Olde Tyme Preacher: "The Jews Are Involved in All of It"

Here's Iraqi Shiite cleric Sheikh Muhammad Al-Lami ranting that "the Jews", to quote the synopsis provided by Memri.TV:

'are involved in “everything that is happening in the world, especially in the Middle East,” including car bombs, “religious and ideological deviations,” economic ruin, destruction of infrastructure, and Sunni-Shiite hostilities.“As long as Tel Aviv, New York, and Washington live in peace, we will have ruin and destruction,” he said, adding: “We are being destroyed and these countries are safe, which means that they are our destroyers. The Jews!”

Mentioning the antisemitic hadith about the Prophecy of the Rock and the Tree, Sheikh Al-Lami said that the Jews would “suffer merciless humiliation” at the hand of the Muslim believers. He declared: “Our Lord does not need to strike the arrogant nations with TNT or nuclear bombs, in order to destroy them. All the tyrants met their end by simple means.”

The address was posted on Sheikh Al-Lami’s Youtube channel on October 1, 2018.'

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hylsjh4f4dM

Meanwhile, regarding Anjem Choudary, the notorious Islamic extremist in the UK who's shortly to be let out of gaol, here's an BBC assessment of his influence, on video.

Stinkers Out of Bedford (updated)

A tinker out of Bedford,
A vagrant oft in quod,
A private under Fairfax,
A minister of God –
Two hundred years and thirty
Ere Armageddon came
His single hand portrayed it,
And Bunyan was his name!

Thus wrote Rudyard Kipling in his poem "The Holy War" (1917) of John Bunyan, author of A Pilgrim's Progress.

Not too many Christian pilgrims featured in this must-see piece, I fear, nor much of progress either.

And certainly no traces of what Bunyan, Kipling and we ourselves might conceive of as a "holy war".

What's the world coming to?

We may well ask.

There's a not very comforting suggestion here

Oh, and in the "shome mishtake shurely" department, this

Meanwhile, an unmissable article that I missed

And more great graphics from Edgar Davidson

As well as the links regarding the Paris atrocities that that veritable bloodhound Ian provides in the comments section of my previous post.

More stinkers: anthropologists in America vote for BDS

Green slime oozing ... ("Isis funded by Rothschilds")

In Britain, Muslims React To Cameron's Recent Anti-Extremism Speech (videos)

The following two videos relate to British prime minister David Cameron's recent speech in Birmingham as outlined here

In this video (which also features Jonathan Fryer, a journalist specialising in counter-extremism and counter-terrorism issues, who warns inter alia of Saudi-financed Wahhabism) Manchester-based Reza Nadeem of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, unequivocally condemns Cameron's speech. The way Muslims are lectured, Mr Nadeem says, "is so deeply Islamophobic it's off-putting" and excoriates calls for "integration" because, he maintains, "assimilation" is meant by that concept.  He insists that if Muslims are to be placated and feel part of British society Britain's "unjust foreign policy ... needs to change" and inevitably "Palestine" is mentioned (at approx. 11:58 particularly).

In this footage some distinctly less urbane voices react to Cameron's speech.  In fact, one member of the crowd cautions a particularly raucous speaker not to "scream or shout or people will take it the wrong way".  The Crusaders and the East India Company figure in the screeching rant, but so, specifically, do Jews and Christians – the former more than once.  (Highlights, if that's the appropriate term, at approximately 2:10, 4:13, 4:47).

Been & Seen On The Streets of London (includes video)

At left is the link to a report in an Israeli newspaper regarding the squalid anti-Jewish demo held in central London on the 4th of July.

The commenter, one of the friends of Stephen Sizer (remember him?) on Facebook, has form in making anti-Jewish statements, notoriously in a spiteful little screed to the Jewish Chronicle itself back in 2007.  Stephen Pollard, the paper's editor, used the screed as an example of the malevolence that lies behind the BDS movement.

The 4th of July demo, as many readers will know, was due to have taken the form of a march through the London suburb of Golders Green, led by vile young neo-Nazi antisemite called Joshua Bonehill, who on his repugnant racist blog and elsewhere promised his followers: "We're going to have an absolute gas".

It was stymied owing to a groundswell of outrage and opposition on the part of the Jewish community and others, and moved to central London (authorities were powerless to ban it altogether) so that it was easier to police.

As the intrepid British pro-Israel blogger Edgar Davidson noted:

'It seems like the only thing of concern to British Jews at the moment is next week's planned demonstration by a handful of neo-Nazis in Golders Green to "end the Zionist occupation of Britain". Never before has the community been so united.'

http://edgar1981.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/on-hypocrisy-of-golders-green-demo.html

Many congratulations to those who stood firm against the march are of course in order.  But Davidson also writes :

'While the people behind the demo are clearly despicable attention-seeking antisemites deliberately trying to provoke trouble, I am somewhat bemused as to why this tiny piece of antisemitic theatre has so grabbed the attention of the Jewish community. On almost every day of the week on the streets of the UK there are much better planned and coordinated displays of antisemitism that use exactly the same pretext as the one planned in Golders Green (i.e. 'ending the Zionist occupation'). Just look at the future events on websites of organisations like the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the Socialist Workers Party, the UK Boycott Israel Campaign, and the dozens of other trade unions and students associations.

 These events range from weekly (and even daily) protests against shops and businesses with any connection to Israel and those selling Israeli products through to protests to stop any Israeli performer from appearing or any person at all speaking in public in support of Israel. Often they are quite elaborate, lavishly funded pieces of real street theatre with the sole intention of convincing normal Brits that Israeli Jews are the most demonic and evil people in the world. Every one of these events has more antisemitic participants than the number likely to turn up in Golders Green. And, of course, these events pale into insignificance when compared to the daily mass (often violent) rallies of antisemitic hatred that fill the streets of London whenever Israel dares to defend itself from terrorist attacks....

What it comes down to is that Britain's 'official Jews' feel comfortable demonstrating against anti-semitism when the proponents are white racists, but will not get involved when the proponents - - in far greater numbers - are Muslims and socialists....'

Speaking of "street theatre" in London, here's an old ( I mean a young old) friend of ours, attired as we've never seen him before, eliciting some ignorant anti-Israel comments from passers-by:

Also on the streets of London, the menacing sight of a man draped in an Isis flag, with a kid on his shoulders waving a similar item in miniature, strolling  near Parliament.  He was stopped by police, according to this report, but they let him and his flags go on their way unhindered (h/t Vlad Tepes blog):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/

Voices From Eurabia (videos)

A British Islamist: "Only ISIS will help Palestine"

A Spanish Islamist: "Allah, Destroy the Plundering Jews, Do Not Spare a Single One"

Percentages of people with a positive view of ISIS:

 (Read more on that public opinion poll and its implications here)
 

A Portsmouth Jihadist: "I’ll probably end up going on a killing spree with all the kuffar around me"

Portsmouth, the celebrated naval port on the south coast of England, from which sailed (in 1787) the First Fleet which brought convicts to Australia and (in 1805) Lord Nelson bound for Trafalgar, has long been known to locals as Pompey, though nobody seems to know why.

The Jewish community is Portsmouth was the first to develop in the English provinces, and traces its origins to the 1730s, when a number of Jewish dealers settled there as providers of merchandise and loans to sailors. The heyday of the community was in the Georgian period, and after the Napoleonic Wars many Jews drifted to other centres, with their better economic opportunities. Yet there was still a flourishing Jewish community in Portsmouth, with several Jews (including  Emanuel Emanuel, a Bavarian-born silversmith who was responsible for many municipal improvements including Southsea promenade, and his apparently unrelated namesake Leon Emanuel, a jeweller whose name is known even today in the city for his charity to schools) serving as Mayor.  Indeed, it was in 1964, during the mayoralty of solicitor Harry Sotnick, that Portsmouth was twinned with Haifa, a link that I believe endures.  The small Jewish community has also produced its share of famous Jews, including acting brothers Wolfe and Aubrey Morris and, more recently, writer Neil Gaiman.

 Perhaps the most notable Muslim resident of the city, and certainly one of the longest settled there, is Sayyid Sir Jamshid bin Abdullah Al Said GCMG, who was Sultan of Zanzibar from July 1963 to until he was overthrown in January 1964.  He fled into exile in the UK with his family, choosing Portsmouth as the place to put down roots.  That gentleman and his family aside, the Muslim community in Portsmouth is very much newer than its counterparts in London and the large industrial cities of the Midlands and the North, and it is also very much smaller, though it is served by two mosques and has recently opened an Islamic school.

The revelation that jihadist fighters have been recruited from that small community is, then, a salutary and shocking development.

It was stated recently, under the subheading "Portsmouth’s Bangladeshi Bad Boys", in a well-footnoted document: 

"Another cluster of Britons drawn to Syria can be found in Portsmouth where a group that seems to in part echo a local da`wa (propagation) community has gone to fight in Syria alongside the ISIL. The Portsmouth Da`wa Team continues to carry out its peaceful activities in the city center, and there has been no evidence presented that it is connected to terrorism. A number of former members, however, have gone to fight in Syria. Most prominently, Iftekar Jaman, a former call center employee and son of fast food restaurant owners, became something of a celebrity jihadist through his online media profile.  In November 2013, he achieved particular notoriety when he was interviewed by the BBC’s flagship Newsnight program. He was also responsible for helping to facilitate travel to Syria for two other Britons who used the pseudonyms Abu Qaqa and Abu Layth al-Khorasani. Abu Layth was later revealed to be a Manchester-born student at Liverpool University and part-time amateur boxer called Anil Khalil Raoufi. Both Raoufi and Iftekar Jaman have since been killed fighting.

Others from the Portsmouth cluster who are still fighting in Syria include former private schoolboy and fitness fanatic Muhammad Hassan. Hassan, another participant in the Portsmouth da`wa group, is a regular on social media and promotes the ISIL’s cause.  In mid-November 2013, another Portsmouth man, Muhammad Hamidur Rahman, a manager at a local retail clothing store, told his family he was heading to Syria as part of an aid convoy only to reemerge weeks later as a fighter alongside the ISIL. Both men are believed to still be fighting in Syria.

In contrast, Mashudur Choudhury, who recently became the first Briton to be convicted of terrorism charges related to the conflict in Syria, was arrested upon his return to the United Kingdom on October 26, 2013. He had left for Syria on October 8 with four other Portsmouth men on a commercial flight to Turkey (including Muhammad Hamidur Rahman and Muhammad Hassan) after long conversations via various social media and online communication methods, including Skype, with Iftekar Jaman.  In one of these messages, Choudhury suggested that the group he was traveling with should call themselves the “Britani brigade Bangladeshi bad boys,” which elicited a “lol sounds long” from Jaman. Choudhury was also revealed to have argued about his activity with his wife who saw him as a fantasist and who finally told him in a July text message to “go die in battlefield. Go die, I really mean it just go. I’ll be relieved. At last. At last.'"

The presence in Syria of jihadists from Portsmouth was reported late last year here and here and here.

It is seemingly no coincidence that the EDL consequently musters strong in Portsmouth, a city which at first glance would not seem to constitute a fertile breeding ground for that organisation.

Moreover, Pompey's local paper now reports:

'The leader of the city council has moved to reassure people after it emerged a jihadi from Portsmouth posted he would go on a ‘killing spree’ if he returned from Syria.

The comments from Councillor Donna Jones come after a man fighting with Al-Qaeda linked group Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant in Syria wrote a message on Twitter.

The man, using the name Abu Abdullah, seemed to threaten to kill non-Muslims.

He wrote: ‘Yeah mate, go back to Britain. You got to be joking. I’ll probably end up going on a killing spree with all the kuffar around me.’

Speaking to The News Cllr Jones said: ‘The Muslim community here in Portsmouth are very upset what’s happened with these young men going over to Syria.

‘We must remember it’s a very small number, when we take into consideration the other British men who have gone. It’s concerning when any British citizen behaves in such a way.’

As reported, a group of men from the city left for war-torn Syria via Turkey to fight with the Islamist rebel group ISIS.

Just yesterday the Home Office banned ISIS, with Immigration and Security Minister James Brokenshire saying the move sends a ‘strong message’ that terrorism is not tolerated.

In a statement he said: ‘We condemn all acts of terrorism committed in Syria, where the conflict poses a growing threat to UK, regional and international peace and security.

‘Proscription is a useful weapon in the armoury at the disposal of the Government, police and security service to disrupt terrorist activity and protect the UK.’

It comes as it emerged 19-year-old, of Portsmouth, Muhammad Hassan also posted a message indicating his support for violence against non-Muslims outside of Syria.

He wrote on Twitter: ‘America wants to drone Dawlah? Inshallah, you will receive many more 9/11s.’

Both Hassan and Abu Abdullah were removed from Twitter over the weekend....'

Read the rest here

"Islamophobia" Crude (video)

There's nothing subtle about this video, a heavy-handed satirical commentary on Islamic extremism in Britain.  Prompting the fear and resentment which lead to the making of such videos are the existence of Muslim supremacist groups proclaiming that Britain's destiny is to be a sharia-dominated state, the existence of Islamic enclaves in parts of Britain that are effectively "no-go" zones (and not just in London) for the "kuffar", the imposition of gender segregation at civil institutions, the activities of Muslim gangs in major cities grooming vulnerable underage non-Muslim girls for abuse, the surreptitious widespread imposition of halal meat onto unwitting elements within the general population (schools, barracks, takeaways, even parliamentary canteens!), the emergence of sharia courts and a sharia-compliant banking system, and of course the gross misogyny and gruesome violence that characterises so much of the Islamic world.

Regarding the "Islamophobia" that underlies this video and similar expressions of anxiety about the future of western societies, "You might expect to find such ideas among some of the more benighted members of the general community, but not among fellow-Jews," inveighed a Jewish far-left activist in the correspondence column of the Australian Jewish News not so long ago regarding a friend's opposition to Muslim immigration: the latter had warned that such immigration, if left unchecked, threatened to become a "tsunami that threatens to engulf us all".

 None so blind as those who will not see.

One Law For Paul Weston ...?

As widely noted, on this blog and elsewhere, last week English politician Paul Weston, a Liberty GB candidate for the forthcoming European elections who on the steps of Winchester Guildhall quoted (through a megaphone) Sir Winston Churchill's views on Islam, centrally regarding the subjugation of women, was peremptorily taken into custody by no less than seven of Hampshire Constabulary's finest.

Although Islam is not a race, and he appeared to be harassing nobody, he now faces a charge of "racially aggravated harassment," which entails a sentence of up to two years' imprisonment.

By contrast, on a busy shopping street in  London, an Islamist (through a megaphone) spruiks for khalifah while a mass of his cohorts hand out supportive leaflets, some evidently with inflammatory messages.

And not a police person in sight.

The charge against Weston, upped from a lesser one, would not have been made for politically correct reasons, would it?

It would not, by any chance, stem from what is cynically seen as the increasing politicisation (indeed dhimmitide), of Britain's police?
Hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog

"If Sharia Law Ever Were To Formally Become Part of Our Legal System It Would Not Exit That Legal System Quietly": A British lawyer's chilling warning

http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/letter-to-the-justice-ministry-on-sharia-law-from-anne-marie-waters/

Rejoice, rejoice!  (And if you're female, dance a jig.)  A fightback has begun in Britain against the creeping inroads of the Islamic injustice system.  Britain's bulldog spirit is not yet dead! At least not on the part of some of the country's best and brightest, a number of whom (and this comes as no surprise, given the inferior status of women in Islamic law and practice) are female.

Yesterday, on the premises of the British House of Lords, a crucial new initiative called "Sharia Watch UK" was launched, and not before time.

As reported here (where several useful relevant links such as this are posted):

'The new organisation will campaign for recognition of the dangers posed by sharia law in the UK, particularly in relation to women’s rights.... The event was hosted by Baroness Caroline Cox who has campaigned against the use of sharia law in tribunals and councils across the UK.  Lady Cox has argued that sharia law “undermines the most fundamental principles of equality enshrined in British law” in respect of its treatment of women.

The new Sharia Watch UK web resource aims to highlight the impact of Islamism in Britain, and the often hidden face of is proponents.  Sharia tribunals and councils currently operate a system of family law in the UK which denies women unilateral divorce rights – even in cases of domestic violence.  Sharia family law also denies child custody to women and treats their testimony as worth less than that of their husbands....

Sharia Watch UK will show the public, and our political leaders, the extent of the threat that sharia and Islamic extremism pose to the rights and freedoms of women, freedom of speech, and democratic principles....'

 Concurrent with the launch, a report entitled "Sharia Law – Britain’s Blind Spot", has appeared:

 'It]analyses the beliefs of apparently “mainstream” Muslim organisations and argues that such beliefs represent an extremist view and should be regarded as such.  Some of the senior figures involved in these groups advocate not only sharia law, but “jihad” against non-Muslims.  Furthermore, they express a desire for a full Islamic state – including barbaric punishments – in Britain.  Such groups have been represented as “moderate” and endorsed by the legacy media and mainstream public figures.'

At the launch of the new initiative, Charlie Klendjian, Secretary of the Lawyers' Secular Society (LSS)  made an impressive must-read speech, in which he noted inter alia:

".... Political Islam, a crucial plank of which is sharia law, presents what we can calmly describe as “a unique set of challenges” for the 21st century.

Sharia law is perhaps the most serious political, legal, moral and social issue we face – and when I say “we” I do not mean lawyers, or secularists, but sadly humanity itself.

I am very pleased that this group has been set up, and with the participation of parliamentarians, because a political response is sorely needed to what is essentially a political threat, and a very grave one, to our way of life.

To the extent there’s any consensus on sharia law amongst our politicians at the present time it’s a consensus, at best, of collective head‐burying in sand and at worst, a consensus of positively encouraging and facilitating sharia law; of giving it the oxygen it craves.

This worrying trend must be reversed, and at some tempo, and I hope today might be the beginning of that process ....

Through the work of Baroness Cox and Anne Marie Waters, and many other fine individuals, we have seen the mayhem that sharia law is already creating in our jurisdiction – and remember, this is when it has the status of theology.

We know that women and children routinely have their fundamental legal rights violated in sharia councils, be it because of duress, because of an inequality of bargaining power, or because of a simple ignorance of their rights under English law. And so we can ask another question: “If this is the mayhem created when sharia law has the status of theology, dare we imagine what kind of mayhem it might create as law?"....

Make no mistake, if sharia law ever were to formally become part of our legal system it would not exit that legal system quietly. Indeed, this country might even require some form of civil disorder or something akin to a violent revolution to remove sharia law from our legal system.

Once sharia law is formally within our legal system there will follow a process of contagion to other areas of our legal system.

This is as inevitable as day following night.

It will spread to the criminal law.

And to those who dismiss these fears as pie‐in‐the‐sky, tabloid scare‐mongering, or “illinformed”, and who say, “Charlie, this could never happen, you’re just being silly now”, I say this: I didn’t think the Law Society would issue Sharia guidance on how to discriminate against women and non‐Muslims. Did you?”....'  [Emphasis added]

 Read all of Charlie Klendjian's important, admirable, courageous speech here

"As For The Indian Businesses You Bomb Them; As For The Jews You Kill Them" (video)

That's an example of Islamic extremism in Britain cited by lawyer Gavin Boby, addressing the Australian Q Society last week on the impact of rape jihad and of multi-mosque building on traditional British freedoms and values and what he and like-minded individuals are doing about such encroachments.

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog

In Britain, Extremist Palestinian Cleric Encounters The Ides of March

Reported Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn on 18 February:

"Legoland has been hired out to a radical Muslim cleric for a ‘Family Fun Day’. Maybe that’s ‘Fun’ as in ‘Fundamentalism’.

The theme park in Windsor,  Berkshire, has accepted a booking from a man said to be among the top 25 hate preachers in Britain.

Haitham al-Haddad leads the Muslim Research and Development Foundation, which is based in Tower Hamlets, and is in favour of turning this country into a Sharia state.

Al-Haddad is an enthusiastic supporter of Taliban policies, believes that Jews  are ‘descended from apes and pigs’, homosexuals are criminals and those who leave Islam should be killed.

Usama Hasan, of the moderate, anti- terrorism think tank, the Quilliam  Foundation, said: ‘Like all extreme Islamists, he uses fascist language about non-Muslims and refuses to sit at the same table as women.’

Al-Haddad’s repugnant views are as abhorrent to mainstream Muslims as they are to the rest of us and have led to him being banned from a number of universities.

But not, apparently, Legoland. On  March 9, a convoy of coaches will  set off from the East London Mosque  in Whitechapel for a day of ‘Halal entertainment’.

We’re not talking the Jolly Boys’ Outing to Margate here...." [Emphasis added]

Reported the Daily Mail shortly afterwards:

"An extremist Muslim who has claimed Jews are descended from 'apes and pigs', called gays 'criminals' and has made controversial comments about domestic violence has given a talk at a London university.

Haitham al-Haddad spoke to students on Islamic finance at the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London.

He has outraged moderate Muslims who are critical of him for teaching young Muslims that men and women should be segregated....

....Radio Netherlands reported that in February 2012, Dutch authorities tried to prevent Dr al-Haddad speaking at a university in Amsterdam. The university subsequently cancelled the event. He blamed a 'Zionist lobby' for the opposition to the talk....

Dr al-Haddad has defended a man's right to hit his wife in the past...." [Emphasis added]

(Be sure to click here for the sheikh's despicable remarks concerning Jews; a female Dutch interviewer has him cornered; see also this blogpost from Harry's Place)

Later, the Sunday Express informed its readers that:

"far right thugs from the English Defence League and the neo-Nazi linked Casuals United had been threatening a demonstration at the [Legoland] outing on March 9.

Far right protestors, Windsor residents and a local Ukip [UK Independence Party] councillor had asked Legoland to cancel the group’s private booking because it is run by by Haitham al-Haddad, who has been banned from speaking at a number of British universities due to his anti-Western views"

And now the event at Legoland, expected to attract some 1000 Muslim families, has been cancelled, owing to such opposition.

The pro-Labour Daily Mirror takes up the story:

Just fancy that!

'....Yesterday a spokesman for Legoland said the decision had been made following discussions with police because they could not guarantee the safety of staff and guests.

A spokesman for Legoland said that it was "appalled" at the outcome.

Yesterday (Weds) a spokesman for Legoland said: "The Legoland Windsor Resort prides itself on welcoming everyone to our wonderful attraction; however due to unfortunate circumstances the private event scheduled for Sunday March 9 will no longer take place.

"This was an incredibly difficult decision made after discussions with the organisers and local Thames Valley Police, following the receipt of a number of threatening phone calls, emails and social media posts to the resort over the last couple of weeks.

"These alone have led us to conclude that we can no longer guarantee the happy fun family event which was envisaged, or the safety of our guests and employees on that day - which is always our number one priority.

"Sadly it is our belief that deliberate misinformation fuelled by a small group with a clear agenda was designed expressly to achieve this outcome.

"We are appalled at what has occurred and at the fact that the real losers in this are the many families and children who were looking forward to an enjoyable day out at Legoland.

"We would like to apologise to them and to the organisers, and to thank them for their understanding.

"We hope that they will all be able to come to visit us during the season."....' 

Rage, Rage, Against The Dhimming Of the Light

Universities.  Seats of learning and, as such, bastions of enlightenment, one would have thought.

Alas.  Far from upholding the principles of Western liberalism and of gender equality (the latter hard won by women in the academy) the vice-chancellors of Britain's universities have surrendered twenty-first century Western norms to the demands of seventh-century Islamic misogyny, by agreeing to gender separation at lectures where speakers demand it.

So long, that is, as the inferior sex is not seen as such by having to sit at the back of the room, as in many Muslim gatherings.

Reports the London Daily Telegraph:

 'Universities can segregate students during debates as long as the women are not forced to sit behind the men, university leaders have said.

Segregation at the behest of a controversial speaker is an issue which arises "all the time” and banning men and women from sitting next to each during debates is a "big issue" facing universities, Universities UK has said.

As a result they have issued guidance which suggests that segregation is likely to be acceptable as long as men and women are seated side by side and one party is not at a disadvantage.

In a new guidance on external speakers, vice-chancellors' group Universities UK says that universities face a complex balance of promoting freedom of speech without breaking equality and discrimination laws.'

Beneath an outraged op-ed from a female columnist in the same paper, one male Islamic apologist has commented tellingly [emphasis added]:

"....You are targeting and attacking Muslims and nothing else. There is nothing 'backwards' about gender segregation. Do men enter women's bathrooms and vice versa? Why do women pray behind men? Because they are 'lower than men??' no because men would be staring at women's asses if they were in front. We muslims (I am a convert to Islam myself not born Muslim, I'm white European) have our reasonings and it is not without rational, you may not like it, but the only ones shuvving [sic] anything down anyone's throat are angry and hateful non-muslims who have beef with Muslims not the other way around. Jews segregate too, but you are not targetting Jews because you would be labelled "anti-semetic" and be losing your job at a newspaper for it, but Muslims are open season."

But these are secular events, not religious ones, taking place in university lecture halls and rooms, not in mosques, and in those circumstances it is utterly unconscionable that university vice-chancellors should cave in to Islamic demands.

Evidently, segregation is fine, so long as it's only women who are being insulted: it's unthinkable that the vice-chancellors would agree to black people being forced to sit apart from white at the behest of some speaker from the Ku Klux Klan, for instance.

Athough I do not usually agree with Richard Dawkins, Peter Tatchell, and Polly Toynbee, I applaud them, and the many other appalled people (some Muslims and ex-Muslims among them) who have put their names to the following petition:

'Universities UK (UUK) has issued guidance on external speakers saying that the segregation of the sexes at universities is not discriminatory as long as “both men and women are being treated equally, as they are both being segregated in the same way.”

UUK add that universities should bear in mind that “concerns to accommodate the wishes or beliefs of those opposed to segregation should not result in a religious group being prevented from having a debate in accordance with its belief system” and that if “imposing an unsegregated seating area in addition to the segregated areas contravenes the genuinely-held religious beliefs of the group hosting the event, or those of the speaker, the institution should be mindful to ensure that the freedom of speech of the religious group or speaker is not curtailed unlawfully.”

We, the undersigned, condemn the endorsement of gender apartheid by Universities UK. Any form of segregation, whether by race, sex or otherwise is discriminatory. Separate is never equal and segregation is never applied to those who are considered equal. By justifying segregation, Universities UK sides with Islamist values at the expense of the many Muslims and others who oppose sex apartheid and demand equality between women and men.

The guidance must be immediately rescinded and sex segregation at universities must come to an end.'

To sign the petition click here

"Delusion & Terrorism": The Muslim Brotherhood (Now Active Down Under) & Its Global Supporters (videos)

With the revelation that the Muslim Brotherhood is now active in Australia, having opened an office in Sydney's western suburbs, here is a timely video about the aims and actions of Muslim Brotherhood that could teach Al Beeb's Jeremy Bowen as well as Robert Magid's detractors a thing or two:

In Jerusalem, a vast throng of Islamists demonstrates in support of Morsi:

 (Read more here)

In London, a rally in support of Morsi is told "Egypt is a model for all the Arab world".  I seem to detect some loud hostile-sounding chants about Israel ...

In Paris, more pro-Morsi demonstraters: see here and here  (hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog)

And similar high jinks in Sydney ...

(Don't blame me for the white format - Blogger works in mysterious ways sometimes!)

"Thanks To Islam, The Truth Has Become Our Enemy" (video)

Here's that man again, defending the EDL from obloquy, and observing that "self-righteous cretins" of the "hard left nutcase fringe Stalinist wing" have silenced opposition to "the real fascism," with the result that, owing to the connivance of "cosy progressive middle-class" cowards, "all our [western] values have been turned inside out" in order to appease a supremacist ideology that "despises all we stand for" including the rights of women:

Hat tip: reader Shirlee

"Monstrously Outrageous": Robert Spencer On Being Banned From Britain

"[B]ecause of political correctness, and because of media and general government unwillingness to face the sources of Islamic terrorism, these things remain largely unknown."  Thus asserted Robert Spencer, in the speech which has resulted in his being banned from Britain.

And here is the man persona non grata with Her Majesty's Government,talking about the "monstrously outrageous" decision with British-born Canadian broadcaster Michael Coren, both men citing the double standards that permit Islamic misogynists and antisemites to enter Britain and agreeing that the ban proves how supine Britain has become in the face of "Islamic supremacism".

Coren makes the point that Britain fought a world war against fascism ...

Meanwhile, blogging on ConservativeHome, a grassroots Conservative Party website that he edits, MP Paul Goodman (incidentally a Roman Catholic of Jewish extraction) defends the government's decision, while recognising that there are gross and troubling double standards involved:

"Such is the harm that Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are doing to the struggle against Islamist extremism that they might as well be paid by the Muslim Brotherhood.  Although their views and outlook are not identical, both are either incapable or unwilling of making the vital distinction between Islam and Islamism - and thereby damage the combat with the latter.... 

.... Much though I detest Spencer and Geller .... Neither oppose western liberal democracy.  Neither support attacks on British troops.  And neither back the deliberate targetting of civilians (at least, as far as I know).  Furthermore, supporters of free speech should be deeply uneasy about May's use of "may" (small m) and "might".

Incitement to violence is one thing; remarks that may lead to hatred which might lead to violence are another. And although May has cracked down on hate preachers who have made remarks that may lead to hatred that might lead to violence, it can be argued that some are still slipping through the net.  I see that the Commentator has raised the case of Muhammad Al-Arifi. But what swings the balance of the argument in favour of May's decision is the intention of Spencer and Geller of speaking at an English Defence League rally in Woolwich.

The EDL is hopelessly compromised by thuggery and violence: indeed, both are intrinsic to it....  I suspect that in the Home Secretary's judgement Geller and Spencer's intention of speaking at the Woolwich event made incitement to violence probable.  It will be claimed that this is an insufficient grounds for banning either or both.  But neither are British citizens.  May is under no obligation to admit them.  She is entitled to consider the public interest in doing so - or the lack of it, as in this case.

But there is a sting in the tail.  It was not in the public interest to let Abu Qatada into Britain, either - and his case is far worse than that of either Spencer or Geller, neither of whom are terrorists.  And it is not in the public interest to keep him here.  While there is no guarantee that withdrawal from the ECHR [European Commission on Human Rights] would provide a cure-all for his case, it's worth noting that our courts have twice gone along with efforts to deport him.  If the Government is to ban the specks that are Spencer and Geller, it must expel the beam that is Qatada."

The comments beneath Mr Goodman's blog indicate a large degree of dissension, disillusionment, and disgust with the decision, however.

"The problem is that nobody in parliament really speaks up for what the majority of the population think re immigration. The political class limit their discussions to a very narrow range. Where is the political representation for thinking folk who want to see immigration fixed? In the absence of proper representation for the decent views of the majority of the population, in politics or the press especially the bbc, then its kinda inevitable the pressure cooker will continue to build up pressure. So we will have more ... voters turning to ukip [UK Independence Party] in desperation, and we will have the more extreme political groups gaining support" is a fairly typical comment, one that manages to keep the I word at bay, that is (others are not so restrained).

To quote some of The Commentator article, cited above:

'But let's even park the concerns of the non-Muslim population in the UK, and look at the recent entry of someone like Muhammad Al-Arifi, a Saudi scholar who has been widely criticised for his sectarian views. Al-Arifi has declared that Shia Muslims are “evil” and that they “set traps for monotheism" - a sure sign of creating division and discord, bringing an entire community into disrepute. Conducive to the public good? I think not.

But he was allowed into Britain, no problems at all. And allowed to proselytise on British airwaves. Again. No problem.

In February 2013 he also stated that “Al-Qaeda members do not tolerate accusing other Muslims of apostasy and they do not tolerate bloodshed” and that “...al-Qaeda leader Sheikh Oussama Bin Laden, may his soul rest in peace, did not adopt many of the thoughts that are attributed to him today”.

There's also Shady Al-Suleiman, the Australian cleric who has called, "for Allah to destroy the enemies of Islam” and who has endorsed the terrorist outfit Hamas (which Britain recognises as a terrorist entity). He's even endorsed the killing of British soldiers, saying, "Give victory to all the Mujahideen all over the world. Oh Allah, prepare us for the jihad”.

And yet, not a peep from Theresa May or the Home Office. Even amidst the concerns from the Muslim community. 

So let's recap: Geller and Spencer banned for blogging critically about Islam. Al-Suleiman and Al-Arifi given free passage despite actively fomenting sectarian divisions and endorsing terrorism.

I'm beginning to see how this all works.'

Incidentally, regarding one of Britain's home-grown extremists, Anjem Choudary, Muslim "revert" Lauren Booth (interviewed by Aled Jones and Lorraine Kelly regarding Muslim fears in the wake of the Woolwich atrocity) dismisses him as a marginal figure with a tiny following and asks why the media interviews him so often.  She also takes issue with her brother-in-law Tony Blair's warning regarding the threat of Islamic extremism (video here).