Jihate in UK: Terror felt everywhere…………..

THE Church of England’s only Asian bishop, whose father converted from Islam, has criticised many Muslims for their “dual psychology”, in which they desire both “victimhood and domination”.

In the most outspoken critique of Muslims by a church leader, Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, said that because of this view it would never be possible to satisfy all their demands.

“Their complaint often boils down to the position that it is always right to intervene when Muslims are victims, as in Bosnia or Kosovo, and always wrong when the Muslims are the oppressors or terrorists, as with the Taliban or in Iraq,” said Nazir-Ali.

“Given the world view that has given rise to such grievances, there can never be sufficient appeasement and new demands will continue to be made.”

The failure to counter such beliefs meant that radical Islam had flourished in Britain, spread by extremist imams indoctrinating children for
up to four hours a day, he said.

Nazir-Ali added that rigorous checks, from which the government had retreated in face of Muslims’ protests, should be imposed to ensure that arriving clerics were committed to the British way of life.

“Characteristic British values have developed from the Christian faith and its vision of personal and common good,” said the bishop in an interview with The Sunday Times.

“After they were clarified by the enlightenment they became the bedrock of our modern political life. These values need to be recovered to help us to inculcate the virtues of generosity, loyalty, moderation and love.”

Nazir-Ali, who was born in Pakistan and whose father converted from Islam to Catholicism, said radical Islam was being taught in mosque schools across Britain. “While radical teaching may not be happening everywhere, its presence is felt across the country. It affects all Muslims,” he said.

“The two main causes of the present situation [rising extremism] are fundamentalist imams and material on the internet.” He proposed to filter out imams who might whip up extremism: “They must be vetted for appropriate qualifications,   they must have a reasonable knowledge of the English language and they must take part in a recognised process of learning about British life and culture.”

The government, after lobbying from Muslim groups, retreated from proposals to toughen entry requirements put forward by David Blunkett, the former home secretary, two years ago. Plans to require foreign clerics to sit a test on British civic values a year after arriving were cancelled along with the introduction of a requirement to speak English to conversational level.

Nazir-Ali also criticised women wearing veils that cover the whole face. Tony Blair called the full veil a “mark of separation”, but Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, said any curbs on wearing it would be “politically dangerous”.

Nazir–Ali drew attention to a “huge increase” in the wearing of Muslim dress in Egypt, Malaysia and Pakistan, saying that in Britain there were circumstances where the full veil should not be worn: “I can see nothing in Islam that prescribes the wearing of a full-face veil. In the supermarket those at the cash tills need to be recognised. Teaching is another context in which society requires recognition and identification.”

Nazir-Ali, 57, was born a Catholic in Karachi, converted to Protestantism and was received into the Church of Pakistan at 20. He settled in Britain in the 1980s and became the youngest bishop in the world at 35.

Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said his comments were not “very helpful for community relationships

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2438570,00.html

The Stages of Jihate – Where are your Society Right now…

By Abul Kasem

To listen to this article  podcast click on speaker Also visit this blog

 

Islamists living in the infidel West are greatly alarmed and deeply perplexed after the September terrorist attack in
America.  After 9-11, many of them are doing overtime to search the ‘goodies’ from the Qur’an and are desperate to prove that Islam is a religion of unbound mercy to their host countries.  They repeatedly quote a handful of these ‘goldies‘ from the ‘Meccan Verses’ of the Qur’an, which are milder in tone than the ones descended on
Medina.  They carefully hide the unconscionable, intolerable, barbaric verses that litter the almost entire Qur’an by saying that ‘those verses are out of context’ and are not applicable to the infidels who have given them a chance for a better life and have accepted them as their own countrymen.  Nothing can be worse than this hide and seek game of the Islamists living in the West.  It is in the interest of all the non-Muslims (as well as the innocent Muslims who have very little knowledge about ‘real Islam’) that the truth must be told.

 

The message is very clear.  Those Islamists living in the West quote those ‘goodies’ from the Qur’an are actually showing the dead ‘Meccan Islam‘ to the vast majority of the ignorant non-Muslims (as well as half-informed Muslims) to camouflage the most up to date version of Islam; i.e. the living and breathing ‘
Medina Islam‘.  The strategies of these Islamists are also very clear:

 

·        When in the West or in the land of the infidels or when weak, then practice ‘Meccan Islam’.

·        When in Islamic paradises or when the number of Muslims becomes sizable in an infidels land, then practice ‘
Medina Islam’ or the ‘real Islam’.

 

The sooner the humanity discovers this double face of Islam (a la Roman god Janus) the quicker will it be saved from the further catastrophe of the like of 9-11.

 

So, how do we know about the ‘living and breathing Medina Islam‘?  Here is the answer.

 

In order to understand the ‘real Islam’ we must look at Qur’an in chronological order and not the way it is published. The chronological order shows which verses are canceled and which verses are replaced.  It is meaningless to study and to explain Qur’an without the knowledge of its currency. Many verses in the Qur’an have been replaced by other verses.

 

The Qur’an itself talks about this in the following verses:

 

God does not abrogate any verse but substitutes something similar or better…2:106

God removes (abrogates?) what He wills…13:39

God substitutes one revelation with another; God has the mother of the Book…16:101

 

These verses have created a lot of confusions among many.  However, one thing is certain.  It is this.  God does change His mind and that that change can be very dramatic. In many cases, the matter of abrogation may involve life and death situation.  So, it is extremely important (especially for the ignorant non-Muslims) to know which verses are applicable to them and which verses are not.  The most important among these verses are the ones containing the provisions of fighting the infidels.  There was a time when fighting was prohibited and there was (rather is) a time when fighting became compulsory.

 

Those verses revealed in
Mecca are considered to be the benign and non-violent type.  There are 87 Meccan verse and 27
Medina verses (this may vary slightly but we shall work with these numbers). Thus, there are total 114 suras (or chapters) in Qur’an.

 

Medina verses contain the provisions of fighting because it was in
Medina that Mohammad received the green light (read signal) from God to fight the infidels.  So, as a guide we can conclude that the verses with a chronology order of 87 or more are the replacement for the Meccan verses regarding the treatment of the unbelievers.

 

 In this short discourse, I shall try to elucidate how we can eliminate the confusion regarding the ‘goodies’ from the Islamists and the ‘bashings’ from the secularists/freethinkers/infidels.

 

Please note that the chronology order of the verses are indicated in bold (   ).

 

We can divide the propagation of Islam by Mohammad in four distinct phases. These phases are:

 

1.      Peaceful persuasion

2.      Fighting for defense

3.      Limited attack

4.      Open aggression

 

 

Phase 1: Peaceful persuasion stage.

Highlights

·        A policy of peaceful co-existence with the pagans of
Mecca.

·        Give and take strategy with the pagans and the hypocrites.

·        Jews and Christians (people of the Book) were considered as friends.

·        Mohammad was almost like the Buddha preaching love, forgiveness, non-violence, and peace.

·        Only the pagans of
Mecca were considered as enemies (i.e. enemy list contains only one group).

 

 

Important verses

 

(Note: To save time and space I have given the main messages of the verses omitting the complete verses. Click HERE if you want to read the complete verses)

 

1.      Be patient and bear with those who deny the truth; God will deal with them…73:10, 11 (3)

2.      ‘To you is your religion, to me is mine’…109:1- 6 (8)

3.      Be patient with the evil doers…38:15-17 (38)

4.      Show patience to the pagans…20:130 (42)

5.      Don’t be in a haste to fight…19:83, 84 (44)

6.      Be patient with the unbelievers (pagans); God’s way will prevail…20:134, 135 (45)

7.      Mohammad is not sent to dispose of people’s affairs…17:54 (50)

8.      God guides those whom He pleases; rewards will be in paradise…10:25, 26 (51)

9.      God will call into account the pagans who slander the Qur’an…15:91-93 (54)

10.  It is not God’s job to see if people believe the truth or not…6:104 (55)

11.  Turn away from those rejecting faith and proclaim peace on them…43:88, 89 (69)

12.  Invite the unbelievers (pagans) with beautiful preaching and gracious arguments; be patient and do not retaliate…16:125, 126 (70)

13.  Leave the unbelievers (pagans) alone…23:54 (74)

14.  Repeal evil with good deeds…23:96 (74)

15.  Leave the unbelievers alone and wait in patience for God to punish them…52:45, 47, 48 (76)

16.  Mohammad is only a warner and not an enforcer…67:26 (77)

 

 

Phase 2: Fighting for defense stage

Highlights

·        Mohammed along with his handful followers migrated to
Medina (622 AD). Some tribes of
Medina accepted him as their leader.

·        Mohammed and his gang started raids on passing caravans of the Meccans to acquire the wherewithal for survival.

·        Mohammad won the battle of Badr (same year of migration i.e.622 AD) which bolstered his morale for further raids on Meccan caravans.

·        After several years of stay in
Medina, God gave Mohammad permission to launch defensive war.

·        Enemies were the pagans of
Mecca and the hypocrites (note: the enemy list includes two groups now).

 

Important verses

1.      Permission to fight for self defense is granted…22:39-41 (105)

2.      Rewards for Jihad is announced…22:58 (105)

 

 

Phase 3: More defensively aggressive stage

 

Highlights

·        Mohammad expected the Jews of Medina to accept him as their new Moses.

·        The Jews rejected Mohammad as their new apostle.

·        Mohammad included the Jews as his enemy and started to raid their sanctuaries.

·        Enemies of Mohammad now were pagans, hypocrites, and the Jews (note: the enemy list now contains three).

·        Mohammad was a little bit forgiving to the defeated Jews. He gave them a chance to live in their lands provided they paid him fifty percent of their agricultural produce of land.

·        This way Mohammad acquired the means of a guaranteed livelihood for his horde of soldiers.

·        The battle of Uhud (623 AD) was fought. Muslims suffered a severe beating in the battle.

·        The battle of trench (625 AD) took place with huge loss of lives. Mohammad managed to win this battle.

·        Treaty of Hudaibiya (626 AD) was signed with the pagans of
Mecca ensuring ten years of peace. Mohammad was allowed to visit Kaba along with his followers during the pilgrimage season.

·        Battle of Khaibar (627 AD) took place.  The Jews lost the battle and surrendered unconditionally. Mohmmad ordered the beheading of around 700 adult male surrendered Jews and took 17 years old Jewess Safiya as a war booty and made her his wife.

 

Important verses

1.      Forgive and overlook the unbelieving Jews; God will take care of them…2:109 (87)

2.      Fight defensively the Meccan pagans but if they cease hostility then stop fighting except for the oppressors…2:190-194 (87)

3.      Fighting against the Meccan pagans is prescribed after the passing of the month of pilgrimage (Zulhaj)…2:216, 217 (87)

4.      ‘No compulsion in religion’; do not force the defeated enemy to embrace Islam; but they will be thrown in hell…2:256, 257 (87)

5.      Spoils of war belongs to God and Mohammad…8:1 (88)

6.      Strike terror in the hearts of the unbelievers; cut the necks and finger tips of those who oppose God and Mohammad…8:12, 13 (88)

7.      When you meet, the unbelievers in hostility attack them and never turn back from them.  If you retreat except for a strategic reason then God will punish you and will send you to hell…8:15-16 (88)

8.      Keep on fighting until the persecution stops and Islam is established; one-fifth of booty belongs to God and Mohammad…8:39-41 (88)

9.      Obey Mohammad, be united and persevere in fighting…8:45, 46 (88)

10.  If you defeat the enemy then teach them with treachery and terror; if they ask for peace then give them peace…8:57-61 (88)

11.  Rouse the believers to fight with perseverance, God will help by increasing your strength…8:65 (88)

12.  Continue killing and do not take prisoners until the land is subdued then enjoy the war booty…8:67-69 (88)

13.  Martyr’s sins are blotted out and they go to paradise…3:157, 169-171, 195 (89)

14.  Can take women captives as concubines in addition to wives…33:50 (90)

15.  There is a great reward for fighting against the friends of Satan…4:74-78 (92)

16.  Fight and rouse other believers to fight; God will restrain the fury of the unbelievers…4:84 (92)

17.  Kill the hypocrites if they turn renegades…4:89 (92)

18.  Higher grade for fighting for God…4:95, 96 (92)

19.  Guaranteed reward for fighting in the cause of God…4:100 (92)

20.  Whether a fighter kills or is killed, he is admitted in paradise to reside there permanently…22:58, 59 (103)

21.  Struggle for God’s cause…22:78 (103)

22.  Can’t lag behind in fighting for God…48:15-16 (111)

23.  Muslims are compassionate with each other but are strong to fight against the unbelievers…48:29 (111)

 

 

Phase 4: Offensive war or open declaration of attack to spread Islam

 

This phase is the stage of open offensive war against all the unbelievers. This phase started in 630 AD after Mohammad re-entered
Mecca and captured Kaba from the pagans. This is the phase, which is currently valid for all Muslims.

 

Highlights

·        Permission was granted by God to declare offensive war against all non-Muslims.

·        Kill the pagans and humble the Jews and the Christians through Jizya tax.

·        Tabuk expedition (late 630 AD) is the first war against the Christians.

·        The world is divided into two houses, viz. House of Islam (Darul Islam) and the House of war (Darul Harb).

·        All Muslims must fight to convert the Darul Harb into Darul Islam.

·        This is the final teaching of Qur’an and so it is valid today and for future (that is, for eternity).

·        Christians are included in the list of enemies (that is, the list now grows to four).

·        Verse 9:5 (also called the verse of the sword) replaces all verses showing mercy, love, tolerance and forgiveness to all non-Muslims.

 

Important verses

1.      Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable…3:85 (89)

2.      Kill (execute by beheading)/crucify/torture who opposes Mohammad…5:33 (112)

3.      Do not make friendship with the Jews and the Christians…5:51 (112)

4.      After giving four months notice break all treaties with the pagans that they did not keep; those treaties with the pagans that they kept are to be honored to their full term; in future make no more peace treaties with the pagans and kill all pagans who do not accept Islam…9:1-6 (113)

5.      Pagans who accept Islam are brothers of Muslims; those who break the agreement fight them…9:11, 12, 14, 15 (113)

6.      Do not make friend or seek protection from the unbelievers (includes pagans, hypocrites, Jews and the Christians)…9:16 (113)

7.      Unbelievers should not visit mosques or maintain the mosques of God; they will go to hell…9:17 (113)

8.      Those who do Jihad are the highest in rank; they will dwell in paradise…9:19-22 (113)

9.      The unbelievers are unclean, forbid them to enter Kaba…9:28 (113)

10.  Fight against the Jews and the Christians until they are subdued and pay the Jizya tax with submission; God’s curse is on them…9:29-31 (113)

11.  If you do not fight in the cause of God with whatever you have got then God will punish you with a serious punishment…9:38, 39, 41 (113)

12.  If you fight for God then expect either martyrdom or paradise. The unbelievers can expect only punishment from God…9:52 (113)

13.  Those who are able to fight for God but do not do so are rejected by God…9:90-96 (113)

14.  Whether you slay or slain in Jihad, God has promised paradise for giving all in the cause of God…9:111 (113)

15.  Fight the unbelievers surrounding you…9:122 (113)

 

So, what do we learn from the above list of Quranic verses?  Are you confused?  Of course you are.  When the Islamists in the west are drumming, “Islam is peace. Islam is tolerance.  Islam is merciful” who will not be confused by such contradictory statements!  Let me tell you something.  Actually there is no confusion whatsoever if we follow the simple rule on abrogation.

 

This simple doctrine of abrogation says that when there are confusions (i.e. contradictory statements in Qur’an), the later verses abrogate the former contradictory verses. The result is that only the latest category of verses remains valid without any doubt.  That is why it is so important to know the chronological order of verses in Qur’an.

 

 Let us hear from a modern translator (Yusuf Ali is too old) of the Qur’an and Hadith.

 

“So at first ‘the fighting’ was forbidden, then it was permitted and after that it was made obligatory against those who start ‘the fighting’ against you (Muslims) and against all those who worship others along with Allah”.

 

 (Ref.  Introduction section of the English translation of Sahih Bukhari by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Medina Islamic University).

 

In the same section Dr M. Muhsin Khan writes further

 

, “Then Allah revealed in Sura Bara’at (9) the order to discard (all) the obligations (covenants, etc.) and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the people of the scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizya (a tax levied on the Jews and Christians who do not embrace Islam and are under the protection of an Islamic government) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (9:29). So they (Muslims) were not permitted to abandon ‘the fighting’ against them (Pagans, Jews and Christians) and to reconcile with them and to suspend hostilities against them for an unlimited period while they are strong and have the possibility of fighting against them.”

 

Jalaluddin Suyuti wrote Itqan fi ‘ulum-il-Qur’an in 1497 AD. This book is the Tafsir (explanation) of Qur’an and is highly regarded.  It is a compulsory reading for any one who wants to study Qur’an for its ‘real meanings’.  His another famous book is Istenbat al-Tanzeel.  In this book

 

Suyuti wrote,”everything in the Qur’an about forgiveness is abrogated by verse 9:5“.

 

Please read that above quote again if you are really serious about Islam. Remember that this verse has a chronology order of 113 (Remember?  There are 114 suras in Qur’an).

 

Islamic apologists often quote the following verses to portray the mercy and forgiveness in Islam.

 

To you is your religion and to me is mine…109:6

No compulsion in religion…2:256

Turn away from those who join false gods with Allah…15:94

 

Unfortunately, all those ‘goodies’ of Qur’an are canceled if we follow the Tafsir (explanation) of Suyuti and the doctrine of abrogation) regarding the verse of the sword (9:5).

 

Islamists love Ms. Karen Armstrong for her siding with them.  Ms. Karen Armstrong writes to fool the non-Muslims in believing what George Bush is drumming, ‘Islam is a peaceful religion’. Any one who has a workable knowledge on Islamic matters knows for sure that her writings are very misleading and does not tell the truth at all.  When Ms. Karen Armstrong writes by quoting verse 2:190

 

“the only permissible war (in the Qur’an is one of self defense. Muslims must not begin hostilities”, (Time magazine October 1, 2001)

 

she is clearly being dishonest in telling the truth about the phase four of Islamic war which calls all Muslims to declare a total war on the house of Harb (i.e. the infidels abodes). Phase four of Jihad is valid until all the people of the world are converted to Islam. Thus, today’s Muslims are in perpetual war with the infidels whether they (the Muslims) are in an Islamic paradise like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh (recently included, previously not), Iran …or in infidel lands like USA, UK, Canada, France…etc.

 

Here is another quote from Alsaylu Jarar (4:518-519) by Al-Shawkani.  Shawkani is a famous writer on Islamic matters.  His writings are authoritative and are used by the Jihadis to justify their merciless actions.

“Islam is unanimous about fighting the unbelievers and forcing them to Islam or submitting and paying Jizya tax (protection money for the Jews and the Christians only) or being killed. The verse about forgiving them are abrogated unanimously by the obligation of fighting in any case”.

 

Can Ms. Karen Armstrong and other Islamists living in the comfort of non-Muslim freethinking society refute the above assertion by an eminent Alim (Islamic scholar)?

 

Please note that verse 9:5 is a very important verse of Qur’an.  This verse marks the transition from the phase of showing mercy (phase 1) and forgiveness to the unbelievers to the phase of open aggression on them (phase 4). As told before, this verse is known as the verse of the sword.  This verse cancels all the verses containing mercy, tolerance, and forgiveness to the non-Muslims (as many as 111 to 124 verses; you got to scan the entire Qur’an; anything forgiving, merciful, friendship is out).

 

Also, note carefully how the chronology order increases as Mohammad turns from a non-violent (like Buddha) person to a fascist nazi like Hitler/Mussolini/Osama/Ayatollah. In fact, we can safely conclude that Mohammad was a saint before the chronology order of the Qur’an was below 87 but he became a fascist dictator after this.

 

Again note that the chronology order in the final phase of open aggression against all non-Muslims of the world (phase 4) is almost the end (113) chapter (sura) of Qur’an (Remember? There are 114 suras in Qur’an).

 

Is lying allowed in Islam?  I must be a nut to ask such a question!  Of course, not, you say.  Lying is a great sin in Islam; at least the Islamists will let us believe this.  This is a complete delusion.  Muslims are allowed to tell lies in order to make the religion of Islam rule the world. Would you not believe me?  See for yourself what Imam Ghazali (another supreme Islamic scholar) says:

 

“Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praise worthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible “ (Ref: Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller , Amana publications, 1997, section r8.2, page 745).

 

And what could be the noblest goal of a Muslim than to make Islam rule world? This is the secret why the Islamists constantly lie about their religion when they are in West.  Because, if they tell the truth, no one will be attracted to Islam.

 

Islamists often attack the secularists and freethinkers whenever they (secularists/freethinkers) quote the offensive verses of the Qur’an by ‘out of context’ arguments.

 

What could be more clear and forceful evidences / proofs than what has been told above that ‘out of context’ argument by the Islamic apologists is a total hoax?

————————–

*A double-faced head represented Janus, a Roman god.  

Kasem writes from
Sydney, Australia.  Comments could be made by writing to –  abul88@hotmail.com

 

 

Note: The author relied on the English Translation of Qur’an by A. Yusufali and the English Translation of Sahih Bukhari by Dr. M. Muhsin Khan.  All references given are believed to be correct.  However, the author is not responsible for any misconception that a reader may have due to his consultation of other sources.

 

Britain is turning on the U.S. — at its own peril

Anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism have poisoned British politics. In a world of terrorism, the timing couldn’t be worse
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Everyone knows that Europe is a continent stuffed with craven, terror-appeasing fromages who loathe America. Britain, by contrast, led by the lion-hearted Tony Blair, is full of stalwarts who stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States in the defense of the West. Right?
Wrong. Fury at Prime Minister Blair for being President Bush’s “poodle” has reached such a pitch that the most successful Labor prime minister in memory is being forced out of office because of his support for U.S. policy in Iraq and Israel. Labor’s members of Parliament say his refusal to break with America by calling for an earlier cease-fire in Lebanon was the last straw. The disturbing fact is that Britain is consumed by a rampant anti-Americanism and an allied hostility toward Israel, which are driving public debate into irrationality, prejudice and appeasement.

BACKLASH TO THE U.S.
In a Populus poll last month in The Times of London, 62% said the government should change its policy by distancing itself from the United States, being more critical of Israel and declaring a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq. An August YouGov poll in The Spectator magazine revealed that while 53% wanted a tougher anti-terrorism policy, 45% wanted to be allied more closely with the European Union than with America. Only 14% supported closer U.S. ties.
As a result, the prospects for the alliance between Britain and the United States in the post-Blair era do not look promising. Despite being an instinctive Atlanticist, Gordon Brown, the most likely successor as Labor prime minister, is thought to be only a reluctant backer of the war in Iraq, according to a new autobiography by former Labor minister David Blunkett.
Meanwhile David Cameron, the new young leader of the opposition Conservative Party, made a speech last month distancing himself from U.S. foreign policy and blaming America for fanning the flames of anti-Americanism. The outcome might be that Britain increasingly snuggles up to the EU over foreign policy while an irritated America, bereft of its principal advocate in Europe, moves toward isolationism.
Much of Britain’s anti-Americanism is driven by the usual suspects, such as far-left lawmaker George Galloway or newspapers such as the ultra-left Guardian. Galloway, for instance, said during an interview with GQ magazine earlier this year that the assassination of Blair by a suicide bomber would be “morally justified.”
Left-wing discourse, now staple fare on the BBC and applauded even by conservatively minded audiences in panel discussions, proclaims that the United States is the fount of Third World oppression and the greatest threat to world peace.
But British animosity toward the U.K.’s most important and historic ally is wider and deeper. Partly it derives from simple snobbery, the long-standing British belief that Americans are vulgar upstarts who lack the gravitas that Britain has accrued from a thousand years of history.
Probe further, however, and you discover anguish at the progressive junking of that history. Schools, for example, no longer teach the history or values of the British nation on the grounds that national identity based on a majority culture is viewed as “racist.” Instead, they promote multiculturalism, the doctrine that minority value must have equal status to those of the majority. Loss of confidence in Britain’s role in the world has demoralized its governing class so badly that it has come to believe that the nation state is the principal source of all ills from prejudice to war, and that legitimacy resides instead in supranational institutions.
So no international action can be taken without sanctification by that holy of holies, the United Nations. As a result, the British regard Bush’s “unilateral” foreign policy with undiluted horror. This is made worse by disdain for Bush himself, regarded as a tongue-tied cowboy who actually believes in G-d — to the post-religious British, the nearest thing to a certificate of lunacy.
The biggest single cause of British anti-Americanism, however, is Israel. Despite being the target for more than half a century of genocidal Arab and Muslim aggression, Israel is widely perceived in Britain as the regional bully, and its acts of self-defense are viewed as the principal motor behind both the Middle East impasse and Islamic grievance because of its supposed refusal to allow the Palestinians to have a state of their own.
Thus John Denham, chairman of the parliamentary Home Affairs Select Committee, wrote that Israel’s policies were making Britain a target for terror. America brought the 9/11 attacks upon itself, goes this type of thinking, because of its support for Israel — and the only reason Britain is now threatened by Islamic terror is because of Blair’s support for the United States.

OPEN SEASON ON JEWS
This has opened a Pandora’s box of anti-Jewish prejudice in Britain.
A recent report by the Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-semitism found that since 2000, anti-Semitism is on the rise in Britain. It is now common to read in the news media, for example, that the Jews are engaged in a global conspiracy that has subverted U.S. foreign policy to serve the interests of Israel and put the rest of the world at risk. In April, for instance, The Independent newspaper illustrated an interview on the subject of the “Israel lobby” in America with a picture of the American flag in which the stars of the union were replaced with the Stars of David. The headline: “The United States of Israel.” Thus the prejudice against America is inextricably conflated with prejudice against Jews and the Jewish state.
The dismaying truth is that, even after the suicide bombings in London, America’s defense of the free world against Islamic terror is widely viewed in Britain as the cause of that terror. The paranoid bigotry that drives the jihad — that the United States and its Jewish puppet masters make up a giant conspiracy of evil — is being increasingly echoed within Britain’s non-Muslim population. The very idea that weakening the alliance with the United States would be in Britain’s interests is madness. But in a country that has lost its way, rationality is a commodity in short supply.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1006/phillips_us_uk.php3?printer_friendly

Clitoris Jihate:Parents fly in African village elders to circumcise their young daughters

Police and health authorities fear that 25,000 British girls are at risk of genital mutilation

Esther has been granted asylum in Britain after fleeing the threat of mutilation in Sierra Leone (Ben Gurr) HUNDREDS of young girls in Britain are suffering genital mutilation at the hands of women paid to come to Britain by their families.African immigrants are clubbing together to pay for practitioners to fly to Britain and circumcise their daughters in highly secretive rituals. Police believe that the trend has developed among parents who do not have passports or cannot afford to return to their home countries to have their daughters circumcised, a brutal practice that remains commonplace throughout Africa.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2416783,00.html

Now Where is the Eurabias Center for Racism ?????: Livingstone’s Nazi jibe was offensive but he shouldn’t be barred, says judge

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/20/nken20.xml

By Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor

Last Updated: 1:43am BST 21/10/2006

Ken Livingstone, the London mayor, won his High Court appeal yesterday against a finding that he had breached his authority’s code of conduct by likening a Jewish reporter to a Nazi concentration camp guard. The court quashed his four-week suspension from office, which had never been implemented, and ordered the Standards Board for England, which initiated the proceedings, to pay his costs. Mr Justice Collins decided that the mayor had not been acting “in his official capacity” when he made “offensive” and “indefensible” remarks to Oliver Finegold of the London Evening Standard after leaving a party one evening. In addition, the judge found, Mr Livingstone had not conducted himself in a manner that brought his “office or authority into disrepute”. But this did not mean Mr Livingstone’s actions were appropriate, Mr Justice Collins continued. “His initial question: ‘Were you a German war criminal?’ was obviously intemperate. However strongly he felt about the impropriety of the journalist’s conduct, the remark was unnecessarily offensive,” the judge said. In itself, that would not have led to the proceedings against the mayor. “But, when he knew that Mr Finegold was particularly offended because he was Jewish, to go on to compare him to a concentration camp guard was indefensible. He should have realised it would not only give great offence to him but was likely to be regarded as an entirely inappropriate observation by Jews in general and those who had survived the holocaust in particular.” Mr Livingstone “loathed and despised” Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Evening Standard and the Daily Mail, “because of its past record of pre-war support for anti-Semitism and Nazism and what he regarded as its continuing racist bigotry, hatred and prejudice”. Even so, the judge continued, Mr Livingstone could have apologised without compromising his feelings about the newspaper group and its employee. “Had he done so, it is likely that no action would have been taken against him.” The case arose from a formal complaint by the Board of Deputies of British Jews. However, the Jewish representative body subsequently made it clear that it had never been seeking the mayor’s suspension. Mr Justice Collins said that the mayor had been “indulging in offensive abuse of a journalist”. But, “surprising as it may perhaps appear to some, the right of freedom of speech does extend to abuse”. It was important, he added, that any individual “knows that he can say what he likes, provided it is not unlawful”. The judge overturned a decision by a case tribunal, set up by the Adjudication Panel for England, that had “failed to recognise the real distinction between the man and the office”. Mr Livingstone exercised “real power” over millions of people and had “a unique position with unique powers”, and people were entitled to expect that he would conduct himself “to a high standard suitable to his office”, said the judge. “But it does not mean that, if he falls below that high standard, the office as well as he are brought into disrepute.” Leaving court yesterday, Mr Livingstone again declined to apologise. He said that he had never claimed his remarks to Finegold were not offensive — “they were meant to be offensive: the behaviour of the reporter was offensive”. Describing the ruling later as “a victory for democracy and common sense”, the mayor said that “those who have been elected by the people should only be removed by the people, or because they have broken the law”. The Evening Standard said that the whole affair could easily have been resolved without costly and unnecessary legal action if Mr Livingstone had simply apologised for his remarks at the time. “This is precisely what Jewish groups and this newspaper repeatedly urged him to do. It was his failure to do this which led to the complaint from the Board of Deputies.”

EUrabia Pays Religious tribute.

 EU Pays Allowances to Health workers and Teachers During Ramadan

RAMALLAH, October 18, 2006 (WAFA – PLO news agency) – Palestinian health
workers, teachers and other civil servants will receive a further allowance
of 1,500 NIS in their bank account this week from the Netherlands, Germany
and the UK, Netherlands Representative Office to the PNA said Wednesday in a
press release.

The Office said the disbursement of 20 million Euros is made in reply to a
request by President Abbas to the European Union for payment of emergency
allowances during Ramadan.

“70,000 of the poorest-paid public-sector workers will benefit from this
payment. They have received almost no salary for the past six months.In
addition, the European Commission will make available a payment of 1,000 NIS
to 90.000 so called social hardship cases (people who are unemployed and
have no other sources of income) for a total amount of 17 million Euros,”
reads the press release.

The European Union is concerned about the severe economic crisis in Gaza and
the West Bank. Figures from the Palestinian Poverty Monitor in October show
that the number of households below the poverty line has dramatically
increased.

Nowadays, 67 percent of the Palestinian people live below poverty level of
around 2,000 NIS per month for a family of two adults and four children.

The Temporary International Mechanism has been set up to ensure that aid
goes directly to the Palestinian people, without government intervention, to
reverse the worsening humanitarian situation in Gaza and the West Bank.

It was established by the European Union to support basic needs of the
Palestinian people, including health, education, social services, fuel and
utilities.

“The EU stresses once more that the resumption of transfers of tax and
customs revenues collected by Israel on behalf of the Palestinian Authority
would have a significant impact on the Palestinian economy,” the press
release adds.

The EU has continuously called on Israel to release the funds and recently
asked the Palestinian Authority to consider the resumption of such transfers
via the Temporary International Mechanism to improve the economic and
humanitarian conditions in the West Bank and Gaza.

BBC on terror in UK: “They set up groups a bit like Boy Scouts or Boys’ Brigade… totally legitimate”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6065460.stm

UK ‘number one al-Qaeda target’

The bombings on 7 July last year killed 52 people Al-Qaeda has become more organised and sophisticated and has made Britain its top target, counter-terrorism officials have told the BBC.Security sources say the situation has never been so grim, said BBC home affairs correspondent Margaret Gilmore. They believe the network is now operating a cell structure in the UK – like the IRA did – and sees the 7 July bomb attacks “as just the beginning”. Each cell has a leader, a quartermaster dealing with weapons, and volunteers. According to our correspondent, each cell works on separate, different plots, with masterminds controlling several different cells. Those involved in the cells were often aware they were being followed and so were meeting in public spaces. In addition, training is taking place in the UK and Pakistan. They set up groups a bit like Boy Scouts or Boys’ Brigade… totally legitimate BBC home affairs correspondent Margaret Gilmore It was thought that five years ago al-Qaeda was a number of “loosely-connected organisations” with common aims, but it is now more organised, she said. Security officials are concerned the group is targeting universities and the community, and are “less worried” about mosques, she added. The network is targeting men in their late teens and early 20s, according to our correspondent. “They set up groups a bit like Boy Scouts or Boys’ Brigade… totally legitimate. “Those who are particularly interested they start giving religious indoctrination. “Then those who are very interested they start introducing to political teachings, anti-Western rhetoric. Bonding sessions “And those who are still interested they then start giving technical training. “They also start sending them on bonding sessions to things like white-water rafting. “You end up with a small team of people – the cell is prepared. “A lot of this is happening outside London,” our correspondent added. Joint regional offices of MI5 intelligence gatherers and anti-terrorist police officers have been set up in Manchester, Birmingham and Sheffield. The leadership of al-Qaeda does appear to … be more coherent and organised than had been thought in recent years Gordon Corera BBC security correspondent BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera said the view was Britain was particularly vulnerable because “it may be easier for al-Qaeda to strike the UK than other targets”. He said these views were “based on activity they are actually seeing. Plots they’re disrupting, trials which might be coming up soon”. “There is hard evidence behind it, rather than just theories,” said our correspondent. “That’s based partly on what they are seeing, in terms of the types of activity, and partly based on the coincidence, that al-Qaeda’s leadership is based in the tribal areas of Pakistan where there are links to the UK and flows of people going back and forwards. “It makes it easier to make the UK a target than the other countries it might wish to target.” The network also appeared to be better organised, he continued. “The leadership of al-Qaeda does appear to have been re-grouping and to be more coherent and organised than had been thought in recent years. “The view is it clearly was an organised group before 9/11, but the campaign in Afghanistan disrupted that leadership very heavily. It is no longer about looking for a needle in a haystack Crispin Black Security analyst “But in recent years, particularly in the tribal areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the al-Qaeda leadership has been able to re-group and re-organise itself. “In doing so it’s able to open up channels of communication, contact, recruitment and planning around the world, and operate those in a more coherent fashion than maybe we were seeing three years’ ago.” However, intelligence analyst Crispin Black said another attack in the UK “was not inevitable”, citing the UK’s “considerable successes against the IRA”. “We still have that expertise and training present within our military forces and intelligence,” he said. “It is no longer about looking for a needle in a haystack. We have some pretty good clues and information on where we should be looking.” A Home Office spokeswoman referred to a recent speech by Home Secretary John Reid in which he referred to the now “seamless threat” of radicalisation. This was a challenge they expected to “last a generation”, she said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6065460.stm

Multicultural madness needs such antidotes

 http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,20599335,00.html

October 18, 2006

IN another sign of predictable cultural capitulation, a check-in employee with British Airways is banned from wearing a small Christian cross but Muslim and Sikh employees may wear turbans and the hijab. Little wonder, then, that Munira Mirza is so refreshing. This young woman, reared as a Muslim, says it’s time to scrap multiculturalism and to stop defining people as members of a minority group. Specifically, it’s time for our political leaders to stop engaging with Muslims as Muslims. They are citizens; no special rules apply.

Mirza pulls few punches when exposing the West’s cultural surrender. We all know the problem. Free speech in the polite West is a little clogged up these days. A Dutch film-maker, Theo van Gogh, is slain for making Submission, a movie critical of Islam. The scriptwriter, Dutch political activist Ayan Hirsi Ali, is forced to live under threat of death. Amateurish Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed unleash orchestrated madness across the globe. A nun is killed in Somalia because local Muslims don’t like the Pope musing about Muslim attitudes to violence. A French teacher is hiding, under police protection, after describing Mohammed as a “merciless war leader”. And so it goes on.

When it’s easier to stay quiet for fear of provoking violence from some Muslims or attracting accusations of racism from Western appeasers, then the West is already living under the shadow of Islamic fascism. We’re stuck with silent feminists who prefer cultural rights and the burka over women’s rights and the silly noise of some on the so-called progressive side of politics marching to the tune of “We’re all Hezbollah now”.

Which is why, in the battle of ideas, Mirza is a much needed and perhaps most unlikely warrior. This twentysomething petite British woman who visited Australia last week says multiculturalism has caused the West’s cultural timidity. She isn’t talking about the simple acceptance of diversity originally sold to us as multiculturalism and embraced by Australians. Multiculturalism has gone far beyond whether to eat Thai, Indian, Italian or Chinese food.

Particularly in her native Britain, but also across large swaths of the Western world, multiculturalism has become a far bigger and more insidious concept during the past three decades. Its basic proposition is cultural relativism: that all cultures are of equal value, none can be criticised (except for the majority one), and that encouraging integration is racist.

In Mirza’s Britain, this has delivered a tribalised society in which identity politics reigns supreme.

In this world, victimhood is especially prized. Mirza told The Australian that multiculturalism “encourages groups to claim exclusion in order to get attention. In order to get resources, you have to prove your weakness.” In a competitive multicultural marketplace, groups vie for most victimised status. This political culture disenfranchises people as individuals, rejecting that they are moral agents responsible for their own future.

At a Centre for Independent Studies lecture last Wednesday, Mirza told her audience that when she was at school in Britain a decade ago, few Muslim girls wore headscarves. Now Muslim girls, even those whose mothers don’t wear the scarf, are choosing to put it on as an identifier of difference and oppression, the oppressor being the West.

Multiculturalism makes the private part of you – your religion – your most valuable public asset. And it’s off bounds to criticise any part of it.

Just ask Jack Straw, the leader of Britain’s House of Commons, who was recently dubbed a terrorist guilty of inciting religious hatred for raising the problem of interacting with veiled Muslim women.

That powerful multicultural concoction of separateness and victimhood has left the West fractured, neutered of a confident and united identity. The consequences have been far ranging, according to Mirza. Most acutely, it has fuelled home-grown terrorism.

Young Muslim boys such as the London bombers – born, reared and educated in the West – have gone looking for meaning elsewhere because, Mirza says, “being British is so discredited in this country … The most compelling thing about the al-Qa’ida identity is its victimhood status; it is the ultimate logic of multiculturalism, with its claim that it represents an oppressed minority.”

The multicultural message has wrought other disastrous consequences documented by Mirza. Culture Vultures, a book she edited earlier this year, showcases how the arts have been subsumed by an ethnocentric emphasis that promotes wasteful projects with little artistic merit. In the workplace, multiculturalism has spawned diversity training because difference needs to be micro-managed. The premise is that without expert training in how to deal with difference, pudden-headed workers will succumb to their inherent bigoted, racist tendencies.

But, as Mirza points out, emphasising difference through diversity training ends up dividing us more. The ostensibly different ones are reminded of their difference, encouraged to treat every slight as an exhibition of racism. And the rest, their fellow workers, are left paralysed in their interactions for fear of being labelled a racist.

Australia has not yielded to the levels of multicultural madness infecting Britain and Europe, which is why Mirza’s message is both a warning for Australia and a sign that perhaps the intellectual tide is turning in Britain. She says the answer is to stop the politics of tribalisation and start being unashamedly proud about the Enlightenment values that lie at the core of Western liberal democracies, values such as freedom of speech.

Where Mirza is less than convincing is in her tendency to ignore Islam as part of the problem confronting the West. When asked whether there was something about Islam that explained the rise of Islamic terrorism, she said all religions could be twisted to suit warped agendas of violence. Perhaps. But disaffected Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs are not plotting jihad: a point the Pope wished to raise in his speech at a German university before being pummelled into apologetic appeasement.

Following that fracas, Marcello Pera – who in 2004 co-wrote with the then cardinal Joseph Ratzinger a book titled Without Roots: The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam – told the International Herald Tribune it was legitimate for those in the West to ask if jihad is a necessary part of some interpretations of Islam. It’s not a comfortable topic but it goes with the terrain of free speech. And on that score, as Mirza said at a lunch last week, “we could all do with a little more courage, frankly”. Amen to that.

BBC mounts court fight to keep ‘critical’ report secret

By Chris Hastings and Beth Jones

(Filed: 15/10/2006)

 

The BBC has spent thousands of pounds of licence payers’ money trying to block the release of a report which is believed to be highly critical of its Middle East coverage. The corporation is mounting a landmark High Court action to prevent the release of The Balen Report under the Freedom of Information Act, despite the fact that BBC reporters often use the Act to pursue their journalism. The action will increase suspicions that the report, which is believed to run to 20,000 words, includes evidence of anti-Israeli bias in news programming. on error resume next flash2Installed = (IsObject(CreateObject(“ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.2”))) flash3Installed = (IsObject(CreateObject(“ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.3”))) flash4Installed = (IsObject(CreateObject(“ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.4”))) flash5Installed = (IsObject(CreateObject(“ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.5”))) flash6Installed = (IsObject(CreateObject(“ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.6”))) flash7Installed = (IsObject(CreateObject(“ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.7”))) The court case will have far reaching implications for the future working of the Act and the BBC. If the corporation loses, it will have to release thousands of pages of other documents that have been held back. Like all public bodies, the BBC is obliged to release information about itself under the Act. However, along with Channel 4, Britain’s other public service broadcaster, it is allowed to hold back material that deals with the production of its art, entertainment and journalism. The High Court action is the latest stage of a lengthy and expensive battle by Steven Sugar, a lawyer, to get access to the document, which was compiled by Malcolm Balen, a senior editorial adviser, in 2004. Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, who is responsible for the workings of the Act, agreed with the BBC that the document, which examines hundreds of hours of its radio and television broadcasts, could be held back. However, Mr Sugar appealed and, after a two-day hearing at which the BBC was represented by two barristers, the Information Tribunal found in his favour. Mr Sugar said: “This is a serious report about a serious issue and has been compiled with public money. I lodged the request because I was concerned that the BBC’s reporting of the second intifada was seriously unbalanced against Israel, but I think there are other issues at stake now in the light of the BBC’s reaction.” The BBC’s coverage of the Middle East has been frequently condemned for a perceived anti-Israeli bias. In 2004, for example, Barbara Plett, a Middle East correspondent, was criticised for revealing in an episode of Radio 4’s From Our Own Correspondent that she had been moved to tears by the plight of the dying Yasser Arafat. MPs said it proved that the corporation was incapable of presenting a balanced account of issues in the Middle East. Figures released by the Information Commissioner’s Office show that there have been 105 complaints about the BBC’s attitude to the Act since it came into force in January 2005. Only four of these have been dismissed and the rest are being examined. The BBC has lodged at least 25 complaints about the way other organisations have dealt with its requests. The BBC declined to say how much it was spending on the High Court action. “We will be appealing the decision of the Information Tribunal,” a spokesman said. “This case has wider implications relating to the way the Act applies to public broadcasters.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?

xml=/news/2006/10/15/nbeeb15.xml

Islam is Racism

NON-Muslim English girls will be ordered to wear headscarves at a new Islamic school. Madani High School in Leicester will take ten per cent of its pupils from other faiths — but insists all must cover their heads. Headteachers ruled the hijab scarf is part of the uniform. Assistant principal Zainab Elgaziari said the demand was not a problem despite the row over Muslim women’s veils. He said: “I can’t see why if a student wears a headscarf it should be an issue. It’s the same as a shirt or tie — it’s just part of our uniform.” Leicester City Council said it did not believe the scarves would deter non-Muslim parents from sending children to the school, which opens next September. Education spokesman Hussein Suleman, who is also a member of the school’s temporary governing body, said: “I hope discretion will be used if there are any disagreements.” Suleman Nagdi, of the Federation of Muslim Organisations, said: “All Islamic schools have certain criteria for uniform. I can’t see anything different about theirs.” Shadow education secretary David Willetts said the move would harm hopes of integrating communities and drive non-Muslims away. He added: “We should expect schools with a Muslim majority to make special arrangements for non-Muslims — the majority should not oppress the minority.” The Commission for Racial Equality urged the school to consider all pupils when putting together a uniform policy. m.lea@the-sun.co.uk