Another Manchester Victim?

7/7 London attack survivor Tony Walters has been found dead amid suicide fears

From the UK Sun (May 28, 2017):

7/7 HERO IS '23RD VICTIM': Survivor of 7/7 London terror attack Tony Walters, 52, found dead hours after Manchester bombing as friends claim ‘he didn’t want to live in a world where ­attacks continue’

Pals believe recent Westminster attack and Monday night's atrocity at an Ariana Grande concert brought back traumatic memories for the haunted 52-year-old

A SURVIVOR of 7/7 was found dead hours after the Manchester Arena attack — amid fears he took his own life.

Haunted Tony Walters, 52, was discovered at his home after failing to go to work. A friend said: “He is the 23rd victim of Salman Abedi‘s suicide bombing.”

Friends believe he killed himself because he was overwhelmed by the horror of yet more innocent lives lost to terrorism.

One said: “He didn’t want to live in a world where these ­terror attacks continue.”

[...]

On July 7, 2005, Tony was yards from fanatic Mohammad Sidique Khan when he detonated a device on a Tube train after it left Edgware Road station.

Seven people, including Khan, died. Tony was showered with shrapnel but survived.

Friends believe the Manchester bombing, coupled with the Westminster attack in March when four people were killed by Khalid Masood, brought back traumatic memories of 7/7 and Tony could not cope.

[...]

“Everyone that knew Tony believes he is the 23rd victim of the Manchester Arena attack....

Read the entire article HERE.

The empty same old, same old did not begin to console or help Tony Walters. He had been bloodied on the field of jihad warfare on his home soil almost twelve years ago. Some experiences are just too intense to forget and continue to claim victims.

UK: Islamists contibue receiving secretly funding in Tower Hamlets

Very disturbing things are going on at Tower Hamlets, the east London council which has fallen under the influence of an Islamic supremacist group, the Islamic Forum of Europe, based at the hardline East London Mosque.

The Labour council leader, Lutfur Rahman, squirmingly refuses to deny that he was elected to his job with the IFE’s help. Several key officials and councillors are closely linked to the IFE. Various organisations controlled by the IFE, including a youth group called the Osmani Trust, have been given enormous amounts of council money.

The Osmani Trust, run by leading figures in the IFE, is a recent merger of two IFE youth organisations, Blyda and Elite Youth. Part of its purpose, according to critics, is to take vulnerable young people off the streets and imbue them with the values of the IFE.

The man in charge of its project working with local gang members, Muhammad Rabbani, is the same person who trains young IFE recruits. Last year, he told them: “Our goal is to create the True Believer, to then mobilise these believers into an organised force for change who will carry out dawah [preaching], hisbah [enforcement of Islamic law, eg Sharia law] and jihad. This will lead to social change and iqamatud-Deen [an Islamic social, economic and political order.]… We have to bear in mind that victory is for Islam and Muslims.”

Despite the exposure of all this, the council’s cabinet brazenly decided on April 7 to hand another £500,000 to the Osmani Trust.

Continue reading here.

But the UK Labour Government continues doing nothing about it. IN fact the Tower Hamlets borough had been for some time under investigation from the party but nothing has been done, even after all the informations that suggest that IFE has actually infiltrated the Labour party in the place and has helped the Labour concil to get elected. Apologists continue meanwhile to consider that every criticism made on the IFE is a sign of Islamophobia. The comments show that a lot of people is worried about the situation lived in the place, with threats against other Muslims (which dared not to bow to IFE) and non-Muslims.

I Was In Birmingham Yesterday

I was in Birmingham, UK yesterday. In my mind, at first, I was in any regular European city. Modernity, a vibe of freedom and a lot of pubs is what I was thinking would be waiting there to welcome just any infidel. In all honesty, what would you expect when you would go to a country but to see their culture in proud display everywhere? Little did I know, I was in for a big surprise!

After my flight to Birmingham day before yesterday, I was really tired so I decided to sleep through the night. When I woke up, I was naturally hungry. So I thought I’d get up and go have some Fish & Chips or something. I went out of my hotel looking for local restaurants. I found plenty of those but what surprised me and pissed me off to a great degree were the signs “100% Halal” that I could see everywhere. It shouldn’t have surprised me, knowing the current turn of events in Europe, but it did.

I don’t know how many of you are aware that my fiancé and I have decided to boycott Halal food altogether. Being from a Muslim background myself, I fully understand the meaning of Halal; I know what it means for meat to be Halal. It’s true that Halal, the word itself, means permissible. However, the process by which meat is declared Halal is, in our opinion, idolatry. When a Muslim butcher slaughters a goat or a cow, for example, not only does he make sure the animal is facing Mecca but he also recites “Be-ism-Allah-e-Allah-u-akbar” which literally translated means, “In the name of Allah, Allah is greater”. So, whenever you eat something that is Halal, you are bearing witness to that statement. And my fiancé and I have decided, we won’t worship Allah, the Muslim god, in any way or let the Muslims profit from us buying their food!

Living in a Muslim country, because of our decision, we pretty much have to not eat any chicken or beef or lamb or whatever else kind of meat you can think of apart from pork and fish. And we have been doing fine without it for about a year. However, whenever we go to “infidel” countries, we eat beef and chicken and whatever else we want, knowing that it is not Halal. And that is what I was hoping to do in Birmingham; I guess you understand me being pissed more now.

Anyway, that is not the only reason I was pissed (because eventually I did find a fast food restaurant that didn’t have Halal all over it and just to make sure it was “extra” Haram, I asked them to put bacon in it), another reason that I was pissed was that wherever I looked, I saw bearded men in their Pakistani or Arabic garb walking around. I heard Urdu and Arabic spoken on the street more than I did English. I saw more women wearing abayas or other things like it to cover themselves than I did free western women wearing skirts or other sorts of beautiful dresses. Yes, I was in Birmingham but I felt like I was back in Dubai or actually worse. I walked into a Borders bookstore there and I saw Qurans on the top shelf. The Bibles were kept on the third or fourth and no one cared but they made sure the Quran had the top spot. In my silent protest, I took one of the Qurans with my left hand and put it on the floor and left the store. I am sure that didn’t mean anything to anyone; I am sure that that Quran ended back up on the shelf but even when no one is watching, I won’t bow down to Allah; even when no one is watching, my God is!

You can read about it in the news, people can show you pictures of how bad England has become but you have to see it for yourself for your blood to actually boil. You have to see it for yourself to believe that England or at least Birmingham as we knew it is no more. We can keep telling our children stories about Charles Martel or the Siege of Vienna but those stories in the near future are going to mean nothing because, as I saw yesterday, Muslims have arrived. And they have arrived with full might. They have taken over stores, restaurants, streets and culture. Muslims have won the war and we haven’t even realized it. Even the most hardcore counter-jihadists among us are thinking, “Europe is going to be Muslim soon” but little do we realize that at least England already is. The only thing that’s left is for Muslims to declare it a Muslim state.

I came back from Birmingham appalled. I hated it. I hated every second that I had to spend there. Western civilization undone in front of our very own eyes. And who is responsible for all of this?

I blame you Britons. No, you weren’t helpless in all this. You weren’t forced at gun point nor were you conquered by another nation against your will. You willingly gave away your country in the name of multiculturalism and equality. You still don’t realize what has happened. I am sure the day you realize what you have done, you will fight harder than ever to reclaim your country but I’m afraid it’s going to be too late for you to just say to Muslims, “you know what? I think you should just leave!” I am afraid when you realize you’ve lost your country, you will have to reclaim it after losing millions of lives including innocent women and children who looked up to you in strong belief that you would protect them and put them before anyone else.

I really do hope Britain wakes up. I am sure it’s not just Britain but other countries in Europe also that are going through this. I have read up on it but I would like to see it myself. Sometime next month, if all goes well, I should be going to Paris for a day. I will make sure to write on that also if I see similar Islamization there. For now, I am just pissed because there isn’t a thing I can do but protest!

Are the antis really so anti?

Demonstrators against the Islamification of the UK and wider Europe are planning a peaceful demo in London tomorrow, the eighth anniversary of 9/11.

But the group United Against Fascism (UAF) still want to stick their oar in and organise a counterdemonstration in the form of a vigil followed by a rally.

It was UAF who managed to halt a British National Party (BNP) news conference back in June, so concerned are they about freedom of speech.

Whatever you think about the BNP – and I and many more who value freedom don’t think much – they’re an official political party with representation in the European Parliament and several British local councils. If these useless prats in UAF really wanted to do damage to the BNP, they’d use debate.

The protest planned for tomorrow is described in the Independent (which manages to ignore hyphenation completely and talks of a “counter demonstration” as if a shop-fittings salesman were about to give a little show, but that’s by the bye).

The organisers, a group called Stop Islamification of Europe, say they always work with the police, they hate racism, but they don’t like Islamification. Sounds good to me, as long as they mean that.

A spokesman, Stephen Gash, is quoted as saying, “We mean what we say and we say what we mean regarding racism, because we don’t tolerate any kind of racism, but Islam itself is another matter.

“We are against any form of totalitarianism and basically we regard Islam as the nastiest form of totalitarianism ever devised.

“We fundamentally oppose any introduction of sharia law into England, the UK and the European Union.”

Which all seems rather reasonable. However, UAF say on their website:

Islamophobia – bigotry against Muslims – is as unacceptable as any other form of racism. [Er, racism? Is Islam a race? When did that happen?]

Its aim is to divide us by making scapegoats of one community, just as the Nazis did with the Jews in the 1930s.

Today they threaten the mosque, tomorrow it could be a synagogue, temple or church.

Today they threaten Muslims, tomorrow it could be Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, blacks, gays, travellers or Eastern Europeans.

And today you threaten those protesting against creeping Islamification, but tomorrow it could be people campaigning for freedom of speech in an area you don’t happen to like, so you’ll try to silence them.

Just as you did with Nick Griffin of the BNP. Being united against fascism but wanting to trample on freedom of speech is a rather contradictory stance that only woolly-minded so-called antifascists could think up.

Come off it, Boris!

“Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, has urged non-Muslims to fast for a day during Ramadan and then to break their fast at a mosque to improve their understanding of Islam,” The Times (London) tells us this weekend.

Oh, yes? More ingratiating, appeasing nonsense from grubby politicians who are after the Muslim vote?

It’s so easy to like good old Boris Johnson. He has that floppy-haired geniality about him, and has committed one or two gaffes in his time as an MP (before he was Mayor of London) that tended to endear him to us rather than alienate him. A sort of likable oaf – that sort of image.

Like his predecessor, Ken Livingstone (who, like Johnson, has done stints on comedy panel shows such as Have I Got News For You), he often gets referred to by his first name. He’s Boris, not Johnson.

But we mustn’t forget that he’s a politician, and, to a large extent, politicians are grubby people who lie and cheat and will stop at nothing to push themselves up the career ladder. Bugger public service, unless it just happens to coincide with my ambitions and greed for power (and, of course, a generous, easy-to-abuse expenses package).

Boris – er, Johnson – thinks that, because some Muslims are trying to fit in with the host culture (no more than we’d expect), we ought to go to a mosque, learn more about their religion and even fast for a day during Ramadan.

But why the hell should we? If you’re studying religions, including Islam, that’s one thing, but why should we wish to dip our toe into this hideous belief system any more than, say, chomp on a thin biscuit and try to believe we’re eating bits of Jesus?

Johnson oozed, “There are valuable lessons people of all backgrounds can learn from Islam, such as the importance of community spirit, family ties, compassion and helping those less fortunate, all of which lie at the heart of the teachings of Ramadan.”

Last time I looked community spirit was thriving in other religions and among those of no religion, Mr Johnson, as were compassion and service to others.

The Times cites the Home Office Islamic Network, which

says that non-Muslims should consider fasting for a day and also asks non-Muslims to be sensitive when eating lunch near a Muslim who is fasting. In Personnel Today magazine, Rachel Krys, of the Employers’ Forum on Belief, writes: “Something as simple as not having biscuits at a team meeting would demonstrate sensitivity to what Muslim colleagues are doing.”

Bollocks, Ms Krys! If they don’t want to see people eat, they can decline to take part in the meeting, and suffer the consequences if their boss tells them they must be there.

What is it about bloody Islam that we should all be expected to bow down to it and observe its ways if there are Muslims close by? What comes next? Sharia courts? Oh, I was forgetting: we already have those.

Perhaps barbarically slaughtered meat forced on non-Muslims? Oh, I was forgetting: there’s already evidence of that – and, of course, it’s set to continue, along with equally barbaric slaughter to appease orthodox Jews.

So no, Mr Johnson and Ms Krys, we must not keep bowing down to demands that we accept their “faith”. There should be no place for “faith” in the public square, unless it’s in the form of reasoned discussion. We’ve seen what a mess it can make of the world.

Why Mr Khan wants to put religion before the law

Some sections of officialdom show common sense when it comes to appeasement, or lack of it, of unreasonable religious demands.

There’s this Muslim geezer in Birmingham, UK, who wants special dispensations on his community service – a punishment handed out after he was racist to an Irish policeman and harassed a judge – because Muslims are in the middle of their Ramadan season, during which they believe they can’t eat or drink during daylight hours.

You can see the rest of the story at my regular blog, Pink Triangle.

This sort of attitude pisses me off, but it's great to see that not everyone is giving in to Muslim whining and whingeing here in the UK. Unfortunately, too many people still are.

Censorship

Yours truly was censored on a Yahoo! Groups discussion list recently for using a word. The word was “Muzzies”.

The odd thing is that the censoring organisation was the UK’s Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association (GALHA), which, as its name suggests, is not especially fond of religion. And it’s less fond – or should be – of religions that like to bash gays.

I can’t say I’ve been that frequent a poster, but I’ve posted a fair few over the years. I won’t be doing so again, except to respond to something that really needs a response.

What rubbed salt into the wounds was that a member of the GALHA committee – who censor members’ posts to that discussion list – said the word was akin to “Paki” and “nigger”. Well is it? You wuold have to have a pretty skewed sense of etymology to think so. Those words are distinctly racist, and to be discouraged (although I personally wouldn’t go so far as to censor them, but would merely expect others, and possibly myself, to come into the discussion and give the culprit a verbal going-over, because racism just isn’t acceptable). “Muzzies”, on the other hand, is clearly referring to a religious persuasion.

To give the censors their due, they allowed my next post onto the list, but could they have done otherwise, since in it I felt I had to rebut the accusation of racism? The word “Muzzies” was then used – in my post – because we were now discussing the word rather than merely using it.

Now why am I talking on here about a dispute on a discussion list over the use of a word? Well the word does concern Muslims, which this blog is about. The word was mildly piss-taking, which is what antireligion organisations do (certainly my other blog, Pink Triangle, does, as does another favourite of mine, the Freethinker). And, of course, censorship was afoot.

And I’ve blogged on here before about how the UK is appeasing Muslims, the very people who pose such a threat to our culture, and especially to gays and lesbians, of whom I am one (well, gay, not lesbian – at least not the last time I looked).

I don’t expect this sort of appeasement from a “humanist” organisation. While I would expect it to get excited over out-and-out racism, I don’t expect such groups to waste valuable energy censoring the word “Muzzies”.

By the way, for those of you who are gay, or straight but gay-friendly, and/or are atheists, freethinkers, agnostics, we’ve set up an alternative discussion group called Gaytheist, which can be found on Pink Triangle sidebar or by sticking your email address in the box below.

Subscribe to Gaytheist

Softly softly catchee votee

Grubby politicians are giving in to Islamists again for votes, it seems – that is if this story from Britain’s red-top tabloid Sun is to be believed.

“Labour slammed the brakes on its war against violent extremism yesterday,” it says, “amid fears it had upset Muslim voters. Millions spent preventing Asian kids becoming terrorists will now be used to tackle right-wing racists in white areas.”

It quotes the Community Cohesion Minister, Shahid Malik – Britain’s first Muslim MP – who “admitted he was softening his stance because Muslims felt stigmatised”.

Tories have branded the move a shameless bid to win back Muslim voters who deserted Labour over British engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"You speak to any Muslim in this country,” Malik has told Sky News, “and they are as opposed as you and I are to extremism and terrorism. The frustration is they are constantly linked with terrorism as a community as a whole."

It’s not easy, but it’s up to Muslims to sort out the extremists in their midst. When did you last witness a sea of Muslims marching and demonstrating, holding up banners calling on their fellow religionists to forsake jihad, to forsake terrorism, to integrate into the country that’s hosting their culture?

Instead, they complain if they don’t get their own way and are forced to do things at work that their religion forbids them to do, such as handle alcohol (which they’re paid to do and know what they’re signing up to when they take the job), and demand their own system of law within the secular law that exists in this country.

What chance of a concerted effort on the part of “ordinary Muslims” to curb the murderous enthusiasm of their “brothers” when they don’t even like the host culture?

UK: Member of Parliament Calls for Worldwide Islamic Caliphate

From Vlad Tepes:

“We Need You to Lead Our Politics”

by Baron Bodissey

That’s what Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for North Southwark and Bermondsey, said to British Muslims gathered for the Global Peace and Unity Event on October 25th, 2008.

He also said, “Every country of the world is your country.”

And he said much, much more than that. Here’s the video:

Mr. Hughes is gay, and homosexuality was an issue when he was first elected to Parliament. Funnily enough, it wasn’t his own sexual orientation that caused controversy, but that of his opponent. From the wiki on him:

The by-election was described by Gay News as “the dirtiest and most notorious by-election in British political history” because of the slurs against the character of the Labour candidate and gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell by various opposition campaigners. The Liberal Campaign leaflet described the election as a “straight choice”, a standard campaigning slogan which was open to misinterpretation. Hughes won the seat with 57.7% of the vote. He apologised for the campaign in 2006, during the same few days revealing his own homosexual experiences, and confirming that he is bisexual after being outed by The Sun newspaper

And this is the man who is now pandering so shamelessly to the local British representatives of the Ummah…

You’ll notice that Mr. Hughes opens his address with “salaam aleikum”, the standard Muslim-to-Muslim greeting. He then quotes from Sura 45 and other parts of the Koran. The Hon. MP may want to meditate on another part of Sura 45, namely verses 7-11:

Woe to each sinful dealer in Falsehoods:

He hears the Signs of Allah rehearsed to him, yet is obstinate and lofty, as if he had not heard them: then announce to him a Penalty Grievous!

And when he learns something of Our Signs, he takes them in jest: for such there will be a humiliating Penalty.

In front of them is Hell: and of no profit to them is anything they may have earned, nor any protectors they may have taken to themselves besides Allah: for them is a tremendous Penalty.

This is (true) Guidance and for those who reject the Signs of their Lord, is a grievous Penalty of abomination.

Mr. Hughes looks ahead with great anticipation to the election of Barack Hussein Obama. It’s obvious that both he and his enthusiastic audience consider Obama to be a Muslim, and that his election will constitute a great sea change in which America reverses position and embraces the Muslim world.

But his wrap-up is the most chilling part of his speech: borders must be abolished, all nations become one, and his Muslim “brothers and sisters” step forward to take their rightful place as leaders of this new transnational entity.

Now, remember: this man was lawfully elected to his office by the voters. Judging by the location of his constituency — just south of the Thames — its voters must be fairly culturally enriched.

But were “persons of British background” a minority among them?

Please tell me that citizens of good English stock were not the ones responsible for voting this man into Parliament.

Bringing home the bacon – or not

Another instance of how religion gets in the way of people’s work and the service they owe to others comes to us from the UK’s Mail.

Muslim care home owner “bans pensioners from eating bacon sandwiches”, says the headline.

The story tells us:

A Muslim care home owner has been branded “a disgrace” after banning his pensioner residents from eating bacon.

The 40 pensioners – none of them Muslim – were shocked when all pork products were cut off the menu by owner Dr Zulfikar Ali Khan.

He stopped deliveries from the butcher who supplied the home for years and instead ordered halal-meat only from another firm.

Bacon sarnies are a favourite at the home, and this chap, according to the Mail, didn’t even consult the residents.

Now he may have an objection to having dead pig on his plate, and no one’s asking him to eat it. But, if his job involves handling it and he wishes not to, he’s in the wrong job. However, he says the residents are now able to have whatever meat they want.

If he did refuse to serve them the meat they wanted, then he is a disgrace.

One unnamed member of staff said it was quite wrong for him to impose his cultural and religious beliefs on others. Not only is it a question of not allowing pork, it seems, but insisting that other meats be halal only – in other words, killed cruelly to satisfy religious whims, and allowed to be so by our supine government, which makes exceptions for Muslims in its rules on animal slaughter.

If this chap has changed his ways, then fine. But it’s time this sort of behaviour was stamped on.
__________
Related links:
In favour of animal suffering
Animals suffer to appease Muslim prisoners
Whingeing Muslim loses employment case

Arresting Moslem Extremists Is A No-No?

I knew this kind of dhimmitude was coming.

Via this posting at Jihad Watch, citing this source (entire article):

TAKE IT EASY ON MUSLIM EXTREMISTS, POLICE TOLD

POLICE will be ordered not to charge Muslim extremists in many hate crime cases – to stop them becoming more militant.

Guidelines will tell forces to press for conviction only in cases of clear-cut criminal acts.

Officers will be advised not to proceed when evidence of lawbreaking is “borderline”.

Examples of crimes to which a blind eye may be turned include incitement to religious hatred or viewing extremist material on the internet.

Last night critics warned that the move could mean Islamic radicals being give the freedom to encourage violence.

Some saw the move as a politically correct attempt to appease extremists who hate Britain.

It could even mean officers tolerating many activities of Muslim preachers of hate like the hook-handed cleric Abu Hamza.

Tory MP David Davies said: “This sounds like abject surrender. Everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law.

“It doesn’t matter whether someone is suspected of incitement to hatred or shoplifting – they should all face the same risk of prosecution.

“There should be no special favours or treatment for any section of the community.”

Officials insist there is no suggestion that people who have clearly committed offences will avoid prosecution.

Instead, they want to avoid alienating Muslims on the fringes of extremism by dragging them to court over petty allegations unlikely to result in conviction.

One fear is that some young Muslims are falling under the influence of extremist preachers while serving prison sentences or on remand awaiting trial.

A senior Whitehall official said the guidance was being drawn up as part of a drive to use persuasion rather than the criminal justice system to fight extremism.

He added: “The aim is to stop people being dragged into extremism.

“We are not talking about letting someone off who has committed a clear offence, but where it is unclear if an offence has been committed.

“For instance, where there has been incitement or someone has been on the internet there can be a grey area where there is some discretion and it would be more sensible to avoid going down the criminal route.”

The Government’s counter- terrorism board is drawing up the advice, which will be sent to all police forces, including the Metropolitan, later this year.

The move follows an updated Home Office counter-terrorism strategy announced earlier this year. The new strategy urges preventative measures to win round potential extremists instead of arrest and prosecution.

“We need to be able to provide support for individuals who are drawn into criminal activity,” the document says.

Councils, community groups and the Government’s youth justice board will be among organisations expected to identify those drawn into extremism or at risk.

Social workers, teachers and other professionals will be asked to try to work with some Muslim youths to reduce the likelihood of them turning into extremists.

But the new strategy is likely to reduce the likelihood of prosecutions against Islamist extremists protesting against troops.

In Luton earlier this year, protesters displayed placards bearing the words “butchers” and “animals” at a homecoming parade for 2nd Battalion, The Royal Anglian Regiment. There were no arrests for incitement.

A Home Office spokesman said: “Preventing people becoming radicalised is a key priority for the Government. The police response needs to be proportionate to deal with crimes people commit while reducing the risk to public safety.”

The latest move represents a reversal of the policy introduced under Tony Blair in the wake of the terrorist attacks in London in 2005, when as Prime Minister he called for an overhaul of the criminal justice system to root out and prosecute extremists.

Past attempts to win over potential Muslim radicals have frequently run into controversy. Millions of pounds have been pledged to fund Muslim groups, drawing claims that they are receiving special treatment.

Different rules of law and different methods of law enforcement for different groups? How can a nation remain a nation with that kind of division?

I can see how this special treatment for Moslems could be extended to an official governmental politcy of no criticism of Islam allowed by anyone in the UK. Mustn't rile up those extremists, you know.

Four short years after the London bombings, the UK is apparently moving from prosecuting traitors, terrorists, and seditionists to giving a pass to those wanting to destroy the UK's way of life. In other words, "reach out" to Moslems. Where have we heard that phrase before?

Anything to avoid addressing the ideology driving the jihadist movement.

How Islam tries to dictate what we read

ieligious fanatics have been jailed for an attack on the UK home of a publisher. His “crime”? He dared to want to publish a novel about Aisha, the child bride of the Islamic prophet, Muhammad.

Now, according to The Times, among others, three Islamic fundamentalists have been banged up “for an arson attack on a London publisher who planned to print an ‘offensive’ book about the Prophet Muhammad”.

The attack was on the home of Martin Rynja, and “has been compared to the campaign against the publication of Salmon Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses”.

You can see from the links below just what a fuss was made by these and other morons, who believe that historical figures don’t belong to all, and if we wish to write fiction based on them, draw cartoons of them, make sculptures of them or paint them, we should be allowed to do so.
__________
Related links:
How Muslims rule what we read
Aisha author should be compensated, says Rushdie’s QC
Cowardice condemned

Up to our necks in sharia

Few people who read this blog need to be reminded, I’m sure, of how hideous sharia law can be. I’ve blogged numerous times on Pink Triangle (just put “sharia” into the search box top left) about it, and how it’s creeping into the UK.

Most of my postings have not been so much about how sharia law affects gays, but how it affects Muslims themselves – the women, of course.

A friend and fellow blogger pointed me to a video he has since embedded there, which has been posted today, and it makes shocking viewing in places. It deals not with sharia as practised in the UK, using the Arbitration Act to run these kangaroo “courts”, but how it’s delivered in Muslim countries.

It makes you wonder, of course, how long it would be before the punishments depicted there would become commonplace if our rapidly growing Muslim population reached a critical power mass and introduced sharia as the primary law of the United Kingdom. A long time a-comin’? Maybe, but possible.

Setting the images against Lennon’s “Imagine” gives them even more impact.

The video also features the front cover from Gay & Lesbian Humanist magazine from autumn 2005, which led to something of a row in gay humanist circles, showing, as it did, what it called “The sick face of Islam”, and featuring hangings of gay teens in Iran and news billboards about the 7/7 bombings in London.

I was editor of the magazine at the time, and came in for a lot of flak from cuddly Lefties who displayed more political correctness than common sense.

You don’t need to be gay to enjoy that magazine, by the way. It’s online only now, and you can see it by going to the Pink Triangle blog and clicking in the sidebar, or by clicking the icon below.

How do you solve a problem like sharia?

It’s reported today that there are now 85 sharia courts in Britain.

This is 17 times higher than previously accepted, says a Daily Mail story.

OK, we know they’re not legally recognised and any judgments have to be ratified. But that, apparently, is easily done, and it’s women who lose out, because Islamic law belongs in the Dark Ages and doesn’t give a toss about human dignity and equality.

“The spread of sharia law has become increasingly controversial since its role was backed last year by Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams and Lord Phillips, the Lord Chief Justice, who stepped down last October,” says the Mail, citing a study by an Islam specialist, Denis McEoin. The story continues:

The report added: “The fact that so many sharia rulings in Britain relate to cases concerning divorce and custody of children is of particular concern, as women are not equal in sharia law, and sharia contains no specific commitment to the best interests of the child that is fundamental to family law in the UK.

“Under sharia, a male child belongs to the father after the age of seven, regardless of circumstances.”

It said: “Sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation.”

More appeasing and kowtowing by our politicians, who ought to be stamping this evil out, and insisting that all disputes that require a decision that will have legal status be begun and ended in proper courts, not imported kangaroo courts run for invisible sky fairies and ancient scriptures rather than real people, living now, in this country, facing 21st-century problems.
__________
Related links:
How do you solve a problem like sharia?
Creeping ever closer! When will they ever learn?
Sharia in the workplace
Sharia – the disturbing story continues
The danger of sharia courts
Sharia – a waste of time

UK: Halal Pizza Only At Domino's

From Mail Online (hat tip to Weasel Zippers), and it's not going over well with the infidels:

Residents have threatened to boycott a Domino's Pizza - after it took pork off its menu and now only offers halal food.

Customers in Blackburn are angry that the managers of the store - which is located in a heavily populated Asian area - made the move in a bid to attract more Muslim clients.

Toppings now include halal pepperoni, halal spicy beef sausage, and customers wanting a Hawaiian pizza traditionally topped with ham will be offered the new version which features halal cured turkey along with pineapple and mushrooms.

[...]

[So]me residents have slammed the move on the grounds that they want to eat pork dishes and others saying they think that the halal slaughter method is cruel.

Mike Costa from Blackburn said: 'They have now set their stall out to cater for Muslim customers. They won't get my trade. That's their business risk though so good luck to them.'

Another resident said: 'This place has just lost our custom. Every week we used to order from there for a youth club, but after getting their 'new' menu it looks like Pizza Hut is now our place to go.'

Another fan said: 'How long before K.F.C, Mcdonalds and Burger King start to alter their menus to suit.'...

Not long, at the rate things are going in certain sections of the UK.

Beef is considered somewhat risky in the UK, what with Mad Cow Disease. I guess that Moslems aren't concerned about that, huh?

In The Anger and the Pride, Oriana Fallaci warned that the mushrooming up of more halal stores and eateries inevitably brought in the radicals from among the Sons of Allah - something the UK should consider.

One in four will be a Muslim, gloats British MP

Religion has contributed to education, politics and morality, reckons the Tory MP Paul Goodman. “It is completely impossible to imagine human life or social life without it.”

Oh no it isn’t.

He was talking about how one in four of the population of Wycombe will one day be Muslim. He seems to think that is a good thing.

In and of itself, there’s no argument. People should be free to practise their chosen superstition (much as they hate it when some people choose not to practise any at all). However, because Muslims tend to be shrill and demanding, it won’t be long before sharia law creeps ever further into Britain’s legal system. All it needs is a concession here and a concession there, and each one becomes a precedent, and on precedent new laws are made.

His talk of how religion has contributed to education, politics and morality is like saying fresh air has contributed to education, politics and morality because people breathe it. Things would have happened without religion, because it’s human beings who have set the agenda.

Some agendas have been set by religious people based on their religious beliefs, yes, and we have some of those hanging about like a bad smell nowadays, such as religion’s propensity for interfering in what people do in their bedrooms.

However, when human beings have thoughts and make laws, they do so as human beings, and call upon a whole raft of reference points and examples. It is not hard to imagine a world without religion, Mr Goodman.

Given that we have religion, however, it needs to be kept in its place: behind closed doors and between consenting adults – just as homosexuality had to be when it was “legalised” in Britain (I prefer to think it was still criminal, but with a few exceptions) in 1968.

Religion was happy that that should be the case. But it bleats when the so-called New Atheists dare to criticise it and the toxicity of its influence in so many areas of life.
__________
Related links:
Norman stormin’ against Islamic courts in UK
Sharia: creeping ever closer

Stormin’ Noman has a go at sharia

Our old friend the homophobic Norman Tebbit – sorry, Lord Tebbit – has put the right-wing cat among the Muslim pigeons with a remark about the hideous sharia law that is creeping into Britain.

The Daily Mail tells us how Tebbit has likened sharia tribunals to the kind of arbitration run by the Kray twins.

He told the House of Lords, “Are you not aware that there is extreme pressure put upon vulnerable women to go through a form of arbitration that results in [their] being virtually precluded from access to British law?”

Five sharia courts currently operate mediation systems approved under the 1996 Arbitration Act. Although their rulings are not legal under British law, once they’ve been through these kangaroo courts they can merely be approved by a proper judge.

As you would expect, Muslims don’t agree with Tebbit’s comment. The Mail says they’ve called it “baseless and ignorant”.

Well take a look a this post, and make up your own mind about sharia law. If they want to practise it, they know where they can bugger off to.

Another Muslim complains of “religious discrimination”

Here’s another person who refuses to do his job because of some religious nonsense. If his religion (it’s the Religion of Peace™, of course, as you would expect) prevents Hasanali Khoja from doing the job of catering manager for the Metropolitan Police, why did he take it on in the first place?

Now he’s bleating about religious discrimination because he needs to handle pork products, according to a story in Scotland’s Herald newspaper.

The paper continues:

An informal agreement has been reached but Mr Khoja, who launched his claim last year, wants it to be formalised.

An employment tribunal in Watford will consider his claim in a hearing which is expected to last two weeks.

Mr Khoja, who has worked for the force since 2005, had previously worked at Hendon Police College in north west London, but was excused from touching pork products due to his religion.

As a senior catering manager, he does not cook on a regular basis, but is expected to handle food, his lawyer, Khalid Sofi, said.

Yes? And pork is not food? To carnivores is is. Within catering parlance it is. He’s a catering manager. So, as far as this whiner’s job is concerned, he’s paid to handle pork.

Given the way our country is forever appeasing encroaching Islam and its alien ways, he’ll probably win his case.
___________
Related links:
Muslim sues Tesco over booze
Whingeing Muslim loses employment case

Get lost, filth!

One of Britain’s appalling red-top rags – but an influential red-top rag – is calling for the nutcase Anjem Choudary to be arrested.

The Sun carries an appallingly punctuated profile of this self-styled sharia judge and former lawyer – who, apparently, used to break all the Islamic rules by boozing and drug taking when he was a student – and wonders just how long it will be before he’s carted off.

We reported recently on how Choudary had wanted to see “the flag of Allah flying over Downing Street”, women, whether Muslim or not, wearing body bags, floggings, stonings in the streets – all the sorts of things he could find in abundance if he buggered off to Saudi Arabia or some other benighted Islamic theocracy.

So get lost, filth. Decent people don’t want you here. (Oh, dear! Is that sounding a bit like the Sun?)

See also this post on Pink Triangle.

Stone all gays, says Islamic nutjob

“If a man likes another man, it can happen, but if you go on to fulfil your desire, if it is proved, then there is a punishment to follow [. . .] There are some people who are attracted to donkeys but that does not mean it is right.”

These are the hate words of one Anjem Choudary, whom I blogged about on Pink Triangle last Saturday after a (London) Standard article had drawn attention to his wish to see “the flag of Allah flying over Downing Street”.

Today, it’s the UK’s Daily Mail that is drawing attention to the madman’s words of vituperative hate for all things Western, under the headline, All homosexuals should be stoned to death, says Muslim preacher of hate.

The Mail says, “Under [sharia], adulterers and homosexuals would be killed by stoning. Asked if that would include anybody – even a Cabinet minister such as Business Secretary Lord [Peter] Mandelson – Choudary responded with an astonishing diatribe.”

It then quotes the words that begin this post.

If gay people or anyone else were holding a press conference to denounce Muslims for being Muslims and practising Islam, would the police not be in there like a shot?

“If a man fancies the idea of Islam, it can happen,” one might have said. “But if you go on to fulfil your desire and practise Islam, and if it is proved, then there is a punishment to follow.

“There are some people who are attracted to all kinds of superstitions, but that does not mean it is right.”

The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement’s Rev. Sharon Ferguson is quoted in Sam Greenhill’s Mail piece as saying, “This is appalling. The police should look very closely at what has been said to see if there is any action they should be taking.”

Quite. Having an opinion about homosexuality is one thing and I would defend the right of, say, a vicar to hold up the gay lifestyle against what he perceives to be biblical proscription of that lifestyle, and thus condemn the gay lifestyle. It’s up to him or her. It’s an opinion, and he/she wouldn’t, we assume, be recommending a rock-flinging death for gay people caught daring to love one another.

What this nutjob is doing is tantamount to incitement.

The press conference, in London, was arranged by Muslim extremists to justify their protest in Luton last week against soldiers returning home from Iraq.

I've blogged quite a lot on Pink Triangle about the threat of creeping sharia (just put the word into the search box there). It’s worrying. I don’t think for a moment that we are on the verge of it in the UK, but speech such as this has to be denounced with ferocity and ridiculed at the highest levels – and that means that the supine British government, made up, as it is, of shoddy, third-rate careerist politicians who care more about the Muslim vote than freedom of expression, should be very firm very soon.

Some more recent posts on Pink Triangle (two of them by my blogging colleague Diesel B) that may interest IBA readers are to be found here, here and here.