Posts

Scotland: The Most Popular Name for Rapists is Mohammed by Joshua Winston

The most popular name for male rapists in Scotland is Muhammad (or Mohammed, or variant spellings thereof). You could be forgiven for thinking that in such a land, the most popular names for any kind of criminal might by Angus or Archie or Donald, etc. This is quite an accomplishment by Muslims, whose population density in Scotland is allegedly hovering around the 2% mark. We always see in the newspapers that the most popular boys’ name for any given year in London or England as a whole is Mohammed, but the headline ends there and it doesn’t develop into any kind of substantive story. We’re never told what these Mohammeds come to be known for, or what they achieve. It’s probably because their tales are mostly to do with rape, drugs, and jihad. It wouldn’t do to tell the reader that there’s a new litter of jihadis and jihad enablers growing in our midst.

These Muslim rapists are non-discriminatory when it comes to having their libidos’ needs met. They are not ‘ableist’, to use a ‘woke’ word that has been recently coined by today’s liberals. Oh no, they will rape anyone regardless of physical or mental disability, as in the case of this woman who has Down’s Syndrome. On the plus side, you can rest assured that regardless of your age, race, gender or physical or mental condition, there is a Mohammed out there who will absolutely not be prejudiced or bigoted against you when it comes to having his sex needs met.

Another serial rapist called Mohammad, a father if you please, doesn’t stop to bother with such silly little things as consent. No, he’ll take it wherever he can find it. Lie down for a nap? That’s not a problem for Mohammed. He doesn’t need your permission or your interaction. Seems pretty versatile also, he can rape victims in their houses or his car.

Another family man and father called Mohammed pounced at the chance of luring a teenage girl into his car when he saw her leaving the pub drunk. He raped her and then kicked her into the street half naked. Probably thought he had done her a favour, he’d driven her halfway home after all. Makes me wonder what qualities he is instilling into his own children if that is the way he treats other people’s children.

Escaping life in the ‘open air prison’ that we are told is Palestine was probably too much too soon for this Muslim rapist named Mohammed. He was probably light-headed on the fumes of free Scottish money and free social housing as he raped a sex worker, probably thinking that unlimited non-Muslim women were also included in his asylum application, and that as a Muslim man he did not need to pay the girl.

And over in Falkirk, where Braveheart’s very own William Wallace once fought and was defeated by that most ancient of foes, the English, a ‘burly beast’ of a Muslim named Mohammed raped an underage schoolgirl. These rape wars are not the kind of battles that Scots should be fighting in their historic landscapes. The ‘Battle of Falkirk’ now seems to be one in which schoolgirls fight for their right to keep their virginities intact, and to not be raped in night-time parks by Mohammeds.

These Mohammeds consistently show us that they are industrious and can work as part of a team. Nor are they homophobic, and they show us that they can dispense of their desert ways when they come to civilised lands by using apps on smart-phones. Technology opens up new avenues for these Mohammeds by which they can rape people. These Muslims used the gay app Grindr to arrange meets with gay men in their houses, where they would rape and rob them.

The list is endless, and does not incorporate all of the Mohammeds who have participated in grooming and rape gangs. And the reader should keep in mind that this article has been written with a slightly satirical overtone to it, but it should be read as being appalling. The subject of rape is not a funny one, and it is not my intention to trivialize the act of rape or to mock any victims of sexual assault. I find the over-representation of Mohammeds in Scotland in relation to rape, given their percentage of the population, to be astounding. The fact that no one is curious about this phenomenon is, to my mind, mind-blowing, and it is the people who are ignoring and denying what is going in Scotland whom I am mocking here. No one seems to be connecting the religious and cultural dots. How many more women and children and men need to be raped by more Mohammeds before people start talking about the problem? At this late stage in the game, the wilful ignorance is farcical, and it is my hope that the tone of the article reflects that.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Afghan soldier opens fire on his US “allies,” murdering two and injuring six

Hezbollah: The Noose Tightens

Iranian Regime Cracks Down on ‘Indecently Dressed’ Mannequins in Shops

Iran’s Theocrats Mix God and Country

Muslim State Department ex-employee sues Pompeo for $500,000 for discrimination over eye-rolling and dirty looks

Germany: doctor warns female genital mutilation on the rise because of mass Muslim migration

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Islamic Belief that Muslim Lives are Worth More than Infidel Lives

The UK’s Mailonline reported recently that “a hero police officer suffered multiple skull fractures when an uninsured white van man tried to murder him in a savage machete attack.” After the perpetrator, a Muslim named Muhammad Rodwan, was arrested, Rodwan explained: “My life is worth more than his life.” Meanwhile, in northern Italy, according to the German-language site UnserTirol 24 “The higher regional court confirmed on Tuesday the first-instance verdict against Rabih Badr for the brutal murder of his partner Marianne Obrist (UT24 reported). Badr’s father was also present at the trial. The latter defended his son and accused Obrist of infidelity.” Badr’s father complained: “There was a problem between him and Marianne, namely the problem of infidelity. She was not loyal to him, he dedicated his whole life to her, but Marianne was not worthy of him.”

“My life is worth more than his life.” “Marianne was not worthy of him.” Is this just more Islamic “extremism,” or do Rodwan and Badr have a point?

Unfortunately, they do have a point – an Islamic point.

Reliance of the Traveller, a classic manual of Islamic sacred law, explains matter-of-factly that “the indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth that of a Muslim.” (o4.9)

Sultanhussein Tabandeh, author of A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, agrees, stating:

“Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the shaving of his head, and one year of banishment. But if the man is not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is execution. … Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death by the next of kin. But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be punished with the lash. … Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim, then his punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain…Again, the penalties of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in general, and so must be executed. … Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them.”

These ideas have lethal consequences. In Badr’s case, “according to judge Peter Michaeler,” Badr “‘beat her like a stray dog’ first with a stick, then with a baseball bat. Badr is said to have stabbed the 39-year-old with a knife….As was evident from Judge Michaeler’s reasoning at the time, the act was culturally motivated. Badr, who comes from Morocco, killed Obrist ‘without mercy’ and ‘bestially’ and exemplifies radical attitudes that are incompatible with the way of life of a Western woman….In Badr’s mind, the woman is subordinate to the man, the judge continued. As a result, Badr unjustly accused his partner of infidelity, and restricted and suppressed her. According to Michaeler, the motive was not jealousy, but the complete control Badr wanted to exercise over Obrist.”

As far as Badr was concerned, Obrist should have been under his total control, for she was not only a woman, but an infidel. She had no rights he was bound to respect. But of course, saying such things in the West today brings one charges of “Islamophobia.” Meanwhile, more women like Marianne Obrist will continue to be victimized and brutalized.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel: Muslim who recently converted from Christianity fires at Israeli policemen at entrance to Temple Mount

Italy: Muslim migrants attack police with bricks in migrant center

Israel: Muslim runs down and injures twelve Israeli soldiers in vehicular jihad attack in Jerusalem

UK: London jihad stabber spent days before the attack praying

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Manchester Muslima wears shirt with LOVE spelled out with guns, knives and grenades

Coexist with that. What better way to show one’s horror at the Manchester jihad massacre than to wear a shirt showing the word “love” spelled out using various weapons as letters?

Is this niqabbed Muslima a moderate? Is her shirt moderate, or extremist? Was she radicalized on the Internet (where, presumably, she bought the shirt, since no one would sell such a thing among the peaceful and benign Muslim community in Britain, right?)? Did anyone in Britain notice or care about her shirt, which, given the context, seems unwise to ignore?

Channel 4 has pulled this segment, which is full of the usual finger-pointing and blaming of others by the Muslims who are interviewed, but the Internet remembers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Minnesota: Muslims arrested with guns and bomb-making materials get only light charges

Federal appeals court upholds block on Trump’s temporary immigration ban

VIDEO: Gays Against Islamic [Shariah] Law Rally in Manchester

This special edition of The Glazov Gang presents the Tommy English Moment with Tommy English, the leader of Gays Against Shariah-UK.

Tommy discussed Gays Against Shariah Rally in Manchester, announcing the march that will shed light on Islam’s teachings on homosexuality —  and call out the Left and LGBT community on their silence and betrayal.

Gays Against Shariah and Gay Conservative Forum “The Outright” will be protesting in Manchester on June 10, 2017. They will be meeting at Manchester Piccadilly railway station between 11:00 am and 1:45 pm for a march starting at 2:00 pm. Visit their event page for all the finalized details of the rally. (Visit Tommy on Twitter at @EnglishTommy1).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Female Iranian footballer kicked off national team for playing without hijab in Switzerland

Sandra Solomon Moment: What Islam Taught Me About Homosexuality

EDITORS NOTE: Please support The Glazov Gang because they are a fan-generated show and need your help to keep going. Make a contribution or set up a monthly pledge by clicking here.

Man who popularized term ‘Islamophobia’ says it was a mistake, Muslims won’t assimilate

It was Trevor Phillips who first gave the spurious propaganda term “Islamophobia” an intellectual veneer. Now he is admitting he was wrong all along, and has enabled and abetted the creation of Sharia enclaves in Britain and all over Europe. So what is he going to do about it now? Can the damage done to Britain be repaired? Does Phillips or anyone else have the will to try to repair it.

“UK Equalities Chief Who Popularised The Term ‘Islamophobia’ Admits: ‘I Thought Muslims Would Blend into Britain… I Should Have Known Better,’” by Raheem Kassam, Breitbart, April 10, 2016:

The former head of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Trevor Phillips, has admitted he “got almost everything wrong” on Muslim immigration in a damning new report on integration, segregation, and how the followers of Islam are creating “nations within nations” in the West.

Phillips, a former elected member of the Labour Party who served as the Chairman of the EHRC from 2003-2012 will present “What British Muslims Really Think” on Channel 4 on Wednesday. An ICM poll released to the Times ahead of the broadcast reveals:

  • One in five Muslims in Britain never enter a non-Muslim house;
  • 39 per cent of Muslims, male and female, say a woman should always obey her husband;
  • 31 per cent of British Muslims support the right of a man to have more than one wife;
  • 52 per cent of Muslims did not believe that homosexuality should be legal;
  • 23 per cent of Muslims support the introduction of Sharia law rather than the laws laid down by parliament.

Writing in the Times on the issue, Phillips admits: “Liberal opinion in Britain has, for more than two decades, maintained that most Muslims are just like everyone else… Britain desperately wants to think of its Muslims as versions of the Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, or the cheeky-chappie athlete Mo Farah. But thanks to the most detailed and comprehensive survey of British Muslim opinion yet conducted, we now know that just isn’t how it is.”

Phillips commissioned “the Runnymede report” into Britain and Islamophobia in 1997 which, according to both Phillips himself and academics across the country, popularised the phrase which has now become synonymous with any criticism – legitimate or not – of Islam or Muslims.

Durham University’s Anthropology Journal noted in 2007: “It has been a decade since the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia was established, a Commission that through its 1997 report, “Islamophobia: a challenge for us all” (“the Runnymede report”) not only raised an awareness of the growing reality of anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic hostility in Britain, but also marked the onset of what might be described as ‘the first decade of Islamophobia’. In doing so, the Runnymede report propelled the word ‘Islamophobia’ into the everyday common parlance and discourses of both the public and political spaces.”

Phillips says his new data shows “a chasm” opening between Muslims and non-Muslims on fundamental issues such as marriage, relations between men and women, schooling, freedom of expression and even the validity of violence in defence of religion. He notes – echoing an article on Breitbart London just two weeks ago which reveals a growing disparity between older and younger Muslims in Britain – that “the gaps between Muslim and non-Muslim youngsters are nearly as large as those between their elders”.

And while he is cautious to note that many Muslims in Britain are grateful to be here, and do identify with role models such as Hussain and Farah, there is a widening gap in society with many Muslims segregating themselves.

“It’s not as though we couldn’t have seen this coming. But we’ve repeatedly failed to spot the warning signs,” he admits.

“Twenty years ago… I published the report titled Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, we thought that the real risk of the arrival of new communities was discrimination against Muslims. Our 1996 survey of recent incidents showed that there was plenty of it around. But we got almost everything else wrong.”

His comments will come as a blow to those who continue to attack elements in British society who are concerned about Muslim immigration and integration, and in fact may even go some way to shoring up comments made by U.S. Presidential candidates Donald Trump and

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) seeking to slow down or pause the rate of Muslim immigration into the West.“We estimated that the Muslim population of the UK would be approaching 2 [million] by 2020. We underestimated by nearly a million. We predicted that the most lethal threat to Muslims would come from racial attacks and social exclusion. We completely failed to foresee the urban conflicts of 2001 that ravaged our northern cities. And of course we didn’t dream of 9/11 and the atrocities in Madrid, Paris, Istanbul, Brussels and London.”“For a long time, I too thought that Europe’s Muslims would become like previous waves of migrants, gradually abandoning their ancestral ways, wearing their religious and cultural baggage lightly, and gradually blending into Britain’s diverse identity landscape. I should have known better.”

And Mr. Phillips even acknowledges that the mass sexual grooming and rape scandals that are plaguing heavily Muslim populated towns across Britain are because of Muslim – not ‘Asian’ – men. He writes: “The contempt for white girls among some Muslim men has been highlighted by the recent scandals in Rotherham, Oxford, Rochdale and other towns. But this merely reflects a deeply ingrained sexism that runs through Britain’s Muslim communities” – in a nod to those who have long protested this to be the case in the face of political, media, and even police cover ups.

Even left wing columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown told him: “[W]e [liberal Muslims] are a dying breed — in 10 years there will be very few of us left unless something really important is done.”

Phillips comments: “Some of my journalist friends imagine that, with time, the Muslims will grow out of it. They won’t.”

And indeed he lays the blame at the feet of the liberal, metropolitan elite, media classes: “Oddly, the biggest obstacles we now face in addressing the growth of this nation-within-a-nation are not created by British Muslims themselves. Many of our (distinctly un-diverse) elite political and media classes simply refuse to acknowledge the truth. Any undesirable behaviours are attributed to poverty and alienation. Backing for violent extremism must be the fault of the Americans. Oppression of women is a cultural trait that will fade with time, nothing to do with the true face of Islam.”

“Even when confronted with the growing pile of evidence to the contrary, and the angst of the liberal minority of British Muslims, clever, important people still cling to the patronising certainty that British Muslims will, over time, come to see that “our” ways are better.”

In terms of solutions, Mr. Phillips opines on “halting the growth of sharia courts and placing them under regulation” ensuring that school governance never falls into the hands of a single-minority group, “ensuring mosques that receive a steady flow of funds from foreign governments such as Saudi Arabia, however disguised, are forced to reduce their dependency on Wahhabi patronage” and an end to the “silence-for-votes understanding between local politicians and Muslim leaders — the sort of Pontius Pilate deal that had such catastrophic outcomes in Rotherham and Rochdale”.

Mr. Phillips’s comments echo those of the Czech president, and research from across Europe that revealed attitudes amongst Muslims on the continent have hardened. The younger the Muslim, the more likely they are to hold hard-line views, one recent study found.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Dr. Omar Ahmad and The Agony of the “Decent Muslim”

Canada: Muslim migrant children choking, brutalizing non-Muslim students

Muslim who wished Christians Happy Easter slaughtered by fellow Muslim

Here is the straight truth from IslamQA.com:

Can a Muslim celebrate a non-Muslim holiday like Thanksgiving?
Published Date: 1998-03-29

Praise be to Allaah.

Greeting the kuffaar on Christmas and other religious holidays of theirs is haraam, by consensus, as Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allaah have mercy on him, said in Ahkaam Ahl al-Dhimmah:

“Congratulating the kuffaar on the rituals that belong only to them is haraam by consensus, as is congratulating them on their festivals and fasts by saying ‘A happy festival to you’ or ‘May you enjoy your festival,’ and so on. If the one who says this has been saved from kufr, it is still forbidden. It is like congratulating someone for prostrating to the cross, or even worse than that. It is as great a sin as congratulating someone for drinking wine, or murdering someone, or having illicit sexual relations, and so on. Many of those who have no respect for their religion fall into this error; they do not realize the offensiveness of their actions. Whoever congratulates a person for his disobedience or bid’ah or kufr exposes himself to the wrath and anger of Allaah.”

Congratulating the kuffaar on their religious festivals is haraam to the extent described by Ibn al-Qayyim because it implies that one accepts or approves of their rituals of kufr, even if one would not accept those things for oneself. But the Muslim should not aceept the rituals of kufr or congratulate anyone else for them, because Allaah does not accept any of that at all, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“If you disbelieve, then verily, Allaah is not in need of you, He likes not disbelief for His slaves. And if you are grateful (by being believers), He is pleased therewith for you. . .”
[al-Zumar 39:7]

“. . . This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islaam as your religion . . .”
[al-Maa’idah 5:3]

So congratulating them is forbidden, whether they are one’s colleagues at work or otherwise.

If they greet us on the occasion of their festivals, we should not respond, because these are not our festivals, and because they are not festivals which are acceptable to Allaah. These festivals are innovations in their religions, and even those which may have been prescribed formerly have been abrogated by the religion of Islaam, with which Allaah sent Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to the whole of mankind. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Whoever seeks a religion other than Islaam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:85]…

Asad Shah was murdered after he wished Christians a “Good Friday and very happy Easter, especially to my beloved Christian nation.”

Asad Shah

“Scotland police probe killing of Muslim shopkeeper who posted Facebook Easter message to Christians,” FoxNews.com, March 26, 2016:

A popular shopkeeper who wished Christians a happy Easter on Facebook was stabbed to death in what police in Scotland say was a “religiously prejudiced” attack carried out by a fellow Muslim, it was reported Saturday.

A vigil was held Friday night in Glasgow’s Shawlands neighborhood in memory of Asad Shah who was killed the day before– a few hours after he apparently posted messages on Facebook that said “Good Friday and very happy Easter, especially to my beloved Christian nation.”

“Let’s follow the real footstep of beloved holy Jesus Christ and get the real success in both worlds,” one of the messages said.

Police said a 32-year-old man has been arrested in connection with Shah’s death. Police said the suspect is Muslim. He was not been identified.

Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon joined the vigil in support of Shah and his family.

“Moved to be one of hundreds tonight as Shawlands united in grief for Asad Shah and support for his family,” Sturgeon tweeted afterward, the BBC reported Saturday.

According to the BBC, those attending the memorial were encouraged to bring a daffodil. Those at the gathering laid flowers and lit candles.

“It was very respectful,” vigil organizer Eildon Dyer told the BBC. “There were a lot of people clearly very upset. There were a lot of tears and lots and lots of flowers.”

Dyer added: “Everybody has said he was the nicest man. He was clearly much-loved. Everybody had nice stories to tell about him and warm stories. It’s just very, very sad.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canadian Imam admirer of Trudeau: “Muslims will conquer Rome, defeat Christianity”

Time Mag: Jihadists don’t understand the Qur’an

Canada’s New Democratic Party: Supporters of the BDS Movement

Muslim Major in the IDF speaks out against Israeli Apartheid Week and BDS

Major Alaa Waheeb, the highest ranked Muslim officer in the Israel Defense Forces, wrote an op-ed column in the Jewish News titled, “There’s only one country in the Middle East that could produce a soldier like me.”

Major Alaa Waheeb, highest ranked Muslim officer in the Israel Defence Forces

Major Alaa Waheeb, highest ranking Muslim officer in the Israel Defense Forces.

Major Waheeb writes:

In the last few weeks, students across the UK have been involved in Israeli Apartheid Week.  Some have supported it. Others have opposed it. Invited by the Zionist Federation UK, last week I was able to attend campuses up and down the country specifically to address and counter some of the claims involved.

These fall into roughly three categories. First, that Israel is an inherently racist, and therefore unacceptable country, comparable to Apartheid South Africa. Second, that its army defends this racist status with acts of illegal and immoral violence. And third, that the only solution to this problem is through the isolation tactics of boycotts.

Like many I met during my visit, I oppose these views. But perhaps more than most people on either side of the debate, I am better placed to argue against them. Because I am an Israeli, an Arab, and the highest ranked Muslim in the IDF.

Is Israel inherently racist, an apartheid state? Well, do you think that such a country would tolerate a person like myself getting to the position I am today? Forget for a second (BDS supporters would like you to forget permanently!) that 20 percent of Israelis are non-Jewish, have full rights, and are represented throughout society. It’s one thing, after all, to have Arab politicians, Christian voters, and Muslim doctors – although we do have them, and quite a few at that.

But a non-Jewish army Major? Someone who has not only fought alongside Jewish soldiers, but now trains them too? Would a truly racist state allow me to play such an integral role in our nation’s defences?

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLE: Egypt finds Gaza smuggling tunnels big enough for trucks

Muslim convert joins Islamic State, family blames ‘right-wing’ media

“‘The only truth is that Jack is a Muslim and he is overseas. But everything else is made up and it is just getting worse.’ The man, who refused to confirm his identity, said the ‘right wing’ media were only ‘interested in a snappy line like “Jihadi Jack” and “Jihadi John” that rolls off the tongue, but it is all wrong.’” Yes, he doubtless went to Syria to study botany.

“Family of convert feared to be with Isil blame right wing conspiracy,” by Tom Whitehead, Telegraph, January 24, 2016:

The family of a man feared to be Britain’s first white convert to join Isil last night claimed he is the victim of a “right wing” conspiracy.

Jack Letts, 20, has been dubbed “Jihadi Jack” by friends after leaving his Oxford home and travelling to Syria, where he is suspected of having joined the terror group.

He has posted photos of himself on social media, thought to have been taken near the Taqba Dam in Syria. In one he is wearing combat-style clothing.

But a man who identified himself only as a close family member insisted there had been “an avalanche of misinformation” about him in the media.

Mr Letts’ father, John, is a leading organic farmer who has appeared on BBC’s Countryfile and won a Prince Charles grant to help preserve crop biodiversity.

John Letts is an archaeobotanist and a leading light in organic wheat as well as being a master thatcher and baker.

Neighbours said he and his family were left devastated and depressed after Jack ran off to Syria in 2014 aged just 18.

One said he first converted to Islam after being encouraged by Muslim classmates but was later radicalised by local extremists.

But speaking at the family home last night, the close family member said: “There has been an avalanche of misinformation.

“We don’t want to comment on all of this, but what I will say is that 95 per cent of what has been published is incorrect, it is desperately wrong.

“The only truth is that Jack is a Muslim and he is overseas. But everything else is made up and it is just getting worse.”

The man, who refused to confirm his identity, said the “right wing” media were only “interested in a snappy line like ‘Jihadi Jack’ and ‘Jihadi John’ that rolls off the tongue, but it is all wrong”.

Mr Letts, now 20, was once a keen sportsman and Liverpool FC fan who had been the “class clown” when a pupil at Cherwell School in Oxford, according to former classmates.

But he converted to Islam and friends fear was then radicalised by local fanatics in discreet prayer meetings.

It is believed he lied to his parents before leaving for Syria and told them he was moving to Kuwait to study Arabic.

Since arriving in Syria, he is thought to have married and had a son.

His father, who is Canadian, is a leading figure in reviving traditional crops that were in common use hundreds of years ago.

He produce heritage flour from wheat grown around Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire and feature on BBC Countryfile last year.

In 2011, he was a co-recipient of £25,000 from the Prince’s Countryside Fund.

Neighbours on the terraced street where the family live in Oxford spoke of their “utter sadness” that the “polite and lovely” boy they had seen grow up had allegedly joined Isil.

One woman Muslim neighbour, who asked to remain anonymous, told how she became concerned after his conversion to Islam.

“He told me he had started visiting a Wahhabi mosque. I believe he started going there with his classmates and I knew this could be bad as Wahhabi is not Islam, it is very bad,” she said.

“I spoke with his father who became very worried when he converted to Islam. I sat with him and told him not to worry….

Yes, he had nothing to worry about. He probably went home reassured that this neighbor with her peaceful Islam could help his son stave off those who tried to “radicalize” him. She failed. Authorities will almost certainly not try to figure out exactly why.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hugh Fitzgerald: The Task You Have Taken Upon Yourself

New Islamic State beheading video celebrates jihad murders, promises more

EDITORS NOTE: The features image is of Ibrahim Jack Letts making the one-finger sign of allegiance to the Islamic State.

New reforms give Muslim migrants with more than one wife extra benefits

Paying for something will only encourage more of it, and there will even be conversions to Islam by people who want to take advantage of this. Britain’s Islamization is proceeding nicely, and anyone who raises a dissenting voice is ruthlessly silenced, so all is well and all manner of thing shall be well.

“Wives With Benefits: Immigrants With More Than One Spouse Win EXTRA Payments Under New Reforms,” by Simon Kent, Breitbart, January 24, 2016:

Immigrants with many wives stand to make substantial financial gains under looming changes to Britain’s welfare system.

Polygamous marriages, which form a common thread in Islam, are recognised in Britain but only if they take place in countries where they are legal. Now a House of Commons library paper, published earlier this month, has highlighted a loophole that will allow additional wives coming to the UK to claim a full single person’s allowance while the husband and his first wife still receive their respective benefits.

At present additional wives receive reduced individual income support, meaning the husband and his first wife receive up to £114.85. Subsequent spouses living under the same roof receive a reduced allowance of about £40 each.

The foreshadowed changes mean some polygamous households may receive more under universal credit than under the present benefit and tax credit system. The paper said:

“The Government decided that the universal credit rules will not recognise additional partners in polygamous relationships,” the paper states.

“This could potentially result in some polygamous households receiving more under universal credit than under the current benefit and tax credit system.

“Treating second and subsequent partners in polygamous relationships as separate claimants could in some situations mean polygamous households receive more under universal credit than they do under the current rules for means-tested benefits and tax credits.

“This is because the amounts which may be paid in respect of additional spouses are lower than those which generally apply to single claimants.”

The news comes as universal credit (UC), introduced in April 2014, is applied to more Jobcentre areas, including Kent and Leicestershire, from tomorrow. More, including Cambridge and Hull, are set to introduce it before April this year.

UC is to replace all means-tested benefits and tax credits for families of working age and is gradually being introduced to new claimant groups and areas including those in polygamous unions.

This is not the first time that Islamic marriage traditions have been highlighted in the UK.

As Breitbart London reported, last year Britain’s first female sharia law judge stated that the “government cannot ask Muslims not to have more than one wife”.

That revelation came on the back of a report by the Times newspaper which claimed that Britain is experiencing a “surge” in Sharia marriages, as young British Muslims adopt a more hardline religious stance than their parents.

According to The Times:

“As many as 100,000 couples are living in such [sharia] marriages, which are not valid under UK law, experts said. Ministers have raised fears that women can be left without the right to a fair share of assets if the relationship ends, while others are forced to return to abusive “husbands”.

A leading Islamic family lawyer warned that the increase in Sharia ceremonies among the 2.7 million-strong Muslim population in Britain was also behind a growth in ‘secret polygamy’.

“Probably a quarter of all couples I see involve polygamy issues,” Aina Khan told The Times. “There has been a huge rise in recent years because people can have a secret nikah [Islamic marriage] and no one will know about it.”

A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions told the Daily Express: “The previous system accommodated polygamous marriages but this Government has done away with it. Under new rules any additional partners who are unemployed have to claim benefits independently and will need to sign a claimant commitment, and look for work like anyone else. They will also not get benefits for housing costs if they are living together.”

It has been claimed that Muslim men are having up to 20 children each because of polygamy and the rise of “religiously-sanctioned gender discrimination” under Sharia Law.

Baroness Cox, a cross-bench peer, has highlighted a series of “shocking” examples of the impact of Sharia law on Muslim women in Britain as she called for them to be given greater protection.

Bigamy in the UK is a crime under Section 57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 however in 2008, the Blair government gave the go-ahead for husbands with multiple wives to claim extra welfare benefits, so long as the weddings took place in countries where the arrangement is legal (as is permitted under Islamic law).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Palestinian media celebrates terror and murder

British Leftists lead violence as they aid Muslim migrants to invade Calais

Italy: Islamic State jihadi arrested; talked of “fastening belt to reach heaven”

British Parliament Moves Against the Real Threat: Donald Trump

In FrontPage today I discuss how the British Parliament went into full Sharia mode as it debated banning the Presidential candidate for his unwelcome opinions.

Say goodnight, Winston. Sayonara, Shakespeare. It’s light’s out in the United Kingdom. In Britain, it’s all over but the Sharia. This was made abundantly clear on Monday, when the British Parliament held a three-hour debate on whether or not to ban Donald Trump from the country.

It used to be that only serious criminals, severe threats to the public order, were ever banned from countries. Ostensibly, that is still the case, but the idea of who and what constitutes a threat to the public order has changed. Multitudes in Britain want to keep Trump out of their green and pleasant land not because he absconded with the church funds, or plotted bomb attacks in the London Tube, but because he said that in light of the jihad terror threat and the impossibility of distinguishing Islamic jihadists from peaceful Muslims, there should be a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration into the U.S.

For that, the learned Parliamentarians debated banning Trump from Britain, and in the process, heaped abuse upon him, calling him a “fool,” a “buffoon” and a “wazzock,” which is apparently a word more properly applied to those who voted for David Cameron. One thing that never became clear during the entire three hours of heated discussion, however, was what terrible results the foes of Trump thought might ensue from his entry into the Sceptered Isle. Did they think that if he repeated his call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration on British soil, that Muslims, those notorious shrinking violets, would retreat to psychologists’ couches in such droves that the British mental health system would be overwhelmed?

More likely, the unspoken fear was that if Trump entered Britain, Muslims would riot. And so those British politicians who have insisted that Islam is a Religion of Peace moved to ban him, knowing but afraid to admit that the adherents of the most famous peaceful religion in the world could quite easily become violent if crossed. To avoid crossing them was their highest of priorities – and as Sharia forbids criticism of Islam and offense to Muslims, they eagerly became Sharia-compliant, eagerly anticipating the electoral rewards that were certain to follow in the wake of their submission.

The whole thing looks now as if it was just a chance for Trump’s foes to do a bit of grandstanding and show their Muslim masters how solidly they were in their corner, but seriously, why not ban Trump? After all, I myself was banned from entering Britain for saying that Islam “is a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers for the purpose for establishing a societal model that is absolutely incompatible with Western society.”

The anti-Trump movement in the UK implied that Trump might escape due punishment for his heinous crimes because he is rich: “If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the ‘unacceptable behaviour’ criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.” But that’s a lot of hooey. The “unacceptable behavior” criteria is already applied unfairly. Just days before Pamela Geller and I were banned, the British government admitted Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. Al-Arefe has said:

“Devotion to jihad for the sake of Allah, and the desire to shed blood, to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of His religion, is, undoubtedly, an honor for the believer. Allah said that if a man fights the infidels, the infidels will be unable to prepare to fight.”

That was acceptable in Britain. My work, which has consistently denounced violence and been in defense of the equality of rights of all before the law, was not. That’s a fair application of the “unacceptable behaviors” criteria?

If I can get banned for making a manifestly true observation about Islam, then Trump can certainly be banned for calling for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration in view of jihad terror. The UK continues to demonize and stigmatize resistance to jihad terror, and will probably continue to do so until it is far too late: the last free Briton will be congratulating himself that he was not “Islamophobic” as the knife slices through his neck.

As Britain continues to make itself an international laughingstock, transgressing its core principles by banning people for holding unpopular opinions, there is one thing that can be said for that once-great nation: as Sharia states go, it is a hell of a lot funnier than Saudi Arabia or Iran.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Muslim migrants grope Swedish woman, demand she “make sex”

Islamic State razes to ground 1,400-year-old Christian monastery

The Left’s Embrace of Islamic Rape by Jamie Glazov [+Videos]

As the disturbing reports pour in about the New Year’s Eve Muslim sex assaults in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Finland and other European countries, it has become clear that the new Utopian Multicultural Europe that the Left has worked so hard to build is now here. Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker’s response to the assaults under her watch has been to reprimand the victims, suggesting that they had asked for it. She has vowed to make sure that women will change their behavior, so that they don’t provoke Muslims to sexually assault them again. There will now be published “online guidelines” for women to read so they can prepare themselves. One wonders if it will be the burqa or the niqab that will be the solution of choice.

These eerie developments are, of course, completely in line with why Naomi Wolf finds the hijab “sexy” and why Oslo Professor of Anthropology Dr. Unni Wikan’s solution for the high incidence of Muslims raping Norwegian women is not for the rapists to be punished, but for Norwegian women to “take their share of responsibility” for the rapes because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. Norwegian women, she has counseled, “must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”

We are also now aware that German police fired water cannons at German protesters in Cologne who gathered to protest the rapes and sexual assaults committed by the Muslim refugees. Right, it is not the Muslim migrants who committed sex assaults that are being shot at with water cannons, but those who feel that what they did violates women’s rights and western values.

In response to this new horrifying European reality, in which if you are a kuffar female who is raped it means you asked for it, Frontpagemag.com is running my article “How Vittorio Arrigoni Went to Gaza Hoping to Die” from PJMedia’s April 18, 2011 issue. The article unveils the death wish in the heart of the Left and in the impulses of its fellow travelers. In so doing, it crystallizes the pathological mindset of the progressive elites running Western Europe today and why they have created the toxic and suicidal circumstances in which their own women are now victims of mass sexual assaults by followers of a totalitarian and misogynist ideology — and why they, the elites, are shaming the victims and taking the side of the perpetrators.

When one grasps that the yearnings of Western Europe’s rulers today are the same yearnings that Vittorio Arrigoni indulged, the whole picture becomes transparently clear.

Read the article HERE.

RELATED ARTICLE: Daniel Greenfield Moment: The Muslim Brotherhood is a Bigger Threat than ISIS

RELATED VIDEOS:

Woman being Dragged Screaming into Subway by Muslims (via PamelaGeller.com):

Muslim hits woman near subway station (via PamelaGeller.com):

UK Parliament will debate barring Trump from country

Why not ban Trump? After all, I was banned from entering Britain for saying that Islam “is a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers for the purpose for establishing a societal model that is absolutely incompatible with Western society.”

If I can get banned for that manifestly true observation, then Trump can certainly be banned for calling for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration in view of jihad terror. One thing British authorities are sure of: it is wrong, wrong, wrong to want to take any action against jihad terror.

“If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the ‘unacceptable behaviour’ criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.” That’s a lot of hooey. The “unacceptable behavior” criteria is already applied unfairly. Just days before Pamela Geller and I were banned, the British government admitted Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. Al-Arefe has said:

“Devotion to jihad for the sake of Allah, and the desire to shed blood, to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of His religion, is, undoubtedly, an honor for the believer. Allah said that if a man fights the infidels, the infidels will be unable to prepare to fight.”

That was acceptable in Britain. My work, which has consistently denounced violence and been in defense of the equality of rights of all before the law, was not. That’s a fair application of the “unacceptable behaviors” criteria?

“UK Parliament Will Debate Barring Trump from Country,” by Carrie Dann, NBC News, January 5, 2016

The British parliament will formally debate a petition later this month from backers wishing to prevent Donald Trump from entering the United Kingdom.

The debate is set for January 18, according to a government announcement Tuesday. The petition, launched after Trump announced his proposal to bar Muslims from entering the United States, has garnered over 568,000 signatures to date.

Online petitions like the one targeting Trump are automatically considered for debate by a Petitions Committee if they garner more than 100,000 signatures.

The petition reads: “The signatories believe Donald J Trump should be banned from UK entry. The UK has banned entry to many individuals for hate speech. The same principles should apply to everyone who wishes to enter the UK. If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the ‘unacceptable behaviour’ criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Facebook swiftly removes anti- “Palestinian” material, keeps up incitement against Jews

Cologne Mayor: Women should be more careful after Muslim mass rapes, promises “guidance” so they can “prepare”

UK’s Cameron breaks with Obama on the Muslim Brotherhood

When even David Cameron, thoroughly compromised to Islamic supremacists and in near-total denial about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, is tougher than Obama on a stealth jihad group such as the Muslim Brotherhood, you know we’re in deep trouble.

MuslimBrotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood logo.

“UK breaks with U.S. on Muslim Brotherhood,” by Steve Emerson and Pete Hoekstra, Washington Examiner, December 24, 2015:

The United Kingdom broke from the largely complacent U.S. position on radical Islamists in a startling indictment of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

“Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities … run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs,” Prime Minister David Cameron said in a statement. Cameron further states that “association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism.”

As the West attempts to pinpoint potential terrorists, the Brits tell us where to look, and that is to the MB and its associates.

The new account — resulting from an 18-month-long exhaustive investigation by respected foreign policy experts — presents a brutally honest examination of the movement. In breaking from the U.S., the UK has shifted closer to Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia in identifying it as a terrorist organization.

The UK position sharply contrasts with that of the Obama administration, which sought to strengthen ties to the Brotherhood. Just a few years ago Director of National Intelligence James Clapper described the MB as “largely secular…” and “which has eschewed violence.”

The Obama administration quickly condemned the UK report in an email to the IPT, citing the MB’s stated commitment to nonviolence and that pushing back against the organization would lead to the radicalization of a minority of its followers.

We’re not sure that they even read the report. Since founding the group in 1928, former schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna, “accepted the political utility of violence, and the Brotherhood conducted attacks, including political assassinations and attempted assassinations against Egypt state targets and both British and Jewish interests during his lifetime,” it says….

RELATED ARTICLES:

No Christmas celebration in Sudan: Muslims burn and demolish churches

India: Muslim abducts, tortures, sexually assaults woman, forces her to convert to Islam to marry him

PODCAST: Is it Safe to Fly?

Listen to this podcast of The Lisa Benson Show on National Security  that aired  Sunday, November 8, on KKNT 960 The Patriot and SMARTPHONE iHEART App: 960 the Patriot. Lisa Benson and New English Review Senior Editor Jerry Gordon  co-hosted this show.

Our guests were:

Amb. R. James Woolsey, Chairman of the Washington, DC –based Leadership Council of Foundation for Defense of Democracies on Global aviation and airport insecurity with the ISIS terrorist bombing of Metrojet Flight 9268  in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula and  lax screening of  refugee airport workers at 13  US  airports revealed in a Lisa Benson National Security Task Force of America investigation as reported onFoxNews, CNN, MSNBC, NewsMax  and The Blaze.

Dr. Raymond Stock, Shillman/Ginsburg Fellow at Middle East Forum and noted Egyptian expert on the aftermath of the security issues facing President el-Sisi in the Sinai from ISIS and Muslim Brotherhood terrorism in the wake of the downing of Metrojet Flight 9268.

Additional contributions on this broadcast were made by Board of Advisor members, Richard Cutting and Michael Weiser on calls for US  Congressional heatings on airport security and refugee employees screenings, as well as Isareli airline and airport security.  As a result of the broadcast interest has been expressed in doing a documentary of the issues raised arising from the terrorist bombing of Metrojet Flight 9268 as well as an op ed for a major media publication. Stay tuned for further developments.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

VIDEO: Muslim Brotherhood affiliated charity bringing Syrian refugees to U.S.

Invasion of Europe news…..

And, you can bet they would scream bloody murder if the Cameron government ever had the guts to put persecuted Christians at the head of the line.

BTW, Islamic Relief is working in the U.S. to help Syrians get resettled in your states—Kentucky and Maryland that we know of (so far).

I wanted to learn more about the new UK Director of Islamic Relief, Imran Madden.  I didn’t find much, but am posting this 2012 Al Jazeera interview I found informative…..a bit off-topic!

Here is the surprising (not!) news from Islamic Relief (UK must dramatically accelerate Syrian resettlement):

The new UK Director of Islamic Relief will use his speech in a fringe debate at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester to urge the Government to inject greater urgency into resettling Syrian refugees in the UK and leave ‘no diplomatic stone unturned’ in the search for a lasting peace in Syria.

At a conference fringe debate organised by Islamic Relief and World Vision (details in Notes to Editors along with details of separate Muslim Charities Forum fringe event), Imran Madden will speak alongside the Minister of State for International Development, Desmond Swayne MP, to highlight the enormous human cost of forgotten crises around the world – and the Syrian conflict in particular.

They recommend 5 prescriptions for the crisis, this is #5:

A dramatic acceleration of planned refugee resettlement in the UK.

Related:  First Syrians headed to Northern Ireland, here.  They will be mostly Muslims as the UK is working with the UNHCR to pick its refugees.

About the video (and maybe too much in the weeds for most readers!):   I’ve been following the Rohingya refugee issue for nearly eight years.  In the most recent years, the reason for the original outbreak in the latest wave of violence in Burma (Myanmar) which broke out when three Rohingya Muslim men raped a Buddhist woman, has been long forgotten.  I have been so annoyed over the years to see that original spark for the latest violence between the ethnic groups expunged from media coverage. The media and humanitarian agitators (including the OIC) have made it look like the Rohingya were pure as the driven snow.

I was thus surprised to see this 2012 Al Jazeera piece (an interview with Imran Madden) that actually does mention the rape that started it all.

For Hillary watchers out there, one of the few foreign policy success stories that Hillary was earlier mentioning was supposedly bringing some democracy to Burma. She even sent the ‘Podesta Group’ there to help shore-up her legacy.  Dead silence now as Burma is still in internal conflict.

If you are interested in the Rohingya issue we have enough posts here that you could write a book (see Rohingya Reports category).

For all of our posts on the ‘Invasion of Europe’ go here.