from Rationalwiki
Role of Islam
Nick Griffin pointed to the religion of the rapists: "the common denominator is not their Asian ethnicity, it’s the fact that they are Muslims", he said. "Their 'good book' tells them that that's acceptable. If you doubt it, go and buy a copy and you will find verse after verse saying you can take any woman you want as long as they're not Muslim."
"These gang members select their victims from communities which they believe to be 'unbelievers' -- non-Muslims whom they view with disdain and hostility", commented Melanie Phillips. "You can see that this is not a racial but a religious animosity from the fact that, while the vast majority of the girls who are targeted are white, the victims include Sikhs and Hindus, too."
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Muslims in UK: 15-year-old victim told to 'Bring your younger friends next time'
Five vulnerable victims aged 13 to 15 were made to have sex with several men a day, several times a week, jury is told
Helen Carter
Guardian
Tuesday 21
February 2012 13.11 EST
A group of 11 men plied girls as young as 13 with alcohol and drugs so they could use them for sex, a court has heard.
The five victims, who were aged between 13 and 15 when the alleged abuse began, were passed around by the men "who acted together to sexually exploit the girls", a trial at Liverpool crown court was told.
All the girls were vulnerable as they were from broken homes and one was in the care of a local authority. Rachel Smith, opening the case for the prosecution, warned the jurors: "Some of you may find what you are about to hear distressing. The events and circumstances described by the girls are at best saddening and at worst shocking in places. No child should be exploited as these girls say they were."
The court heard that some of the girls were raped and physically assaulted, with some forced to have sex with "several men in a day, several times a week", in and around Rochdale, Greater Manchester, in 2008 and 2009. Some of the defendants allegedly paid the girls and took payments from other men to whom they supplied the girls for sex.
Kabeer Hassan, 24, Abdul Aziz, 41, Abdul Rauf, 43, Mohammed Sajid, 35, Adil Khan, 42, Abdul Qayyum, 43, Mohammed Amin, 44, Qamar Shahzad, 29, Liaquat Shah, 41, and Hamid Safi, 22, are on trial at Liverpool crown court charged with conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children under the age of 16. They have all pleaded not guilty along with a 59-year-old man who cannot be named for legal reasons, who also denies two rapes, aiding and abetting a rape, one sexual assault and an allegation of trafficking within the UK for sexual exploitation.
Hassan, from Oldham, and Shahzad, from Rochdale, also deny rape. Aziz, of Rochdale, denies two counts of rape and one allegation of trafficking for sexual exploitation. Khan and Rauf, of Rochdale, have also pleaded not guilty to trafficking for sexual exploitation. Sajid, also of Rochdale, denies trafficking, two counts of rape and one allegation of sexual activity with a child. Amin, from Rochdale, denies sexual assault. Shah and Safi, both of Rochdale, each denied two counts of rape and Safi has also pleaded not guilty to trafficking.
One 13-year-old victim became pregnant by Adil Khan and had an abortion, the jury was told. She said Khan attacked her when she refused to have sex with "two of four men" who were waiting at a house in Rochdale. He later denied knowing her, despite DNA proof he was the father of the baby, the court heard.
One girl said she was raped by Abdul Aziz in his taxi in December 2009 and afterwards he told her she no longer needed to pay the fare. She was also raped by Liaquat Shah while Safi watched, the jury was told. She claimed two men raped her while she was so drunk "she was vomiting over the side of the bed" after drinking spirits and beer.
She told police: "They were just having it in turns sort of thing … there was nothing I could do, I was throwing up, I just kept throwing up … And I felt like I couldn't move." When the men left, she said, she cried herself to sleep.
Another alleged victim, who was 14, said she would get "proper hammered" and, the court heard, "lost count of the number of times she had had sex with men when she did not want to do so".
The prosecutor said: "She was unable to describe all of the men but said she would regularly find herself drunk to near-unconsciousness, waking up with men having sex with her."
The court was told that in about August 2008 Abdul Aziz "took over" from the 59-year-old and started taking girls to various locations – including a flat in Rochdale where Sajid and Shahzad lived – where a "group of men" would always be waiting to have sex with them.
"Abdul Aziz was being paid by the various men to whom he delivered the girls for the purposes of sex," Smith said. One girl estimated that she was "having sex with several men in a day, several times a week", she said.
The court heard that on one occasion the 59-year-old man met two girls at a takeaway where they were given food and vodka.
He allegedly told a 15-year-old that he wanted sex, saying: "It's part of the deal because I bought you vodka, you have to give me something." When the girl refused, he allegedly raped her. The court was told that when the girl started crying, he said: "Don't cry, I love you."
On another occasion, the jury heard, he took one of the girls to Oldham where she was raped by another man, who told her: "Don't tell anyone. I'll give you money. I'll give you anything you want."
One girl, who was 15 when she met the defendants, told police she had been flattered by the attention. She said she thought it meant she was attractive and they thought she was pretty. However, she quickly began to drink heavily, became depressed and incapable of getting herself out of the situation, the court heard.
"At first I was scared," she told police. "Then after that it … just didn't bother me any more … At first I felt dead bad and horrible but then I didn't feel anything any more." The girl was persistently coerced or forced into submission by the men, Smith said.
"When she was told that she had to have sex with the particular defendant or other men, she would submit to them, although she describes herself as lying impassively with her eyes shut or looking at the wall. She was given alcohol, which she drank heavily, not least because it numbed her thoughts to what was happening to her."
It was "common knowledge", Smith said, among the defendants that the girl was 15 and that Aziz would give her lifts to school while Rauf asked the other older girl if she "knew anyone younger". Smith told the jury that one of the older girls, who was 16 at the time, recruited younger girls for the men as well as having sex with them for money.
The 16-year-old introduced a 14-year-old girl "to a number of different men who wanted to have sex with her, with or without her consent". The younger girl was raped at a takeaway and taken by the man to other places where she was provided to other men for sex.
One girl, who was 13 when the alleged abuse began, told police that the men she met were "friends" who looked after her and "her number would be passed around amongst the Pakistani men in her area".
She told police: "When you've got Asian friends, [your] number gets passed and they pass it to their friends. And they pass it to their friends, end up with a massive circle … everyone's got it."
"There were also occasions on which one or more of the girls were so incapacitated by alcohol and/or drugs that they were incapable of having any control over whether or with whom they had sexual intercourse," Smith said.
The court heard the men knew each other and that two of them worked in the takeaways Tasty Bites and the Balti House, both in Heywood. Four of the other men worked as cab drivers at local taxi firms, one was a student and four were jobless.
The men were known to the girls by nicknames such as "Master" and "Tiger", the court was told. The girls would often spend their days "unsupervised by responsible adults", were not in school regularly and drank and smoked and hung around with little to do.
Smith said they were the "sort of children who were easy to identify, target and exploit for the sexual gratification of these men".
The trial continues.
24th February 2012
Daily Mial (UK)
A member of an alleged child abuse ring told his teenage victims to supply him with even 'younger girls', a court heard today.
The witness, who cannot be identified, was giving evidence in the trial of 11 men accused of being part of a sexual exploitation ring operating in and around Rochdale, Greater Manchester, in 2008 and 2009.
Kabeer Hassan, Abdul Aziz, Abdul Rauf, Mohammed Sajid, Adil Khan, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Amin, Qamar Shahzad, Liaquat Shah, Hamid Safi and a 59-year-old man who cannot be named all deny conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with five girls under the age of 16.
The jury at Liverpool Crown Court were today shown a third day of police interviews with one alleged victim, recorded when she was 15 years old.
Questioned by a female police officer the witness, now aged 19, said she had had sex with defendant Abdul Rauf, a taxi driver, 'about 10 times' before she turned 16.
'Did he know how old you were?' the officer asked.
'He knew my age because my friend told him,' the girl replied.
'We were in his taxi and he just asked us how old we were.
'She told him I was 15 and she was 16 and he asked if we knew anyone younger and she said she did.
'He told us to bring them next time.'
The police officer asked the girl: 'What did you think about that?'
The witness said she 'would have been glad' because the younger girls would take attention off her. But she went on to say those feelings had made her feel 'tight'.
'Because it would happen to them and I would feel bad,' she explained.
She said Rauf would pay her friend about £20 if he had sex with one of them and £40 if he had had sex with them both.
Around half that money would then go to co-defendant Abdul Aziz, accused of 'taking over' the exploitation ring, she said.
The girls were abused by the men who used alcohol, money, drugs and threats of violence to force them to have sex, the court heard earlier.
Four were from broken homes and one was in care, and they would often spend their days 'unsupervised by responsible adults', the prosecution said.
The jury were told the girls were not in school regularly and 'drank and smoked and hung around with little to do'.
Hassan, 24, Aziz, 41, Rauf, 43, Sajid, 35, Khan, 42, Qayyum, 43, Amin, 44, Shahzad, 29, Shah, 41, and Safi, 22, all live in the Greater Manchester area.
In further police interviews, recorded when she was 18, the witness said she never discussed her age with Aziz but he had dropped her off at school in his car.
'He knew that I went to school. I don’t think he knew my age but obviously he knew I was under 16,' she said.
She was asked about her emotions during this period and replied: 'I wasn’t even bothered any more, I didn’t feel anything about it.'
Asked to explain further, she went on: 'At first I felt dead bad and horrible but then I didn’t feel anything any more.'
The officer asked: 'How did you cope?'
The girl replied: 'I don’t remember ... Most of the time I was just getting dead drunk so when it happened it didn’t feel that bad.'
Asked how she feels about it some years later, the teenager said: 'Horrible about myself that I didn’t do anything to stop it.'
The trial was adjourned until Monday at 10am.
A bomb alert at Liverpool Crown Court brought proceedings to a halt during the trial of the eleven men accused of grooming young children
A bomb alert at Liverpool Crown Court earlier this week brought proceedings to a halt during the trial of the eleven men accused of grooming young children
The sex gang accused of grooming underage girls
The Sun
26, Feb, 2012
(top left to bottom right) Abdul Rauf, Liaquat Shah, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Sajid, Kabeer Hassan and Mohammed Amin
Six of the accused ... (top left to bottom right) Abdul Rauf, Liaquat Shah, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Sajid, Kabeer Hassan and Mohammed Amin
Phil Richards/ Mercury Press
By GUY PATRICK
Last Updated: 22nd February 2012
GIRLS as young as 13 got pizzas and booze for having sex with a gang of men — whose nicknames included The Ugly One, Master and Tiger, a jury heard yesterday.
Victims were chatted up and groomed by the men who then passed them around so fellow Asians could satisfy their lust, the court was told.
Prosecutor Rachel Smith said as 11 men including a 59-year-old went on trial for child-sex crimes how schoolgirls would be plied with drink until they were in a stupor.
Ms Smith said of one 14-year-old: "She was unable to describe all of the men but said she would regularly find herself drunk to near-unconsciousness, waking up with men having sex with her."
The youngster told cops how she was so "hammered" on one occasion that two men even had sex with her while she was being sick over the side of a bed. The girl said: "They were just having it in turns sort of thing. There was nothing I could do — I was throwing up. I felt like I couldn't move." The prosecutor said: "Afterwards they left and she cried herself to sleep."
On another occasion a man watching her being raped begged: "I want a turn, I want a turn."
The 11 men in the dock plead not guilty to plotting to have sex with underage girls in and around Rochdale, Gtr Manchester.
Several are charged with rape, which they also deny.
Four of the accused are taxi drivers and two are fast food workers.
The girls — often chatted up at kebab shops — were targeted because they were seen as having little parental supervision, Liverpool Crown Court heard.
They saw the men who seduced them as boyfriends. But before long a "pattern of abuse emerged".
Youngsters started out being rewarded for sex with treats such as food and free cab rides, it was claimed. Later they would be driven to various addresses where they were passed around to other men who would pay for sex in cash. Some of those in the dock are accused of sex trafficking, which they deny.
The charges against the 11 involve five girls — all aged between 13 and 15 at the time. The attacks are alleged to have happened between 2008 and 2010.
The jury heard that youngsters reluctant to have sex were held down and raped. Some deliberately drank themselves into oblivion to blot out what was happening.
One was said to have told police how after she was befriended a "massive circle" of Pakistani men ended up with her phone number.
Prosecutor Ms Smith described all the victims as "easy to identify, target and exploit for the sexual gratification of these men".
That was partly because they spent a lot of time off school.
An older girl — who cannot be named for legal reasons — moved on from having sex with the gang to finding fresh prey, it was claimed. Ms Smith said the former victim was paid for "procuring" others. One 15-year-old was said to have told police she was having sex with "several men in a day, several times a week".
The girl said she would get drunk so "it wouldn't feel as bad" when the men raped her.
The jury was told the first to abuse her was the 59-year-old. He cannot be named for legal reasons.
After repeatedly raping her he forced her to have sex with fellow defendant Kabeer Hassan, 25, it was alleged. The court heard she told cops but no charges were brought — and the abuse went on.
Two victims — one of them just 13 — were made pregnant by members of the gang, it was claimed.
Those on trial with the 59-year-old and Hassan are: Abdul Aziz, 43, Abdul Rauf, 43, Mohammed Sajid, 35, Adil Khan, 42, Abdul Qayyum, 43, Mohammed Amin, 44, Qamar Shahzad, 29, Liaquat Shah, 41, and Hamid Safi, 22.
The case continues.
Helen Carter
Guardian
Tuesday 21
February 2012 13.11 EST
 |
| Abdul Rauf |
A group of 11 men plied girls as young as 13 with alcohol and drugs so they could use them for sex, a court has heard.
The five victims, who were aged between 13 and 15 when the alleged abuse began, were passed around by the men "who acted together to sexually exploit the girls", a trial at Liverpool crown court was told.
All the girls were vulnerable as they were from broken homes and one was in the care of a local authority. Rachel Smith, opening the case for the prosecution, warned the jurors: "Some of you may find what you are about to hear distressing. The events and circumstances described by the girls are at best saddening and at worst shocking in places. No child should be exploited as these girls say they were."
The court heard that some of the girls were raped and physically assaulted, with some forced to have sex with "several men in a day, several times a week", in and around Rochdale, Greater Manchester, in 2008 and 2009. Some of the defendants allegedly paid the girls and took payments from other men to whom they supplied the girls for sex.
Kabeer Hassan, 24, Abdul Aziz, 41, Abdul Rauf, 43, Mohammed Sajid, 35, Adil Khan, 42, Abdul Qayyum, 43, Mohammed Amin, 44, Qamar Shahzad, 29, Liaquat Shah, 41, and Hamid Safi, 22, are on trial at Liverpool crown court charged with conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children under the age of 16. They have all pleaded not guilty along with a 59-year-old man who cannot be named for legal reasons, who also denies two rapes, aiding and abetting a rape, one sexual assault and an allegation of trafficking within the UK for sexual exploitation.
Hassan, from Oldham, and Shahzad, from Rochdale, also deny rape. Aziz, of Rochdale, denies two counts of rape and one allegation of trafficking for sexual exploitation. Khan and Rauf, of Rochdale, have also pleaded not guilty to trafficking for sexual exploitation. Sajid, also of Rochdale, denies trafficking, two counts of rape and one allegation of sexual activity with a child. Amin, from Rochdale, denies sexual assault. Shah and Safi, both of Rochdale, each denied two counts of rape and Safi has also pleaded not guilty to trafficking.
One 13-year-old victim became pregnant by Adil Khan and had an abortion, the jury was told. She said Khan attacked her when she refused to have sex with "two of four men" who were waiting at a house in Rochdale. He later denied knowing her, despite DNA proof he was the father of the baby, the court heard.
One girl said she was raped by Abdul Aziz in his taxi in December 2009 and afterwards he told her she no longer needed to pay the fare. She was also raped by Liaquat Shah while Safi watched, the jury was told. She claimed two men raped her while she was so drunk "she was vomiting over the side of the bed" after drinking spirits and beer.
She told police: "They were just having it in turns sort of thing … there was nothing I could do, I was throwing up, I just kept throwing up … And I felt like I couldn't move." When the men left, she said, she cried herself to sleep.
Another alleged victim, who was 14, said she would get "proper hammered" and, the court heard, "lost count of the number of times she had had sex with men when she did not want to do so".
The prosecutor said: "She was unable to describe all of the men but said she would regularly find herself drunk to near-unconsciousness, waking up with men having sex with her."
The court was told that in about August 2008 Abdul Aziz "took over" from the 59-year-old and started taking girls to various locations – including a flat in Rochdale where Sajid and Shahzad lived – where a "group of men" would always be waiting to have sex with them.
"Abdul Aziz was being paid by the various men to whom he delivered the girls for the purposes of sex," Smith said. One girl estimated that she was "having sex with several men in a day, several times a week", she said.
The court heard that on one occasion the 59-year-old man met two girls at a takeaway where they were given food and vodka.
He allegedly told a 15-year-old that he wanted sex, saying: "It's part of the deal because I bought you vodka, you have to give me something." When the girl refused, he allegedly raped her. The court was told that when the girl started crying, he said: "Don't cry, I love you."
On another occasion, the jury heard, he took one of the girls to Oldham where she was raped by another man, who told her: "Don't tell anyone. I'll give you money. I'll give you anything you want."
One girl, who was 15 when she met the defendants, told police she had been flattered by the attention. She said she thought it meant she was attractive and they thought she was pretty. However, she quickly began to drink heavily, became depressed and incapable of getting herself out of the situation, the court heard.
"At first I was scared," she told police. "Then after that it … just didn't bother me any more … At first I felt dead bad and horrible but then I didn't feel anything any more." The girl was persistently coerced or forced into submission by the men, Smith said.
"When she was told that she had to have sex with the particular defendant or other men, she would submit to them, although she describes herself as lying impassively with her eyes shut or looking at the wall. She was given alcohol, which she drank heavily, not least because it numbed her thoughts to what was happening to her."
It was "common knowledge", Smith said, among the defendants that the girl was 15 and that Aziz would give her lifts to school while Rauf asked the other older girl if she "knew anyone younger". Smith told the jury that one of the older girls, who was 16 at the time, recruited younger girls for the men as well as having sex with them for money.
The 16-year-old introduced a 14-year-old girl "to a number of different men who wanted to have sex with her, with or without her consent". The younger girl was raped at a takeaway and taken by the man to other places where she was provided to other men for sex.
One girl, who was 13 when the alleged abuse began, told police that the men she met were "friends" who looked after her and "her number would be passed around amongst the Pakistani men in her area".
She told police: "When you've got Asian friends, [your] number gets passed and they pass it to their friends. And they pass it to their friends, end up with a massive circle … everyone's got it."
"There were also occasions on which one or more of the girls were so incapacitated by alcohol and/or drugs that they were incapable of having any control over whether or with whom they had sexual intercourse," Smith said.
The court heard the men knew each other and that two of them worked in the takeaways Tasty Bites and the Balti House, both in Heywood. Four of the other men worked as cab drivers at local taxi firms, one was a student and four were jobless.
The men were known to the girls by nicknames such as "Master" and "Tiger", the court was told. The girls would often spend their days "unsupervised by responsible adults", were not in school regularly and drank and smoked and hung around with little to do.
Smith said they were the "sort of children who were easy to identify, target and exploit for the sexual gratification of these men".
The trial continues.
- Teenager told court she had sex with taxi driver 'about 10 times' before she was 16
- 11 men are accused of being part of a child sexual exploitation ring
24th February 2012
Daily Mial (UK)
A member of an alleged child abuse ring told his teenage victims to supply him with even 'younger girls', a court heard today.
The witness, who cannot be identified, was giving evidence in the trial of 11 men accused of being part of a sexual exploitation ring operating in and around Rochdale, Greater Manchester, in 2008 and 2009.
Kabeer Hassan, Abdul Aziz, Abdul Rauf, Mohammed Sajid, Adil Khan, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Amin, Qamar Shahzad, Liaquat Shah, Hamid Safi and a 59-year-old man who cannot be named all deny conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with five girls under the age of 16.
 |
| Qamar Shahzad and Mohammed Amin |
The jury at Liverpool Crown Court were today shown a third day of police interviews with one alleged victim, recorded when she was 15 years old.
Questioned by a female police officer the witness, now aged 19, said she had had sex with defendant Abdul Rauf, a taxi driver, 'about 10 times' before she turned 16.
'Did he know how old you were?' the officer asked.
'He knew my age because my friend told him,' the girl replied.
'We were in his taxi and he just asked us how old we were.
'She told him I was 15 and she was 16 and he asked if we knew anyone younger and she said she did.
'He told us to bring them next time.'
The police officer asked the girl: 'What did you think about that?'
The witness said she 'would have been glad' because the younger girls would take attention off her. But she went on to say those feelings had made her feel 'tight'.
'Because it would happen to them and I would feel bad,' she explained.
She said Rauf would pay her friend about £20 if he had sex with one of them and £40 if he had had sex with them both.
Around half that money would then go to co-defendant Abdul Aziz, accused of 'taking over' the exploitation ring, she said.
The girls were abused by the men who used alcohol, money, drugs and threats of violence to force them to have sex, the court heard earlier.
Four were from broken homes and one was in care, and they would often spend their days 'unsupervised by responsible adults', the prosecution said.
The jury were told the girls were not in school regularly and 'drank and smoked and hung around with little to do'.
Hassan, 24, Aziz, 41, Rauf, 43, Sajid, 35, Khan, 42, Qayyum, 43, Amin, 44, Shahzad, 29, Shah, 41, and Safi, 22, all live in the Greater Manchester area.
In further police interviews, recorded when she was 18, the witness said she never discussed her age with Aziz but he had dropped her off at school in his car.
'He knew that I went to school. I don’t think he knew my age but obviously he knew I was under 16,' she said.
She was asked about her emotions during this period and replied: 'I wasn’t even bothered any more, I didn’t feel anything about it.'
Asked to explain further, she went on: 'At first I felt dead bad and horrible but then I didn’t feel anything any more.'
The officer asked: 'How did you cope?'
The girl replied: 'I don’t remember ... Most of the time I was just getting dead drunk so when it happened it didn’t feel that bad.'
Asked how she feels about it some years later, the teenager said: 'Horrible about myself that I didn’t do anything to stop it.'
The trial was adjourned until Monday at 10am.
A bomb alert at Liverpool Crown Court brought proceedings to a halt during the trial of the eleven men accused of grooming young children
A bomb alert at Liverpool Crown Court earlier this week brought proceedings to a halt during the trial of the eleven men accused of grooming young children
The Sun
26, Feb, 2012
(top left to bottom right) Abdul Rauf, Liaquat Shah, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Sajid, Kabeer Hassan and Mohammed Amin
Six of the accused ... (top left to bottom right) Abdul Rauf, Liaquat Shah, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Sajid, Kabeer Hassan and Mohammed Amin
Phil Richards/ Mercury Press
By GUY PATRICK
Last Updated: 22nd February 2012
GIRLS as young as 13 got pizzas and booze for having sex with a gang of men — whose nicknames included The Ugly One, Master and Tiger, a jury heard yesterday.
Victims were chatted up and groomed by the men who then passed them around so fellow Asians could satisfy their lust, the court was told.
Prosecutor Rachel Smith said as 11 men including a 59-year-old went on trial for child-sex crimes how schoolgirls would be plied with drink until they were in a stupor.
Ms Smith said of one 14-year-old: "She was unable to describe all of the men but said she would regularly find herself drunk to near-unconsciousness, waking up with men having sex with her."
The youngster told cops how she was so "hammered" on one occasion that two men even had sex with her while she was being sick over the side of a bed. The girl said: "They were just having it in turns sort of thing. There was nothing I could do — I was throwing up. I felt like I couldn't move." The prosecutor said: "Afterwards they left and she cried herself to sleep."
On another occasion a man watching her being raped begged: "I want a turn, I want a turn."
The 11 men in the dock plead not guilty to plotting to have sex with underage girls in and around Rochdale, Gtr Manchester.
Several are charged with rape, which they also deny.
Four of the accused are taxi drivers and two are fast food workers.
The girls — often chatted up at kebab shops — were targeted because they were seen as having little parental supervision, Liverpool Crown Court heard.
They saw the men who seduced them as boyfriends. But before long a "pattern of abuse emerged".
Youngsters started out being rewarded for sex with treats such as food and free cab rides, it was claimed. Later they would be driven to various addresses where they were passed around to other men who would pay for sex in cash. Some of those in the dock are accused of sex trafficking, which they deny.
The charges against the 11 involve five girls — all aged between 13 and 15 at the time. The attacks are alleged to have happened between 2008 and 2010.
The jury heard that youngsters reluctant to have sex were held down and raped. Some deliberately drank themselves into oblivion to blot out what was happening.
One was said to have told police how after she was befriended a "massive circle" of Pakistani men ended up with her phone number.
Prosecutor Ms Smith described all the victims as "easy to identify, target and exploit for the sexual gratification of these men".
That was partly because they spent a lot of time off school.
An older girl — who cannot be named for legal reasons — moved on from having sex with the gang to finding fresh prey, it was claimed. Ms Smith said the former victim was paid for "procuring" others. One 15-year-old was said to have told police she was having sex with "several men in a day, several times a week".
The girl said she would get drunk so "it wouldn't feel as bad" when the men raped her.
The jury was told the first to abuse her was the 59-year-old. He cannot be named for legal reasons.
After repeatedly raping her he forced her to have sex with fellow defendant Kabeer Hassan, 25, it was alleged. The court heard she told cops but no charges were brought — and the abuse went on.
Two victims — one of them just 13 — were made pregnant by members of the gang, it was claimed.
Those on trial with the 59-year-old and Hassan are: Abdul Aziz, 43, Abdul Rauf, 43, Mohammed Sajid, 35, Adil Khan, 42, Abdul Qayyum, 43, Mohammed Amin, 44, Qamar Shahzad, 29, Liaquat Shah, 41, and Hamid Safi, 22.
The case continues.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Headley was the first one to shed light on the involvement of the ISI-LeT joint venture in the creation of the IM
Excerpts from Shishir Gupta’s book which traces the genesis of the terror group
Banglore Mirror July 18, 2011
| While reams could be written on 26/11, our focus is on the intersection and overlap between LeT-ISI and the Indian Mujahideen. The role of the Indian Mujahideen was peripheral, but it was in the investigation of the Mumbai attacks that one could trace out the birth and origins of this group and the Pakistani involvement behind its creation. Had it not been for the mistakes mentioned earlier, the Mumbai attacks would also have been blamed on the Shahbuddin Ghouri brigade of the Indian Mujahideen. The terrorists involved in the Mumbai attacks were all carrying fake identity cards of Arunodaya Degree and Post-Graduate College, Vedre Complex, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. Kasab was Samir Dinesh Chaudhari from Bengaluru; Ismail Khan was Naresh Vilas Varma of Hyderabad, Imran Babar was Arjun Kumar of Hyderabad; Nasir Umar was Dinesh Kumar of Hyderabad; Hafiz Arshad was Raghubir Singh of Ahmedabad; Abdul Rehman was Arun Sharma of Navi Delhi and Fahadullah was Rohil Patil of Hyderabad. Not only this, a virulent e-mail from the so-called group Mujahideen Hyderabad Deccan was sent to all the prominent TV news channels and print media during the Mumbai terror attack. Highlighting the plight of Muslims in India, the e-mail, written in chaste Hindi, said that the Mumbai attack was the revenge for the communal riots and the Babri Masjid demolition at the hands of Hindu zealots. If the Kuber had been sunk by the LeT terrorists, Ajmal Kasab not survived and arrested and there were no telephone intercepts, India would have found it extremely difficult to prove the Pakistani involvement. Just as in the case of the 26/11 attacks, it was investigations at the American end that provided the big picture of Pakistani complicity in Islamist terror attacks against India. It also became evident that jihadist terrorist groups like the LeT and the JeM were part of the larger Pakistani strategy to contain and hurt India. On 3 February 2010, former director of US National Intelligence Admiral Dennis Blair said before the US Senate Committee that the overall Pakistani strategy was to use militants as an important part of its strategic arsenal to counter India's military and economic advantages. This view was reinforced by a secret cable sent in September 2009 by US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson, which Wikileaks released in December 2010, stating that Islamabad would not abandon the LeT even if the US was to pump more aid into that country. If the LeT-ISI combine is the heart of this jihadist-terrorist nexus against India, the Indian Mujahideen group is another manifestation of the same with the controls in Pakistan. The origin of the Indian Mujahideen and its true mentors was revealed only after David Coleman Headley, a Pakistan-born American national formerly known as Daood Syed Gilani, was arrested by the FBI on 3 October 2009. It was Headley who identified the voices of Abu Al Qama, Sajid Majid alias Wasi Bhai and Abu Qahafa in the 26/11 control room in Karachi. The fourth person in the 26/11 control room who guided the ten gunmen is suspected to be an Indian with the nom de guerre of Jindal Bhai as identified by Ajmal Kasab. While arrested terrorist Amjad Khaja identified the fourth voice in the control room as Syed Zabiuddin Ansari of Maharashtra others believe that it could be Mohammed Abdul Aziz alias Ashraf alias Gidda, a radical Islamist who had fought the jihad in Bosnia and Chechnya and now works with the ISI. Both Zabiuddin Ansari and Gidda were members of SIMI in the 1990s. While India is still to get the voice samples of those Pakistanis accused in 26/11, the final word on the Indian in the The Indian Mujahideen 226 26/11 control room is still to be said as Headley could not identify the fourth voice. The Indian intelligence agencies, and visa and immigration officials were caught napping; they were oblivious to the fact that Headley had visited India nine times between September 2006 and March 2009 in order to survey Mumbai, Delhi, Pune, Jaipur and other places to help the LeT target them. Headley was arrested by the FBI, which had been informed by MI-6 that he was in touch with Al Qaida operatives in Europe, at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport while en route to Pakistan as part of the global conspiracy to target and attack Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten, a Danish newspaper that had earned the ire of Muslims all over the world for publishing blasphemous cartoons of Prophet Mohammed in September 2005. Headley's two associates in the conspiracy (called the Mickey Mouse project) to attack the Danish newspaper personnel and facilities were two top-notch Pakistan-based terrorists: Syed Mohammed Abdur Rehman Hashmi alias Abdur Rehman Syed alias Pasha and Ilyas Kashmiri. While Headley was the first one to shed light on the involvement of the ISI-LeT joint venture in the creation of the Indian Mujahideen, Saeed and Kashmiri were the front officers of Islamist jihad against India. HuJI veteran Kashmiri's involvement in jihad against India began in 1994 with Omar Saeed Sheikh. Abdur Rehman Syed was the controller of the Karachi Project, so called by Headley. But before we go into Headley's revelations on the Karachi Project in detail, it is important to understand Ilyas Kashmiri, for he is the perfect example of the fact that there may be group loyalties or specified target areas of operation in jihad but the master, the ISI, remains the same. Excerpted with permission from Hachette India. Price: 550
|
Saturday, September 10, 2011
The Odyssey of Islamism in America
Family Security Matters
October 26, 2010
Amil Imani
Islamism is a mutation of Islam and is rapidly advancing on two fronts. In every Islamic country, it is cowing the non-radicals while recruiting more and more radicals into its own ranks. In non-Muslim lands, flush with Petrodollars, Islamism is establishing itself as a formidable force by enlisting the disaffected and attracting the delusional liberals with its promises. For the faithful, there is the added incentive of Allah’s heaven and its irresistible attractions.
Wherever Islam goes, so goes its ethos. Throwing acid in the face of women who fail to don the hijab or just by going to school, flogging people for sporting non-Islamic haircuts, and stoning to death violators of sexual norms are only a few examples of a raft of daily barbaric acts of Islamists in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and many Islamic lands. Other forms of Islamic brutalities such as Honor Killing have already found their way to America, Germany and other European countries with the ever-burgeoning Muslim populations
Reading about these religiously mandated horrific acts and even seeing them on television or the Internet may momentarily repulse, but does not terribly concern many Americans. After all, those things are happening on the other side of the world, and those people deserve each other; we are safe in fortress America, so goes the thinking.
But “Fortress America” is a delusion that even the events of 9/11 seem to have failed to dispel. Many prefer to believe that the assault of 9/11 was an aberration, since nothing like it has happened again, and it is unlikely that anything of the sort will ever happen again, so goes the wishful thinking. The reality portrays a vastly different picture. America is far from a fortress given its vast wide-open borders. It is a nation of laws where all forms of freedom are enshrined in its constitution; it’s where Americans live by humane ethos diametrically different from those of Islamist savagery. Sadly, these differences confer great advantage to the Islamists and place America in imminent danger.
The breach of “Fortress America” from the air on 9/11 is only the first installment of many more forthcoming heinous assaults, unless we abandon our complacency, stop relying on the invincibility of the law-enforcement people and willingly make the sacrifices that would protect our way of life.
Knowing Islam intimately and having experienced its systemic savagery, has compelled me to warn repeatedly of the deadly imminent threat it poses to all non-Muslims (Why Confront Islamism) attempting to present a comprehensive treatment of the evil precepts and practices of Islamism. I am listing a few facts that should be enough to alarm anyone who cherishes liberty and freedom and awaken anyone who is comforted by the belief that all the Islamic mayhem is limited to an illiterate gang of primitive Middle Easterners and has no implications for America. Sorry, bad news is here already.
* Some 26 percent of American Muslims, ages18-29, support suicide bombings "in defense of Islam," according to findings of a recent Pew poll.
* According to Pew, there are 2.35 million Muslims in America, 30 percent of whom are in the 18-29 age range. Some claim that the number of Muslims is in fact much larger. Even using the conservative Pew numbers, over 180,000 Muslims in America are bomb-approving. This is an alarmingly large number, given that Muslims, as an article of faith, practice dissimulation in dealing with infidels and under-report their true intentions. How many human bombs and bomb-approving people does it take to wreak havoc on our country?
* The 180,000 Muslims living among us don’t define what “defense of Islam” is. It could be anything that they feel constitutes an attack on Islam and Islamic values, such as the reported flushing of the Quran down the toilet, the Danish Cartoons, Rushdie’s book, a newspaper article, an Internet posting, or even women not donning the hijab.
When religious fanatics unreservedly advocate wanton acts of mass murder, they are not likely to shy from coercion and intimidation measures to impose their will on the larger society. In tandem with the cold murder of Van Gough in Holland, for instance, Islamists had been striving to supplant civil laws with the Islamic Sharia in the country. In other lands such as France, England and Canada, Muslims have also been waging serious campaigns for adoption of the Sharia or some of its provisions, just for starters.
In 2001, ISNA published a brochure that is sent to public school teachers and administrators. "You’ve Got a Muslim Child in Your School" spells out some of the basics of Islam and specifies some of the restrictions. One section reads:
“On behalf of the Islamic Society of North America, the largest organization of Muslims in the United States and Canada, we would like to request that in view of the above teachings of Islam, Muslim students in your school system should not be required to:
1) Sit next to the opposite sex in the same classroom;
2) Participate in physical education, swimming or dancing classes. Alternative meaningful education activities should be arranged for them. We urge you to organize physical education and swimming classes separately for boys and girls in accordance with the following guidelines:
• Separate classes for boys and girls in a fully covered area
• Only male/female instructors for the respective group
• Special swimming suits that cover all the private parts of the body down to the knee
• Separate and covered shower facilities for each student
3) Participate in plays, proms, social parties, picnics, dating, etc. which require free mixing of the two sexes;
4) Participate in any event or activity related to Christmas, Easter, Halloween or Valentine’s Day. All such occasions have religious and social connotations contrary to Islamic faith and teachings. We also urge you to ensure that the following facilities are available to Muslim students in your school:
5) They are excused from their classes to attend off-campus special prayers on Fridays (approximately 1:00 to 2:00 P.M.).
6) They are excused for 15 minutes in the afternoon to offer a special prayer in a designated area on the campus. The prayer is mandatory for all Muslims and often cannot be offered after the school hours.
7) All food items containing meat of a pig in any form or shape, as well as alcohol, should be clearly labeled in the cafeteria.
8) At least one properly covered toilet should be available in each men’s and women’s room.
9) Muslim students are excused, without penalty of absence, for the two most important festivals of Islam: Eid Al-Fitr and Edi Al-Adha, in accordance with the lunar calendar.”
Ever since 9/11, and possibly before, America has been concerned about terrorists coming from Islamic lands. For this reason, some people advocated profiling as a safeguard against the 9/11 type mass murderers. But how do you profile hundreds of thousands of Muslim Americans who are already here and look and act like other Americans? How can an open free society such as ours safeguard the individual freedom we so greatly value and protect the safety of its citizens?
The immensely difficult task of safeguarding our freedom while ensuring our safety is seriously and repeatedly undermined by Islamist apologists, pontificating academes, vote-hungry politicians, and the mainstream media, each for their own reasons. Here are some of the comfort pills dispensed by the mainstream media’s polls: “Most Muslims seek to adopt American lifestyle" (U.S. Today); "Muslims assimilate better in U.S. than Europe, poll finds" (New York Times); Poll: “US Muslims Feel Post-9/11 Backlash Despite Moderate Outlook" (Voice of America).
It is said that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. The mainstream media’s manipulation of statistics goes beyond selective reporting and qualifies as outright disinformation. Is the U.S. Muslims’ outlook moderate? All U.S. Muslims? What about the self-reported outlook of hundreds of thousands who support mass murder in the “defense of Islam?”
Even if most Muslims seek to adopt an American lifestyle, a great many Muslims are dead set on using violence to make America conform to their barbaric way of life. Islamism is cancer. Cancer cells are always few at the beginning and if they are left unchecked, they keep on multiplying, eventually devouring the non-cancerous.
Why all the fuss about “mild Islamism”? After all, mild Islamism is not all that bad and they are coming to power through free elections, the leftists keep preaching. In reality, even coining the term, “mild Islamism” is a clear instance of the leftists’ treachery. Being mildly Islamist is as plausible as being mildly pregnant. There is no such a thing as mild Islamism. It only starts mildly, just the way Muhammad himself started it in Mecca. Then, it builds momentum and settles for nothing less than the total imposition of its dogma and will. Being mildly Islamist is only the head of the camel poking into the tent. Wherever the head of the animal goes, if it is not chopped off, the body eventually follows. And the body of Islam is a disease-bearing body that will infect the healthy secular societies.
As is the case with cancer cells, it is the malignant minority that is death-bearing.
In the Germany of the 1930s, for instance, very few people were Nazis and most Germans dismissed them as a bunch of hotheaded fools. Before long, the hotheaded few cowed the dismissive masses and as a result, millions lost their lives.
Escalations of demands, intolerance of differences, and contempt for the non-Muslims are hallmarks of Islam. The deluded liberals as well as the publishers of the leftists are destined to be among the very first victims of mild Islamism as it gathers power.
Mild Islamism may indeed be a minority in America. Yet, this deadly cancer has metastasized throughout all fifty-states and is attempting to devour Michigan with Dearborn as its capital. Urgent confrontation of this advancing disease is imperative to stave it off. We must resist the intrusion of this seventh-century mentality into our country and our way of life. We must do all we can to protect our precious freedom. Here is the question: Do we, in America and the West, have the sense and the will to forestall mild Islamism from evolving into a real Islamism?
Just a sobering note, mild Islamism is already here in our country, the Muslim cab driver of the Minneapolis Airport refusal to ferry passengers with alcohol or even those with seeing-eye dogs. Muslim inmates demand to be served only halal Food. Campbell's Soup catering to Islam; Muslim students badger universities for special facilities for their meetings; and, the first ever Muslim Congressmen’s assumption of office by swearing on the Quran and not the Bible. More NJ school district recognizes Muslim holidays and much more.
Along with Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran funded mosques, there are other infrastructures supporting sharia law:
Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America
Sharia Academy of America
Sharia Board of America
Islamic Supreme Council of America
Islamic American University
Government agencies at the city/state level have started abiding by sharia law:
Minneapolis Community Planning and Economic Development Department
“The Alternative Financing program provides small Minneapolis businesses (neighborhood retail, service or light manufacturing) an alternative financing to the interest-based system that is in accordance with Islamic law, or Sharia.”
“At the federal level, taxpayer dollars to bailout sharia-promoting AIG.”
Further, the University of Wisconsin Law School published research that stated:
“American judges have been judging Muslim divorces in state courts for years, creating a body of case law that…involves Islamic family law doctrines…”
“And courts in Texas have referred cases to Texas Islamic Court are just a few examples for the lemmingswho are coming out in force to support Islamic sharia law.”
“Islamism has grown spectacularly since 1989, becoming the most powerful form of radical utopianism, forming an alliance with the left, dominating civil societies, challenging many governments and taking over others, establishing a beachhead in the West, and smartly advancing its agenda in international institutions,” says Dr. Daniel Pipes.
Well, mild Islamism is not all that obtrusive, since it is similar to the early stages of cancer. Yet, cancer it is. And before long, the full-blown cancer will develop. If we do not want to deal with that beast, we need to take drastic measures to eradicate the disease no matter how unpleasant and unpopular they may be.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. Amil Imani is the author of the smashing book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad.
October 26, 2010
Amil Imani
Islamism is a mutation of Islam and is rapidly advancing on two fronts. In every Islamic country, it is cowing the non-radicals while recruiting more and more radicals into its own ranks. In non-Muslim lands, flush with Petrodollars, Islamism is establishing itself as a formidable force by enlisting the disaffected and attracting the delusional liberals with its promises. For the faithful, there is the added incentive of Allah’s heaven and its irresistible attractions.
Wherever Islam goes, so goes its ethos. Throwing acid in the face of women who fail to don the hijab or just by going to school, flogging people for sporting non-Islamic haircuts, and stoning to death violators of sexual norms are only a few examples of a raft of daily barbaric acts of Islamists in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and many Islamic lands. Other forms of Islamic brutalities such as Honor Killing have already found their way to America, Germany and other European countries with the ever-burgeoning Muslim populations
Reading about these religiously mandated horrific acts and even seeing them on television or the Internet may momentarily repulse, but does not terribly concern many Americans. After all, those things are happening on the other side of the world, and those people deserve each other; we are safe in fortress America, so goes the thinking.
But “Fortress America” is a delusion that even the events of 9/11 seem to have failed to dispel. Many prefer to believe that the assault of 9/11 was an aberration, since nothing like it has happened again, and it is unlikely that anything of the sort will ever happen again, so goes the wishful thinking. The reality portrays a vastly different picture. America is far from a fortress given its vast wide-open borders. It is a nation of laws where all forms of freedom are enshrined in its constitution; it’s where Americans live by humane ethos diametrically different from those of Islamist savagery. Sadly, these differences confer great advantage to the Islamists and place America in imminent danger.
The breach of “Fortress America” from the air on 9/11 is only the first installment of many more forthcoming heinous assaults, unless we abandon our complacency, stop relying on the invincibility of the law-enforcement people and willingly make the sacrifices that would protect our way of life.
Knowing Islam intimately and having experienced its systemic savagery, has compelled me to warn repeatedly of the deadly imminent threat it poses to all non-Muslims (Why Confront Islamism) attempting to present a comprehensive treatment of the evil precepts and practices of Islamism. I am listing a few facts that should be enough to alarm anyone who cherishes liberty and freedom and awaken anyone who is comforted by the belief that all the Islamic mayhem is limited to an illiterate gang of primitive Middle Easterners and has no implications for America. Sorry, bad news is here already.
* Some 26 percent of American Muslims, ages18-29, support suicide bombings "in defense of Islam," according to findings of a recent Pew poll.
* According to Pew, there are 2.35 million Muslims in America, 30 percent of whom are in the 18-29 age range. Some claim that the number of Muslims is in fact much larger. Even using the conservative Pew numbers, over 180,000 Muslims in America are bomb-approving. This is an alarmingly large number, given that Muslims, as an article of faith, practice dissimulation in dealing with infidels and under-report their true intentions. How many human bombs and bomb-approving people does it take to wreak havoc on our country?
* The 180,000 Muslims living among us don’t define what “defense of Islam” is. It could be anything that they feel constitutes an attack on Islam and Islamic values, such as the reported flushing of the Quran down the toilet, the Danish Cartoons, Rushdie’s book, a newspaper article, an Internet posting, or even women not donning the hijab.
When religious fanatics unreservedly advocate wanton acts of mass murder, they are not likely to shy from coercion and intimidation measures to impose their will on the larger society. In tandem with the cold murder of Van Gough in Holland, for instance, Islamists had been striving to supplant civil laws with the Islamic Sharia in the country. In other lands such as France, England and Canada, Muslims have also been waging serious campaigns for adoption of the Sharia or some of its provisions, just for starters.
In 2001, ISNA published a brochure that is sent to public school teachers and administrators. "You’ve Got a Muslim Child in Your School" spells out some of the basics of Islam and specifies some of the restrictions. One section reads:
“On behalf of the Islamic Society of North America, the largest organization of Muslims in the United States and Canada, we would like to request that in view of the above teachings of Islam, Muslim students in your school system should not be required to:
1) Sit next to the opposite sex in the same classroom;
2) Participate in physical education, swimming or dancing classes. Alternative meaningful education activities should be arranged for them. We urge you to organize physical education and swimming classes separately for boys and girls in accordance with the following guidelines:
• Separate classes for boys and girls in a fully covered area
• Only male/female instructors for the respective group
• Special swimming suits that cover all the private parts of the body down to the knee
• Separate and covered shower facilities for each student
3) Participate in plays, proms, social parties, picnics, dating, etc. which require free mixing of the two sexes;
4) Participate in any event or activity related to Christmas, Easter, Halloween or Valentine’s Day. All such occasions have religious and social connotations contrary to Islamic faith and teachings. We also urge you to ensure that the following facilities are available to Muslim students in your school:
5) They are excused from their classes to attend off-campus special prayers on Fridays (approximately 1:00 to 2:00 P.M.).
6) They are excused for 15 minutes in the afternoon to offer a special prayer in a designated area on the campus. The prayer is mandatory for all Muslims and often cannot be offered after the school hours.
7) All food items containing meat of a pig in any form or shape, as well as alcohol, should be clearly labeled in the cafeteria.
8) At least one properly covered toilet should be available in each men’s and women’s room.
9) Muslim students are excused, without penalty of absence, for the two most important festivals of Islam: Eid Al-Fitr and Edi Al-Adha, in accordance with the lunar calendar.”
Ever since 9/11, and possibly before, America has been concerned about terrorists coming from Islamic lands. For this reason, some people advocated profiling as a safeguard against the 9/11 type mass murderers. But how do you profile hundreds of thousands of Muslim Americans who are already here and look and act like other Americans? How can an open free society such as ours safeguard the individual freedom we so greatly value and protect the safety of its citizens?
The immensely difficult task of safeguarding our freedom while ensuring our safety is seriously and repeatedly undermined by Islamist apologists, pontificating academes, vote-hungry politicians, and the mainstream media, each for their own reasons. Here are some of the comfort pills dispensed by the mainstream media’s polls: “Most Muslims seek to adopt American lifestyle" (U.S. Today); "Muslims assimilate better in U.S. than Europe, poll finds" (New York Times); Poll: “US Muslims Feel Post-9/11 Backlash Despite Moderate Outlook" (Voice of America).
It is said that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. The mainstream media’s manipulation of statistics goes beyond selective reporting and qualifies as outright disinformation. Is the U.S. Muslims’ outlook moderate? All U.S. Muslims? What about the self-reported outlook of hundreds of thousands who support mass murder in the “defense of Islam?”
Even if most Muslims seek to adopt an American lifestyle, a great many Muslims are dead set on using violence to make America conform to their barbaric way of life. Islamism is cancer. Cancer cells are always few at the beginning and if they are left unchecked, they keep on multiplying, eventually devouring the non-cancerous.
Why all the fuss about “mild Islamism”? After all, mild Islamism is not all that bad and they are coming to power through free elections, the leftists keep preaching. In reality, even coining the term, “mild Islamism” is a clear instance of the leftists’ treachery. Being mildly Islamist is as plausible as being mildly pregnant. There is no such a thing as mild Islamism. It only starts mildly, just the way Muhammad himself started it in Mecca. Then, it builds momentum and settles for nothing less than the total imposition of its dogma and will. Being mildly Islamist is only the head of the camel poking into the tent. Wherever the head of the animal goes, if it is not chopped off, the body eventually follows. And the body of Islam is a disease-bearing body that will infect the healthy secular societies.
As is the case with cancer cells, it is the malignant minority that is death-bearing.
In the Germany of the 1930s, for instance, very few people were Nazis and most Germans dismissed them as a bunch of hotheaded fools. Before long, the hotheaded few cowed the dismissive masses and as a result, millions lost their lives.
Escalations of demands, intolerance of differences, and contempt for the non-Muslims are hallmarks of Islam. The deluded liberals as well as the publishers of the leftists are destined to be among the very first victims of mild Islamism as it gathers power.
Mild Islamism may indeed be a minority in America. Yet, this deadly cancer has metastasized throughout all fifty-states and is attempting to devour Michigan with Dearborn as its capital. Urgent confrontation of this advancing disease is imperative to stave it off. We must resist the intrusion of this seventh-century mentality into our country and our way of life. We must do all we can to protect our precious freedom. Here is the question: Do we, in America and the West, have the sense and the will to forestall mild Islamism from evolving into a real Islamism?
Just a sobering note, mild Islamism is already here in our country, the Muslim cab driver of the Minneapolis Airport refusal to ferry passengers with alcohol or even those with seeing-eye dogs. Muslim inmates demand to be served only halal Food. Campbell's Soup catering to Islam; Muslim students badger universities for special facilities for their meetings; and, the first ever Muslim Congressmen’s assumption of office by swearing on the Quran and not the Bible. More NJ school district recognizes Muslim holidays and much more.
Along with Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran funded mosques, there are other infrastructures supporting sharia law:
Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America
Sharia Academy of America
Sharia Board of America
Islamic Supreme Council of America
Islamic American University
Government agencies at the city/state level have started abiding by sharia law:
Minneapolis Community Planning and Economic Development Department
“The Alternative Financing program provides small Minneapolis businesses (neighborhood retail, service or light manufacturing) an alternative financing to the interest-based system that is in accordance with Islamic law, or Sharia.”
“At the federal level, taxpayer dollars to bailout sharia-promoting AIG.”
Further, the University of Wisconsin Law School published research that stated:
“American judges have been judging Muslim divorces in state courts for years, creating a body of case law that…involves Islamic family law doctrines…”
“And courts in Texas have referred cases to Texas Islamic Court are just a few examples for the lemmingswho are coming out in force to support Islamic sharia law.”
“Islamism has grown spectacularly since 1989, becoming the most powerful form of radical utopianism, forming an alliance with the left, dominating civil societies, challenging many governments and taking over others, establishing a beachhead in the West, and smartly advancing its agenda in international institutions,” says Dr. Daniel Pipes.
Well, mild Islamism is not all that obtrusive, since it is similar to the early stages of cancer. Yet, cancer it is. And before long, the full-blown cancer will develop. If we do not want to deal with that beast, we need to take drastic measures to eradicate the disease no matter how unpleasant and unpopular they may be.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. Amil Imani is the author of the smashing book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad.
Why Islam Isn't Innocent
by James Dunnigan
September 3, 2011
StrategyPage
Twenty nations account for over 95 percent of terrorism activity in the world. Of these twenty (Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Yemen, Iran, Uganda, Libya, Egypt, Nigeria. Palestinian Territories, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Colombia, Algeria, Thailand, Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Iran, Burundi, India, Nigeria and Israel), all but four of them (Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Colombia and Burundi) involve Islamic terrorism. In terms of terrorism fatalities, the top four nations (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia) accounted for 10,400 dead last year, 75 percent of the world total. All of these were the result of Islamic radicalism, often directed at other Moslems, and not just non-Moslems (“infidels”).
This has been the case for decades, and the Moslem world does not like to dwell on this fact. Many Moslem leaders admit that there is a lot of Islamic terrorism, but insist that it’s all the fault of Infidels who are making war on Islam, so some Moslems feel compelled to fight back. The catch-phrase Moslem leaders like to repeat is that Islam is the “religion of peace.” It is not, and the historical record makes that very clear.
And not just the historical record. Currently you find Moslems attacking Buddhists in Thailand, Jews everywhere, Baha'is in Iran and Christians in Egypt, Iraq, the Philippines, Pakistan, Malaysia and elsewhere. This is not a sudden and unexpected outburst of Moslem violence against non-Moslems. It is normal, and at the root of Islamic terrorism. While this violent behavior represents only a small number of Moslems, it is a large minority (from a few percent of a population, to over half, according to opinion polls). Moreover, the majority of Moslems has not been willing, or able, to confront and suppress the Islamic radicals that not only spread death and destruction, but also besmirch all Moslems. This reveals a fundamental problem in the Islamic world, the belief that combining righteousness with murderous tactics is often the road to power and spiritual salvation. Throughout history, when these tactics were applied to non-Moslems, they often failed. The non-Moslems were unfazed by the religious angle, and, especially in the last five hundred years, were better able to defeat Islamic violence with even greater violence. Thus, until quite recently, the Moslems fought among themselves, and left the infidels (non-Moslems) alone. But after World War II, that began to change.
Naturally, this began to show up first in the Middle East. During the Lebanese civil war of 1975-1990, Christian and Moslem Arabs fought bitterly over political, cultural and, ultimately, religious differences. The capital, Beirut, was divided into Christian and Moslem sections by the Green Line. The name came from the fact that in this rubble filled no man's land, only grass and weeds survived. And that the line on a ceasefire map was drawn in green. There have been a lot more Green Lines since then. Few realized it at the time, but this war was but the first of many major conflicts between Christians and Moslems in the 20th and 21st centuries.
Many of the earliest Moslem converts were Christians. And many of the peoples Moslem armies unsuccessfully sought to conquer were Christian. The original Crusades, which modern Moslems portray as Western aggression, were actually a Western attempt to rescue Middle Eastern Christians from increasing Islamic terrorism and violence. But Islam as a political force was in decline for several centuries until the 1970s. Then things changed, and they continue to change. Fueled by oil wealth and access to Western weapons and technology, Islamic radicals saw new opportunities. Islam was again on the march, and few have noticed the many places where it was turning into religious war with Christians and other non-Moslems.
In Asia, we have a Green Line between India and Pakistan. Inside India, many Moslem communities remain, and feelings aren't always neighborly. Indonesia and the Philippines suffer growing strife between Moslems and non-Moslems. Malaysia has fanatical Moslems persecuting more laid-back ones, and non-Moslems in general. China has a large Moslem community that generates an increasing amount of violence. Russia and America have formed a curious partnership to deal with Islamic-based terrorism coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. And in Chechnya, Russia faced Islamic-inspired violence all alone in the 1990s.
Africa has a rather dusty Green Line south of the semi-arid Sahel region. Many African nations are split by increasingly sensitive religious differences. The Moslems are in the north, Christians and animists in the south. Nigeria, Chad and Sudan are among the more violent hot spots at the moment. When the Moslem Somalis stop fighting each other they will return to raiding their Christian and animist neighbors to the south.
The Middle East still contains many non-Moslems. None have their own country, except for Israel. But Egypt contains five million Copts, native Christians who did not convert to Islam. Similar small Christian communities exist throughout the Middle East, and growing hostility from Moslem neighbors causes many to migrate, or get killed.
Moslems also have turned their righteous wrath on dissident Moslem sects. The Druze and Alawites are considered by many Moslems as pagans pretending to be Moslems. Similarly, the Shias of Iran and neighboring areas are considered less orthodox, not just for their admitted differences, but because many adherents openly practice customs of the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian religion. These differences are less frequently overlooked today. To survive, many Druze have allied with Israel, and most of the current Syrian leadership are Alawites who pretend to be more Shia than they really are.
Even Europe has a Green Line. The Moslems in the Balkans (Albanians and Bosnians) have been a constant source of strife for the last decade. Moslem migrants in Europe face even more persecution because of all those Green Lines, and this makes it easier for radical groups to recruit and carry out their crusade against Christians. In many European cities with Moslem minorities, there are neighborhoods non-Moslems are advised to stay out of.
But the Green Lines are about more than religion. A lot of it is politics. One of the reasons Islam ran out of steam centuries ago was that the Moslem areas never embraced democracy, and intellectual progress. Until the 20th century, most Moslems lived as part of some foreign empire, under local totalitarian monarchs. The foreign empires are gone, but democracy has had a hard time taking hold. The dictatorships are still there. And the people are restless.
Radical Islam arose as an alternative to all the other forms of government that never seemed to work. In theory, establishing "Islamic Republics" would solve all problems. People could vote, but only Moslems in good standing could be candidates for office. A committee of Moslem holy men would have veto power over political decisions. Islamic law would be used. It was simple, and it makes sense to a lot of Moslems in nations ruled by thugs and thieves, especially if the people are largely uneducated and illiterate.
Islamic Republics don't work. The only one that has been established (not counting others that say they are but aren't) is in Iran. The major problems were twofold. First, the radicals had too much power. Radical religious types are no fun, and you can't argue with them because they are on a mission from God. Most people tire of this in short order. To speed this disillusionment, many of the once-poor and now-powerful religious leaders became corrupt. This eventually sends your popularity ratings straight to hell.
It will take a generation or so for everyone in the Moslem world to figure out where all this is going. This is already happening in Iran, where moderates are getting stronger every day, but everyone is trying to avoid a civil war. While the radicals are a minority, they are a determined bunch. The constant flow of Islamic radical propaganda does more than generate recruits and contributions in Moslem countries; it also energizes Moslem minorities (both migrants and converts) in Western countries to acts of terrorism. In the United States, you find such Moslems getting arrested several times a year for attempting to carry out religious violence.
Radicals throughout the Moslem world continue to take advantage of dissatisfaction among the people and recruit terrorists and supporters. To help this process along they invoke the ancient grudges popular among many Moslems. Most of these legends involve Christians beating on Moslems. To most radicals it makes sense to get people agitated over faraway foreigners rather than some strongman nearby.
Most radicals lack the skills, money or ability to carry their struggle to far-off places. So most of the agitation takes place among Moslem populations. Any violent attitudes generated are easily directed at available non-Moslems. Thus we have all those Green Lines. But the more violence you have along those Green Lines, the more really fanatical fighters are developed. These are the people who are willing to travel to foreign lands and deal with non-believers, and kill them for the cause. We call it terrorism; the fanatics call it doing what has to be done.
Not surprisingly, Moslems get motivated to do something about Islamic radicalism when the violence is literally next door. That's why terror attacks in the West are so popular. The infidels are being attacked, without any risk to those living in Moslem countries. Iraq changed all that, and during the course of that war (2004-7) the popularity of Islamic terrorism, in Moslem countries, declined sharply because the terrorists were killing so many Moslems. That, in the end, is what has killed, for a while, most Islamic terrorism in Iraq. But this time around, it would be nice if the Moslem world got their act together and expunged this malevolent tendency once and for all.
September 3, 2011
StrategyPage
Twenty nations account for over 95 percent of terrorism activity in the world. Of these twenty (Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Yemen, Iran, Uganda, Libya, Egypt, Nigeria. Palestinian Territories, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Colombia, Algeria, Thailand, Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Iran, Burundi, India, Nigeria and Israel), all but four of them (Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Colombia and Burundi) involve Islamic terrorism. In terms of terrorism fatalities, the top four nations (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia) accounted for 10,400 dead last year, 75 percent of the world total. All of these were the result of Islamic radicalism, often directed at other Moslems, and not just non-Moslems (“infidels”).
This has been the case for decades, and the Moslem world does not like to dwell on this fact. Many Moslem leaders admit that there is a lot of Islamic terrorism, but insist that it’s all the fault of Infidels who are making war on Islam, so some Moslems feel compelled to fight back. The catch-phrase Moslem leaders like to repeat is that Islam is the “religion of peace.” It is not, and the historical record makes that very clear.
And not just the historical record. Currently you find Moslems attacking Buddhists in Thailand, Jews everywhere, Baha'is in Iran and Christians in Egypt, Iraq, the Philippines, Pakistan, Malaysia and elsewhere. This is not a sudden and unexpected outburst of Moslem violence against non-Moslems. It is normal, and at the root of Islamic terrorism. While this violent behavior represents only a small number of Moslems, it is a large minority (from a few percent of a population, to over half, according to opinion polls). Moreover, the majority of Moslems has not been willing, or able, to confront and suppress the Islamic radicals that not only spread death and destruction, but also besmirch all Moslems. This reveals a fundamental problem in the Islamic world, the belief that combining righteousness with murderous tactics is often the road to power and spiritual salvation. Throughout history, when these tactics were applied to non-Moslems, they often failed. The non-Moslems were unfazed by the religious angle, and, especially in the last five hundred years, were better able to defeat Islamic violence with even greater violence. Thus, until quite recently, the Moslems fought among themselves, and left the infidels (non-Moslems) alone. But after World War II, that began to change.
Naturally, this began to show up first in the Middle East. During the Lebanese civil war of 1975-1990, Christian and Moslem Arabs fought bitterly over political, cultural and, ultimately, religious differences. The capital, Beirut, was divided into Christian and Moslem sections by the Green Line. The name came from the fact that in this rubble filled no man's land, only grass and weeds survived. And that the line on a ceasefire map was drawn in green. There have been a lot more Green Lines since then. Few realized it at the time, but this war was but the first of many major conflicts between Christians and Moslems in the 20th and 21st centuries.
Many of the earliest Moslem converts were Christians. And many of the peoples Moslem armies unsuccessfully sought to conquer were Christian. The original Crusades, which modern Moslems portray as Western aggression, were actually a Western attempt to rescue Middle Eastern Christians from increasing Islamic terrorism and violence. But Islam as a political force was in decline for several centuries until the 1970s. Then things changed, and they continue to change. Fueled by oil wealth and access to Western weapons and technology, Islamic radicals saw new opportunities. Islam was again on the march, and few have noticed the many places where it was turning into religious war with Christians and other non-Moslems.
In Asia, we have a Green Line between India and Pakistan. Inside India, many Moslem communities remain, and feelings aren't always neighborly. Indonesia and the Philippines suffer growing strife between Moslems and non-Moslems. Malaysia has fanatical Moslems persecuting more laid-back ones, and non-Moslems in general. China has a large Moslem community that generates an increasing amount of violence. Russia and America have formed a curious partnership to deal with Islamic-based terrorism coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. And in Chechnya, Russia faced Islamic-inspired violence all alone in the 1990s.
Africa has a rather dusty Green Line south of the semi-arid Sahel region. Many African nations are split by increasingly sensitive religious differences. The Moslems are in the north, Christians and animists in the south. Nigeria, Chad and Sudan are among the more violent hot spots at the moment. When the Moslem Somalis stop fighting each other they will return to raiding their Christian and animist neighbors to the south.
The Middle East still contains many non-Moslems. None have their own country, except for Israel. But Egypt contains five million Copts, native Christians who did not convert to Islam. Similar small Christian communities exist throughout the Middle East, and growing hostility from Moslem neighbors causes many to migrate, or get killed.
Moslems also have turned their righteous wrath on dissident Moslem sects. The Druze and Alawites are considered by many Moslems as pagans pretending to be Moslems. Similarly, the Shias of Iran and neighboring areas are considered less orthodox, not just for their admitted differences, but because many adherents openly practice customs of the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian religion. These differences are less frequently overlooked today. To survive, many Druze have allied with Israel, and most of the current Syrian leadership are Alawites who pretend to be more Shia than they really are.
Even Europe has a Green Line. The Moslems in the Balkans (Albanians and Bosnians) have been a constant source of strife for the last decade. Moslem migrants in Europe face even more persecution because of all those Green Lines, and this makes it easier for radical groups to recruit and carry out their crusade against Christians. In many European cities with Moslem minorities, there are neighborhoods non-Moslems are advised to stay out of.
But the Green Lines are about more than religion. A lot of it is politics. One of the reasons Islam ran out of steam centuries ago was that the Moslem areas never embraced democracy, and intellectual progress. Until the 20th century, most Moslems lived as part of some foreign empire, under local totalitarian monarchs. The foreign empires are gone, but democracy has had a hard time taking hold. The dictatorships are still there. And the people are restless.
Radical Islam arose as an alternative to all the other forms of government that never seemed to work. In theory, establishing "Islamic Republics" would solve all problems. People could vote, but only Moslems in good standing could be candidates for office. A committee of Moslem holy men would have veto power over political decisions. Islamic law would be used. It was simple, and it makes sense to a lot of Moslems in nations ruled by thugs and thieves, especially if the people are largely uneducated and illiterate.
Islamic Republics don't work. The only one that has been established (not counting others that say they are but aren't) is in Iran. The major problems were twofold. First, the radicals had too much power. Radical religious types are no fun, and you can't argue with them because they are on a mission from God. Most people tire of this in short order. To speed this disillusionment, many of the once-poor and now-powerful religious leaders became corrupt. This eventually sends your popularity ratings straight to hell.
It will take a generation or so for everyone in the Moslem world to figure out where all this is going. This is already happening in Iran, where moderates are getting stronger every day, but everyone is trying to avoid a civil war. While the radicals are a minority, they are a determined bunch. The constant flow of Islamic radical propaganda does more than generate recruits and contributions in Moslem countries; it also energizes Moslem minorities (both migrants and converts) in Western countries to acts of terrorism. In the United States, you find such Moslems getting arrested several times a year for attempting to carry out religious violence.
Radicals throughout the Moslem world continue to take advantage of dissatisfaction among the people and recruit terrorists and supporters. To help this process along they invoke the ancient grudges popular among many Moslems. Most of these legends involve Christians beating on Moslems. To most radicals it makes sense to get people agitated over faraway foreigners rather than some strongman nearby.
Most radicals lack the skills, money or ability to carry their struggle to far-off places. So most of the agitation takes place among Moslem populations. Any violent attitudes generated are easily directed at available non-Moslems. Thus we have all those Green Lines. But the more violence you have along those Green Lines, the more really fanatical fighters are developed. These are the people who are willing to travel to foreign lands and deal with non-believers, and kill them for the cause. We call it terrorism; the fanatics call it doing what has to be done.
Not surprisingly, Moslems get motivated to do something about Islamic radicalism when the violence is literally next door. That's why terror attacks in the West are so popular. The infidels are being attacked, without any risk to those living in Moslem countries. Iraq changed all that, and during the course of that war (2004-7) the popularity of Islamic terrorism, in Moslem countries, declined sharply because the terrorists were killing so many Moslems. That, in the end, is what has killed, for a while, most Islamic terrorism in Iraq. But this time around, it would be nice if the Moslem world got their act together and expunged this malevolent tendency once and for all.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Praying for Deliverance - that is what Hindus do
Saturday, April 02, 2011
Gates of Vienna
As soon as you read the headline for this Australian article — “Gunshots Prompt Prayers for Peace” — you know you’re in for the usual ride on the multicultural merry-go-round. Everyone knows the script: culture enrichers shoot and batter and threaten and destroy, and then the rest of us pray for peace — or, more accurately, we pray that we won’t be the ones who get shot, stabbed, or set on fire.
What makes this story interesting is that it’s an enricher-on-enricher case, with Muslims dealing out the punishment and Hindus taking it. This is similar to the behavior of Jamaat ul-Fuqra terrorists here in the USA, who consider Hindus their greatest enemies. Back in the 1980s they staged a series of attacks on Hindus and firebombed their temples.
The Australian case reported in The Sydney Morning Herald is so shot through with politically correct mumbo-jumbo that it’s worth taking it apart to examine the components:
IT BEGAN with minor acts of vandalism, including egg throwing and smashed windows, but instead of remaining periodic footnotes in the night log at Auburn police station, the incidents have grown so violent — and the issue so culturally sensitive — that even authorities are reluctant to speak about them publicly.
The authorities are reluctant to speak about such a “sensitive” issue because it involves brown people doing harm to brown people, and therefore doesn’t fit the mandatory narrative. The white man can’t be blamed in this case — except, of course, that white people are to blame for all bad things, and should somehow have put a stop to all the nastiness before it happened.
Australia’s oldest Hindu temple, the Sri Mandir in Auburn, is under siege and its devotees gripped by fear.
Note: this is a specific fear. It is a non-phobic, rational fear that Muslims will do violent harm to Hindus because of their religion. This is not about some generic form of “violence”, like getting mugged or car-jacked. This is about violent jihad.
The article continues:
On March 19, two men in balaclavas stood at the intersection of a nearby road, spraying the front of the prayer hall with eight rounds of bullets. The building was unoccupied at the time.
The busy Hindu temple opened in 1977. It is surrounded by a predominantly Muslim population and it is no secret among locals that tensions have been simmering in recent years, caused by concerns about noise and parking problems at Sri Mandir.
“There is no excuse [for the gun attack],” the editor of Sydney newspaper The Indian, Rohit Revo, said.
If we weren’t used to this sort of equivocal phrasing, the sentence beginning with “There is no excuse…” would seem somewhat strange. Is it possible that there could have been an excuse? Is there ever a set of circumstances that would provide an “excuse” for attacking a house of worship with automatic gunfire?
Why, yes, there is. If the Hindus had made a joke about Mohammed, or put their feet on a copy of the Koran, then the violent anger of the attackers would be understandable. In that sense, there would be an “excuse” — even if their actions technically broke the law, one could understand their feelings, and everyone would agree that Hindus should not have provoked the righteous anger of Muslims in such an insensitive fashion.
“This was not the work of teenagers; neither was it a petty prank. This is part of a sustained and increasingly violent campaign to scare the temple devotees and drive them out. By definition, this latest attack was an act of terrorism.”
Yes, this is exactly true. It’s one of the few statements in this article that dares to confront the reality of what happened. Such actions are not only terrorism, they are terrorism sanctioned by the Koran, and mandated by the Koran. Allah requires believers to destroy the temples and idols of the polytheists.
The attackers are simply fully observant Muslims.
The Sun-Herald is aware the ongoing feud has caused disquiet among some of the most senior police in western Sydney. In a rare move, details of the shooting were deliberately held back from the NSW police media unit through concern that publicity might inflame hostilities.
This is a strange one. If the police actually revealed the full extent of what happened, something even worse might ensue.
Like what? A firebombing of the temple?
Or are the NSW police afraid the Hindus might retaliate in kind?
I’d be interested to find out the details of police thinking on this one.
Auburn City Council claims the first it knew of the incident was when The Sydney Morning Herald published an article on Wednesday. Since then, the chairman of the Community Relations Commission, Stepan Kerkyasharian, has stepped in as an intermediary between Hindus and Muslims.
“Given the enormity and complexity of the issues, this is a classic example where we need to apply the principles of multiculturalism and get people to understand and accept that we are a religiously diverse community … we live together and we respect each other’s religious diversity,” he told The Sun-Herald.
Ah, yes, this is where we respect each other’s diversity. Over here we have people who chant and burn incense, and over there are people who shoot up temples — a very diverse community indeed.
And if we respect it really, really hard, but that doesn’t solve the problem, then what? Why, we apply the principles of multiculturalism some more, and bring in more foreigners with all their wonderful new diversity! That’ll fix it!
Temple priest Jatinkumar Bhatt is praying for a peaceful solution for the sake of his three young children. Bhatt and his family live behind the temple and are too frightened to go outdoors after dark.
“On the night of the shooting, we heard the noise, but every 10 or 15 days we experience the sound of firecrackers being thrown [over the fence], so we thought it must be that again,” Mr Bhatt said.
“Then the police came. They showed me the bullet holes in the walls and asked permission to come in and investigate. I am too afraid to say why I think this is happening.”
In an attack in November, four men wielding iron bars smashed their way through 10-millimetre- thick windows, showering the hall with glass while devotees were praying inside.
The Hindu response so far has been well within the limits set by Orthodox Political Correctness:
The temple recently held a community open day in the hope of brokering fresh ties with the wider community.
A normal, sensible policy would be for the congregants to arm themselves and stock up on plenty of ammunition. But that’s not the way we solve problems in Modern Multicultural Australia.
Unfortunately, some of the Hindus are beginning to doubt that this really is Australia:
“Many of our neighbours are very friendly but sometimes it feels like we are in a different place to Australia,” Mr Bhatt said. “The attacks are now always. It is like in Libya or Afghanistan.”
Mr. Bhatt is quite right. Multiculturalism means that you live in a little enclave of the Ummah, no matter what might be your technical country of residence, provided the local population density of Muslims is high enough.
It’s not Australia. It’s the Caliphate.
And now it’s time to trot out Keysar Trad, the famous Australian culture enricher and welfare parasite with nine kids, who always speaks for the “Muslim community” at media events:
The founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, Keysar Trad, said he had given a speech at the open day, in which he stressed the need to “respect religious places of all faiths”.
“I am convinced these problems are not being caused by people who are religious and would urge the Muslim community to show support and solidarity to their neighbours at this time,” he said.
The function of the Keysars of the multicultural world is to lull everybody back to sleep with nonsense phrases like these while the Ummah goes about its customary work. Everything bad done by Muslims is said to be the work of a Tiny Minority, and real Muslims have nothing to do with it and cannot stop it.
Then it becomes an ordinary law-enforcement matter, and the police must enter the no-go zones and somehow find the perpetrators — who look like all the other residents of the neighborhood — and bring them to justice.
Flemington local area commander Superintendent Phillip Rogerson said police were trying to identify the attackers. Auburn Labor MP Barbara Perry said: “I’ve got every sympathy for the Hindu community. This type of behaviour should not be tolerated.”
Who should not do the tolerating? The police? The Hindus? Or the Muslims themselves?
It’s important to remember that “moderate” Muslims pray to the same god, read the same Koran, and even worship at the same mosque. Yet they are somehow unable to identify the “extremists” and turn them over to the police.
Again: Who should not tolerate this type of behavior?
Coincidentally, the Gillard Government has just figured out a way to solve the problem: throw more money at it. The Australian taxpayer has been asked to supply fresh suitcases of hundred-dollar bills that will be delivered to “community groups” to prevent “extremism”.
According to The Daily Telegraph:
COMMUNITY groups will be given money to develop programs that tackle violent extremism at the grassroots.
The Gillard Government will award grants worth up to $100,000 to not-for-profit community groups -- which could include youth groups in western Sydney and the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils -- to roll out programs that build resilience [NB — the reporter has chosen the wrong word; she means “resistance”] to violent extremism.
Attorney-General Robert McClelland, who will make the announcement today, said the new program was part of the Government’s $9.7 million investment in supporting individuals away from intolerant and radical ideologies and encouraging positive participation in the community.
“Effective community engagement is a key component of the Government’s approach to building a stronger and more resilient community that can resist violent extremism,” he said.
Under the new program, grants from $5,000 to $20,000, and from $20,000 to $100,000, will be awarded to local initiatives that actively address intolerant or extremist messages and discourage extremism.
The Australian Multicultural Foundation and the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils welcomed the Government’s support.
Notice that the article talks about “extremism”, but never identifies which doctrine has an “extreme” version. Yes, everyone knows the real story — after all, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils is mentioned, and not the Hindu League or the Christian Youth of Australia — but PC rules require that Islam not be mentioned in the same sentence as “violent extremism”.
It’s the same all over the world. In the United States, the FBI, the Pentagon, and the Department of Homeland Security follow exactly the same set of rules. These rules were laid down by the agents of the Muslim Brotherhood who have penetrated our government at all levels.
Who do you think might have carried the exact same rules to Australia?
Pray to be delivered from them. That’s all you can do.
Gates of Vienna
As soon as you read the headline for this Australian article — “Gunshots Prompt Prayers for Peace” — you know you’re in for the usual ride on the multicultural merry-go-round. Everyone knows the script: culture enrichers shoot and batter and threaten and destroy, and then the rest of us pray for peace — or, more accurately, we pray that we won’t be the ones who get shot, stabbed, or set on fire.
What makes this story interesting is that it’s an enricher-on-enricher case, with Muslims dealing out the punishment and Hindus taking it. This is similar to the behavior of Jamaat ul-Fuqra terrorists here in the USA, who consider Hindus their greatest enemies. Back in the 1980s they staged a series of attacks on Hindus and firebombed their temples.
The Australian case reported in The Sydney Morning Herald is so shot through with politically correct mumbo-jumbo that it’s worth taking it apart to examine the components:
IT BEGAN with minor acts of vandalism, including egg throwing and smashed windows, but instead of remaining periodic footnotes in the night log at Auburn police station, the incidents have grown so violent — and the issue so culturally sensitive — that even authorities are reluctant to speak about them publicly.
The authorities are reluctant to speak about such a “sensitive” issue because it involves brown people doing harm to brown people, and therefore doesn’t fit the mandatory narrative. The white man can’t be blamed in this case — except, of course, that white people are to blame for all bad things, and should somehow have put a stop to all the nastiness before it happened.
Australia’s oldest Hindu temple, the Sri Mandir in Auburn, is under siege and its devotees gripped by fear.
Note: this is a specific fear. It is a non-phobic, rational fear that Muslims will do violent harm to Hindus because of their religion. This is not about some generic form of “violence”, like getting mugged or car-jacked. This is about violent jihad.
The article continues:
On March 19, two men in balaclavas stood at the intersection of a nearby road, spraying the front of the prayer hall with eight rounds of bullets. The building was unoccupied at the time.
The busy Hindu temple opened in 1977. It is surrounded by a predominantly Muslim population and it is no secret among locals that tensions have been simmering in recent years, caused by concerns about noise and parking problems at Sri Mandir.
“There is no excuse [for the gun attack],” the editor of Sydney newspaper The Indian, Rohit Revo, said.
If we weren’t used to this sort of equivocal phrasing, the sentence beginning with “There is no excuse…” would seem somewhat strange. Is it possible that there could have been an excuse? Is there ever a set of circumstances that would provide an “excuse” for attacking a house of worship with automatic gunfire?
Why, yes, there is. If the Hindus had made a joke about Mohammed, or put their feet on a copy of the Koran, then the violent anger of the attackers would be understandable. In that sense, there would be an “excuse” — even if their actions technically broke the law, one could understand their feelings, and everyone would agree that Hindus should not have provoked the righteous anger of Muslims in such an insensitive fashion.
“This was not the work of teenagers; neither was it a petty prank. This is part of a sustained and increasingly violent campaign to scare the temple devotees and drive them out. By definition, this latest attack was an act of terrorism.”
Yes, this is exactly true. It’s one of the few statements in this article that dares to confront the reality of what happened. Such actions are not only terrorism, they are terrorism sanctioned by the Koran, and mandated by the Koran. Allah requires believers to destroy the temples and idols of the polytheists.
The attackers are simply fully observant Muslims.
The Sun-Herald is aware the ongoing feud has caused disquiet among some of the most senior police in western Sydney. In a rare move, details of the shooting were deliberately held back from the NSW police media unit through concern that publicity might inflame hostilities.
This is a strange one. If the police actually revealed the full extent of what happened, something even worse might ensue.
Like what? A firebombing of the temple?
Or are the NSW police afraid the Hindus might retaliate in kind?
I’d be interested to find out the details of police thinking on this one.
Auburn City Council claims the first it knew of the incident was when The Sydney Morning Herald published an article on Wednesday. Since then, the chairman of the Community Relations Commission, Stepan Kerkyasharian, has stepped in as an intermediary between Hindus and Muslims.
“Given the enormity and complexity of the issues, this is a classic example where we need to apply the principles of multiculturalism and get people to understand and accept that we are a religiously diverse community … we live together and we respect each other’s religious diversity,” he told The Sun-Herald.
Ah, yes, this is where we respect each other’s diversity. Over here we have people who chant and burn incense, and over there are people who shoot up temples — a very diverse community indeed.
And if we respect it really, really hard, but that doesn’t solve the problem, then what? Why, we apply the principles of multiculturalism some more, and bring in more foreigners with all their wonderful new diversity! That’ll fix it!
Temple priest Jatinkumar Bhatt is praying for a peaceful solution for the sake of his three young children. Bhatt and his family live behind the temple and are too frightened to go outdoors after dark.
“On the night of the shooting, we heard the noise, but every 10 or 15 days we experience the sound of firecrackers being thrown [over the fence], so we thought it must be that again,” Mr Bhatt said.
“Then the police came. They showed me the bullet holes in the walls and asked permission to come in and investigate. I am too afraid to say why I think this is happening.”
In an attack in November, four men wielding iron bars smashed their way through 10-millimetre- thick windows, showering the hall with glass while devotees were praying inside.
The Hindu response so far has been well within the limits set by Orthodox Political Correctness:
The temple recently held a community open day in the hope of brokering fresh ties with the wider community.
A normal, sensible policy would be for the congregants to arm themselves and stock up on plenty of ammunition. But that’s not the way we solve problems in Modern Multicultural Australia.
Unfortunately, some of the Hindus are beginning to doubt that this really is Australia:
“Many of our neighbours are very friendly but sometimes it feels like we are in a different place to Australia,” Mr Bhatt said. “The attacks are now always. It is like in Libya or Afghanistan.”
Mr. Bhatt is quite right. Multiculturalism means that you live in a little enclave of the Ummah, no matter what might be your technical country of residence, provided the local population density of Muslims is high enough.
It’s not Australia. It’s the Caliphate.
And now it’s time to trot out Keysar Trad, the famous Australian culture enricher and welfare parasite with nine kids, who always speaks for the “Muslim community” at media events:
The founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, Keysar Trad, said he had given a speech at the open day, in which he stressed the need to “respect religious places of all faiths”.
“I am convinced these problems are not being caused by people who are religious and would urge the Muslim community to show support and solidarity to their neighbours at this time,” he said.
The function of the Keysars of the multicultural world is to lull everybody back to sleep with nonsense phrases like these while the Ummah goes about its customary work. Everything bad done by Muslims is said to be the work of a Tiny Minority, and real Muslims have nothing to do with it and cannot stop it.
Then it becomes an ordinary law-enforcement matter, and the police must enter the no-go zones and somehow find the perpetrators — who look like all the other residents of the neighborhood — and bring them to justice.
Flemington local area commander Superintendent Phillip Rogerson said police were trying to identify the attackers. Auburn Labor MP Barbara Perry said: “I’ve got every sympathy for the Hindu community. This type of behaviour should not be tolerated.”
Who should not do the tolerating? The police? The Hindus? Or the Muslims themselves?
It’s important to remember that “moderate” Muslims pray to the same god, read the same Koran, and even worship at the same mosque. Yet they are somehow unable to identify the “extremists” and turn them over to the police.
Again: Who should not tolerate this type of behavior?
Coincidentally, the Gillard Government has just figured out a way to solve the problem: throw more money at it. The Australian taxpayer has been asked to supply fresh suitcases of hundred-dollar bills that will be delivered to “community groups” to prevent “extremism”.
According to The Daily Telegraph:
COMMUNITY groups will be given money to develop programs that tackle violent extremism at the grassroots.
The Gillard Government will award grants worth up to $100,000 to not-for-profit community groups -- which could include youth groups in western Sydney and the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils -- to roll out programs that build resilience [NB — the reporter has chosen the wrong word; she means “resistance”] to violent extremism.
Attorney-General Robert McClelland, who will make the announcement today, said the new program was part of the Government’s $9.7 million investment in supporting individuals away from intolerant and radical ideologies and encouraging positive participation in the community.
“Effective community engagement is a key component of the Government’s approach to building a stronger and more resilient community that can resist violent extremism,” he said.
Under the new program, grants from $5,000 to $20,000, and from $20,000 to $100,000, will be awarded to local initiatives that actively address intolerant or extremist messages and discourage extremism.
The Australian Multicultural Foundation and the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils welcomed the Government’s support.
Notice that the article talks about “extremism”, but never identifies which doctrine has an “extreme” version. Yes, everyone knows the real story — after all, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils is mentioned, and not the Hindu League or the Christian Youth of Australia — but PC rules require that Islam not be mentioned in the same sentence as “violent extremism”.
It’s the same all over the world. In the United States, the FBI, the Pentagon, and the Department of Homeland Security follow exactly the same set of rules. These rules were laid down by the agents of the Muslim Brotherhood who have penetrated our government at all levels.
Who do you think might have carried the exact same rules to Australia?
Pray to be delivered from them. That’s all you can do.
Islamization of Australia: Auburn Leads the Way
Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:27
Dr. Radhasyam Brahmachari
Muslims sprayed a Hindu temple in Auburn Australia and struck terror into the hearts of Hindu devotees as their usual pattern of action in Islamizing the West...
The Sri Mandir temple in Auburn, the Australia oldest Hindu temple, is under the siege of Muslims and its devotees are gripped by fear. On March 19, two armed Muslim miscreants, standing at the intersection of a nearby road, sprayed the front of the temple's prayer hall with eight bullets. Fortunately the building was unoccupied at the time, which helped avoid casualties. This busy Hindu temple, opened in 1977, is surrounded by a predominantly Muslim population. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, tensions have been building in recent years between the temple and the mainly Muslim locals, allegedly for noise and parking problems. [1]
The trouble began earlier with acts of vandalism, including egg throwing and smashing of window-panes, with the Auburn police remaining silent. Despite the violence, authorities are reluctant to speak about it publicly due to cultural sensitivity.
Whatever the real motive for the attack, ''There is no excuse for the gun attack,'' says Rohit Revo, editor of the Sydney newspaper The Indian. ''This was not the work of teenager; neither was it a petty prank. This is part of a sustained and increasingly violent campaign to scare the temple devotees and drive them out. By definition, this latest attack was an act of terrorism'', added Revo.
The Sun-Herald reports that the ongoing feud has caused disquiet among some of the most senior police in western Sydney. In a rare move, details of the shooting were deliberately held back from the NSW police media unit because of concern that publicity might inflame hostilities... Many believe that Muslims are trying to occupy the temple land by terror and intimidation for building a mosque at the site.
Located 19 kms from the centre of Sydney, Auburn has a greatly diversified population of Turkish, Lebanese, Vietnamese, Somali, Sudanese, Bosnian, Afghan, Chinese and Indian immigrants. According to Wendy Larkson, the area is gradually becoming Muslim dominated. “If you walk around Auburn you will see many signs in Arabic, African immigrants and of course many hijabbed women walking past shops with names like ‘Medina Bakery’ and so on”. [2]
Auburn is home to the Gallipoli Mosque, the first mosque in the Sydney locality, which opened for worship in November, 1979. It is also the largest Mosque in Australia today.
According to the 2006 census, approximately 1.71% of the total Australian population are Muslims. At present, the five most prominent religions in Auburn are Islam (40.9%), Catholicism (15.3%), No religion (10.3%), Buddhism (6.8%) and Anglican (3.6%). The dominance of Muslims is due to their influx into the area over the past decades leading to a demographic change and also a qualitative social change. In fact, Auburn was the first suburb in Australia in which security guards were introduced into supermarkets to patrol the aisles, because the burqa-clad women were engaging in too much stealing.
Problem with the Muslim immigrants
There is an unusual increase in Chinese presence in Auburn. While they may pose as nuisance over territorial battle, they will not create any major problem for the wider community.
The most dramatic has been the increase of Muslim population, who poses a serious threat for non-Muslims of the locality, which has been the case in so many areas in Western countries. In the UK, Muslims growing ten times faster than the rest of the population, which is attributable to (1) large scale immigration, (2) a higher birthrate through deliberate rejection of family planning measures, and (3) conversions of indigenous people to Islam.
It has been found to be a familiar phenomenon that wherever Muslims become dominant in the population in the West, they intensify jihadi violence and other unlawful activities. And they do it knowing well that the government would turn a blind eye to those activities because of religious and cultural sensitivities as well as not to lose their votes. The terror attack on the Hindu temple at Auburn is simply the manifestation of this pattern. In other incidents, a number of terror plots by Muslim radicals have been foiled in Australia. In a major terror plot, five men, Somali and Lebanese immigrant Muslims, were arrested in Melbourne in August 2009 for conspiring to commit a terrorist act. They were accused of targeting Sydney's Holsworthy military base. Police said the attack would have been the worst in Australian history.[4]
A rise in Muslim population also poses a serious threat to the cultural and social fabric of the host Christian country because of their refusal to get assimilated with the mainstream population. Instead, they not only want to retain their Muslim culture, values and identity, but also are hell-bent on making the indigenous population to conform to their culture and values. This is part of the Islam's aim of destroying all other religions so as to establish Islam as the supreme religion over the entire world (see Quran 8:39, 2:193).
The Auburn temple attack by Muslims is a typical pattern of Islamization as seen elsewhere in Europe and North America. And as Muslims engage in violence in Auburn, the leftist Labour government of Prime Minister Julia Gillard takes recourse of Muslim appeasement as expected by taking no action against the miscreants and by keeping mum about the serious issue fearing cultural and religious sensitivity.
References:
[1] http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/04/australia-muslims-spray-hindu-temple-with-bullets.html
https://mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&shva=1#inbox/12f2d683aeca60b5
http://hinduexistence.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/oldest-hindu-temple-under-jihadi-attack-islamists-sprayed-bullets-hindu-community-express-concern-over-temple-attacks-in-australia/
[2]http://islammonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4268:just-looking- around&catid=185&Itemid=22
[3] http://www.timesonl ine.co.uk/ tol/news/ uk/article562148 2.ece).
[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12064988
[5] The Guardian, February 22, 2010
Dr. Radhasyam Brahmachari
Muslims sprayed a Hindu temple in Auburn Australia and struck terror into the hearts of Hindu devotees as their usual pattern of action in Islamizing the West...
The Sri Mandir temple in Auburn, the Australia oldest Hindu temple, is under the siege of Muslims and its devotees are gripped by fear. On March 19, two armed Muslim miscreants, standing at the intersection of a nearby road, sprayed the front of the temple's prayer hall with eight bullets. Fortunately the building was unoccupied at the time, which helped avoid casualties. This busy Hindu temple, opened in 1977, is surrounded by a predominantly Muslim population. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, tensions have been building in recent years between the temple and the mainly Muslim locals, allegedly for noise and parking problems. [1]
The trouble began earlier with acts of vandalism, including egg throwing and smashing of window-panes, with the Auburn police remaining silent. Despite the violence, authorities are reluctant to speak about it publicly due to cultural sensitivity.
Whatever the real motive for the attack, ''There is no excuse for the gun attack,'' says Rohit Revo, editor of the Sydney newspaper The Indian. ''This was not the work of teenager; neither was it a petty prank. This is part of a sustained and increasingly violent campaign to scare the temple devotees and drive them out. By definition, this latest attack was an act of terrorism'', added Revo.
The Sun-Herald reports that the ongoing feud has caused disquiet among some of the most senior police in western Sydney. In a rare move, details of the shooting were deliberately held back from the NSW police media unit because of concern that publicity might inflame hostilities... Many believe that Muslims are trying to occupy the temple land by terror and intimidation for building a mosque at the site.
Located 19 kms from the centre of Sydney, Auburn has a greatly diversified population of Turkish, Lebanese, Vietnamese, Somali, Sudanese, Bosnian, Afghan, Chinese and Indian immigrants. According to Wendy Larkson, the area is gradually becoming Muslim dominated. “If you walk around Auburn you will see many signs in Arabic, African immigrants and of course many hijabbed women walking past shops with names like ‘Medina Bakery’ and so on”. [2]
Auburn is home to the Gallipoli Mosque, the first mosque in the Sydney locality, which opened for worship in November, 1979. It is also the largest Mosque in Australia today.
According to the 2006 census, approximately 1.71% of the total Australian population are Muslims. At present, the five most prominent religions in Auburn are Islam (40.9%), Catholicism (15.3%), No religion (10.3%), Buddhism (6.8%) and Anglican (3.6%). The dominance of Muslims is due to their influx into the area over the past decades leading to a demographic change and also a qualitative social change. In fact, Auburn was the first suburb in Australia in which security guards were introduced into supermarkets to patrol the aisles, because the burqa-clad women were engaging in too much stealing.
Problem with the Muslim immigrants
There is an unusual increase in Chinese presence in Auburn. While they may pose as nuisance over territorial battle, they will not create any major problem for the wider community.
The most dramatic has been the increase of Muslim population, who poses a serious threat for non-Muslims of the locality, which has been the case in so many areas in Western countries. In the UK, Muslims growing ten times faster than the rest of the population, which is attributable to (1) large scale immigration, (2) a higher birthrate through deliberate rejection of family planning measures, and (3) conversions of indigenous people to Islam.
It has been found to be a familiar phenomenon that wherever Muslims become dominant in the population in the West, they intensify jihadi violence and other unlawful activities. And they do it knowing well that the government would turn a blind eye to those activities because of religious and cultural sensitivities as well as not to lose their votes. The terror attack on the Hindu temple at Auburn is simply the manifestation of this pattern. In other incidents, a number of terror plots by Muslim radicals have been foiled in Australia. In a major terror plot, five men, Somali and Lebanese immigrant Muslims, were arrested in Melbourne in August 2009 for conspiring to commit a terrorist act. They were accused of targeting Sydney's Holsworthy military base. Police said the attack would have been the worst in Australian history.[4]
A rise in Muslim population also poses a serious threat to the cultural and social fabric of the host Christian country because of their refusal to get assimilated with the mainstream population. Instead, they not only want to retain their Muslim culture, values and identity, but also are hell-bent on making the indigenous population to conform to their culture and values. This is part of the Islam's aim of destroying all other religions so as to establish Islam as the supreme religion over the entire world (see Quran 8:39, 2:193).
The Auburn temple attack by Muslims is a typical pattern of Islamization as seen elsewhere in Europe and North America. And as Muslims engage in violence in Auburn, the leftist Labour government of Prime Minister Julia Gillard takes recourse of Muslim appeasement as expected by taking no action against the miscreants and by keeping mum about the serious issue fearing cultural and religious sensitivity.
References:
[1] http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/04/australia-muslims-spray-hindu-temple-with-bullets.html
https://mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&shva=1#inbox/12f2d683aeca60b5
http://hinduexistence.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/oldest-hindu-temple-under-jihadi-attack-islamists-sprayed-bullets-hindu-community-express-concern-over-temple-attacks-in-australia/
[2]http://islammonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4268:just-looking- around&catid=185&Itemid=22
[3] http://www.timesonl ine.co.uk/ tol/news/ uk/article562148 2.ece).
[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12064988
[5] The Guardian, February 22, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)