I Want My Country Back

This video was filmed under cover in the Czech republic: The film has english subtitles and is a true reflection on what is going on all over Europe.

 

Sharia chic has come to London a couple of weeks ago. During London Fashion Week, Fashion East designer Louise Goldin sent a model down the catwalk wearing an outfit that obscured the model’s entire face, all except her eyes, and covered her head entirely. Nor was this the only such outfit Goldin featured during London Fashion Week. The outfits were clearly modeled after Islamic dress, particularly the niqab, the full-face veil.

London is not the only place Sharia chic has appeared. In December, Marie Claire magazine ran a photoshoot featuring three glamorous women, all wearing hijabs and black dresses down to their shoetops -- and sporting ipods, designer handbags, and other evidence of their modernity and sophistication.

 

Meanwhile, Urban Outfitters is selling the Palestinian kufiya, worn by murderous jihad terrorists for decades, as a “Skull Desert Scarf.”

 Obviously there is no reason for the fashion world to be immune to the fashionable contempt for Western culture and values that pervades most creative fields these days, but it is one thing to hold that contempt and quite another to proffer it to the masses as the vanguard of contemporary culture. Contrast the Urban Outfitters item with the fact that in the 1930s, the British considered banning the kufiya, as it had become a symbol of Arab nationalist resistance to their rule. In the 1930s, the British were unafraid to do what they had to do to protect their own interests; in 2007, the U.S. pledged to give 86 million dollars to the government of Mahmoud Abbas just as a former official of Abbas’ Fatah party appeared on Palestinian Authority television saying to Al-Qaeda: “Do to Bush whatever you want, and we wish you success...We are fighting the Americans and hate the Americans more than you!” The official, Abu Ali Shahin, was of course wearing a kufiya. Likewise, was Louise Goldin or anyone else connected with the pseudo-niqab fashions displayed in London this week aware of the nature of the culture they were aping. Those who are likely to prefer that women never venture outside without covering everything except their eyes are likely also to believe that women are essentially the possessions of men: the Qur’an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: “Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will” (2:223). The Qur’an also declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man: “Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her” (2:282). Likewise, this is also a culture that allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: “If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice” (4:3). The same holy book rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: “Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females” (4:11). 

Worst of all, the Qur’an tells husbands to beat their disobedient wives: “Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them” ( 4:34).

 Finally, the Qur’an allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated” (65:4). 

And it is the culture of those who revere the Qur’an as the supreme authority for human behavior that has produced the niqab. Is that the culture Louise Goldin wishes to bring to Britain? Or does she perhaps think its presence there is a fait accompli, since Muslims who clearly believe in Islamic supremacism have become such a prominent feature of the British landscape? Does she regard her fashion creations as a necessary attempt at inclusion and accommodation?

 

More accurately, they manifest the cultural weariness that has allowed those Islamic supremacists to become quite vocal in Britain, as the recent Dispatches documentary revealed. One may hope that the British will before too longer remember that they were once made of sterner stuff.

Muslims living in Britain are facing two choices; either to migrate or to join the jihad, a key Islamic figure has said.

Sheikh Omar Bakir Muhammed, leader of the now officially disbanded Islamic militant group Al Muhajiroun told United Press International Saturday that as the covenant of security under which Muslims previously lived in Britain has been broken, Muslims must now consider themselves at war.

"And I declare we should ourselves join the global Islamic camp against the global crusade camp," he said.

What violated the covenant, according to Sheikh Omar, was the anti-terrorist legislation introduced in the United Kingdom after the 9/11 attacks. If the British government would review these policies and release those detained without trial in Belmarsh prison and elsewhere, Muslims could live at peace in Britain. Otherwise, they must prepare themselves to fight.

"The response from the Muslims will be horrendous if the British government continues in the way it treats Muslims," he said, adding that suicide bombings were a possibility.

He called on Muslims to form a new coalition united behind al-Qaida with Osama Bin Laden as their leader.

This jihadi group would replace Al-Muhajiroun, which is no longer needed, he said. By dissolving such parties the Muslim community will have to come together, and as the judge of the Sharia court in Britain, he is the one to unite them, he added.

Those who did not wish to either leave or fight would not be regarded as Muslims, said Sheikh Omar, condemning in particular the Muslim Council of Britain for urging the Muslim community to cooperate with the British government.

"They are hypocrites, we don't believe they are Muslims," he told UPI. "In a time of crisis, who ever allies with them (the kuffaar -- non-believers) is one of them, so I don't believe they are Muslims in the first place."

"I doubt if one of them would dare to walk the streets of Mecca by themselves," he added.

 Racism Defined?

Racism was once defined as “prejudice plus power” - a definition which, in a British context, has tended to exclude all but the white population.

However, the “racist murders” of Kriss Donald in Glasgow in 2004 and Ross Parker in Peterborough in 2001, young white men killed by Asians, demonstrate how society has been forced to redefine racism.

It was, of course, the murder of a young black man, Stephen Lawrence, which changed the debate about race crime in Britain.

The inquiry which followed redefined a racist incident as any “which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person”. It is, therefore, a largely subjective crime - and one which has proved extremely difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt.

The statistics reflect that subjectivity, but they also reflect a belief right across the spectrum in multicultural Britain, that people are attacked because of the colour of their skin.

Changing picture

Until the mid-nineties, the government’s British Crime Survey only asked ethnic minority groups whether they had been the victim of a crime which was racially motivated. Since then, all victims are asked and the picture has changed dramatically.

The most recent analysis shows that in 2004, 87,000 people from black or minority ethnic communities (BME) said they had been a victim of a racially motivated crime. In the same period, 92,000 white people said they had also fallen victim.

Focusing on violent racial attacks, 49,000 BME were victims. Among whites, the number was 77,000.

Of those that involved wounding 4,000 were BME. Among the white population it was 20,000.

The numbers can be highly misleading, though. Since about 90% of people in Britain are white, the statistics actually show the risk of being a victim of race crime is significantly greater if you are from an ethnic minority.

According to the most recent Home Office analysis, the chances for a white person is less than 1%. For Black and Asian people it is put at about 1%.

Low risk

Taking into account the subjective nature of the statistics, it seems that the risks are relatively low across all communities.

Nevertheless, for the tens of thousands of white people affected by race crime, the issue is a real one.

The far right has tried to exploit what it claims is the untold story of racial attacks on white people. On the National Front website they feature a long list of “The Fallen”, white people they say were killed by non-whites.

Often, however, the crimes have nothing to do with race and in a number of cases, for instance Ross Parker, relatives of the victims have objected to their names being used.

Trying to unravel the motivation behind a crime is always difficult. Was a kick or a punch in a violent robbery any harder because of the victim’s skin colour?

Describing an incident as racist may say as much about a victim’s mindset as the offender. How else can one explain the British Crime Survey finding that 3,100 car thefts from Asians were deemed to be racially motivated?

Most of the offenders (57%) in the racially motivated crimes identified in the British Crime Survey are not white. White victims said 82% of offenders were not white.

Among black victims of race crime, a quarter of offenders were identified as not white. Among Asian victims, the non-white proportion rises to a third.

There has been in increase in recorded instances of race crime, but experts believe this is due to more people coming forward to report incidents and a greater willingness from the police to take accusations seriously.

The British Crime Survey tells a different story. The most recent figures suggest the incidence of race crime is falling - a drop of 13% year on year.

Amid this soup of subjective and contradictory statistics, what is clear is that race crime is no longer a black and white issue. It is as complex and multifaceted as the communities in which it occurs.

In the Lozells district of Birmingham last year, tensions defined around race exploded into violence. Asian gangs and black gangs clashed in what have been described as “race riots”. But, in reality, the disturbances were about poverty, housing and fear.

Racism, prejudice and bigotry are not defined by the colour of someone’s skin.

From BBC News:

Radical Islamic cleric Abu Qatada has lost his appeal against a Home Office move to deport him to Jordan.

The home secretary welcomed the ruling, seen as the first test of a policy that seeks assurances deportees in terror cases will not be abused on return.

The alleged al-Qaeda figure's lawyers said he could face torture at home but the UK said he was a security threat.

Qatada, who has been convicted in Jordan for terror attacks, is to seek leave to appeal the deportation ruling.

Human rights lawyer Gareth Peirce said it was a "profoundly important appeal" that could have ramifications across the world.

Qatada, 45, has spent most of the past five years in prison in the UK under anti-terrorism and immigration laws.

These agreements strike the right balance between allowing us to deport individuals who threaten the security of this country and safeguarding the rights of these individuals Home Secretary John Reid

The judgment by Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) chairman Mr Justice Ouseley said members had concluded there was "no real risk of persecution of [Qatada]" on his return.

The case is significant because the government has been trying to secure deportations to countries accused of torture by securing special agreements that deportees will not be abused.

The agreement - called Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) - signed between the UK government and Jordan in 2005, aimed to guarantee that anyone deported to the country would not face torture or ill-treatment.

Critics claim the MOU is meaningless but a lawyer for the home secretary, Ian Burnett QC, had said it would be "extraordinary" if Jordan did not comply with its diplomatic assurances.

Mr Reid said the government was "pleased" the court had recognised the value of MOUs.

"It is our firm belief that these agreements strike the right balance between allowing us to deport individuals who threaten the security of this country and safeguarding the rights of these individuals on their return."

Qatada's legal team claimed in Siac hearings last May that part of the government's case against him was based on evidence extracted by torture.

But on Monday the Siac members dismissed the case put by Qatada, also known as Omar Mahmoud Mohammed Othman.

Ms Peirce said the ruling would mean sending Qatada to a "flagrant denial of justice".

"We say it would be so grotesquely unreconcilable with the concept of justice that it would constitute a complete denial of our responsibilities - to deport on that basis with that known prospect."

She added: "We understand that this decision is being monitored and watched by a number of other countries who are considering deporting individuals to regimes where they know they will be tortured."

"We abhor the thought of evidence in Guantanamo obtained by torture. We say what is the difference to sending someone to a military court to face evidence obtained from torture?" she said.

Torture ban

Amnesty International UK campaigns director Tim Hancock said the group was "profoundly concerned" Siac had discounted evidence showing the risk of torture if Qatada was returned to Jordan.

This included material documenting the "routine infliction of torture on 'security suspects' in Jordan...a practice which continues with impunity".

Qatada became one of the UK's most wanted men in December 2001 when he went on the run on the eve of government moves to introduce new anti-terror laws.

Former Home Secretary David Blunkett once described him as the most significant extremist Islamic preacher in the UK.

But the Palestinian-Jordanian has always publicly distanced himself from claims of links to al-Qaeda and insists he has never met its leader, Osama Bin Laden.  Yes, that old chesnut!

A MUSLIM fanatic who dressed as a suicide bomber at a rally threatening terror attacks has got a job on TRAINS. Sick Omar Khayam cleans carriages unsupervised for rail giant First Group. And he has even got keys to onboard electrical cupboards. Furious train drivers last night claimed the safety of staff and passengers is being put at risk.

One driver added: “It’s an astonishing security breach.

“We cannot believe this man is employed in a job giving him access to locked places on trains where bombs could be hidden and never be found.

“He has keys that could be passed on to others for the electrical cupboards in carriages. It is a risk too far.”

Convicted drugs dealer Khayam, 22, had been filmed dressed as a bomber at the controversial demonstration outside London’s Danish Embassy last year. He wore a sinister camouflage outfit with a black vest. Extremists around him — protesting at cartoons of the prophet Mohammed — waved placards supporting the 7/7 London bombings and calling for new UK terror attacks.

When challenged about his job, he said: “So what? I’ve not committed a crime. If there is a concern, that’s what the police are there for. That’s what security services are for.”

TICK TICK TICK TICK

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TIME

Email the Managing Director of the train company, First Group, to put the pressure on...

Elaine.Holt@firstgroup.com

Raja Ibrer Faisel, 19, from Small Heath, Birmingham, admitted causing the death of Sarah Hunt, 28, and her son Kieran by dangerous driving on the A45 in the Hay Mills area of Birmingham.The court heard how Mrs Hunt had been seven months pregnant with a child she planned to call Connor when the accident happened.He said: "As a family we are disgusted at the sentence which only amounts to 18 months per life. No remorse has been shown by the other family for the stupidity of one man." (WELL OF COURSE THEY WOULDN'T SHOW REMORSE - HE'S A GOOD MUZZIE OBEYING ALLAH'S COMMAND TO KILL KAFIRS)

The mother-of-four was with Kieran and his seven-year-old brother Ryan - who suffered multiple injuries - as they crossed the A45 on October 2 last year when they were struck by Faisel's Nissan Micra.The trio were holding hands as they walked across a pedestrian crossing to meet the boys' father, who was waiting on the opposite side of the dual carriageway, prosecutor Ailsa Davis said.Mrs Davis said the traffic lights were on red when Faisel drove through the crossing at about 50mph and struck the victims, "catapulting them through the air". He then drove off with Mrs Hunt wedged under the car for about 367 metres, Mrs Davis said."

From http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=3220027

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2018191,00.html

A DfES spokesman said: "This is not official guidance and is not endorsed by the government, nor does it have any binding power whatsoever on schools.

"The Department for Education and Skills has no involvement with the document produced by the MCB. "We have already provided schools with a wealth of official guidance, which makes clear they should take into account, and recognise, the needs and cultural diversity of all their pupils regardless of their background."

The country's biggest heads' union warned that many of the MCB's demands - such as for individual changing room cubicles for all Muslim pupils - were "undoable".

............................................................................

WHO THE HELL DO THEY THINK THEY ARE ISSUING GUIDELINES FOR SCHOOLS? THEY HAVE ATTEMPTED TO RIDE ROUGH SHOT OVER THE POLICIES SET OUT BY A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT. JUST BECAUSE SOME SCHOOLS NOW HAVE MAJORITY MUSLIM POPULATIONS, THEY FELT THEY HAD THE POWER TO ENDORSE THEIR POLICIES. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD FORCE THEM TO REMOVE THE DOCUMENT FROM THEIR SITE.

MCB......

SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP!

Osama bin Laden personally has targeted Iraq-bound Prince Harry, saying he is wanted "dead or alive". Code-breakers for MI6, Britain's external intelligence agency, have cracked al-Qaida's secret communications system and discovered Prince Harry is named as a prime target for the terror network when he goes on active service to Iraq. The MI6 code-breakers also have discovered the first real evidence in over a year that bin Laden is alive and personally has authorized the capture of the young prince – third in line to the throne – "dead or alive."

"The Royals recognize Harry is no 'ordinary soldier' and that his capture would be a priceless propaganda prize for al-Qaida. What would Blair do if they threatened to behead Harry?" asked a senior intelligence officer.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54405