Rights. The ECHR’s director, Anas Mekdad, has personally tweeted supporting recent terrorist attacks in Jerusalem. He is the founder of AlMakeen Network, a UK-based website which also publishes articles praising the Brotherhood, Hamas and suicide bombings.

Other extremist organisations based at Crown House, though not formally linked to the Brotherhood, include the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA), which sends extremist preachers around British universities and mosques.

Both Westgate House and Crown House have other tenants and there is no suggestion that all their tenants are Islamists or extremists.

European ‘No-Go’ Zones: Fact or Fiction? Part 2: Britain

enclavesby Soeren Kern
February 3, 2015

“There’s things that I see when I’m driving around Birmingham that shouldn’t be happening. I only drive into these areas, never actually walk into these areas, I just wouldn’t. Just in case I did do something that…because of their culture or their religion it was a threat or it was an insult or something.” — Resident of Birmingham.

“There are some communities born under other skies who will not involve the police at all… there are communities from other cultures who would prefer to police themselves.” — Sir Tom Winsor, chief inspector of the police forces in England and Wales.

“We are sleepwalking our way to segregation. We are becoming strangers to each other and leaving communities to be marooned outside the mainstream.” — Trevor Phillips, former chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality.

“One of the results of [multiculturalism] has been to further alienate the young from the nation in which they were growing up and also to turn already separate communities into ‘no-go’ areas where adherence to this ideology [of Islamic extremism] has become a mark of acceptability.” — Michael Nazir-Ali, former Bishop of Rochester.

This is the second article in a multi-part series documenting so-called no-go zones in Europe. The first article in this series documents no-go zones in France. This second segment focuses on the United Kingdom. It provides a brief compilation of references to British no-go zones by academic, police, media and government sources.

An erroneous claim on American television that Birmingham, England, is “totally Muslim” and off-limits to non-Muslims has ignited a politically charged debate about the existence of no-go zones in Britain and other European countries.

No-go zones can be defined as Muslim-dominated neighborhoods that are de facto off limits to non-Muslims due to a number of factors, including the lawlessness, insecurity or religious intimidation that often pervades these areas.

In some no-go zones, host-country authorities are unable or unwilling to provide even basic public aid, such as police, fire fighting and ambulance services, out of fear of being attacked by Muslim gangs that sometimes claim control over such areas.

Muslim enclaves in European cities are also breeding grounds for Islamic radicalism.

Europe’s no-go zones are the by-product of decades of multicultural policies that have encouraged Muslim immigrants to remain segregated from — rather than become integrated into — their European host nations.

The problem of no-go zones is well documented, but multiculturalists and their politically correct supporters vehemently deny that they exist. Some are now engaged in a concerted campaign to discredit and even silence those who draw attention to the issue — often by deliberately mischaracterizing the term “no-go zone.”

Islam expert Andrew C. McCarthy has offered a lucid clarification of what no-go zones are and of what they are not:

“[N]o sensible person is saying that state authorities are prohibited from entering no-go zones as a matter of law. The point is that they are severely discouraged from entering as a matter of fact — and the degree of discouragement varies directly with the density of the Muslim population and its radical component. Ditto for non-Muslim lay people: It is not that they are not permitted to enter these enclaves; it is that they avoid entering because doing so is dangerous if they are flaunting Western modes of dress and conduct.

“White Flight”

In the United Kingdom, much of the debate over no-go zones — in Britain they are sometimes referred to as “Muslim areas” or “Muslim enclaves” — has focused on “white flight,” the large-scale migration of native white Britons out of a given neighborhood as more and more Muslim and other immigrants move in.

Although the issue of “white flight” remains taboo for British multiculturalists, official statistics and academic research confirm that many British cities are undergoing huge demographic transformations due to mass immigration.

A study by Oxford Professor David Coleman showed that if current immigration levels continue, white Britons will be a minority in little more than 50 years — within the lifespan of most young adults alive today. Coleman warned that this will be accompanied by a total change in national identity—cultural, political, economic and religious. He wrote: “The ethnic transformation implicit in current trends would be a major, unlooked-for, and irreversible change in British society, unprecedented for at least a millennium.”

A recent study by the think tank Demos found that native white Britons are increasingly abandoning parts of the country where Muslim immigrants have become the majority of the population. Demos wrote:

“In these areas, departing white British are replaced by immigration or by the natural growth of the minority population. Over time, the end result of this process is a spiral of white British demographic decline.”

An example of this trend is Birmingham. In August 2007, researchers at Manchester University predicted that the number of native white Britons in Birmingham would drop by nearly one-fifth over the next 20 years, from 65% in 2006 to 48% in 2027. At the same time, the number of Pakistanis in the city would nearly quadruple, increasing from 13% in 2006 to 48% in 2027.

In January 2013, Manchester University statistician Ludi Simpson analyzed official data from the 2011 census and found that native white Britons are already a minority in Leicester (45%), Luton (45%) and Slough (35%). He also forecast that they would be a minority in Birmingham by 2019, nearly a decade earlier than the previous estimate.

Muslim Enclaves in Britain

An analysis of 2011 census data reveals the existence of more than 100 Muslim enclaves in Britain. The Muslim population exceeds 85% in some parts of Blackburn and 70% in a half-dozen wards in Birmingham and Bradford. There are also large Muslim communities in Dewsbury, Leicester, London, Luton and Manchester, among others.

Birmingham: Bordesley Green (includes Small Heath) (73.9%); Hodge Hill (includes areas of Saltley and Ward End) (41.5%); Ladywood (35.2%); Lozells and East Handsworth (48.9%); Nechells (43.5%); Sparkbrook (includes Sparkhill) (70.2%); Washwood Heath (includes Alum Rock) (77.3%).

Blackburn with Darwen: Audley (68.7%); Bastwell (85.3%); Corporation Park (62.6%); Little Harwood (51.9%); Queen’s Park (51.5%); Shear Brow (77.7%); Wensley Fold (39.8%)

Bolton (Greater Manchester): Crompton (32.7 %); Great Lever (36.6%); Halliwell (27.9%); Rumworth (51.8%)

Bradford (West Yorkshire): Bowling and Barkerend (45.8%); Bradford Moor (72.8%); City (57.3%); Great Horton (42.8%); Heaton (55.9%); Keighley Central (51.2%); Little Horton (58.0%); Manningham (75.0%); Toller (76.1%)

Brent: Barnhill (23.3%); Dollis Hill (31.3%); Dudden Hill (23.5%); Harlesden (21.8%); Stonebridge (28.2%)

Dewsbury (West Yorkshire): Dewsbury South (including Savile Town) (43.8%); Dewsbury West (46.7%)

Leeds: Gipton and Harehills (33.2%)

Leicester: Charnwood (38.7%); Coleman (39.7%); Spinney Hills (69.6%); Stoneygate (50.2%)

London Borough of Enfield: Edmonton Green (29.1%); Haselbury (25.7%); Jubilee (24.1%); Lower Edmonton (24.1%); Ponders End (29.0%); Upper Edmonton (26.4%)

London Borough of Tower Hamlets: Bethnal Green South (45.7%); Bromley-by-Bow (48.7%); East India and Lansbury (42.9%); Limehouse (35.5%); Mile End and Globe Town (34.3%); Mile End East (45.9%); Shadwell (46.7%); Spitalfields and Banglatown (38.6%); St Dunstan’s and Stepney Green (48.7%); Weavers (30.3%); and Whitechapel (42.4%).

London Borough of Newham: Boleyn (40.5%); East Ham Central (39.6%); East Ham North (50.1%); Green Street East (49.1%); Green Street West (50.4%); Little Ilford (44.8%); Manor Park (45.4%); Wall End (33.9%)

London Borough of Redbridge: Clementswood (42.7%); Cranbrook (36.6%); Goodmayes (33.5%); Loxford (46.0%); Mayfield (34.6%); Newbury (29.4%); Seven Kings (31.3%); Valentines (40.0%)

London Borough of Waltham Forest: Forest (31.9%); Lea Bridge (32.3%); Leyton (30.2%); Markhouse (32.4%)

Luton: Biscot (64.6%); Dallow (includes parts of Bury Park) (61.6%); Saints (51.1%)

Manchester: Cheetham (43.3%); Longsight (53.8%); Rusholme (37.9%); Whalley Range (32.7%)

Oldham: Coldhurst (64.2%); Medlock Vale (32.3%); St Mary’s (58.7%); Werneth (68.2%)

Pendle: Bradley (45.7%); Brierfield (38.8%); Walverden (47.1%); Whitefield (69.8%)

Rochdale: Central Rochdale (52.4%); Milkstone and Deeplish (67.1%)

Slough: Baylis and Stoke (44.7%); Central (40.6%); Chalvey (37.2%);

Westminster: Church Street (42.0%); Harrow Road (24.1%); Hyde Park (25.1%); Queen’s Park (26.3%); Westbourne (33.1%)

Wycombe: Bowerdean (35.6%); Oakridge and Castlefield (45.7%)

Britain’s Asian Muslims

The British Muslim community is ethnically diverse, although the vast majority are from Asia. Census data shows that two-thirds of Muslims (68%) have an Asian background, including 38% from Pakistan and 15% from Bangladesh. Just over 10% of Muslims fall into the official census category of “Black/African/Caribbean/Black British,” 7.8% are “White” and 6.6% are “Arab.”

Opinion surveys cited by Ludi Simpson show that most ethnic minorities identify as “British” at least as strongly as do native white Britons.

Many areas of Britain with large concentrations of Pakistani, Kashmiri and Bangladeshi Muslims, however, are insular, parallel societies that are run according to patronage-based politics, known as the biraderi (clan or tribal) system. These enclaves are also run according to Sharia law, as evidenced by the prevalence of honor-based violence, polygamy and forced marriage.

A report by the former chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, Lord Ouseley, foundthat arranged marriages, common among Asian Muslims, are a key factor in the formation of Muslim ghettoes in Britain. The report said:

“The Sikh and Hindu communities are doing relatively well. Overall, their children are performing above average in educational terms. They tend to be better housed and are more likely to be in employment than are those of Pakistani or Bangladeshi origins. This can be explained mainly in class terms. Most of the Sikhs and Hindus come from the middle strata of their societies and are relatively well educated. Most of the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, predominantly Muslim, come from rural, or more correctly, peasant societies. Many have relatively little education and hold traditionalist views on religion. This, coupled with complex family relationships often identified with land ownership in Pakistan and Bangladesh, leads to a predominance of first cousin marriages which include one spouse from the country of origin. It is estimated these constitute 60% of marriages. This has a significant impact.

“It has a major impact on population growth. About 1,000 Bradfordian Muslims marry each year. If most of those marriages were internal to this country, it would lead to 500 new households which would be likely to average 4 children per household. (This is based on experience from other immigrant groups where family size usually halves that of the first generation by the second generation.) With 60% of marriages involving a spouse from overseas, the number of households goes up to 800 and, with many of the spouses being first generation, family size is likely to be significantly larger. So whereas 500 internal marriages might be expected to produce 2,000 offspring, the 800 marriages are likely to produce 4,000 offspring. This leads to very rapid population growth. In the eighties the Council estimated that the Muslim population would reach 130,000 by 2030 and then level. Now the projection is for 130,000 by 2020 and rising. The number of separate households is predicted to rise from 16,000 now to 40,000 in 2020. This rate of growth concentrated in particular areas puts severe demands on the public services. It has other ramifications. Many of the children arrive at school with little or no English. Many of those who come from overseas have little education and do not possess skills which are transferable to a Western economy. The high family size means overcrowding will be a persistent problem.”

Blackburn

A BBC Panorama documentary about separation and segregation between Muslim Asians and white Britons in Blackburn in Lancashire can be viewed here. According to the BBC:

“For all the hopeful talk about ‘integration,’ ‘multiculturalism’ and now ‘cohesion,’ the reality on the ground appears to be that Britain’s Muslim Asian community and its white community have few points of contact, and that the white majority often feel they share little in common with the growing Muslim Asian minority.”

Professor Ted Cantle, an expert on inter-cultural relations, told the BBC:

“There is not just simply residential segregation, but there is separation in education, in social, cultural, faith, in virtually every aspect of their daily lives, employment too.

“It exists as a problem, to some degree or other, throughout the country, and it may be in small pockets and neighborhoods within larger cities like London and Birmingham and therefore not quite so evident.

“It might be whole boroughs or whole cities, but to some degree or another it exists. There is some degree of separation or segregation in most towns and cities.”

Read more at Gatestone Institute

ISLAM IN EUROPE NOW A NO-GO SUBJECT

WhiteHouse.gov

WhiteHouse.gov

The American Spectator, By Aaron Goldstein, Jan. 28, 2015

A few days after the terrorist attacks in Paris on the offices of Charlie Hebdo and the Hyper Cacher grocery store, terrorism expert Steve Emerson appeared on the Fox News Channel’sJustice with Judge Jeanine hosted by Jeanine Pirro to discuss Islamic extremism in Europe. During his appearance, Emerson spoke about Muslim “no-go zones” throughout Europe where countries like France, Germany, Sweden, and Britain have ceded sovereignty and non-Muslims are not permitted to enter. Emerson also stated that Birmingham, Britain’s second largest city, is “totally Muslim where non-Muslims just simply don’t go.”

All hell would break loose and Emerson would issue an apology for his comments whileFNC issued several apologies after repeating Emerson’s statements. Despite the apology, the mayor of Paris has declared she will sue Fox News. In a snarky piece written in the Atlanticby David A. Graham titled “Why the Muslim ‘No-Go-Zone’ Myth Won’t Die?” Graham writes:

Have you heard about the areas of Europe, or perhaps even of the United States, that are run by jihadists and which non-Muslims can’t even enter? Don’t get too worried if you haven’t: They don’t exist.

Needless to say the Left hasn’t been this happy since Barack Obama’s first election victory. Speaking of President Obama, his British BFF David Cameron referred to Emerson as “a complete idiot.” Cameron is one to talk. This is the same man who once characterized Israel’s blockade of Gaza as “a prison camp.” Never mind that Egypt was also participating in this blockade as well. Apparently, Cameron also thinks the Hamas-run government bears no responsibility for the sorry state of affairs in Gaza either.

Criticize Steve Emerson all you want. Emerson may have been wrong in this instance, but he did warn the world months before the September 11, 2001 attacks, “Al Qaeda is … planning new attacks on the US…. [It has] learned, for example, how to destroy large buildings.” No, Steve Emerson is not a complete idiot. Far from it. In exposing threats from Islamic extremists, Emerson has subjected himself to numerous death threats by jihadists and, for the past two decades, has taken extraordinary protective measures in his day-to-day living. I can attest to the heavy security measures deployed when I went to see him speak at a Brookline synagogue more than a decade ago. Emerson’s bravery cannot be called into question, which is more than what I can say for David Cameron.

Besides, if David Cameron considers Steve Emerson to be a complete idiot for talking about the existence of Muslim no-go zones then why, as Robert Spencer has noted, have the New York Times, Newsweek, and New Republic also used the term “no-go zone”?

So something the New York Times noted in 2002 and Newsweek in 2005, and that the New Republicreported was still a problem in January 2015, is now something Fox News has to apologize for discussing?

Actually, the New York Times used the term “no go zone” as recently as September 2014 in anarticle discussing European anti-Semitism.

Yet FNC apologized and it wasn’t alone in issuing apologies. CNN’s Anderson Cooper also issued an apology for using the term “no-go zones” on the air as well. Will  the New York Times, Newsweek, and New Republic be issuing apologies next? If so, will Cameron also call them complete idiots?

It may be wrong to say that large parts of Europe are under Muslim control where law enforcement and non-Muslims at large are forbidden from traversing. But only a complete idiot would deny there isn’t a desire among a critical mass of Muslims to impose Sharia law or, at the very minimum, behave in a violent manner towards non-Muslims.

In 2011, the group Islam4UK led by Ahmed Choudary began putting up posters around the UK bearing an ominous warning:

YOU ARE ENTERING A SHARIAH CONTROLLED ZONE

ISLAMIC RULES ENFORCED

The sign also indicated that in these zones alcohol, gambling, drugs, smoking, porn, prostitution, music and concerts were forbidden. At the time Choudary stated, “We want to run the area as a Sharia-controlled zone and really to put the seeds down for an Islamic Emirate in the long term.”

If the name Ahmed Choudary sounds familiar, it should. Following the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, Choudary penned an op-ed in USA Today praising the attacks:

Muslims consider the honor of the Prophet Muhammad to be dearer to them than that of their parents or even themselves. To defend it is considered to be an obligation upon them. The strict punishment if found guilty of this crime under sharia (Islamic law) is capital punishment implementable by an Islamic State. This is because the Messenger Muhammad said, “Whoever insults a Prophet kill him.”

However, because the honor of the Prophet is something which all Muslims want to defend, many will take the law into their own hands, as we often see.

Choudary was interviewed last November on 60 Minutes Overtime as was his colleague Abu Ramaysah. Take a look what Ramaysah told correspondent Clarissa Ward:

Ultimately, I want to see every single woman in this country covered from head to toe. I want to the see the hand of the thief cut. I want to see adulterers stoned to death. I want to see Sharia law in Europe. And I want to see it in America as well. I believe our patrols are a means to an end.

In view of Choudary and Ramaysah’s aims and objectives in conjunction with Choudary’s praise of the Charlie Hebdo attacks, he and those who wish to impose Sharia law in Britain and elsewhere in Europe must be taken every bit as seriously as the people who perpetrated theCharlie Hebdo attacks.

It is true that these posters Choudary disseminated were not legally sanctioned and Scotland Yard worked with local councils to take them down. Nevertheless, this hasn’t prevented self-appointed Muslim Patrols from trying to enforce Sharia law on the streets of London. Similar patrols have also surfaced in Germany.

In October 2013, an American student from Florida named Francesco Houyne was severely beaten and had a beer bottle smashed into his face by one of these London patrols for drinking alcohol. Two months later, a Muslim Patrol threatened a couple holding hands in public telling them, “Let go of each other’s hands. This is a Muslim area!” and then blocked their car when they tried to get away. On both occasions the people responsible for the incidents were arrested and charged.

It would be difficult for British authorities to overlook violent incidents which take place in public. However, when things take place behind closed doors in Muslim majority neighborhoods, the authorities have looked the other way. as was the case in the Rotherham child sex scandal in which 1,400 girls were sexually abused over a 16-year period by a group of predominantly Muslim men of Pakistani origin (or “Asian” origin, as the Brits like to say). Police and the local council were aware of the abuse, but did nothing out of fear of being called racist. Indeed, a researcher who alerted authorities to the abuse back in 2001 was sent on an “ethnicity and diversity” sensitivity course and admonished for making reference to their “Asian” heritage. As far as British police and public officials were concerned, the sexual abuse of girls by Muslim men was, well, a no-go zone.

This problem isn’t confined to Britain. Consider what Pakistani-born Canadian Muslim journalist Natasha Fatah wrote in December 2010 following a trip to Malmo, Sweden, with her husband:

Malmo was supposed to be a symbol of Sweden’s multiculturalism. But it is in danger of turning into an Islamist ghetto, with a hard core of those who favour an Islamic state.

Fatah went on to write that synagogues have been vandalized and Jews have been publicly accosted on the streets, but that local authorities have done little to stop the problem and as a result Jews are leaving Sweden. So here is a Muslim who recognizes the danger of turning Sweden into an Islamic state. Would David Cameron call her a complete idiot too?

So where does this leave the term “no-go zone”? The term was coined by Daniel Pipes back in 2006. But by 2013, following visits to Muslim neighborhoods throughout Europe, Pipesreassessed his view:

I found that those areas “are not full-fledged no-go zones” — meaning places where the government had lost control of territory. No warlords dominate; sharia is not the law of the land. I expressed regret back then for having used the term no-go zones.

So how does Pipes think these enclaves should now be described? He suggests “semi-autonomous sectors.” Honestly, it doesn’t matter what term Pipes uses to describe Muslims who seek to impose Sharia on the rest of the population. Islamists and their left-wing apologists in the media believe Islam is beyond criticism. They want Islam to be a no-go subject.

The Muslim Brotherhood Inquiry: What’s Happening?

Gatestone Institute, by Samuel Westrop, January 23, 2015

There are several reasons the British government may be publishing only the “principal findings” of the report. First, some of the information gathered will have been done so by the intelligence services, so there are assets and agreements to protect. Another is the possibility that by revealing the scope of the Muslim Brotherhood network in full, the government would be revealing its own partnerships with Brotherhood organizations, and providing insights into the vast amount of public funds that has filled the coffers of Brotherhood charities.

“Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups in each country work according to a common vision — but in complete operational independence, making the Brotherhood an informal global movement. It’s what makes designating the whole movement a terrorist organisation virtually impossible in the UK, as authorities knew from the very beginning. But the lack of a ban does not equal an exoneration or an endorsement — hardly the general tone of the review.”

The British government will publish only the “principal findings” of an inquiry commissioned by the British government into the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in Britain, according to a report in the Financial Times.

Although the former head of the MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove, has described the Brotherhood as being, “at heart, a terrorist organization,” Brotherhood organizations in the UK have, nevertheless, long enjoyed the support of government ministers and taxpayers’ money.

Previous media statements have indicated that the report written for the inquiry, first commissioned in April 2014, has since sparked a great deal of argument between government ministers and officials and has led to a lengthy delay.

The biggest point of contention has reportedly focused on concerns over the expected reaction of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — both of which have recently designated the Muslim Brotherhood and some of its front groups as terrorist organizations – if the inquiry’s report is perceived to be a whitewash.

London, it seems, has long been an important hub for the Muslim Brotherhood. Over the past 50 years, Brotherhood members have established dozens of Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, including lobby groups, charities, think tanks, television channels and interfaith groups.

The secretary-general of the International Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood, for example, Ibrahim Munir, is a resident of London. In 2013, the Egyptian newspaper Al-Masry al-Youm reported that Munir was providing funds to the Egyptian Brotherhood through British Brotherhood groups such as the Muslim Welfare House — but under the guise of fundraising for Palestinians in Gaza.

This government inquiry was established to examine not just the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in Britain, but to understand better the workings of the worldwide Brotherhood network. This network is both big and nebulous. The inquiry sought to examine the network comprehensively, including the Brotherhood’s collaboration with other Islamic groups, such as Jamaat-e-Islami, a South Asian Islamist network that also has a strong presence in Britain.

Why, then, has the report been delayed?

The question that has dominated most British media reports of the inquiry’s findings has centered on the allegation of terrorism. The relationship between Western governments and the Brotherhood on this point has long appeared murky. In 2002, for instance, the United States government shut down the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim Brotherhood fundraising group for the Hamas terrorist organization. And in 2011, FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives: “I can say at the outset that elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism.”

At the same time, however, both the Bush and Obama administrations also sought to woo the Muslim Brotherhood. One anonymous Palestinian official, quoted in Asharq Al-Awsat, claimed: “The Americans mistakenly think that moderate political Islam, represented by Muslim Brotherhood, would be able to combat radical Islam.”

The inconsistency seems to have revolved around the Muslim Brotherhood’s connection to Hamas. Although Hamas’s 1988 covenant asserts that, “The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine,” Western governments have nevertheless treated Hamas and the Brotherhood as unconnected entities — despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary.

In the United Kingdom, Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas networks appear to overlap heavily. In 2005, for instance, the British government handed over the running of London’s Finsbury Park mosque to the Muslim Association of Britain [MAB]. The Muslim Association of Britain was founded by Muslim Brotherhood activists including Kemal Helbawi, who described the Israel-Palestinian conflict as “an absolute clash of civilisations; a satanic programme led by the Jews and those who support them, and a divine programme carried [out] by Hamas … and the Islamic peoples in general.”

One of the trustees appointed to run the Finsbury Park mosque was Muhammad Sawalha, a fugitive Hamas commander who, according to BBC reports, is “said to have masterminded much of Hamas’s political and military strategy” from London. Yet the police and local government continue to fund the mosque with tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money.

Muhammad Sawalha, a fugitive Hamas commander who is “said to have masterminded much of Hamas’s political and military strategy” from London, is a trustee of the Finsbury Park mosque, which receives tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money. (Image source: inminds YouTube video screenshot)

By ignoring both the operational and ideological relations between the Brotherhood and Hamas, Western governments have been able to claim a dedication to opposing terrorism while at the same time courting Islamist allies, ostensibly to help fight the jihadist threat. By 2009, for instance, the British government provided the Muslim Welfare House, mentioned earlier, with £48,000 of “counter-extremism” funds. To this day, leading Islamist charities, established by Brotherhood figures, continue to receive millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money.

The Muslim Brotherhood, without Hamas, has worked hard to present itself as a benign organization. It is the government’s apparent failure to demonstrate adequate evidence of connections to terrorism, some critics argue, that has led to the delay in publishing the inquiry’s report. The prominent newspaper journalist, Peter Oborne, has claimed that the report “had discovered no grounds for proscribing the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group… Publication of the report as originally written would infuriate the Prime Minister’s Saudi allies — and not just them. The United Arab Emirates have long been agitating for the defenestration of the Brothers…. The reason [for the delay] is simple: money, trade, oil, in a number of cases personal greed.”

Peter Oborne, a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, was, in fact, echoing the line taken by the Brotherhood itself. British Brotherhood operatives, such as Anas Al-Tikriti, recently placed an advertisement in the Guardian newspaper that claimed, “this review is the result of pressure placed on the British government by undemocratic regimes abroad, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.” The letter was signed by a number of senior Brotherhood activists, MPs, Peers and journalists — including Peter Oborne.

The “Saudi pressure” argument serves a useful purpose. There is not a lot that can undermine a government inquiry so much as an accusation of political leverage and foreign financial influence. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE regard the Muslim Brotherhood as a threat, and would like to see it suppressed. But neither the Saudis nor the Emiratis are naïve: both have worked to influence the British government for decades and both know how Westminster works. Hence, both know that it is extremely unlikely that the British government would ban the Muslim Brotherhood.

All that said, it is still possible to ignore Hamas and nevertheless link the Brotherhood to violence. In September 2010, the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohamed Badie, advocated violent jihad against the United States, and declared that, “the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life… The U.S. is now experiencing the beginning of its end, and is heading towards its demise.” In 2013, Muslim Brotherhood members and supporters in Egypt attacked 70 Coptic Christian churches, and more than 1000 homes and businesses of Coptic Christian families were torched.

Banning the Brotherhood, however, is difficult for another reason. Security analyst Lorenzo Vidino writes:

“Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups in each country work according to a common vision — but in complete operational independence, making the Brotherhood an informal global movement. It’s what makes designating the whole movement a terrorist organisation virtually impossible in the UK, as authorities knew from the very beginning. But the lack of a ban does not equal an exoneration or an endorsement — hardly the general tone of the review.”

If the delay in the report’s release has been the product of political wrangling at all, the debate within Westminster is most likely over the influence of the Brotherhood upon extremism and radicalization, and with which groups the government should continue to work.

There is already some indication that changes are taking place. On December 18, 2014, the government announced publicly that two Brotherhood-linked Islamic charities, Islamic Help and the Muslim Charities Forum, were to lose their government grants over links to extremism. The Department for Communities and Local Government stated that it would not fund any group “linked to individuals who fuel hatred, division and violence.” This loss of funding followed a Gatestone Institute report investigating the Muslim Charities Forum’s links to extremism, which was subsequently picked up by mainstream British media.

Also in December, Islamic Relief, after being placed on terror lists by both the governments of the UAE and Israel, published an “independent audit,” claiming there was “absolutely no evidence” to link the charity to terrorism.

The British government, which has provided over £3 million of funding to Islamic Relief since 2013, offered little comment, but did publish, at the end of December, a document revealing that the UK government would match £5 million of donations to Islamic Relief until 2016.

Herein lies the contradiction. The Muslim Charities Forum is essentially a project of Islamic Relief. The present chairman of the Muslim Charities Forum, in fact, is Hany El Banna, who founded Islamic Relief, the leading member body of the Muslim Charities Forum. Islamic Relief, as the Gatestone Institute has previously revealed, has given platforms to the same extremists as those promoted by the Muslim Charities Forum, an act that led to its loss of funding. Why would the British government discard one charity while embracing the other? Is this perhaps a sign of further sleight-of-hand to come? Rather than sanction the Brotherhood as a whole, is the government likely in future to work only with sections of the Islamist network?

We have seen such posturing before. In 2009, Britain’s Labour government cut ties with the Muslim Council of Britain after some of its officials became signatories to the Istanbul Declaration, a document that calls for attacks on British soldiers and Jewish communities. The government has continued, however, to work with and fund interfaith groups partly managed by MCB figures and Istanbul Declaration signatories.

There are several reasons the British government may be publishing only the “principal findings” of the report. First, some of the information gathered will have been done so by the intelligence services, so there are assets and agreements to protect. Another is the possibility that by revealing the scope of the Muslim Brotherhood network in full, the government would be revealing its own partnerships with Brotherhood organizations, and providing insights into the vast amount of public funds that has filled the coffers of Brotherhood charities.

In spite of the expectedly unexciting report, the global Muslim Brotherhood still seems worried. Even the most benign report could damage the legitimacy upon which the Brotherhood thrives. Although unlikely, visas for Brotherhood residents in Britain could be revoked, and the report could produce a domino effect — sparking inquiries in other European countries. Evidently, the Brotherhood attaches great importance to its political and diplomatic connections and influence.

Because of the uncertainty surrounding the report, media misinformation and Brotherhood propaganda have been spreading. Back in April 2014, the British government’s announcement of the inquiry produced a great deal of noise. The actual scope of the inquiry and the possible consequences, however, were left to the imaginations of the many commentators and conspiracy theorists.

Consequently, just as the full findings of the report are unclear, so is its significance. If certain sections of the Brotherhood are declared unsuitable, it seems that the report might provide a useful opportunity for the British government — aided by new statutory powers for the Charity Commission and proposed new counter-extremism powers — to crack down on those parts of the Muslim Brotherhood which serve to accrue financial and political support for Hamas.

Thus far, for the government, the Muslim Brotherhood inquiry has been a PR disaster. The eventual publication of the inquiry’s report could provide an opportunity for the British government to end its continued support and funding for Britain’s Muslim Brotherhood charities, and to stop treating Brotherhood operatives as representatives of Britain’s Muslim community. It would indeed be a shame if the only outcome of the inquiry were an even cozier realignment with the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities.

UK Gov’t Minister Warns Mosques About Hate Preaching

_80356881_80356880IPT, by John Rossomando  •  Jan 21, 2015

A letter from a top British government official calling on United Kingdom mosques to root out “men of hate” is generating push-back from the Muslim Council of Britain.

The letter from Communities Secretary Eric Pickles was co-signed by Lord Tariq Ahmad of Wimbledon, a member of the House of Lords and sent to 1,100 imams and other Islamic religious leaders.

It called on the imams to dissuade young Muslims from following extremists, urging them to emphasize the threat the extremists pose to British freedoms.

“We must show them the multitude of statements of condemnation from British Muslims; show them these men of hate have no place in our mosques or any place of worship, and that they do not speak for Muslims in Britain or anywhere else,” the letter said.

The letter offended some Muslim leaders. The Muslim Council of Britain responded with its own letter saying it resented the “idea that Muslims and Islam are inherently apart from British society.” The letter from MCB Secretary General Shuja Shafi also disputed the notion “that extremism takes place at mosques, and that Muslims have not done enough to challenge the terrorism that took place in our name. We also reject suggestions that Muslims must go out of their way to prove their loyalty to this country of ours.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron called the letter’s tone “reasonable, sensible and moderate.”

Security services estimate that at least 500 British citizens are fighting for the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. One of them, known as “Jihadi John,” is believed responsible for beheading American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, and well as Britons Alan Henning and David Haines.

To combat such trends, Pickles and Ahmad suggested the need for the imams to “demonstrate the true nature of British Islam today” and to show that the extremists do not represent Islam.

“You have a precious opportunity and an important responsibility in explaining and demonstrating how Islam can be part of British identity,” they wrote.

It was accepted more eagerly by other British Muslims.

“If non-Muslims intervene in the Islamic reform debate, they get told: ‘stay out of it’ … It’s a lose/lose scenario for the poor folks. But there is *no* way to undermine both Islamism & fundamentalism if Muslims don’t join everyone else in challenging them,” Maajid Nawaz wrote on Twitter Monday.

Nawaz is the co-founder and chairman of the anti-extremist think tank Quilliam Foundation.

“If we keep shirking, sidestepping [and] obfuscating on the reform debate,” Nawaz added, “it appears o others that we’re happy with the status quo, which is *clearly* very bad.”

TERROR EXPERT UNDER FIRE FOR HIGHLIGHTING UK’S TERROR ENCLAVES

Terrorism expert Steve Emerson has come under fire for daring to warn about the continuing Islamist radicalization of Birmingham and the greater United Kingdom.

Emerson has spent a lifetime warning about the threats to the West posed by Islamic radicals. His organization, The Investigative Project On Terrorism, has been relied heavily upon by law enforcement and federal officials in helping to catch those who seek to do us harm.

British PM David Cameron has gone as far as to call Emerson a “complete idiot” for his remarks during a Fox News appearance, in which he stated that Birmingham had become“totally Muslim.”  “When I heard this, frankly, I choked on my porridge and I thought it must be April Fools day,” said Cameron.

Emerson has apologized for his remarks, saying that he made an “inexcusable error” in overstating particular claims such as that religious police beat “anyone who doesn’t dress” in Islamic garb.

However, while many in the mainstream media are forbidden from reporting on such issues, for fear of being labeled an “Islamophobe” or “racist,” Breitbart London has reported extensively on the continuing Islamic radicalization of Birmingham.

Birmingham, where 22 percent of its population follows Islam, represents almost five times higher than the 4.8 percent national average. Additionally, a 2011 census found that Birmingham had more Muslims enrolled in schools than Christians.

In April, Breitbart London reported that a whopping twenty-five institutions across Birmingham were subject to a “Trojan Horse” plot in which jihadists attempted to install Islamic radicals as the school’s head teachers.

A report released in June by the U.K. Education office (Ofsted) found that five state schools in Birmingham had attempted to impose an Islamic, “narrow faith-based ideology.” Ofsted found that Islamic schools countrywide were promoting stoning, lashing, and loving “death more than life.”

In July, a counterterrorism official uncovered a “sustained and coordinated agenda to impose upon children in a number of Birmingham schools the segregationist attitudes and practices of a hardline and politicised strain of Sunni Islam,” reported the Guardian.

While Cameron has been “choking on his porridge,” Birmingham and the entire U.K. has continued its slide towards radicalization. On Cameron’s watch, those who have carried out the barbaric act of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) have never been prosecuted; Islamic radicals are free to stay, while freedom fighters are denied entry; and the proliferation of Sharia courts and push for full Sharia law continues.

Additionally, throughout the United Kingdom and the whole of Europe, there exist hundreds of self-ruling Sharia enclaves where the “writ of the state, the sovereignty of the nation does not apply,” Breitbart’s Sebastian Gorka told Fox News on Saturday.

*******

Birmingham

 

Farage: Muslim radicalisation the product of “4 decades of state-sponsored multiculturalism”

Published on Sep 4, 2014 by PlanetEarthAwakens01

UKIP Forum: http://www.reddit.com/r/ukipparty
TWITTER: http://www.twitter.com/ukipforum

The Islamization of Britain in 2014

by Soeren Kern
December 30, 2014

“Britain remains the world’s leading recruiting ground for al-Qaeda.” — Con Coughlin, Daily Telegraph.

When she sought help from the police and a lawyer, “the family of the defendants were insulted that she had gone to the law. They wanted her back within the family fold… Therefore, it was decided that she should be forced to comply or be killed.” — Prosecutor of Ahmed A-Khatib, who murdered his wife for becoming “too westernized.”

British school teachers are afraid to teach their students about Christianity out of fear of offending Muslims. — Roger Bolton, BBC Radio 4’s Feedback program.

Rather than taking steps to protect British children, police, social workers, teachers… and the media deliberately played down the severity of the crimes [of Muslim sexual grooming gangs] in order to avoid being accused of “Islamophobia” or racism. — From the report “Easy Meat: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery.”

A group of British lawyers launched a website, Sharia Watch UK. The group called Sharia law “Britain’s Blind Spot.”

After Adebolajo, who murdered and tried to behead British soldier Lee Rigby with a meat cleaver, was given a “whole-life” prison term, his brother said his sibling was the victim of “Islamophobia.”

“The problem of honor-based violence and forced marriages in England is “worse than people think.” — Claire Phillipson, Wearside Women in Need

The Muslim population of Britain reached 3.4 million in 2014 to become around 5.3% of the overall population of 64 million, according to figures extrapolated from a recent study on the growth of the Muslim population in Europe. In real terms, Britain has the third-largest Muslim population in the European Union, after France and Germany.

Islam and Islam-related issues were omnipresent in Britain during 2014, and can be categorized into four broad themes: 1) Islamic extremism and the security implications of British jihadists in Syria; 2) the continuing spread of Islamic Sharia law in Britain; 3) the sexual exploitation of British children by Muslim gangs; and 4) Muslim integration into British society.

What follows is a chronological review of some of the main stories involving the rise of Islam in Britain during 2014.

In January, an analysis of census data showed that nearly 10% of the babies and toddlers in England and Wales are Muslim. The percentage of Muslims among children under five is almost twice as high as in the general population. By way of comparison, fewer than one in 200 people over the age of 85 are Muslim, an indication of the extent to which the birth rate is changing the religious demographic in Britain.

Also in January, Muslim fundamentalists threatened to behead a fellow British Muslim after he posted an innocuous image of Mohammed and Jesus on his Twitter account. The death threats against Maajid Nawaz, a Liberal Democrat Party candidate for British Parliament, added to the growing number of cases in which Islamists are using intimidation tactics to restrict the free speech rights of fellow Muslims in Europe.

On January 16, a Muslim woman was arrested by counter-terrorism police at Heathrow Airport as she was preparing to board a flight to Turkey. Nawal Masaad, 26, is accused of trying to smuggle £16,500 ($27,000; €20,000) in her underwear to jihadists in Syria. She and her alleged co-conspirator, Amal El-Wahabi, 27—a Moroccan who does not work and claims British social welfare benefits for herself and two young sons—were the first British women to be charged with terrorism offenses linked to the conflict in Syria.

On January 23, the head of Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism unit, Commander Richard Walton, revealed that 14 British minors were arrested on charges linked to the Syrian conflict in January alone, compared to 24 for the whole of 2013. He said it was “almost inevitable” that some fighters would try to mount attacks in Britain upon their return.

On January 16, British Islamist Abu Waleed outlined his vision of an Islamic state in Britain, and called for Christians to be humiliated so that they would convert to Islam. In a video, he said:

“If the Muslim sees a kaffir [non-Muslim] with nice clothes, the kaffir has to take his clothes off and give them to the Muslim. The kaffir, when he walks down the street, he has to wear a red belt around his neck, and he has to have his forehead shaved, and he has to wear two shoes that are different from one another. He [the non-believer] is not allowed to walk on the pavement, he has to walk in the middle of the road, and he has to ride a mule. That is, my dear brothers, the Islamic state.”

In Bristol, the city council approved a controversial plan to convert a former comedy club into a mosque. In Cambridgeshire, a Muslim group submitted plans to convert a warehouse into a new mosque. In Cambridge, locals opposed a plan to build a £17.5 million ($28.5 million; €21 million) mega-mosque, claiming it could be “a front for terrorism.” In Blackburn, home to nearly 100 mosques, city councilors were urged to reject a plan to open a mosque in a residential neighborhood.

In Southend, local residents celebrated after a four-year battle resulted in the closing of an illegal mosque. In Newton Mearns, south of Glasgow, plans were abandoned to build a mosque within the grounds of a school in one of the most affluent suburbs of Scotland, due to local criticism of the move.

In Catherine-de-Barnes, a tiny village in western central England, local residents objected to plans for a large, Muslim-only cemetery, which will include space for 4,000 followers of Islam to be buried, and 75 parking spaces for visitors. The village has a population of just 613, which means the cemetery could eventually hold six-and-a-half times as many people as Catherine-de-Barnes itself.

In February, official statistics showed that net immigration to the United Kingdom surged to 212,000 in the year ending September 2013, a significant increase from 154,000 in the previous year. The new immigration data cast doubt on a pledge by Prime Minister David Cameron to get net migration—the difference between the number of people entering Britain and those leaving—down to the “tens of thousands” before the general election in May 2015.

Separately, data released by the National Crime Agency showed a 155% rise in British children groomed by sex gangs during 2013.

Also in January, a Muslim extremist who hacked a soldier to death on a London street in May 2013, launched a taxpayer-funded appeal against his murder conviction. Michael Adebolajo, 29, who tried to behead the British soldier Lee Rigby with a meat cleaver, maintained that he should not have been convicted because he is a “soldier of Allah” and therefore Rigby’s killing was an act of war rather than premeditated murder.

Adebolajo and his co-defendant, Michael Adebowale, 22, were found guilty by a jury in December 2013, and were sentenced on February 26. Adebolajo was given a “whole-life” prison term and Adebowale was given a minimum term of 45 years. Adebolajo’s brother saidhis sibling was the victim of “Islamophobia.”

On February 16, The Sunday Times reported that about 250 British jihadists who went to train and fight in Syria had returned to the UK and were being monitored by the security services. Senior officials said the high number of “returnees”—five times the figure that had been previously reported—underlined the growing danger posed by “extremist tourists” going to the war-torn region. MI5 and police said they feared that “returnees” could be preparing a Mumbai-style gun attack on civilians, possibly in a crowded public place in London.

On February 14, three Muslim vigilantes who terrorized innocent members of the public as the self-styled “Muslim Patrol” were banned from promoting Sharia Law in Britain for a period of five years.

In March, British authorities launched an investigation into the source of a document that purportedly outlined a plot by Muslim fundamentalists to Islamize public schools in England and Wales. The four-page document described a strategy—dubbed Operation Trojan Horse—to oust non-Muslim head teachers and staff at state schools in Muslim neighborhoods and replace them with individuals who would run the schools according to strict Islamic principles.

Also in March, a report entitled, “Easy Meat: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery,”showed how officials in England and Wales were aware of rampant child grooming—the process by which sexual predators befriend and build trust with children in order to prepare them for abuse—by Muslim gangs since at least 1988. Rather than taking steps to protect British children, however, police, social workers, teachers, neighbors, politicians and the media deliberately downplayed the severity of the crimes perpetrated by the grooming gangs in order to avoid being accused of “Islamophobia” or racism.

Meanwhile, official figures revealed that record levels of Muslims are serving jail sentences and that the numbers are still growing. Across England and Wales the proportion has risen from 8% one decade ago to 14% now. In London, the figure is 27%, which is more than double the 12% of the capital’s population who are Muslim.

On March 27, ITV News reported that the problem of honor-based violence and forced marriages in England is “worse than people think,” but that many people are afraid of speaking out because they do not want to be branded as being “racist.” Claire Phillipson from Wearside Women in Need said:

“I have no doubt that all over the North East [England] first, second, third generation English young women are being forced into marriage.

“Schools and communities are keeping silent about it, because they are concerned that they would be called racist, Islamophobic. They don’t quite know where the line between culture, religion and human rights should be drawn.”

An image from the video “Right to choose: Spotting the signs of forced marriage – Nayana”, produced by the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office.

On March 13, the Law Society, the main professional association representing and governing the legal profession in England and Wales, issued ground-breaking guidance to help lawyers draft Sharia-compliant wills and estate planning documents. The move effectively enshrined Islamic Sharia law in the British legal system for the first time.

In April, the British government launched a public consultation on whether or not to introduce student loans that are compliant with Islamic Sharia law, which forbids loans that involve the payment of interest.

Critics said that the dispute over interest-bearing student loans follows stepped-up demands for Sharia-compliant banking and insurance as well as credit cards, mortgages and pension funds, which—taken together—are contributing to the establishment of parallel Islamic financial and legal systems in Britain.

Separately, Lloyds Bank was accused of reverse religious discrimination after dropping overdraft fees for Muslims but not for others. The bank said that non-Muslims would have to pay up to £80 (€97, $135) a month for an overdraft, but that for Muslims “there won’t be any charges.”

Meanwhile, the fast food giant Subway removed ham and bacon from almost 200 outlets in Britain and switched to halal (Arabic for “permitted” or “lawful”) meat alternatives, apparently in an attempt to please its Muslim customers.

On April 9, Home Secretary Theresa May published her annual report on the government’s strategy for countering terrorism. The report concluded that battle-hardened British jihadists returning from the war in Syria now pose the most serious threat to British security.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Hundreds Of British Troops To Be Sent To Iraq

Small groups of British soldiers have been in Iraq training Kurds

Small groups of British soldiers have been in Iraq training Kurds

Hundreds of British soldiers are to be sent to Iraq to help the fight against Islamic State, Sky News understands.

The soldiers – expected to number a few hundred – will go to the region “within weeks” senior military sources have said.

The National Security Council is expected to rubber-stamp the mission when it meets on Tuesday.

Although small groups of British troops have conducted similar missions over the past few months, this will be much greater in size and on a more permanent basis.

A team of military advisors recently went to the country to scope out options.

It’s believed the mission will be largely split between the capital Baghdad and Irbil in the Kurdish controlled north.

It hasn’t been confirmed which regiments the troops will be drawn from.

The UK government has repeatedly insisted that any such training mission would not constitute ‘boots-on-the-ground’ although British Special Forces are operating in the region.

In October a dozen soldiers from The Yorkshire Regiment were dispatched to Irbil to train the Kurds to use heavy machine guns.

An advisory team has also been embedded in the Iraqi military HQ, working alongside the Americans.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman wouldn’t confirm the specifics of the latest mission but did say: “The Defence Secretary announced the intention to provide further training to the Iraqi military in early November.

“No decisions on troop numbers, units or locations have been made, so this is purely speculation at this stage.”

The British contribution will fit into a wider mission involving a number of nations.

Earlier this week, the most senior US Commander Lt Gen James Terry revealed that the coalition training mission would involve around 1,500 soldiers.

US special operations troops have already set up a training base at the Ain al-Asad air base in Anbar Province.

Germany recently pledged around 100 soldiers to help train the Peshmerga in northern Iraq. That mission, if approved, will begin early next year.

NATO has also said it would explore options if the Iraqi government came forward with an official request.

The Alliance said that any training mission wouldn’t necessarily be based in Iraq. Neighbouring Jordan has been used for similar projects.

Killer of British Soldier Trained In Muslim Brotherhood-linked Seminary

michael-adebolajo-230513CSP, By Kyle Shideler, December 1, 2014:

Wales Online reported November 30th, that Michael Adebowale, one of the two men convicted of murdering British Army drummer Lee Rigby by running him over with a car and then cutting his throat while yelling quranic verses trained at an Islamic seminary institution with ties to Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi:

A controversial Muslim cleric who supports suicide bombers was behind the curriculum at a top Islamic college in Wales where one of Lee Rigby’s killers studied, it’s emerged. The work of Egyptian Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who was banned from Britain in 2008, helped shape courses at the Llanybydder-based European Institute of Human Sciences attended by Michael Adebowale. As well as backing suicide attacks on Israelis chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars Al-Qaradawi is reported to have said it’s okay to beat women “lightly”, lash gays and suggested rape victims should be punished if dressed immodestly.

The European Institute of Human Sciences (EIHS) is directly tied to the Global Muslim Brotherhood as the UK branch of the France-based Institut Européen des Sciences Humaines (IESH), which is directly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Federation of Islamic Organizations of Europe (FIOE) according to the Intelligence digest Global Muslim Brotherhood Watch. EIHS openly lists the MB-linked IESH, FIOE, and the European Council on Fatwa and Research (ECFR) as “useful links” on their website. EIHS was noted for its troublesome times to Qaradawi as early as 2005, causing the University of Wales to sever its ties. Despite these known connections, British police referred to the school as having a “moderate ethos” and a government report concluded that the attacks could not have been prevented. Nor was this school’s first run in with terror ties:

Courses run by the European Institute of Human Sciences draw on the teachings of Egyptian Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who the Home Office is currently deciding whether to ban from Britain. Politicians have demanded an investigation into the school as questions grow over its allegiances. Principal Kadhem al-Rawi is an acquaintance of Magdi al-Nashar, the chemist arrested on suspicion of involvement in the 7/7 London bombings. Mr al-Rawi paid tribute to him following his arrest last week, describing him as having “a great personality”. And one of the school’s trustees Ahmad al-Rawi has declared British troops are a legitimate target for Iraqi militants.

The connection between terrorist violence and Muslim Brotherhood-controlled venues for indoctrination, and the inability of Law enforcement to draw that connection is sadly unsurprising, and the United Kingdom is not alone in it. Here in the United States, it was Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) who pointed out in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing that the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), attended by the Tsarnaev Brothers, had ties to convicted al Qaeda financier and self-identified Muslim Brother Abdurahman Alamoudi. One of its founding trustees of ISB was, as at EIHS, Yousef Al Qaradawi. ISB has also produced Al Qaeda propagandist and would be terrorist Tarek Mehenna, and “Lady Al Qaeda” Afia Siddique, along with Islamic State propagandist Ahmad AbouSamra.The mosque attended by Oklahoma beheader Alton Nolen, the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City was likewise founded by convicted Hamas financier and Muslim Brother Mufiq Abdulqader, half brother of Khaled Mashaal, and had close ties to the Council on American Islamic Relations.

Another example is the Dar al-Hijrah mosque, former home of Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki, Al Qaeda ideologue, and connected to the Muslim American Society (MAS), an organization, close to Qaradawi, whose own founders admitted their Muslim Brotherhood connection, and which Al-Amoudi told federal investigators, “Everybody knows MAS is Muslim Brotherhood.” Dar Al-Hijrah was the mosque of Fort Hood Shooter Nidal Hassan, Attempted assassin of President Bush Ahmed Omar Abu Ali- Material support for Al Qaeda, and former CAIR employee Randal Ismail Royer, part of the “paintball Jihad plot” to join terrorist group Laskar-e-Taiba, the group which perpetrated the Mumbai Massacre.

To stop terrorism, law enforcement must be permitted to focus its attention not just on the triggermen, those who are difficult to pick out until the moment they pick up the gun or the knife, but they must be able to focus their attention on the men who create the mosques and seminaries where such men are trained and indoctrinated for jihad.

British Law Society Reverses Itself on Sharia

1477927485CSP, By Kyle Shideler, November 24, 2014:

The Law Society, which represents solicitors in England and Wales, has reversed its decision to publish a “Practice Note” to its members regarding how to facilitate the use of Shariah compliant wills.  The publication met a storm of criticism, leading the society to reverse itself. The Society’s president Andrew Caplen, apologized for publishing the guidelines.

Our practice note was intended to support members to better serve their clients as far as is allowed by the law of England and Wales,” said Mr Caplen. “We reviewed the note in the light of criticism. “We have withdrawn the note and we are sorry.”

Critics of the practice had warned that shariah law does not guarantee equal rights in the division of property and is discriminatory towards the rights of women, and that while written as “guidelines” Law Society Notes could become established practice as law firms feared deviating from the established procedures introduced by the Law Society. Indeed the UK government’s Solicitors Regulation Authority had included the Shariah wills Practice Law in its own guidance, before retracting it when facing criticism.

The guidelines were opposed by the National Secular Society and the One Law for All campaign.  NSS director noted the victory saying,

This is an important reverse for what had seemed to be the relentless march of sharia to becoming de facto British law. “Until now, politicians and the legal establishment either encouraged this process or spinelessly recoiled from acknowledging what was happening. “I congratulate the Law Society for heeding the objections we and others made. “This is particularly good news for women who fare so badly under sharia law, which is non-democratically determined, non-human rights compliant and discriminatory code.”

As in the United States, expressing concern regarding the application of discriminatory foreign law (including Shariah) has been routinely attacked by pro-Shariah supporters as “racist.” As Lawyers Secular Society leader Sadikur Rahman noted to the Telegraph,

“The language that they have chosen to use today is quite astonishing for an organisation that only a few months ago was resistant to change at all,” he said. He added that it was a vindication for those who were accused of racism or being anti-Muslim for questioning the wisdom of original practice note. “You should be able to criticise an ideology, that should not be taken as racism,” he said.

Rahman also pointed out that while the Lawyers Society Practice Note was not legally binding, it was being treated as an endorsement of Shariah, “I certainly heard from Muslim lawyers congratulating the Law Society for having issued it, the way they saw it was that the Law Society had come on board with sharia law.”

This same kind of incremental approach to establishing shariah law has also taken place in the United States, as noted in the Center’s 2011 publication of Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court CasesAn updated study on the topic is due out from the Center for Security Policy Press some time later this year.

HOW BRITISH POLICE COZY UP TO EXTREMISTS IN THE NAME OF ‘ISLAMOPHOBIA AWARENESS’

58504190-58504188jpgBreitbart, by MILO YIANNOPOULOS, Nov. 14, 2014:

British police forces are sharing platforms with Islamic extremists from discredited Islamist organisation MEND, formerly known as iENGAGE—and even co-hosting events with them—throughout November as part of Islamophobia Awareness Month, a Breitbart investigation has revealed.

In November, Mark Burns-Williamson, police and crime commissioner for West Yorkshire Police, will share a platform at an event called Building Bridges in Leeds with Azad Ali, Head of Community Development & Engagement for Islamist organisation MEND. Ali is a notorious Islamic extremist who once suggested that the killing of British troops in Iraq was justified.

The Telegraph reported in 2012 that Ali “has written on his IFE blog of his ‘love’ for Anwar al-Awlaki, the al-Qaeda cleric … used to attend talks by Al-Qaeda’s main representative in the UK, Abu Qatada … described al-Qaeda as a ‘myth’ and said that the Mumbai terrorist attacks were not terrorism.”

Harvinder Saimbhi, Leeds City Council’s Head of Anti-Social Behaviour, is also sharing the same platform with Ali at the Building Bridges conference, an initiative from South Asian charity Hamara, which describes itself as “the largest ethnic minority organisation in the voluntary and community sector in Leeds, based in a purpose developed £1.2 million centre in Beeston”.

Meanwhile, the National Association of Muslim Police are co-hosting an event with MEND’s founder and managing director, Sufyan Ismail. The event will take place on Monday, 24 November at the City of London Police Headquarters in Wood Street, London. A representative from City of London Police will speak alongside Ismail, according to email invitations seen by Breitbart, dated 7 November and signed by Fatima Khan, MEND’s “Hate Crime and Stakeholder Lead”.

Sufyan Ismail has promoted hate preacher Hatham al Haddad, who believes that Muslims should cut all ties with family members who leave Islam, non-Muslim political systems are “filthy” and “slavery” is superior to Western prisoner of war protocols, among other distasteful things catalogued by political blog Harry’s Place.

To those unfamiliar with MEND, the outfit is a rebrand of an earlier, widely discredited organisation known as iENGAGE, a detail confirmed by the City of London Police’s own invitations, which refer to “MEND (formerly known as iENGAGE)”. MEND’s website still resides at iengage.uk.net.

As iENGAGE, MEND targeted Muslim campaigning groups and individuals who spoke out against Islamism, condemned David Cameron for severing ties with the Muslim Council of Britain after its deputy general secretary, Daud Abdullah, refused to withdraw his support from the Istanbul Declarations, and objected to the banning of terrorist group Hizb ut Tahrir from universities and schools.

An All-Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia voted 60-2 to dispense with the services of iENGAGE when these facts came to light in 2011. This followed the resignation of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Group in protest at iENGAGE’s head of research, Islamist sympathiser Shenaz Buglawala, being awarded a House of Commons pass.

Taxpayers will want to know why founder Sufyan Ismail, who has promoted a hate preacher and who founded and still runs an organisation which in its previous incarnation was repeatedly banished from public life for extremist views, is co-hosting an event with a senior police officer aimed at lecturing officers about “hate speech”.

Even more disturbing is the fact that West Yorkshire Police and Leeds City Council have seen fit to share a platform with Ismail’s subordinate, Azad Ali. According to the Telegraph‘s Andrew Gilligan, despite his position as chairman of the Muslim Safety Forum, a body closely linked to the fundamentalist Islamic Forum of Europe, Ali was appointed the Metropolitan Police’s “principal” representative of the Muslim community in 2006.

But, in 2008, Ali was forced to resign from his position as chair of the Muslim Safety Forum, just two years after establishing it as founding chair, after his extremist opinions came to light. The MSF received £30,000 in public funding in 2009 under London mayor Boris Johnson and at least £70,000 under previous mayor Ken Livingstone.

The IFE was the subject of a BBC Dispatches exposé in 2010 which revealed that its stated objectives are jihad, the transformation of Britain into an Islamic state and the establishment of sharia law. In 2012, Ali was the IFE’s community affairs co-ordinator.

In 2009, Ali was suspended from his public sector job at the Treasury after he praised Osama bin Laden’s mentor, Abdullah Yusuf Azzam. Ali had also blogged supportivelyabout Azzam’s son, who had written: “If I saw an American or British man wearing a soldier’s uniform inside Iraq, I would kill him because that is my obligation … I respect this as the main instruction in my religion for jihad.”

In 2010, Ali lost a legal action against the Mail on Sunday for an article about him in which the paper reported some of these unsavoury views. The same year, Labour Cabinet ministers were heavily criticised for sharing a platform with him.

As long ago as 2010, Tory MP and counter-terrorism expert Patrick Mercer said of Ali: “It beats me why the police should want to take the advice of this man. They should have nothing to do with him. I know for a fact that there are just as knowledgeable members of the Muslim community who do not share his subversive views.”

Yet, in spite of his extremist views, Ali’s MEND biography states that he is a member of the IPCC’s Community Advisory Group and the Home Office’s Trust and Confidence Community Panel. West Yorkshire Police, which is sharing a platform with Azad Ali in Leeds this month, did not return a request for comment.

Hamara, the group behind the Leeds Building Bridges conference at which Ali will speak, says it “stands out as a beacon within the community and voluntary sector and its success has inspired many other organisations to emulate its achievements”. It did not return a request for comment.

Invitations to Building Bridges were sent from a Leeds City Council email address on 5 November to delegates within Leeds City Council and Leeds University, according to messages seen by Breitbart, as well as to other police forces, charities and housing associations. Leeds City Council did not provide a spokesperson for comment.

City of London Police’s Equality Diversity and Human Rights Unit confirmed to Breitbart that it was running an event with MEND, and that MEND’s managing director, Sufyan Ismail, would be speaking alongside a representative from City of London Police, but declined to answer further questions by email.

The London Muslim Communities Forum, a strategic body that advises Scotland Yard on Muslim issues, promoted the National Association of Muslim Police event on 24 November to officers elsewhere in the force, charities, youth groups, the Home Office and even Transport for London staff in an email on 10 November, seen by Breitbart.

The LMCF did not respond to a written request for comment, despite agreeing over the telephone to respond to any enquiries sent by email.

“Freedom of Speech, Go to Hell”

20141105_theresamaybritL

“Extremism” is what novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand would call an anti-concept intended to suppress discussion of fundamental principles in order to prevent conflict or open dissension. It is an essentially meaningless term that stands for what she called “blank-outs.” It is anti-mind, an act of deliberate evasion of facts, of reality.

by EDWARD CLINE:

We’ve all seen in the newspapers and on blog sites those cardboard signs carried by maddened, sweaty, screaming Muslims in London and elsewhere on which is scrawled, Freedom of Speech Go to Hell. But now that same sign is being brandished by a political milquetoast, Theresa May, Britain’s Home Secretary. John Bingham’s report in The Telegraph of October 31st, “Sharia law or gay marriage critics would be branded ‘extremists’ under Tory plans, atheists and Christians warn,” is disturbing, to say the least.

Anyone who criticizes Sharia law or gay marriage could be branded an “extremist” under sweeping new powers planned by the Conservatives to combat terrorism, an alliance of leading atheists and Christians fear. Theresa May, the Home Secretary, unveiled plans last month for so-called Extremism Disruption Orders, which would allow judges to ban people deemed extremists from broadcasting, protesting in certain places or even posting messages on Facebook or Twitter without permission…..

But George Osborne, the Chancellor, has made clear in a letter to constituents that the aim of the orders would be to “eliminate extremism in all its forms” and that they would be used to curtail the activities of those who “spread hate but do not break laws”. He explained that that the new orders, which will be in the Conservative election manifesto, would extend to any activities that “justify hatred” against people on the grounds of religion, sexual orientation, gender or disability.

This particular milquetoast – let us dub her Mother Theresa – is proposing out-and-out, blanket censorship which she would enforce with the heavy hand of the police, the courts, and the slimy accusations of informants and those whose “feelings” have been hurt. “I want” figures prominently in her speech. She delivered her speech, in contrast to the chanting and ranting of Muslims who also inform us that Sharia will dominate Britain (and the West), at a Conservative/Tory Party conference in typical wallflower style, from a printed text at the podium (well, at least she didn’t use a teleprompter), with less charisma than Barbara “Let’s go walkies!” Woodhouse giving advice on how to train one’s dogs. Here she condemned “extremists” of all breeds as possibly infected with rabies and she let it be known that they should all “sit” and “heel” and “stay” in their own speech lest they be served with the blackjack of an “Extremism Disruption Order” (EDO) and isolated in a kennel.

Surely the coiner of that awkward, euphemistic nomenclature for “preemptive censorship” could have come up with something a little less depersonalized and antiseptic. Like “Taser”? The purpose of such political tasers, wielded by police or the courts, would be “to prevent conflict, protect life and resolve disputes with personal safety equipment that makes communities safe….” And surely that description is copasetic with Mother Theresa’s agenda of preventing conflicts and resolving disputes, especially if the conflicts concern Muslims, gays, trannies, and other odd bodkins.

I’ll bet not many Britons ever expected to be accosted, manhandled, cuffed, and tossed into a cell by an aggressive milquetoast with a little help from the bully boys for having indulged in their freedom of speech, or for what they might have said. But, there you are. If you’re on her “no barking” list of “extremists,” you’d better confine yourself to whining, whimpering, or pouting. You may be seen, but not heard.

A court, however, could not forbid an “extremist” to speak or broadcast or even “tweet” on Twitter unless his name was on a Vatican-like Index of Prohibited Books. Let us call it instead Index Librorum Prohibitorum Novissimarum Orator, or the Index of Prohibited Extremist Speakers. One must first be a known and red-flagged “extremist” speaker to earn a place on that list.

That’s quite a job for a government practiced in police-state surveillance as Britain’s already is. It even monitors what trash is put in wheelie bins. We have the NSA. Britain has Mother Theresa and her minions. They’re fighting the “war on terror” by promising “extremists” a night in the box. They will be watched, monitored, and even “disrupted.” I think there was a science fiction TV series that featured “disrupter” ray guns. How appropriate a choice of words.

After congratulating herself on fighting crime and dousing the fires of “extremism” with the current tools at hand, Mother Theresa went on:

But we must continue to do more. Soon, we will make Prevent a statutory duty for all public sector organizations. I want to see new banning orders for extremist groups that fall short of the existing laws relating to terrorism. I want to see new civil powers to target extremists who stay just within the law but still spread poisonous hatred. So both policies – Banning Orders and Extremism Disruption Orders – will be in the next Conservative manifesto.

Emma West was put through the judicial wringer for expressing her anger about what was happening to Britain. Paul Weston was arrested for quoting Churchill in public, the quotations expressing Churchill’s estimate of Muslims and Islam. Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, and Geert Wilders were banned from Britain because they’re famous (or notorious) for their anti-Islamic “hate speech.”

So, what is “extremism”?

For one thing, it’s the “extreme” dhimmitude displayed by Mother Theresa throughout her speech. Several times she stated emphatically that ISIS, the al Nusra Front, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, like-minded groups in Libya, Al Shabaab in East Africa, the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan all have nothing to do with Islam. Just as the salute, Sieg Heil!, has nothing whatsoever to do with Nazism, Allahu Akbar! has nothing to do with flying planes into skyscrapers or the mass executions of non-Muslims and rival Muslims.

Or so Mother Theresa would have you believe. This is a species of denial bordering on psychosis. For example:

This hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam itself. And it is rejected by the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Britain and around the world….

Well, no, they don’t reject it. They’re merely the “silent majority” who have no opinion about what their “violent” brethren do in the way of acting out the violent verses in the Koran (about 164 of them, at last count; see Answering Islam’s extensive list of them here). Or they don’t dare frown upon “violent” Islam lest they be subject to violence themselves. After all, it’s all in their “good book,” the Koran, and who are they to question its contents? Those non-participatory, “silent” Muslims have a ho-hum attitude about Islamic terrorism: “Oh, well, there’s another train blown up, more filthy infidels killed in a shopping mall. What’s the latest soccer score?” Some 80% of London Muslims don’t mind the violence one iota.

Mother Theresa conspicuously identifies that what she claims isn’t Islam is also a “hateful” ideology, which proves that some synapses are crackling in her brain. But then a politically correct circuit breaker kicks in, and the current stops flowing. What has nothing to do with Islam is, at the same time, a “radical ideology” or an “extremist” ideology. Can she answer the question: If it is “radical” or “extremist,” what ideology is it a “radical” or “extremist” version of? Has it an identity? What is the thing? Does it have a name? If she saw a half-assembled table, would she object to its completion because she could forecast that at one point it would become an “extremist” table and not a carburetor?

Of course she knows what it is and what it will be. But because the subject is Islam, denying Islam’s essential identity helps her (and fellow dhimmi David Cameron) “prevent” the ruffling of Muslim feathers. Muslim values are now British values.

Read more: Family Security Matters