Imagine There’s No Islam — It’s Easy If You Try!

by Baron Bodissey:

The following excerpts are from a speech given on the floor of parliament by Machiel de Graaf, a member of parliament for Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV) in the Netherlands.

What an exhilarating, energizing, astounding speech this is! Geert Wilders was prosecuted twice, and is about to be prosecuted again, for saying things that were far more circumspect and far less inflammatory to Muslim sensibilities than these frank statements of fact and opinion by Mr. de Graaf. Presumably the speaker is enjoying the protection of his parliamentary immunity while speaking.

I hope this one goes viral on the Internet. Many thanks to SimonXML for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Transcript at Gates of Vienna

“Obama Will Witness His Own Country Run by the Sharia.”

British Islamist Abu Ramaysah

British Islamist Abu Ramaysah

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield:

We’re going to need a lot more Muslim immigrants before that happens.

60 Minutes decided to run a piece on a moderate Muslim who has a beautiful vision for co-existence between Muslims and non-Muslims.

 

“I understand that many people are unaware of the Sharia and the blessings it can bring,” he said. “The Sharia is not there to subjugate non-Muslims, it’s there to liberate them.”

It is.

Islamic law is there to liberate non-Muslims from their civil rights, women from being able to leave the house and everyone else from being able to freely practice their religion.

“So I do believe one day that America and Europe will one day be under the Sharia,” Rumaysah continued. “And I think that is a blessing. However, I would also say that in the short-term, the Americans and the British, they need to be very wary.”

Until they get properly liberated and/or beheaded. After that it’s smooth sailing.

“We’re going to see the Khilafah expand into Jordan, into Saudi Arabia, onto the shores of Europe. And one day Obama, he will witness his own country be run by the Sharia.”

And what’s that going to involve?

 “Ultimately, I want to see every single woman in this country covered from head to toe,” Rumaysah told 60 Minutes correspondent Clarissa Ward. “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.”

And if civilized societies don’t do something about them, those patrols will be our end.

SIX QUESTIONS WITH GEERT WILDERS

Slotdebat_verkiezingen_(final_debate_elections)_2006By Scott McKay:

Geert Wilders is the founder of the Dutch Party for Freedom, the fourth largest in that country’s parliament, and perhaps the Netherlands’ most controversial political figure. Wilders, whose 2008 film Fitna confrontationally opposed the encroachment of Islamic culture into Europe, has become an international figure while being prosecuted for “hate speech.” Calling himself a “right-wing liberal,” Wilders advocates curbing immigration into the Netherlands and other Western countries from Islamic nations, closing radical mosques, denaturalizing violent Muslims, and reducing the power of the European Union, among other things.

In America this week for a one-week tour, Wilders chatted with The American Spectator about Islam, the civilizational conflict, and what must be done to keep the West free.

Islam is a totalitarian ideology aiming for world domination. It wants to establish a worldwide caliphate, ruled by Sharia law — undemocratic, intolerant, barbarian, inhuman.

Terror and violence are just one method which is used in order to achieve this aim. There are other methods, such as conquest by hijra (immigration). Muhammad himself gave this example of hijra when he conquered Medina. This town, which was originally a tolerant and partly Jewish oasis, became Islamic after Muhammad and his followers settled there and took it over.

Western leaders focus solely on terrorism, but fail to see the purpose which terrorism is serving: Islamic word dominance. They should focus on fighting the global imperialist plans of Islam and treat terrorism as one of the means used to achieve this goal.

The Netherlands failed to assimilate Islam. So did the other European nations.

Western Europe is in the grip of cultural relativism. It no longer believes in the superiority of its own Western Judeo-Christian and humanist values. These Western values have brought Europe peace, prosperity, liberty, and democracy. But, unfortunately, European political leaders no longer seem to understand this.

The newcomers were not asked to assimilate. On the contrary, the Europeans told newcomers settling in their nations: you are free to violate our norms and values because your culture is just as good, and perhaps even better, than ours. Muslims were allowed to build enclaves on European soil, where Western values are despised and hated.

The Islamization of Western Europe is a direct result of this. European nations did not assimilate Islam but rather encouraged it to continue to live according to its culture, which is intolerant, inferior, and totally incompatible with Europe’s culture and civilization.

The European nations need to rediscover and reassert their identity. If Europe fails to stand up for its own culture and identity, it, will, indeed, be lost to Islam. Time is running out. Islam is assertive and aggressive. Europe should be assertive in countering Islam. Europe needs to turn the tide of Islamization and start a de-Islamization process.

Here are five things which should be done:

1) Europe should close its borders to all immigration from Islamic countries.

2) It should stimulate voluntary re-emigration;

3) and it should expel all criminals with a dual nationality to the country of their other nationality.

4) It should demand that everyone with a passport from an Islamic country, who wishes to remain living in Western Europe, sign a declaration in which he or she distances himself or herself from Sharia law and the violent commands of the Koran.

5) People who join the jihad have to be expelled, even it they only have our nationality. They can go and live in the Islamic State and no longer belong here.

Read more at The American Spectator

THE ANCIENT WAR BETWEEN THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN WEST AND ISLAM

Steuben_-_Bataille_de_PoitiersBreitbart, By JAMES P. PINKERTON:

Note from Senior Management: Jim Pinkerton outlines the central issues in the 1500-year struggle between competing cultural visions several years ago in this article, which first appeared in The American Conservative.

In one of the great epics of Western literature, the hero, confronted by numerous and powerful enemies, temporarily gives in to weakness and self-pity. “I wish,” he sighs, “none of this had happened.” The hero’s wise adviser responds, “So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide.” The old man continues, “There are other forces at work in this world … besides the will of evil.” Some events, he adds, are “meant” to be, “And that is an encouraging thought.”

Indeed it is. Perhaps, today, we are meant to live in these times. Perhaps right here, right now, we are meant to be tested. Maybe we are meant to have faith that other forces are at work in this world, that we are meant to rediscover our strength and our survival skills.

And so the question: can we, the people of the West, be brought to failure despite our enormous cultural and spiritual legacy? Three thousand years of history look down upon us: does this generation wish to be remembered for not having had the strength to look danger squarely in the eye? For having failed to harness our latent strength in our own defense?

With apologies to the frankenfood-fearers and polar bear-sentimentalizers, the biggest danger we face is the Clash of Civilizations, especially as we rub against the “bloody borders” of Islam.

What if, in the coming century, we lose that clash—and the source of our civilization? What if Muslims take over Europe? What if “Eurabia” indeed comes to pass? Would Islamic invaders demolish the Vatican, as the Taliban dynamited Afghanistan’s Buddhas of Bamyan in 2001? Or would they settle merely for stripping the great cathedrals of Europe of all their Christian adornment, rendering them into mosques? And what if the surviving non-Muslim population of Europe is reduced to subservient “dhimmitude”?

It could happen. Many think it will. In July 2004, Princeton historian Bernard Lewis told Germany’s Die Welt that Europe would be Islamic by the end of this century, “at the very latest.” Other observers, too, have spoken out: Melanie Phillips in ;Londonistan, Bruce Bawer in While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, and Mark Steyn in America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It. Admittedly, these writers share a mostly neoconservative perspective, but such can’t be said for Patrick Buchanan, author of the book that out-Spenglers Spengler, The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization.

On the other side of the great divide, militant Muslims are feeling the wind at their backs. Last November, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, leader of al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, released an audiotape in which he vowed, “We will not rest from our jihad until we are under the olive trees of the Roman Empire”—which is to say, much of Europe. This August, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, traveling to Afghanistan, declared, “There is no way for salvation of mankind but rule of Islam over mankind.” To be sure, there’s no shortage of Christians who speak this way, but none of them are currently heads of state.

If demography is the author of destiny, then the danger of Europe falling within dar al-Islamis real. And in addition to the teeming Muslim lumpen already within the gates, plenty more are coming. According to United Nations data, the population of the Arab world will increase from 321 million in 2004 to 598 million in 2050. Are those swarming masses really going to hang back in Egypt and Yemen when Europe beckons? And of course, over the horizon, just past Araby, abide the Muslim multitudes of Central Asia and Africa, where tens of millions more would love to make the secular hajj to, say, Rome or Berlin.

In other words, if present trends continue, the green flag of Islam—bearing the shahada, the declaration of faith, “There is no god but God; Muhammad is the Messenger of God”—could be fluttering above Athens and Rotterdam in the lifespan of a youngster today. If so, then the glory of Europe as the hub of Greco-Roman and Christian civilization would be extinguished forever.

If this Muslimization befalls Europe, the consequences would be catastrophic for Americans as well. Although some neoconservatives, bitter at Old European “surrender monkeys,” might be quietly pleased at the prospect, the fact is that a Salafist Surge into the heart of Europe—destroying the civilization that bequeathed to us Aesop and Aristotle, Voltaire and the Victorians—would be a psychic wound that would never heal, not across the great sward of America, not even in the carpeted think-warrens of the American Enterprise Institute. A dolorous bell would toll for all of us, scattered as we might be in the European Diaspora.

Read the rest of the article here.

“Our Present Is Your Future”

Gates of Vienna:

Below is the prepared text of the speech given in Chanhassen, Minnesota tonight by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, at an event sponsored by SW Metro Tea Party Patriots and ACT! for America, Minneapolis Chapter.

esw-churchLadies and Gentlemen,

Thank you for inviting me here to Chanhassen. It’s the first time I’ve been to Minnesota, and I must say it’s a pleasure to be here. The closest I came to this part of the country was when I lived in Chicago, but that was many years ago.

I have always admired the Tea Party Movement, contrary to most of my fellow Austrians, who are uneducated when it comes to the historical significance of the original Boston Tea Party. What I admire most is that you are nourished by the very American belief that the government does not have the answers, that reform comes from below, that people are wiser than their leaders.

I bring you greetings from Austria. I’d like to be able to report some happy news, but there is little good news to be had in my country. Austria, like most of the rest of Western Europe, is being Islamized at an accelerating pace, even as our freedom of speech is more and more often suppressed. The two processes are connected with each other: in order to prevent any real public understanding of what Islamization means, and to inhibit any popular discontent, the ability to tell the truth is vigorously squashed.

Those of you who know me are aware that I will NOT cease telling the truth about Islam. For almost ten years I have made it my business to inform my fellow Austrians about the nature of Islam, as revealed in the Koran and the sayings of Mohammed. I refuse to cease my activities merely because dhimmi government bureaucrats consider such truths to be “hate speech”. In the past I have been prosecuted and convicted for explaining Islam in a factual manner, and I may well be prosecuted again. But I shall continue regardless.

Similar conditions exist in other European countries. Austria is not even the worst-off — Britain and Sweden are vying with each other to see who can be the most repressive. In both countries you are likely to be prosecuted for saying anything that reflects badly on Islam. And, just as in Austria, the truth is no defense.

As an example, consider what happened to my good friend Paul Weston, a Counterjihad activist and the leader of the LibertyGB party in Britain. Last April, as a part of his election campaign for the European Parliament, Paul stood on the steps of the Winchester Guildhall and quoted from a book written in 1899 called The River War. He recited the following words:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.”

Someone in earshot heard his words, took offense, and called the police. Paul was eventually arrested, taken to the police station, and charged with “incitement of racial hatred”, which is a “racially aggravated crime under Section 4 of the Public Order Act.” The charges were later dropped, but what happened to him served as a warning to others who might consider doing something similar.

All of this is bad enough — to be arrested for reading from an old book that makes politically incorrect observations about Islam. But that book happens to have been written by a man named WINSTON CHURCHILL.

Such is the sad state of affairs in Modern Multicultural Britain: an English citizen can now be arrested for giving a public reading from a book by the greatest British prime minister who ever lived.

I could cite more examples from all over Western Europe, but if I did I would exceed my allotted time and keep all of us up long past our bedtime. Someone is arrested almost every day in Europe for “hate speech”, and the offending words almost always concern Islam.

There is currently a demand by the Islamic Faith Community in Austria for an “anti-Islamism law”, which is actually a ruse to obtain new favorable provisions for Muslims. The drive for this law is being backed by Turkey. The same law is also being demanded in Germany by the Turkish community. The final result, if they are successful, will be that Muslims in both countries will gain further special privileges and be protected from criticism.

Truth is the first victim when our freedoms are threatened. Seraphina Verhofstadt was asked in a TV interview why she still displays the Israeli flag after being beaten up, and whether it would not be wiser to remove it. She answered: “If I do that, I will also lose my freedom of speech.”

I have been asked frequently after my conviction whether it would not be wiser just to stop talking about Islam “in this way”. My answer is: “If I do that, more people will lose their freedom of speech.”

First we lose truth, then we lose freedoms, and finally we lose life itself.

As I have said previously, “There is no free speech in Austria and in Europe. That’s just an illusion; that’s just what the politicians are telling you. If you wanted a definition of European free speech, I would say, ‘Well, you have the right to say anything as long as it’s within what the government tells you to think.’”

Our politicians, similar to yours here in the United States are members of the Global Ministry of Truth, with its policy that Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by a Tiny Minority of Extremists. They are forcing truth upon us, preventing us from seeking truth and knowledge.

The engine driving the assault on civil liberties in Europe is the presence of millions of Muslims. It’s not just that the Islamic population is large enough in most major cities to pose the risk of mob violence when roused. Muslims also tend to vote as a bloc, and mostly for the socialist parties, so that the ruling establishment falls all over itself to cater to Islamic needs in order to retain its hold on power. Muslims require that there be no public criticism of Islam, so all such speech is in the process of being outlawed. Related issues, such as mass immigration from the Third World, may also trigger the same penalties under the same laws.

Within its borders Europe now has an Islamic population equivalent to that of Saudi Arabia. Due to their aggressive behavior and their group solidarity, Muslims wield an influence far beyond what their numbers would suggest. Muslim demands tend to be enacted as public policy, and what they dislike tends to be outlawed. Halal food is served to everyone at public schools, and gender segregation is instituted at public swimming pools. Muslims are granted special exemptions from dress codes, the right to pray in rooms specially set aside for them, and the right to blast the call to prayer at ungodly hours from the minarets of their mosques.

Not surprisingly, anti-Semitism has risen to a level not seen in Europe since the fall of the Third Reich. And, needless to say, the new Jew-hatred largely originates with European Muslims — the “New Swedes”, the “New Germans”, and the “New Austrians”.

Yes, there are anti-Semitic native Europeans. But they are few in number, and their political parties are generally considered a joke in most countries. The two most significant Jew-hating parties are Jobbik in Hungary and Golden Dawn in Greece. The former arose in a former East Bloc country where pre-war attitudes were preserved by communism like a fly in amber. The latter developed out of the despair and chaos of economic ruin in the most destitute country in Europe — much as the National Socialists did in Germany during the Great Depression.

People outside of Europe, especially talking heads on television, tend to lump the anti-jihad parties in with Golden Dawn and Jobbik as “right-wing extremists”. But this is a false grouping: such parties are quite different. The anti-jihad parties support Israel, promote civil liberties, and generally espouse a classical liberal philosophy. Examples include the PVV in the Netherlands, the Danish People’s Party, the Sweden Democrats, the Austrian Freedom Party, and the Lega Nord in Italy. What they all have in common is their opposition to Islamization and mass immigration.

The rising anti-Semitism in Europe is Islamic anti-Semitism, which, as chronicled by my good friend Dr. Andrew Bostom, is as old as Islam itself. It is sanctioned — even mandated — by the Koran and the sayings of Mohammed. There is no Muslim community in Europe, not even the most “mainstream”, that is not rife with Jew-hatred.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The recent formation of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq has drawn the world’s attention to the true nature of Islam. Images of the horrors unleashed by ISIS have spread all over the world via YouTube and social media. Our cowardly political leaders repeatedly deny that there is any justification in Islam for these acts. They keep telling us: “ISIS does not represent the true Islam”.

Yet nothing could be further from the truth. The Islamic State has returned to the core instructions recorded in the Koran, which Muslims consider to be the word of Allah. This IS the real Islam.

And this is the pernicious ideology that was deliberately imported into Europe along with millions of Muslim immigrants from North Africa, the Middle East, and the Indian Subcontinent. The process began forty years ago, and has been chronicled by Bat Ye’or in her ground-breaking book Eurabia. The first Oil Crisis in 1973 induced European governments to strike a Faustian bargain with Arab countries: in return for a guaranteed flow of oil at a relatively stable price, they were required to support the Palestinian cause, and also allow mass immigration from OPEC countries into Europe.

Four decades later, the results are as I have described. Our political leaders may well regret the decisions their predecessors made back then, but it is now far too late to reverse course. Not only is Muslim anger a potential threat to the civil order, but those in power depend on Muslim votes to keep them there. All they can do is double down on their failed policies, allowing more immigration, granting more concessions to Islam, and paying out billions and billions of additional euros in welfare and other subsidies.

Ladies and gentlemen, this will not end well.

Read more

The Big Picture: ISIS in Context

isis-iraq-450x215by William Kilpatrick:

It’s hard to keep up with the news about Islam. One week, the focus is on Boko Haram, then it shifts to Hamas, and then to ISIS.

Every once in a while, it helps to step back and take a look at the big picture—that is, the big picture in regard to the Islamic resurgence. Not that there aren’t other big threats on the horizon—such as Russia, China, and North Korea—but let’s confine ourselves here to the Islamic threat.

That threat comes in two forms: armed jihad and stealth jihad. Since armed jihad is more conspicuous, it gets most of our attention. It’s difficult not to notice the activities of Boko Haram in Nigeria or ISIS in Iraq, or the major terror attacks that occur once every year or so—the bombing of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the London bus and subway attack, the bombing of commuter trains in Madrid and Mumbai, and the mall massacre in Nairobi. In the back of our minds, we also know that Pakistan has nuclear weapons and that Iran will soon acquire them (although some American bishops assure us that Iran has no such intention).

The balance of military power still favors the West—although it’s no longer clear whether Turkey, which has the second largest military in NATO, will come down on the side of the West or on the side of the Islamists. But military power can be offset by asymmetrical warfare—in other words, the type of warfare that terrorists favor. A small team of terrorists can incinerate the World Trade Center or paralyze Madrid or Mumbai, and there’s not much that F-16s or nuclear submarines can do about it.

Which is where that other form of jihad comes in. Stealth jihad, which, as the name implies, is the less noticeable type, can create a base for armed jihadists to ply their trade. Stealth jihad, in essence, is an attempt to turn a culture in an Islamic direction by infiltrating and influencing key institutions such as schools, courts, churches, media, government, and the entertainment industry. The “Trojan Horse” plot for taking over 10 schools in Birmingham, England is one example of stealth jihad; the national security establishment’s purging of training materials that cast a critical eye on Islam is another.

But, in order to do the long march through the institutions, you have to have enough bodies to do the marching. Thus, many critics look upon Muslim immigration into non-Muslim societies as a form of stealth jihad. For example, in their book Modern-Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, Sam Solomon and Elias Al-Maqdisi describe Muslim immigration as, well, a “modern-day Trojan Horse.” They’re not saying that every single Muslim immigrant wants to subvert your local school, but rather that mass migration and Islamic conquest have been linked ever since Muhammad and his followers migrated from Mecca to Medina and commenced the takeover of Arabia.

Many places in Europe have changed almost beyond recognition due to the combination of mass immigration and high Muslim birth rates. And the political makeup of Europe is also changing. Since Muslims in Europe and the UK tend to vote as a bloc, politicians have begun catering to them, thus magnifying their influence. It’s widely thought, for instance, that the victory margin for French President Francois Hollande—a strong proponent of Muslim immigration—was provided by Muslim voters.

It used to be that anyone who talked about the Islamization of Europe was dismissed as an “alarmist.” But plenty of Europeans are talking about it now– including European Muslims who proudly march with signs proclaiming their intention to dominate Europe. Social-network researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have concluded that “when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakeable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society.” France is already over 10 percent Muslim, and the majority of Frenchmen, like most Europeans, don’t seem to have any strong convictions about anything outside of an unshakeable belief in long vacations and early retirement.

In significant ways, stealth jihad paves the way for armed jihad. In its early stages, it can create localized environments where homegrown jihadists can grow and flourish. In its later stages? The ultimate aim of stealth jihad is to put the reins of power in the hands of Muslims. What if, as seems increasingly likely, France and England concede more and more political power to Islamists? Both countries are nuclear powers with advanced delivery systems. Given the rapid rate at which the old order of things is being turned upside down, it is not inconceivable that these weapons could someday fall into the hands of Islamic radicals.

Read more at Front Page

ACT! for America meeting in Orlando, Florida on May 15, 2014

ESW-start-smallBy Vlad Tepes:

A brief post on the events in Orlando the past day or so. More to come shortly, but in the meantime, here is the text of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff’s speech and some photos from the day.

ESW Islamization of Europe 

Ladies and Gentlemen, I bring you greetings from Austria.

I congratulate Brigitte Gabriel, and you, Mike, and all the various chapters of ACT! For America for their tireless efforts to expose the ongoing stealth Islamization of the United States and Canada. As a native European, I can testify personally that the Islamization of my country and my continent is hardly a matter of stealth — it is occurring quite openly. Radical Islamic preachers declare the supremacy of Islam during Friday prayers in mosques in major cities all across Western Europe. Muslim demonstrators frequently take to the streets carrying signs that read “Islam Will Dominate” and “Sharia is the Answer”.

Under the direction of the EU bureaucrats in Brussels — whom we did not elect and cannot remove — we Europeans are required to admit more and more third-world immigrants, most of them Muslims. Our public institutions must change to accommodate them. Our schools become centers of Islamic propaganda and serve halal food to all their students, Muslim or otherwise. More and more mega-mosques are being built in our cities. Multicultural “tolerance” requires that we permit fully-veiled women as employees in all occupations, public or private. And, most ominously, any criticism of Islam — or even factual accounts of Islamic history and practices — are punished by lawsuits or state prosecution.

Most of you have already heard about my own legal case, so I won’t spend a lot of time going over the gory details. The short version is that I was prosecuted by the Austrian government for what I said in one of my seminars about Islam. My description of Islamic law and its basis in the Koran and the hadith was considered “denigration of religious beliefs of a legally recognized religion.” I was tried, convicted, and fined. I appealed all the way to the highest court in Austria, but my conviction was upheld at all levels. I am in the process of appealing the decision to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Because of my conviction, I can no longer use a certain word in my descriptions of Islam and Mohammed, because the use of that word was judged a denigration of Islamic beliefs. If I were to use it in reference to Islam, I could be prosecuted again, and the sentence might be harsher the second time. They would probably throw the book at me.

ESW_End-small-300x200However, I am not in Austria at the moment. I am here, in the United States of America, where my right to use that word in any context I please is protected by nothing less than the First Amendment to the Constitution.

So it gives me a special pleasure, ladies and gentlemen, to tell you what got me in such hot water with the judicial authorities in Austria: it was the word pedophilia.

In my seminar I explained that, according to the authentic hadith, Mohammed married his wife Aisha when she was six years old, and consummated the marriage when she was nine. In reference to those facts, I described a conversation with a friend about an Austrian politician named Susanne Winter, who had previously been convicted and fined for referring to Mohammed as a pedophile. It was my friend’s opinion that one is simply not allowed to say such a thing. I responded by saying, “What do we call that, if it isn’t pedophilia?”

Now that I’m here in Florida, and it’s safe for me to say it, I can repeat my point: Mohammed is considered the perfect man, an example to be emulated by all Muslims. He had sex with a nine-year-old girl. What do we call that, if it isn’t pedophilia?

Does this perhaps explain the epidemic of child sex slavery by gangs of young Muslim men, which is currently underway in Britain, the Netherlands, and other Western European countries?

Britain is actually the worst offender when it comes to the repression of free speech and open debate about Islam. Almost every day, cases at least as outrageous as mine are brought before magistrates or judges. People who criticize Islam or speak negatively about Muslims are routinely charged with “racially aggravated public order offenses”. Many of them are given a stiff fine when convicted, or even sent to prison.

The most egregious example in recent memory was the arrest of my good friend Paul Weston in Winchester. Paul is a candidate for the European Parliament for the LibertyGB party, and on April 26 he was making a campaign speech over a bullhorn from the steps of the Winchester guildhall. His listeners didn’t realize it, but what he was saying was actually a quote from a book called The River War, which was written in 1899 by a man named Winston Churchill:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.”

A woman who heard him say these words called the police and complained that he was engaging in “hate speech” that was offensive to her. When the police arrived, they told him to stop. When he refused, he was arrested, searched, and taken away in a police van.

Paul was initially charged with “breach of the Section 27 Dispersal Notice”, that is, for refusing to obey a police order to move on. At the police station that charge was dropped, however, and he was given a more serious charge: a “racially aggravated crime under Section 4 of the Public Order Act.” If he is convicted of it, he may be sentenced to up to two years in prison. He will return to the police station next week, on May 24 — two days after the election. At that point he will learn whether the judicial authorities will proceed with a prosecution.

As far as Paul could tell, neither his audience nor the police had any idea that he was quoting Churchill, so they may well have been unaware how bad they would look when the news got out about what happened. And the news certainly did get out — within a few days the story moved out of the blogs and into the mainstream media on  both sides of the Atlantic, and even in Australia. Normally, such Section 4 cases never make it into the media. They are routine and humdrum. Someone complains about the Religion of Peace, and gets charged with racism. It’s no big deal; it happens all the time.

Paul’s case was different, however. Despite the reign of political correctness that smothers all public discourse in Britain, Winston Churchill is still revered by the British public as a great national hero. To arrest and charge someone for quoting Sir Winston’s writings in public is a bridge too far. The police had no idea that they were biting down on a scorpion when they arrested Paul Weston.

Sir Winston Churchill was not only a Prime Minister of Great Britain, he was also an accomplished writer who won the Nobel Prize in Literature for his historical writings. What in the world has happened to the UK when an English citizen cannot quote a respected historian and the greatest war leader in British history without fear of being arrested?

In 1899 Winston Churchill was free to observe what Islam did to its adherents. He could evaluate what he saw, draw conclusions, and publish them in a book, all the while receiving accolades for his work. Today, in the second decade of the 21st century, the same topic cannot even be publicly discussed, and the conclusions drawn by Sir Winston are absolutely forbidden. How the country has changed in just over a century! If nothing else, this incident plainly illustrates the extent to which Britain has been Islamized.

The process by which the nations of Europe became Islamized varies from country to country. My own country, Austria, left a “back door” open for Islam due to the infamous Law on Islam of 1912. This law gave Islam the status of a recognized state religion, and was considered politically necessary after Bosnia-Herzegovina was incorporated into the Austro-Hungarian Empire. More and more Bosnians were joining the Austrian army, and the law was passed to ensure “cohesion” in the ranks.

Sound familiar? In Britain, the greatest excesses of Politically Correct Multiculturalism are justified in the name of “community cohesion” — that is, to prevent Muslims from rioting in the streets.

The mass importation of Muslim immigrants into Britain began more than thirty years ago, but it has accelerated in the last fifteen years as the Labour Party deliberately increased the annual rate of entry in order to import more Labour voters and damage the Conservative Party.

Other countries have implemented similar policies. Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Ireland, and Austria have all increased the numbers of immigrants they allow to enter. Some of these policies are simply the mandate of the European Union, which insists that individual member states have no right to control their borders. But in other cases, the Social Democrats, the Greens, and other left-wing parties find it expedient to import third-world immigrants and grant them the vote as quickly as possible, because they will reliably vote as a bloc for the left-socialist parties.

Read more at Gates of Vienna

Blueprint’s Discovery Fuels UK “Trojan Horse” Concerns

Gavin Boby: Leading the Fight to Stop Islamization

Gavin_Boby2-450x238By Rachel Molschky:

The Islamization of the West is charging full speed ahead with over 1500 mosques in England alone. While politicians talk about curbing immigration and groups like the EDL protest, most people feel powerless as they see the former glory of their nation slip away in the sea of political correctness, multiculturalism and out-of-control Muslim immigration. Attorney Gavin Boby, however, is doing something about it.

Gavin Boby is the founder of Law and Freedom Foundation, an organization which started in 2011, to empower local communities, facing the threat of new mosques or mosque expansions in their neighborhoods, to be proactive and use the law to fight against Islamization. To date, Law and Freedom Foundation has stopped 17 out of 19 mosque planning applications, a success rate of nearly 90%. And as Boby told me, his goal for 2014 is to oppose all mosque planning applications in England, effectively putting a freeze on mosque construction. He has no doubt this can be accomplished.

Anyone anywhere in England can contact Boby’s organization at the early planning stages of a new mosque, and as the Law and Freedom site states, “We can offer you assistance, advice and support to get your concerns heard by those elected to represent you. There is absolutely nothing unlawful about using the consultation procedures that Parliament has provided for your protection, and you should not let anyone make you feel ashamed of doing so. We are extremely proud that, when worried neighbourhoods approach us for help with this, we provide it.”

Is this racist or Islamophobic? Absolutely not, and here’s why. First, Islam is not a race, and Muslims can and do have any skin color, many being white. And second, the word “Islamophobia” suggests an unfounded hatred or fear of Islam or Islamic people based on ignorant prejudice. But Islam cannot be compared to any other religion. Mosques are not houses of worship; they are houses of hate. What is preached in mosques is antithetic to the values of our Judeo-Christian society: anti-Semitism, (anti-all-non-Muslims, in fact), misogyny, world domination and above all, violence.

women_in_burqasFor a little perspective, Law and Freedom highlights an article by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi entitled, “Sharia and Violence in American Mosques,” which has the disturbing results of a study done on 100 mosques across the US and what goes on inside. The majority contained violent materials, mostly books and videos, and there was a direct correlation between Sharia-compliant mosques and the violence promoted. Mosques were identified as Sharia-compliant based on 12 Sharia-adherent behaviors of the worshippers and the imam, including gender segregation and whether or not they wore strict Islamic attire.

It may seem like a basic premise, however the findings clearly showed that where Muslims dress more Islamically, more violence was promoted. It’s a safe bet that when you see a woman dressed in full Islamic garb, niqab and all, she attends a mosque which preaches violence and encourages Muslim “charity” to finance terrorist groups.

The conclusion to the study? As it states on Law and Freedom’s site: “Nearly three quarters of mosque-goers attend ‘severe’ (offering modern materials with a violent political axe to grind) mosques; just over one fifth go to moderate (predominantly worship and ritual with some positive attitudes towards violence) mosques; and 3.5%, or one in thirty, go to mosques with no violent materials in them.”

Only 3.5% of Muslims who attend mosque are getting the peaceful version of the “religion of peace.” Do you want a mosque in your neighborhood now?

Read more at Cherson and Molschky

Gavin Boby’s book, Life Without Politicians: Preserving Freedom after the State Collapses

Gavin Boby at the 1st Intl Symposium on Liberty and Islam in Australia

‘Easy Meat’: Inside the World of Muslim Rape Gangs, Part II — on The Glazov Gang

Kosher Meals For Inmates Will Cost Florida Taxpayers $14.9 Million A year

20140330_inmates_Jail_foodMealsLby ALAN KORNMAN:

Judge Patricia Seitz of the United States District in Miami, FL on December 5, 2013  ordered the Florida Department of Corrections to provide Kosher meals to inmates beginning July 1, 2014.  That is unless the Florida Attorney General puts a stop to this raping of Florida taxpayers money.

Cost To The Taxpayers

The estimated additional cost to provide Florida housed convicts with Kosher meals would be approximately $14,952,283 per year.

This $14.9 Million dollar number is based on 6,283 convicts who identify with religious groups that have previously maintained that Kosher diets are necessary.

Seventh Day Adventists =    402 Convicts

Jewish                            = 2,136 Convicts

Muslim                            = 3,745 Convicts

Kathleen Fuhrman, Public Health Nutrition Manager for the Department of Corrections estimates the annual cost to provide an inmate Kosher meals would be $2,379 compared to $584 per year for regular meals.  According to Judge Seitz’s ruling if  this program goes statewide it could result in a cost upwards of $54.1 Million.

Florida’s prison system, the third-largest in the country, is projected to run a $45 million deficit this year alone and yet, in this case, we taxpayers are forced to foot the bill for this unnecessarily expense food accommodation.

The Hypocrisy of Prison Meal Accommodations

The Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) already provides an alternative entree program which includes dairy and eggs but no meat or a vegan program where all animal products are avoided. These alternative entree’s are provided at little or no added expense to the taxpayer.

In and of themselves,  these ‘alternative entree’s’ are Kosher, Halal, Seventh Day Adventist, Hindu, and frankly acceptable in practice for any particular religious based special dietary requirements.

The most glaring hypocrisy comes from these inmates who had already violated their deeply held religious beliefs committing crimes that landed them in prison to begin with.  Therefore, it is safe to conclude, in most cases, these inmates believed their criminal activity was more important to them than following their faiths religious doctrines.

These inmates, by their own actions, are solely responsible for being wards of the state.  The rights to any special diet is a luxury forfeited when they committed their crimes against society.

The FDOC has already gone above and beyond by offering vegan and dairy & egg only alternative entree’s.  The FDOC has voluntarily removed all pork products from their menus as an accommodation to Muslim inmates.

Bruce Rich, one of the Plaintiff’s in this Kosher meal suit, stated in court documents that, “his soul would be negatively affected if he ingested anything non-kosher.”  Was Mr. Rich’s soul negatively affected when he murdered his parents, Irving and Blanche Rich?

Prosecutors proved Rich killed his parents for their life insurance policy and will, and he tried to make their deaths look like a murder-suicide.  Rich,  also claimed that because of his parents’ Jewish faith, they could not be subjected to autopsy. Inmate Bruce Rich is no ‘Greener’ he is using Judaism to scam the system and Judge Seitz is his patsy.

Now Bruce Rich is trying to make the case that a Vegan diet is not Kosher because of the way alternative entree’s are prepared. Judge Patricia Seitz is allowing this travesty of religious blackmail to continue.  Shame on the Aleph Institute for aiding and abetting this farce that is going to cost Florida taxpayers a minimum of $15 million per year and more likely $54 million by the time this is all over with.

CAIR-FL Says Halal Diets Are Next

 

The Council On American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Director Hassan Shibly says making Halal food available to Muslim convicts will be  a priority for his organization in 2014.

This is just another example of CAIR’s Hassan Shibly trying to game the FDOC when the vegan alternative entree fulfills Halal dietary requirements short of an Imam blessing the food. The fact that a federal court has declared CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist funding trial in U.S. history should limit their credibility with the court until their terrorist status is removed by a Federal judge.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Austria: Muslims Outnumber Catholics in Vienna Schools

by Soeren Kern:

Austria is also in the process of introducing new taxpayer-funded textbooks for the formal teaching if Islam in all public elementary schools across the country…. This is the first time Islam is being taught to Austrian students in the German language.

“What remains, then, is to conquer Rome. This means Islam will come back to Europe for a third time, after it was expelled from it twice. We will conquer Europe! We will conquer America! Not through the sword but through our Dawa [proselytizing].” — Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim students, according to new statistics, now outnumber Roman Catholic students at middle and secondary schools in Vienna, the capital and largest city of Austria.

The data—which show that Muslim students are also on the verge of overtaking Catholics in Viennese elementary schools—reflect an established trend and provide empirical evidence of a massive demographic and religious shift underway in Austria, traditionally a Roman Catholic country.

The Muslim population in Austria now exceeds 500,000 (or roughly 6% of the total population), up from an estimated 150,000 (or 2%) in 1990. The Muslim population is expected to reach 800,000 (or 9.5%) by 2030, according to recent estimates.

In the current school year, 10,734 Muslim students are enrolled in Viennese middle and secondary schools, compared to 8,632 Roman Catholic students, 4,259 Serbian Orthodox students and 3,219 students with “no religious persuasion,” according to statistics compiled by the Vienna Board of Education (Stadtschulrat für Wien) and published by Radio Vatican website on March 21.

As far as elementary schools are concerned, there are 23,807 Roman Catholic students, followed by 17,913 Muslim students, 11,119 “non-religious” students, 6,083 Serbian Orthodox students and 2,322 Protestants.

The statistics show that the only Viennese schools where Muslims remain a distinct minority are in thegymnasium, advanced secondary schools that place a strong emphasis on academic learning rather than on vocational skills. Students graduating from a gymnasium are more likely than others to be admitted to attend university in Austria.

Austria is also in the process of introducing new taxpayer-funded textbooks for the formal teaching of Islam in all public elementary schools across the country.

The textbooks are called “Islam Hour” (Islamstunde) and have been prepared by the Islamic Religious Authority of Austria (Islamische Glaubensgemeinschaft in Österreich, IGGiÖ), a Muslim umbrella organization whose main responsibility is the state-funded supply of Islamic religious education at Austrian public and private schools.

According to the IGGiÖ, the new textbooks are based on “secure and recognized sources of Islam” aimed at “embedding Islam into the lives of students.” Unlike previous versions of the books, which were criticized for being “overly martial in tone” and for not being “sufficiently oriented toward European values,” the new books have been developed based a “completely new didactic model for competency-based education.”

Previously, the main textbook used for Islam instruction in Austrian public schools was a vehemently anti-Western screed entitled “The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam” (Erlaubtes und Verbotenes im Islam) and authored by none other than Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Among other Islamic doctrines, the book taught students that Islamic Sharia law takes precedence over secular laws, that women have fewer rights than men, and that those who abandoned Islam are to be put to death.

The book was eventually banned from Austrian schools (although it is still being openly promoted on the website of the Vienna Islamic Centre, the largest mosque in Austria) after Al-Qaradawi[1] — a spiritual advisor for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas — began publicly endorsing suicide attacks against Jews as “martyrdom in the name of Allah.”

 

The Vienna Islamic Centre.

The new textbooks come in four volumes along with a companion CD that includes not only recitations of the Koran, but also a rap song which deals with the aspects of Ramadan.

In an interview with the Austrian newspaper Heute, an IGGiÖ project manager named Amena Shakir said the aim of the new textbooks is to “learn about how the Koranic suras [chapters] can be applied to everyday life.” Shakir added that this is the first time Islam is being taught to Austrian students in the German language and that the textbooks contextualize Islam in the Austrian countryside rather than in Arabia.

“We want our young people in Austria have a sense of home,” said the president of IGGiÖ, Fuat Sanac. “We have tried for years to bring these books into being.”

Sanac also called on the Austrian government to approve and promulgate a new “Islam Law” that would provide Muslims with more legal rights and protections than they enjoy in the current law, which dates back to 1912.

The original law was adopted to help integrate Muslim soldiers from Bosnia-Herzegovina into the Austro-Hungarian army of the Habsburg monarchy. The law recognized Islam as a religious community in Austria, and allowed Muslims to practice their religion in accordance with the laws of the state.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

“Civilization Jihad” Comes to Court

shariah-will-dominate-AFPBreitbart, By Frank Gaffney:

Want to know what our Islamist enemies have in mind for America? Look at Europe.

Virtually every country there has found itself under siege from Muslims seeking to impose the supremacist Islamic doctrine they call shariah on everyone else. The preeminent organization promoting this agenda is the Muslim Brotherhood, now banned as a terrorist group in its home country of Egypt but prospering in the United Kingdom and elsewhere in what has been known as the Free World. In fact, as Egyptian courts hand down death sentences to those engaged with the Brotherhood’s violent efforts to overthrow the government there, ours is opening the door to asylum for those who have only engaged in “limited” material support for terrorism.

More insidious than the Muslim Brotherhood’s violence, however, is its stealthy subversion. In a 1991 strategic plan introduced into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial, a senior member named Mohammed Akram described this form of warfare as “civilization jihad.”

In Akram’s words, the goal of the Brotherhood’s civilization jihadists is “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within… so that God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” His “Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America” lays out how this ambitious goal is to be achieved under our noses by penetrating and subverting “from within” the West’s civil society and governing institutions.

The London Telegraph reports that this campaign has just scored a major success in Great Britain. The country’s trade association for lawyers, the Law Society, has declared its members can begin drawing up shariah-compliant wills that will be enforceable in British common law courts.

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether.

The documents, which would be recognized by Britain’s courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock – and even those who have been adopted – from being counted as legitimate heirs.

Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Shariah principles, which recognize only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes.

Such inroads are coming on top of the presence of something on the order of 87 shariah courts that operate side-by-side with Britain’s own judiciary. One of the U.K.’s most courageous opponents of such practices, Baroness Caroline Cox, said: “No longer do we have a single legal code in our society. Instead, alongside our own law, there is now effectively a parallel quasi-legal system operating within some Muslim communities.”

Think that cannot happen here? Think again. The Muslim Brotherhood’s largest front group in this country, the Islamic Society of North America, requires each of its chapters to maintain arbitration panels that serve as proto-shariah courts. It is a matter of time before Islamists and their apologists begin demanding that such courts be allowed to adjudicate disputes not just between willing parties but in cases where one party – most likely women and/or children – would prefer to have the protections of our Constitution.

Worse yet, as a study published by the Center for Security Policy in 2011 has documented, there have been at least 27 different instances in which U.S. courts have allowed the use of shariah law to govern – even where doing so has violated constitutional rights of the plaintiffs or defendants. (An updated version of this study now nearing completion indicates that, as of today, there are many more such cases.)

As a corrective to this civilization jihadist incursion into American jurisprudence, seven states have adopted legislation known as American Laws for American Courts (ALAC). If they wish to avoid the fate now facing British citizens who are likely to be denied their rightful inheritances and, in due course, other privations at the hands of shariah, every state in the country should adopt ALAC.

Of course, our Constitution’s Article VI declares that it is the supreme law of the land. But that will not long be the case if the civilization jihadists have their way. We must ensure that shariah is not allowed to undermine that constitutional precept – to the detriment of women, children, and the rest of us.

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. formerly acted as an Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Reagan. He is President of the Center for Security Policy (www.SecureFreedom.org), a columnist for Breitbart News Network, and host of the nationally syndicated program, Secure Freedom Radio. 

Michael Coren – Islamic Sharia law adopted by British legal chiefs

 

Arutz Sheva, Expert: Not All Muslims Happy Over UK’s Sharia Acceptance

In the wake of a decision by Britain to accept the rulings ofIslamic sharia law in matters of inheritance, Arutz Sheva spoke with Ari Soffer, the Managing Editor of Arutz Sheva English and a former resident of London who is familiar with the on-the-ground political situation in the United Kingdom.

According to Soffer, not all British Muslims support the “creeping Islamization” that the UK has been undergoing, in which Islamic law takes its place among the laws of the land. That process is being pushed by Muslim organizations in Britain, but a large number of Muslims in the country would prefer to keep such laws as a private matter between themselves.

UK law already has provisions for the implementation of Sharia law on an individual basis, with decisions handed down by Islamic courts enforced in the country’s courts. Thus, the only purpose for the legislation, he said, was for Islamist radicals to promote their agenda of installing Islamic law in the daily life of Britons.

Soffer added that the British government has only itself to blame for the situation. It was the government that promoted the idea of a “dialog” with what turned out to be a set of radical groups, convinced they were a positive alternative to Al Qaeda. There was a need to create such a dialog in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, it was felt.

The groups encouraged the government to see them as an “Islamic alternative” to Al Qaeda, even though theologically they had much in common. “This was the main reason the governments of Europe enhanced the status of these groups, and now their agenda is clear,” he said. However, he added, most Britons were puzzled at what to do about the situation. “They do not to deal with the new reality because they don’t know how to,” he added.

 

Also see

 

Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills Photo: ALAMY

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills Photo: ALAMY

By , Religious Affairs Editor:

Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system for the first time under guidelines for solicitors on drawing up “Sharia compliant” wills.

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether.

The documents, which would be recognised by Britain’s courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock – and even those who have been adopted – from being counted as legitimate heirs.

Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Sharia principles, which recognise only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes.

Nicholas Fluck, president of The Law Society, said the guidance would promote “good practice” in applying Islamic principles in the British legal system.

Some lawyers, however, described the guidance as “astonishing”, while campaigners warned it represented a major step on the road to a “parallel legal system” for Britain’s Muslim communities.

Baroness Cox, a cross-bench peer leading a Parliamentary campaign to protect women from religiously sanctioned discrimination, including from unofficial Sharia courts in Britain, said it was a “deeply disturbing” development and pledged to raise it with ministers.

“This violates everything that we stand for,” she said. “It would make the Suffragettes turn in their graves.”

The guidance, quietly published this month and distributed to solicitors in England and Wales, details how wills should be drafted to fit Islamic traditions while being valid under British law.

It suggests deleting or amending standard legal terms and even words such as “children” to ensure that those deemed “illegitimate” are denied any claim over the inheritance.

It recommends that some wills include a declaration of faith in Allah which would be drafted at a local mosque, and hands responsibility for drawing up some papers to Sharia courts.

The guidance goes on to suggest that Sharia principles could potentially overrule British practices in some disputes, giving examples of areas that would need to be tested in English courts.

Currently, Sharia principles are not formally addressed by or included in Britain’s laws.

However, a network of Sharia courts has grown up in Islamic communities to deal with disputes between Muslim families.

A few are officially recognised tribunals, operating under the Arbitration Act.

They have powers to set contracts between parties, mainly in commercial disputes, but also to deal with issues such as domestic violence, family disputes and inheritance battles.

But many more unofficial Sharia courts are also in operation.

Parliament has been told of a significant network of more informal Sharia tribunals and “councils”, often based in mosques, dealing with religious divorces and even child custody matters in line with religious teaching.

They offer “mediation” rather than adjudication, although some hearings are laid out like courts with religious scholars or legal experts sitting in a manner more akin to judges than counsellors.

One study estimated that there were now around 85 Sharia bodies operating in Britain. But the new Law Society guidance represents the first time that an official legal body has recognised the legitimacy of some Sharia principles.

Read more at The Telegraph

Also see:

  • ISLAMIC RULES TO BE ENSHRINED INTO ENGLISH AND WELSH LAW (breitbart.com) – The Law Society is officially a trade organisation for solicitors but in reality it has a much wider scope. It regulates Lawyers and can ‘strike them off’ its register, making it impossible to practise.

    Lawyers are required to pay a membership fee to the Society, whether they agree with its stance of things like Sharia or not.

    Conservative Lawyers took to facebook to complain to friends about the new rules, but none felt able to comment publicly because of the Law Society’s ability to end their careers.

Muslims: Halal Lunches in School are a Constitutional Right

halal-slaughter1-450x300Front Page, By Daniel Greenfield:

First Bill de Blasio provided special privileges to Muslims by adding Muslim, but not Hindu or Buddhist holidays, to the school calendar. During the Democratic primaries, he promised Muslims that he would bring Halal meals to city schools.

Now the Muslims are making their demands known. In a city with the largest Jewish population in the country, Kosher meals are not served in city schools. But as usual, Muslims are special and their sense of entitlement knows no bounds.

Marge Feinberg, another spokeswoman for the city’s Department of Education, added that the schools’ menus include vegetarian dishes. “Our kitchens and our kitchen staff are not equipped for specialty meat requirements,” she said. “We have a variety of non-meat options for children.”

But for labor leader Maf Misbha Uddin, the District Council 37 treasurer and founding president of Alliance of South Asian Association of Labor (ASAAL), halal food is not an issue of demand or will, but of religious freedom.

“I feel that serving halal food in school is our constitutional right since the constitution has ensured equal rights for all religious groups and ensured the observance of religion without any obstacle,” said Uddin, whose five children grew up in the city and never ate school lunches because halal menu choices were unavailable.

To no one’s surprise, Mustafa has no idea how Freedom of Religion works. It means freedom from government compulsion in areas of religion, a concept Muslims who push for theocracy everywhere they live simply refuse to understand.

It doesn’t mean a government entitlement to religious practice. That’s not freedom of religion, it’s theocracy.

All the stories about Muslim kids “going hungry” in school are nonsense. There are plenty of non-meat options for them. I went through school without having meat served. Having meat served is a luxury.

More problematically, many Halal certifying organizations are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood or other terrorist and hate groups.

New Yorkers should not be forced to subsidize Muslim terrorism by Islamist pressure groups using their kids as human shields. Those kids aren’t starving in a corner somewhere as their lying parents would have you believe, they’re stuffing their faces with pizza and french fries.