Europe: “The Vision is an Islamic State”

The growing religiousness is not an expression of marginalization. We are talking about people who are well-integrated, but who want to be religious

Professor Viggo Mortensen

The vision is an Islamic state — Islamic society… Muslims will prefer sharia rule. But the vision for twenty years from now is for sharia law to be part of Germany, that sharia will be institutionalized in the state itself“.

I will pick them one by one — I will start with people around me… If every Muslim would do the same in his surroundings, it can happen with no problem… you don’t confront him [the German] with force; you do it slowly… There will be clashes, but slowly the clashes will subside, as people will accept reality.

Europe will still exist but, as with the great Christian Byzantine Empire that is now Turkey, will it still embody Judeo-Christian civilization?

A Dutch government report published in June showed that Muslims in the Netherlands are becoming more religious. The report, based on information from 2006-2015, is a study of more than 7,249 Dutch nationals with Moroccan and Turkish roots. Two thirds of the Muslims in the Netherlands are from Turkey or Morocco.

ACCORDING TO THE REPORT:

78% of Moroccan Muslims pray five times a day.

33% of Turkish Muslims pray five times a day.

40%Approximately  of Both Groups Visit A Mosque At Least Once A Week.

14% Increase Since  2006 to 2015 in young Moroccan Women Wearing A Headscarf
…..(ie. up from 64
% in 2006 to 78% in 2015)

Large Majorities of both groups eat halal:
…..93% of Moroccan Muslims.
…..80
% of Turkish Muslims.

» Muslims say that faith is a very important part of their lives:
96
% of Moroccan Muslims.
89
of Turkish Muslims.

»  7% Increase Since  2006 to 2015 in the number of Dutch Moroccan Muslims who can be described as
….strictly adhering to Islam (increased from 77
% in 2006, to 84% in 2015.

» 8% Increase Since  2006 to 2015 in the number of Turkish Muslims who can be described as
….strictly adhering to Islam (increased from 37% in 2006, to 45% in 2015)

There Are Few Secular Muslims:

7% Among Turkish Muslims.

2% Among Moroccan Muslims.

In Denmark, the trend of Muslims becoming more religious was apparent as early as 2004, when a poll showed that Muslims were becoming more religious than their parents, especially “young, well-educated and well-integrated women”. At the time, Professor Viggo Mortensen said, (PDF of article English)The growing religiousness is not an expression of marginalization. We are talking about people who are well-integrated, but who want to be religious“.

A more detailed Danish poll from 2015 showed that Muslims had become more religious since a similar poll taken in 2006:

In 2006, 37% prayed five times a day, whereas the number had gone up to 50% in 2015.

In 2006, 63% believed that the Koran should be followed to the letter; in 2015, it was 77%.

Brian Arly Jacobsen, a sociologist of religion from the University of Copenhagen, was surprised by the results. “With time we would expect [that Muslims] would become more like the rest of the Danes, who are not particularly active in the religious sphere,” he said.

Jacobsen thought that a possible explanation might have been the 20-30 new mosques that were built in the decade preceding 2015.


The trends expressed by these polls are corroborated by studies and polls showing that many Muslims in Europe want to live under sharia law.

According to a 2014 study of Moroccan and Turkish Muslims in (Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Sweden), an average of almost 60% of the Muslims polled agreed that Muslims should return to the roots of Islam.

75% thought there is only one interpretation of the Koran possible, and 65% said that Sharia is more important to them than the laws of the country in which they live.

A 2016 UK poll showed that 43% of British Muslims “believed that parts of the Islamic legal system should replace British law while only 22 per cent opposed the idea”.

In a 2017 study, which included a poll of 400 Belgian Muslims, 29% said they believe the laws of Islam to be superior to Belgian law, and 34% said they “would definitely prefer a political system inspired by the Quran”.

According to a 2014 study of Moroccan and Turkish Muslims in Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Sweden, an average of almost 60% of the Muslims polled agreed that Muslims should return to the roots of Islam, and 65% said that Sharia is more important to them than the laws of the country in which they live. Pictured: Friday prayers at the IZW Mosque in Vienna, Austria. (Photo by Thomas Kronsteiner/Getty Images)

The more than two million predominantly Muslim migrants that have arrived in Europe in recent years are only reinforcing the trend of growing Muslim religiosity on the continent. A 2017 study of predominantly Afghan asylum seekers in the Austrian city of Graz showed that the asylum seekers, mostly men under the age of 30, were all in favor of preserving their traditional Islamic values with 70% going to the mosque every Friday for prayers.

The women were even more religious, with 62.6% praying five times a day, notably more than the men (39.7%). In addition, 66.3% of the women wore a headscarf in public. Half of the migrants said that religion now plays a larger role in their daily lives in Europe than it did in their native country, and 51.6% of the interviewees said that the supremacy of Islam over other religions was undisputed.

The tendency of many Muslims to become more religious once they arrived in Europe was also on display in a new DOCUMENTARY series, “False Identity,” by Arabic-speaking journalist Zvi Yehezkeli, who went undercover to report on the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe and the US. In Germany, he encountered two young Muslims from Syria, who came to Germany via Kosovo, where they received help from a “British Islamic organization”.

They had left Syria as secular Muslims, but on the way to Germany they lived for a year in Pristina, Kosovo, where, according to Yehezkeli, “Muslim Brotherhood organizations are active in helping refugees while turning them into devout Muslims. Ahmed and Yusuf arrived [in Germany] already praying five times a day“.1)The quote begins at 21:24 in the documentary. The statements by Yusuf and Ahmed follow immediately after.

According to Ahmed:

“When I left Syria, mentally I felt more relaxed. The Islamic charity organization played an important role in this. Look, the first time you meet them they start helping you. You sit, you stare at them, they pray in front of you and here I am a Muslim, studied the Quran, yet don’t pray. Suddenly I find myself alone asking, Why shouldn’t I pray like all others?”

Yehezkeli asked them what their dream is. “The vision is an Islamic state — Islamic society,” said Yusuf, “Muslims will prefer sharia rule. But the vision for twenty years from now is for sharia law to be part of Germany, that sharia will be institutionalized in the state itself“.

In contrast to the growing religiousness of Muslims in Europe, Christians are becoming less religious. In a study of young Europeans, aged 16-29, published in March and based on 2014-2016 data, the author, Stephen Bullivant, a professor of theology and the sociology of religion at St Mary’s University in London, concluded:

“With some notable exceptions, young adults increasingly are not identifying with or practicing religion… Christianity as a default, as a norm, is gone, and probably gone for good — or at least for the next 100 years”.

According to the study, between 70% and 80% of young adults in Estonia, Sweden and the Netherlands categorize themselves as non-religious. Between 64% and 70% of young adults consider themselves non-religious in France, Belgium, Hungary and the UK. The most religious youths were to be found in Poland, where only 17% of young adults defined themselves as non-religious, followed by Lithuania with 25%.

Young Muslims like Yusuf and Ahmed from Syria say they want to spread Islam by converting Europeans, also known as dawa. They are themselves perfect examples of having been at the receiving end of dawa — becoming devout Muslims through the Islamic organization in Kosovo and now engaging in dawa themselves. “I will pick them one by one — I will start with people around me. They will listen. If every Muslim would do the same in his surroundings, it can happen with no problem,” said Yusuf. Asked if the Germans might resist dawa, he said:

“You don’t confront him [the German] with force, you do it slowly… There will be clashes, but slowly the clashes will subside, as people will accept reality. There is no escape; every change involves clashes”.

Given young Europeans’ lack of a religious identity and the vacuum left by the departure of Christianity from the lives of the majority, one has to wonder how sturdy their ability will be to withstand such attempts at proselytizing. Europe will still exist but, as with the great Christian Byzantine Empire that is now Turkey, will it still embody Judeo-Christian civilization?

Article Title: Europe: “The Vision is an Islamic State”
Article Link: gatestoneinstitute.org
Date-stamped: 02.
Time-stamped: 5:00 am
Author:  Judith Bergman is a columnist, lawyer and political analyst.
Article Lead In: A Dutch government report published in June showed that Muslims in the Netherlands are becoming more religious.

Share

References   [ + ]

1. The quote begins at 21:24 in the documentary. The statements by Yusuf and Ahmed follow immediately after.

Lutheran Archbishop of Uppsala “puts Muhammed on an equal plane with Jesus.”

God is greater.” in Swedish: “Gud är större.” in Arabic: “Allahu akbar

• Even as the other key players in Swedish society have adapted to the rise of Islam within the country’s borders, so has the Church of Sweden.

• If you look at Jackelén’s Wikipedia page, you will see that her motto is “God is greater.” In Swedish, it is “Gud är större.” In Arabic, it is “Allahu akbar,” the words that muezzins in mosques around the world shout from the tops of their minarets.

• We cannot know what is really in this woman’s heart; but one thing we can be sure of is that when Islam does eventually take over Sweden, her remarkable history of appeasement will not save either her or her Church from a brutal reckoning.

The Church of Sweden, although no longer a state church, remains an important force in Swedish society. In a time when Sweden’s political, media, and academic establishment are eager to jettison pretty much everything that makes Sweden Swedish, no institution plays a more central role in the preservation of the nation’s cultural heritage than the national church. Yes, ethnic Swedes have become overwhelmingly secular, but, like their cousins elsewhere in Scandinavia, they still look to their national church as a bearer of tradition and a setting within which they wish to baptize and confirm their children and hold their weddings and funerals.

Yet, even as the other key players in Swedish society have adapted to the rise of Islam within the country’s borders, so has the Church of Sweden. The church’s primate – its equivalent of the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury – is a 62-year-old woman named Antje Jackelén, who holds the title of Archbishop of Uppsala. Popes and archbishops traditionally have official mottoes.

Pope Francis’s motto is “Miserando atque eligendo (“mercy and choice”). It was his motto as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, and he chose to retain it upon his elevation to the papacy. If you look at Jackelén’s Wikipedia page, you will see that her motto is “God is greater.” In Swedish, it is Gud är större. In Arabic, it is “Allahu akbar,” the words that muezzins in mosques around the world shout from the tops of their minarets.

These are also, of course, the last words that are heard by many people around the world before they are blown to bits by suicide bombers or run over by jihadists at the wheels of trucks. Some might argue, to be sure, that the Muslim deity is different from the God of Christianity, but Jackelén is not one of them: she has said explicitly that the two deities are one and the same.

“GOD IS GREATER” was Jackelén’s motto in her previous position as Archbishop of Lund. It is also the title of a book she published in 2011. She has always claimed that she took it from the First Epistle of John. Yes, the words do appear in that epistle, but only as part of the statement at 1 John 3:20 that “God is greater than our heart.” In any event, her motto was not subjected to nationwide scrutiny until she was selected to head the Church of Sweden in 2013 and announced that she, like Pope Francis, would stick with the same motto. In response to this news, critics accused her of “flirting with Islam.” The newspaper Östersunds-Posten ran an editorial calling her “clueless” and noting that in Swedish, the words “Gud är större,” in isolation, sound strained and unnatural.

Antje Jackelén, the Archbishop of Uppsala, puts Muhammed on an equal plane with Jesus. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

For anyone who had any doubts, it has since become clear that the Jackelén’s reason for picking her motto are exactly what they always seemed to be. Recognizing that the concept of Jesus Christ as Savior is a major impediment to what may euphemistically be referred to as her ambitious interfaith efforts, she has made a point of downplaying the importance of Jesus and of stating that, when it comes to the question of salvation, Jesus does not really matter.

In March of last year, noting that Jackelén’s “relationship with Islam” had occasioned widespread criticism, Morgonbladet interviewed her “in order to get a better picture what she really thinks about the link between Christianity and Islam.”

Asked about Muhammed, she spurned the orthodox Christian view that he was a “false prophet” and maintained that “[i]n times when Islam is used to legitimize violence and terror, it is important to remember that Muhammad still inspires millions of people today in their pursuit of justice, peace, and a virtuous life.”

Of course, to speak of Muhammed, a military conqueror, as a model of peace and virtue rather than of violence and terror is sheer whitewashing. Asked whether she believes the Angel Gabriel appeared to Muhammed, as claimed in the Koran, Jackelén “declined to answer.”

Last year, three female priests in the Church of Sweden initiated a hashtag campaign, #Mittkors (“My cross”), in solidarity with the Christian victims of Islamic terror in the Middle East.

On August 18, 2016, Ann Charlott Alstadt noted in Aftonbladet that Jackelén’s spokesman, Gunnar Sjögren, had publicly condemned this campaign, calling it “unchristian,” suggesting that it was an invitation to “religious war,” and warning that “the Cross risks being a distancing marker, dividing us into a ‘we’ and a ‘them.'”

Asked in a Twitter Q&A why she refused to help persecuted Christians in the Islamic world, Jackelén herself replied: “We do not help people because they are Christians, but because we are Christians.”

As head of the Church of Sweden, Jackelén has not let her power go to waste. She has just finished overseeing an extensive revision of the church’s manual, its equivalent of the Anglicans’ Book of Common Prayer. The main goal was to make the language more “inclusive” – which meant, among other things, removing references to God as “He” or “the Lord.” As Jesus Christ was indisputably male, the revision also involved pushing God the Son into the background as much as possible. In the local parishes around Sweden, there was considerable opposition to many of the changes recommended under Jackelén’s oversight. On November 23, however, a national Church synod approved the revisions by a considerable margin. A jubilant Jackelén proclaimed: “Let us show the world that we are a church that can deal with diversity.”

It would be foolish to assume that Jackelén’s ecclesiastical revolution will end with this victory. On the contrary, there is every reason to believe that her success at Thursday’s synod will inspire her to redouble her efforts to transform the Church of Sweden into a more Islam-friendly institution – one that ultimately, at the very least, puts Muhammed on an equal plane with Jesus Christ. No, we cannot know what is really in this woman’s heart; but one thing we can be sure of is that when Islam does eventually take over Sweden, her remarkable history of appeasement will not save either her or her Church from a brutal reckoning.

Original Source: Date-stamped: 2017, November, 24. | Time-stamped: 5:41 pm   Author: Bruce Bawer  Article Title: "Reforming" the Church of Sweden Article Link: gatestoneinstitute.org


Share

Nov 2017 The U.S. Middle East Peace Plan?

• No American or European on the face of this earth could force a Palestinian leader to sign a peace treaty with Israel that would be rejected by an overwhelming majority of his people.

• Trump’s “ultimate solution” may result in some Arab countries signing peace treaties with Israel. These countries anyway have no real conflict with Israel. Why should there not be peace between Israel and Kuwait? Why should there not be peace between Israel and Oman? Do any of the Arab countries have a territorial dispute with Israel? The only “problem” the Arab countries have with Israel is the one concerning the Palestinians.

• The question remains: how will the Saudis and the rest of the international community respond to ongoing Palestinian rejectionism and intransigence?

Last week Saudis (PA) Leader Abbas to Riyadh

Who said that Palestinians have no respect for Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab countries? They do.

Palestinians have respect for the money of their Arab brethren. The respect they lack is for the heads of the Arab states, and the regimes and royal families there.

It is important to take this into consideration in light of the growing talk about Saudi Arabia’s effort to help the Trump Administration market a comprehensive peace plan for the Middle East, the details of which remain intriguingly mysterious.

Last week, the Saudis unexpectedly summoned Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas to Riyadh for talks on Trump’s “ultimate solution” for the Israeli-Arab conflict, reportedly being promoted by Jared Kushner.

According to unconfirmed reports, the Saudis pressured Abbas to endorse the Trump Administration’s “peace plan.” Abbas was reportedly told that he had no choice but to accept the plan or resign. At this stage, it remains unclear how Abbas responded to the Saudi “ultimatum.”

Last week, the Saudis unexpectedly summoned Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to Riyadh for talks on Trump’s “ultimate solution” for the Israeli-Arab conflict. Abbas was reportedly told that he had no choice but to accept the plan or resign. Pictured: Abbas on a previous visit to Saudi Arabia, on February 23, 2015, meeting with Saudi King Salman. (Photo by Thaer Ghanaim/PPO via Getty Images)

“ultimate solution”

If true, the Saudi “ultimatum” to Abbas is tantamount to asking him to sign his death warrant. Abbas cannot afford to be seen by his people as being in collusion with an American “peace plan” that does not comply completely with their demands. Abbas has repeatedly made it clear that he will not accept anything less than a sovereign Palestinian state on all the pre-1967 lands, including east Jerusalem. He has also emphasized that the Palestinians will never give up the “right of return” for millions of “refugees” to their former homes inside Israel. Moreover, Abbas has clarified that the Palestinians will not accept the presence of any Israeli in their future Palestinian state.

Abbas has done his dirty work well. He knows that he cannot come back to his people with anything less than what he promised them. He knows that his people have been radicalized to the point that they will not agree to any concessions or compromise with Israel.

And who is responsible for this radicalization? Abbas and other Palestinian leaders, who continue unendingly to tell their people through the media, discourse and mosques that any concession to Israel constitutes treason, pure and simple.

President Donald Trump meets with Saudi Defense Minister and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, March 14, 2017. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

So it would be naïve to think that Saudi Arabia or any other Arab country would be able to strong-arm any Palestinian leader to accept a “peace plan” that requires the Palestinians to make concessions to Israel. Abbas may have much respect for the ambitious and savvy young crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman. This respect, however, certainly stops at the border of the political suicide – and extreme personal risk — from Abbas’s point of view.

Abbas is now caught between two choices, both disastrous: On the one hand, he needs the political backing of his Arab brothers. This is the most he can expect from the Arab countries, most of whom do not give the Palestinians a penny. It is worth noting that, by and large, the Arab countries discarded the Palestinians after the PLO and Yasser Arafat openly supported Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Kuwait was one of several Gulf countries that used to provide the Palestinians with billions of dollars a year. No more.

Since then, the Palestinians have been almost entirely dependent on American and European financial aid. It is safe to assume, then, that the US and EU have more leverage with the Palestinians than most Arab countries.

Nevertheless, no American or European on the face of this Earth could force a Palestinian leader to sign a peace treaty with Israel that would be rejected by an overwhelming majority of his people.

Trump’s “ultimate solution” may result in some Arab countries signing peace treaties with Israel. These countries anyway have no real conflict with Israel. Why should there not be peace between Israel and Kuwait? Why should there not be peace between Israel and Oman? Do any of the Arab countries have a territorial dispute with Israel? The only “problem” the Arab countries have with Israel is the one concerning the Palestinians.

For now, it appears that the vast majority of Arab regimes no longer care about the Palestinians and their leaders. The Palestinians despise the Arab leaders as much as they despise each other. It is a mutual feeling. The Palestinians particularly despise any Arab leader who is aligned with the US. They do not consider the US an honest broker in the Israeli-Arab conflict. The Palestinians, in fact, view the US as being “biased” in favor of Israel, regardless of whether the man sitting in the Oval Office is a Democrat or Republican.

The Saudi crown prince is viewed by Palestinians as a US ally. His close relations with Jared Kushner are seen with suspicion not only by Palestinians, but by many other Arabs as well. Palestinian political analysts such as Faisal Abu Khadra believe that the Palestinian leadership should prepare itself to face the “mysterious” Trump “peace plan.” They are skeptical that the plan would meet the demands of the Palestinians.

The Palestinians appear to be united in rejecting the Trump Administration’s effort to “impose” a solution on them. They are convinced that the Americans, with the help of Saudi Arabia and some Arab countries, are working towards “liquidating” the Palestinian cause. Abbas and his rivals in Hamas now find themselves dreading the US administration’s “peace plan.”

Like lemmings drawn to the sea, the Palestinians seem to be marching towards yet another scenario where they “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” The question remains: how will the Saudis and the rest of the international community respond to ongoing Palestinian rejectionism and intransigence?

Original Source: Date-stamped: 2017, November, 13. | Time-stamped: 5:00 am | Author: Bassam Tawil | Article Title:The U.S. Middle East Peace Plan? | Article Link: gatestoneinstitute.org
Share

Brexit: The Nation is Back!

• In France, before the British vote, the weekly JDD conducted an online poll with one question: Do you want France out of the EU? 88% of people answered “YES!”

• In none of the countries the surveyed was there much support for transferring power to Brussels.

• To calm a possible revolt of millions of poor and unemployed people, countries such as France have maintained a high level of social welfare spending, by borrowing money on international debt markets to pay unemployment insurance benefits, as well as pensions for retired people. Today, France’s national debt is 96.1% of GDP. In 2008, it was 68%.

• In the past few years, these poor and old people have seen a drastic change in their environment: the butcher has become halal, the café does not sell alcohol anymore, and most women in the streets are wearing veils. Even the McDonald’s in France have become halal.

• What is reassuring is that the “Leave” people waited for a legal way to express their protest. They did not take guns or knives to kill Jews or Muslims: they voted. They waited an opportunity to express their feelings.

“How quickly the unthinkable became the irreversible” writes The Economist. They are talking about Brexit, of course.

The question of today is:
Who could have imagined that British people were so tired of being members of The Club?

The question of tomorrow is: What country will be next?

In France, before the British vote, the weekly JDD conducted an online poll with one question: Do you want France out of the EU? 88% of people answered “YES!” This is not a scientific result, but it is nevertheless an indication. A recent — and more scientific — survey for Pew Research found that in France, a founding member of “Europe,” only 38% of people still hold a favorable view of the EU, six points lower than in Britain. In none of the countries surveyed was there much support for transferring power to Brussels.

With Brexit, everybody is discovering that the European project was implemented by no more than a minority of the population: young urban people, national politicians of each country and bureaucrats in Brussels.

All others remain with the same feeling: Europe failed to deliver.

On the economic level, the EU has been unable to keep jobs at home. They have fled to China and other countries with low wages. Globalization proved stronger than the EU. The unemployment rate has never before been so high as inside the EU, especially in France.

In Europe, 10.2% of the workforce is officially unemployed The unemployment rate is 9.9% in France, 22% in Spain.

And take-home salaries have remained low, except for a few categories in finance and high-tech.

To calm a possible revolt of millions of poor and unemployed people, countries such as France have maintained a high level of social welfare spending. Unemployed people continue to be subsidized by the state. How? By borrowing money on international debt markets to pay unemployment insurance benefits, as well as pensions for retired people.

So today France’s national debt is 96.1% of GDP. In 2008, it was 68%.

In the the euro zone (19 countries), the ratio of national debt to GDP in 2015 was 90.7%.

In addition to these issue all, European countries have been remained open to mass-immigration.

Immigration was not an official question of the British “remain” or “leave” campaign. But as noted by Mudassar Ahmed, patron of the Faiths Forum for London and a former adviser to the U.K. government, the question of immigration and diversity has been latent:

“In personal conversations, I have found those most eager to leave the European Union are also most uncomfortable with diversity — not just regarding immigration, but of the diversity that already exists in this country. On the other hand, those who are most eager, in my experience, to support remaining in the European Union are far more open to difference in religion, race, culture and ethnicity”.

Mudassar Ahmed

In France, the question of immigration tied to an eventual “Frexit” is not at all latent. The Front National (FN) strongly supports leaving the EU, and that position is tied to immigration. In France, 200,000 foreigners have been coming annually for several years — from poor countries such as those in North Africa, as well as sub-Saharan countries. The growing presence of Muslims has brought a growing feeling of insecurity, and the cultural traditions of Arab and African countries has created in Europe a cultural “malaise.” Not to everyone, or course. In big cities, people accept diversity. But in the suburbs, it is different. Because those who were on welfare, who were poor, who were old — all these people are living precisely in the same neighborhoods and the same buildings as the new immigrants.

Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, celebrates the Brexit vote under a sign reading, 'And Now: France!', June 24, 2016.

In the past few years, these poor and old people have seen a drastic change in their environment: the butcher has become halal, the café does not sell alcohol anymore, the famous French “jambon beurre” (ham and butter) sandwich disappeared, and most women in the streets are wearing veils. Even the McDonald’s in France have become halal. In Roubaix, for example, all fast food has become halal.

An eventual “Frexit” vote by the poor, the old, and the people on welfare would mean only one thing: “Give me my country back!” Today, to be against the EU is to reclaim the possibility of remaining French in a traditional France.

With the Brexit, the question of the nation is back in Europe. Without immigration, it might have been possible gradually to create an eventual European identity. But with Islam plus terrorism at the door, with politicians saying after each terrorist attack, “These men shouting, ‘Allahu Akbar’ have nothing to do Islam,” the rejection is big.

This “give me my country back” seems frightening. And it is. It is tainted with chauvinism, and chauvinism is not a good thing for any minorities in any country. Jewish people paid a heavy price for chauvinism in WWII.

What is reassuring, nevertheless, is that the “Leave” people waited for a legal way to express their protest. They did not take guns or knives to kill Jews or Muslims: they voted. They waited an opportunity to express their feelings. The “Leave” may not look modern or trendy, but it is peaceful, legal and democratic.

Hope things stay like that.

Share

A Month of Islam in Britain: May 2016

Child Sex Grooming, Prison Brainwashing and “Allah Knows Best”

• “A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. … In a couple more decades Britain may well have its first Muslim Prime Minister. … Reality cannot argue with demographics, so the realistic future for Britain is Islamic.” — Paul Weston, British politician.

• One-third of Muslim adults in Britain do not feel “part of British culture,” according to a new report on British multiculturalism. Nearly half (47%) of Muslims consider their Islamic faith to be the most important part of their identity.

• The government was accused of burying a report on prison extremism which warns that staff have been reluctant to tackle Islamist behavior for fear of being labelled “racist,” according to the Sunday Times. Belmarsh, a maximum-security prison in London, has become “like a jihadi training camp,” according to testimony from a former inmate. There are more than 12,000 Muslims in prisons across England and Wales.

• Former MP Ann Cryer suffered verbal abuse and was accused of “demonizing” the Asian community when she began a campaign more than a decade ago to get the authorities to tackle child sex grooming in Keighley.

• “At the end of the assault, when Mr. Zimmerman was lying motionless and defenseless on the floor of the ticket hall, the defendant crouched over him and quite deliberately began to cut Mr. Zimmerman’s throat with a knife blade.” — Prosecutor in the attempted murder trial of Somalia-born Muhiddin Mire, who attacked a random stranger in the London Underground.

  MAY 1: Mubashir Jamil, a 21-year-old man from Luton, was arrested on suspicion of attempting to travel to Syria and engage in “violent jihad” with the Islamic State. He was charged with “engaging in conduct in preparation for committing acts of terrorism.”

  MAY 2: A senior British jihadi who boasted of recruiting hundreds of Britons for the Islamic State was killed in a drone strike in Syria, according to the Independent. Raphael Hostey, also known as Abu Qaqa al-Britani, left Manchester to join the Islamic State in 2013. The 23-year-old graphic designer became a key recruiter of British fighters and jihadi brides for the terror group and was also heavily involved in its propaganda. At least 700 people from the UK have travelled to support or fight for jihadist groups in Iraq and Syria.

  MAY 4: The “Department of Theology” of the Blackburn Muslim Association ruled that it is “not permissible” for a woman to travel more than 48 miles — deemed to be the equivalent of three days walk — without her husband or a close male relative. The group also ruled that men must grow beards and women must cover their faces. The rulings were accompanied by the catchphrase: “Allah knows best.”

  MAY 7: Labour Party politician Sadiq Khan was sworn in as mayor of London. He is the first Muslim to lead a major European capital. During the election campaign, Khan faced a steady stream of allegations about his past dealings with Muslim extremists and anti-Semites.

British politician Paul Weston warned that Khan’s rise is a harbinger of things to come:

“The previously unthinkable has become the present reality. A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. … In a couple more decades Britain may well have its first Muslim Prime Minister. … Reality cannot argue with demographics, so the realistic future for Britain is Islamic.”

  MAY 7: Mohammed Shaheen, a 43-year-old father of seven, was sentenced to 16 years in prison for raping underage schoolgirls. Shaheen, an immigrant from Pakistan, told the court he was a devout Muslim who had been framed by his victims. Judge Martin Steiger QC said: “He masqueraded as religious when all along he was behaving in this hypocritical way.”

  MAY 8: The Times reported that Britain’s biggest Muslim charity will brand hundreds of buses around the country during Ramadan with a slogan proclaiming glory to Allah. The initiative by Islamic Relief, a government-backed organization, is an attempt to “break down barriers” and portray Islam in a positive light. Islamic Relief has paid for hundreds of buses in Birmingham, Bradford Leicester, London and Manchester to carry advertisements with the slogan “Subhan Allah,” which means “Glory be to Allah” in Arabic.

  MAY 8: Six Algerian terror suspects with links to al-Qaeda were allowed to stay in Britain after winning a protracted legal battle. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) ruled that there was a “real risk” the men would be tortured by the Algerian security services if they were deported. This would have violated Article 3 of the Human Rights Act, which guards against “torture or degrading or inhuman treatment.”

  MAY 9: A Muslim man who was found guilty of threatening to behead a candidate of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) had his sentence overturned on appeal. Aftab Ahmed, 45, had been found guilty of making threats to kill David Robinson-Young, but a Newcastle Crown Court judge said he believed that Ahmed did not intend to act on his threat.

  MAY 10: The Greater Manchester Police (GMP) apologized for a counter-terrorism exercise in which a mock suicide bomber shouted “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is the Greatest). Eight hundred volunteers took part in the overnight drill to make it as realistic as possible. Manchester peace activist Erinma Bell criticized the use of a “Muslim terrorist.” She said “a terrorist can be anyone” and “we need to move away from stereotypes.” A local Muslim leader, Syed Azhar Shah, said it was “shocking to portray Muslims as terrorists” and accused the GMP of “institutional racism.” A statement released by GMP said:

“The scenario for this exercise is based on an attack by an extremist Daesh-style organization and the scenario writers have centered the circumstances around previous similar attacks of this nature, mirroring details of past events to make the situation as real life as possible for all of those involved. However, on reflection we acknowledge that it was unacceptable to use this religious phrase immediately before the mock suicide bombing, which so vocally linked this exercise with Islam. We recognize and apologize for the offense that this has caused.”

  MAY 10: The trial began of three Muslims who plotted to behead British citizens after being inspired by an Islamic State order “to kill civilians everywhere in the West.” The court heard that Haseeb Hamayoon, 29, Yousaf Syed, 20, and his cousin Nadir Syed, 22, planned to carry out a terrorist atrocity after a fatwa was issued by Islamic State spokesman Abu-Mohammad al-Adnani. Hamayoon, who has a Pakistani passport, had bought a “Rambo First Blood II” hunting knife online using his wife’s bank account. British born Nadir Syed had stored images of Lee Rigby’s killers, and the three men had allegedly shared images of beheadings.

  MAY 11: Prime Minister David Cameron apologized to Suliman Gani, a Muslim extremist, for saying he is a supporter of the Islamic State. Gani said accusations that he backs the Islamic State are defamatory and must be retracted. In a statement, Cameron said he was referring to reports that Gani supports “an” Islamic state rather than “the” Islamic State. The Muslim Council of Britain called on Cameron to repeat his apology in Parliament, and for an “urgent review” of Islamophobia in the Conservative party.

  MAY 15: The BBC’s religious output is too Christian, an internal review concluded. A report by Aaqil Ahmed, the BBC’s head of religion and ethics, argued that that Muslim, Hindu and Sikh faiths should get more airtime. One Muslim leader suggested the review could lead to Friday prayers from a mosque being broadcast in the same way that Christian church services currently feature in the BBC’s programming. Ahmed’s appointment to the BBC in 2009 was controversial because of allegations he had shown a pro-Islam bias in his previous role at Channel 4, according to the Telegraph.

  MAY 16: The government confirmed that Sharia-compliant student loans will be offered for the first time in Britain as part of an effort to boost the number of young Muslims applying to university. The new halal (permitted or lawful) finance model complies with Sharia law, which forbids Muslims from taking out loans on which they would be charged interest. In a white paper, the government said:

“We will introduce an alternative finance system to support the participation of students who, for religious reasons, might feel unable to take on interest-bearing loans…. To ensure participation and choice are open to all, we plan to legislate for the creation of an alternative model of student finance.”

  MAY 17: One-third of Muslim adults in Britain do not feel “part of British culture,” according to a new report on British multiculturalism. Nearly half (47%) of Muslims consider their Islamic faith to be the most important part of their identity. Only half (54%) of British adults believe there are a set of values that all nationalities and religions in Britain can agree upon in the future.

  MAY 17: Belmarsh, a maximum-security prison in London, has become “like a jihadi training camp,” according to testimony from a former inmate. Now a whistleblower, the former inmate said that a group of jihadists who call themselves “the Brothers,” or “the Akhi” (Arabic for brother), have gained control of the prison, where many convicted terrorists and terror-related offenders mix freely with ordinary prisoners. “The problem is that Belmarsh is also a holding prison and so young people who are brainwashed and indoctrinated then go out into the wider prison system and create wider Akhi networks.” In the five years to December 31, 2014, the number of Muslim inmates at Belmarsh has more than doubled to 265, or 30% of the total prisoners.

  MAY 17: A Muslim convert who was arrested for a plot to behead a British soldier had his sentence reduced. Brusthom Ziamani, 20, was arrested in east London; he was carrying a 12-inch knife, a hammer and an Islamic flag. At his trial, the court was told that he had researched the location of Army bases in London and had shown his ex-girlfriend weapons, described Lee Rigby’s killer, Michael Adebolajo, as a “legend” and told her he would “kill soldiers.” The judges reviewing his sentence said: “Given his youth, we consider that the custodial part of the sentence, namely 22 years, was too long.” Instead they gave him 19 years.

  MAY 18: Ofsted, the official government agency responsible for inspecting and regulating British schools, admitted that it failed properly to inspect a school run by the Deobandis, a conservative Muslim sect, because the inspector was “prohibited” from talking to pupils or staff. The inspector’s report into child safety at the private Zakaria Muslim Girls’ High School in Batley said that celebrations for the Islamic festival of Eid meant he could only speak to senior managers. After Sky News reported on the issue, Ofsted said it was taking “appropriate action” against the inspector concerned and has re-inspected the school, which teaches 149 girls aged 11 to 16. Deobandis, many of whom are said to shun non-Muslims, are thought to control around half of Britain’s private Islamic schools.

  MAY 18: The Queen’s Speech, setting out the government’s program for the next session of parliament, unveiled a controversial new counter-extremism bill that includes powers to gag individuals and ban organizations deemed as extremist. The bill does not, however, include a definition of extremism. Until now the main focus of British policy has been to prevent violent extremism. Simon Cole, the police lead for the government’s Prevent anti-radicalization program, said that the proposals targeting alleged extremists are not enforceable and risk creating “thought police” in Britain by making police officers judges of “what people can and cannot say.”

  MAY 18: A Muslim man who was arrested after giving police a false name filed a lawsuit against the City of London Police for discrimination. Akmal Afzal, 23, claims he was arrested at the 2012 Olympics because he was an “Asian man with a beard.” Afzal, a Briton of Pakistani descent, was released without charge but is suing for false imprisonment, assault and discrimination. His lawyer said: “His position is he did nothing wrong and he says the reason he was treated in the way he was relates to his ethnic origin and/or his religion.”

  MAY 22: The government was accused of burying a report on prison extremism which warns that staff have been reluctant to tackle Islamist behavior for fear of being labelled “racist,”according to the Sunday Times. The independent review, commissioned by Secretary of State for Justice Michael Gove, says that Islamist inmates have exploited the “sensitivity to racism” among prison staff by making false complaints that they are victims of discrimination. The review recommended the creation of “specially designated units” in high-security prisons to house the most “dangerous, extreme and subversive” Islamists. There are more than 12,000 Muslims in prisons across England and Wales, according to the latest figures.

  MAY 23: British and American intelligence services identified 27-year-old El Shafee Elsheikh as the fourth member of the Islamic State execution cell responsible for beheading 27 hostages. The four guards, led by “Jihadi John,” were nicknamed the “Beatles” because of their English accents. Elsheikh, who was granted asylum in Britain when he was seven, left for Syria in 2012 after being radicalized in just 17 days after attending mosques in London.

  MAY 23: A British Muslim woman who wanted raise her children in the Islamic State in Syria was jailed for two and a half years. Lorna Moore, 34, who failed to tell authorities that her husband, Sajid Aslam, 34, had left for Syria, was planning to take her three young children, one of them 11 months old, to the war zone. During sentencing at the Old Bailey, Judge Charles Wide said Moore, a Muslim convert from Walsall, West Midlands, “knew perfectly well of [her] husband’s dedication to terrorism.”

  MAY 23: A survey conducted by ComRes on behalf of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community UK found that 33% of British adults believe that Islam promotes violence in the UK. The study also found that 56% of Britons disagree with the view that Islam is compatible with British values.

  MAY 24: The BBC reported that a National Health Service (NHS) doctor who spent seven years working in Britain left his wife and two children in Sheffield to join the Islamic State. Issam Abuanza, 37, a Palestinian doctor with British citizenship, is the first practicing NHS doctor known to have joined the Islamic State.

  May 25: Police in West Yorkshire revealed that they are currently investigating 220 alleged cases of child sex grooming in Keighley and Bradford. The cases involve 261 suspects and 188 victims. The revelation came after Keighley’s former MP, Ann Cryer, called for the perpetrators of the crimes to be brought to justice. Cryer suffered verbal abuse and was accused of “demonizing” the Asian community when she began a campaign more than a decade ago to get the authorities to tackle child sex grooming in Keighley.

  MAY 25: A Nigerian man launched an appeal against a decision by the Home Office to strip him of his British nationality. The man, known only as L2 for legal reasons, is directly associated with close friends of Michael Adebolajo, who murdered Lee Rigby in London in May 2013, and Mohammed Emwazi, or “Jihadi John.” L2 was deemed such a national security threat that Home Secretary Theresa May personally signed an order removing his British nationality in 2013.

  MAY 26: Home Secretary Theresa May established an independent review into the “misuse” of Sharia law in Britain. The inquiry will examine if Sharia ideas are being “misused or exploited” to discriminate against women. The review will not, however, examine whether Sharia law itself is discriminatory against women. A Home Office statement said: “It will not be a review of the totality of Sharia law, which is a source of guidance for many Muslims in the UK.” According to May, many British people “benefit a great deal” from Sharia teaching.

Baroness Cox, who has spearheaded a parliamentary drive to rein in unofficial Sharia courts in Britain, said:

“My reservation is that it won’t get to the root of the problem. … a lot of Muslim women I know say that the men in their communities just laugh at this proposed investigation, that they will go underground so the investigation will have to be very robust.


“But the aspects which are causing such concerns — such as that a man can divorce his wife by saying ‘I divorce you’ three times — that is inherent; the right to ‘chastise’ women is inherent; polygamy is inherent. I don’t think those things are a distortion of Sharia law. These are aspects of Sharia law which are unacceptable.”

  MAY 27: A British citizen who plotted to carry out a suicide bomb attack at Heathrow Airport was sentenced to 40 years in prison. Minh Quang Pham, 33, was sentenced in New York for travelling to Yemen to train with members of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Pham pled guilty to three counts of terrorist-related activity based on his support for the group, but denied he intended to carry out his plot and no attack ever occurred. Pham, a Vietnamese born British convert to Islam, was first arrested in Britain in June 2012 and was extradited to the U.S. in February 2015.

  MAY 29: Music festivals, big sports venues and nightclubs have been placed on “high alert” for potential jihadist attacks, according to a senior anti-terrorism officer interviewed by the Sunday Times. Neil Basu, the deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, said that crowded places — including Glastonbury, billed as the world’s largest music festival, which will draw 135,000 people to Somerset from June 22 to 26 — are a major concern for police this summer. Basu warned: “These people are perfectly happy to target civilians with the maximum terror impact. Crowded places were always a concern for us, but now they are right at the top of the agenda.”

  MAY 31: The trial began of a Muslim man who tried to decapitate a random stranger in the London Underground. Somalia-born Muhiddin Mire, 30, attacked musician Lyle Zimmerman, 56, at Leytonstone Underground station on December 5 with a knife while yelling, “This is for my Syrian brothers; I am going to spill your blood.” The jury was told that after the attack, police found images of Islamic State hostages having their throats cut on Mire’s cellphone. The prosecutor said:

“At the end of the assault, when Mr. Zimmerman was lying motionless and defenseless on the floor of the ticket hall, the defendant crouched over him and quite deliberately began to cut Mr. Zimmerman’s throat with a knife blade. Mercifully, Mr. Zimmerman survived the ordeal because, although he suffered three jagged wounds to the front of his neck, none of them caused any damage to any of the major blood vessels in that area.”

Left - Muhiddin Mire, a Somalia-born Muslim, tried to behead musician Lyle Zimmerman at a London Underground station with a knife while yelling 'this is for my Syrian brothers.' Right - Belmarsh maximum-security prison in London has become 'like a jihadi training camp,' according to testimony from a former inmate.
Share

Palestinians: Erasing Christian History

• For Palestinian Christians, the destruction of the ancient Byzantine church ruins is yet a further attempt by Palestinian Muslim leaders to efface both Christian history and signs of any Christian presence in the West Bank and Gaza, under the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas. A growing number of Christians feel they are being systematically targeted by both the PA and Hamas for being Christians.

• Bulldozers were used to destroy some of the church artifacts; some Palestinian Christians accused both Hamas and the PA of copying ISIS tactics to demolish historic sites.

• “Where are the heads of the churches in Jerusalem and the world?… Where are the Vatican and UNESCO? Where are the leaders and politicians who talk, talk, talk about national unity and the preservation of holy sites? Or is this a collective conspiracy to end our existence and history in the East?” — Sami Khalil, a Christian from the West Bank city of Nablus.

• The plight of Palestinian Christians does not interest the international community. That is because Israel cannot be blamed for demolishing the antiquities. If the current policy against Christians persists, the day will come when no Christians will be left in Bethlehem.

Palestinian Christians are up in arms over the destruction of the ruins of an ancient Byzantine church that were recently discovered in Gaza City.

The protest, however, failed to win the attention of the international community, especially United Nations agencies such as UNESCO, whose mission is to secure the world’s cultural and natural heritage.

The ruins of the 1800-year-old church were discovered in Palestine Square, in the Al-Daraj neighborhood of Gaza City, where Hamas is planning to build a shopping mall. The dramatic discovery of the antiquities did not seem to leave an impression on the construction workers, who removed artifacts and continued with their work at the site.

Defying belief, bulldozers were used to destroy some of the church artifacts, drawing sharp criticism from Palestinian Christians, some of whom rushed to accuse both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) of copying ISIS tactics to demolish historic sites.

For Palestinian Christians, the destruction of the church ruins is yet a further attempt by Palestinian Muslim leaders to efface both Christian history and signs of any Christian presence in the Palestinian territories.

Hamas has destroyed the ruins of an 1800-year-old Byzantine church that was recently unearthed in Gaza City.

The charges reflect the bitterness felt by Palestinian Christians against their leaders in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The charges also reveal the growing sense of marginalization and persecution that many Christians feel under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

Palestinian Christians also express disappointment with the lack of interest that the international community, including the Vatican and Christian communities around the world, have shown in this case, which they regard as an assault on their heritage and holy sites.

Hamas claims that it does not have the resources to preserve the ancient site of the church. Preserving the Christian site, they say, would require millions of dollars and hundreds of workers at a time when the Islamist movement is facing a financial crisis due to the ongoing “blockade” on the Gaza Strip.

The Palestinian Authority, for its part, maintains that, as it is not in control of the Gaza Strip, the destruction of antiquities is out of its hands. Still, the PA leadership in the West Bank has not come out publicly against the demolition. This is the same PA that promotes a stabbing and car-ramming “intifada” for the Jews’ “desecrating” the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem by touring the Temple Mount under police protection.

As far as the Palestinian Authority is concerned, visits by Jews to the Temple Mount are far more dangerous than the wrecking of important Christian sites in the Gaza Strip. Instead of denouncing Hamas’s actions itself, the PA’s official news agency, Wafa, ran a report quoting Palestinian archeologists and historians voicing their outrage over the destruction of the Christian site.

One of the leaders of the Christian community in the West Bank, Father Ibrahim Nairouz, wrote an angry letter to PA Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah complaining about the wanton mishandling of the church ruins in the Gaza Strip.

Father Nairouz wrote in his letter: “Would you have handled this issue the same way had the ruins belonged to a mosque or a synagogue?”

He also announced his decision to boycott a tour of the Palestinian prime minister to Bethlehem and Hebron, in protest against the destruction of the church ruins in the Gaza Strip.

Father Nairouz’s protest was joined by many angry Palestinian Christians — and some Muslims — who voiced their revulsion at the wreckage.

Sami Khalil, a Christian from the West Bank city of Nablus, wrote:

I think that silence is up to the stage of conniving. But the question is where are the artists to preserve our Christian Heritage? Where are the heads of the churches in Jerusalem and the world? Where are the bishops? Where are the Vatican and UNESCO? Where are the leaders and politicians who talk, talk, talk about national unity and the preservation of holy sites? Or is this a collective conspiracy to end our existence and history in the East?

Sami Khalil

Another Christian, Anton Kamil Nasser, commented:

Whether it was a church or something else, this is a form of intellectual terrorism and retardation.

Abdullah Kamal, a staff member at Al-Quds University in Jerusalem, said:

Regrettably, the silence over this destruction of this Heritage and historic site in our country is tantamount to a crime.

A Christian woman from East Jerusalem remarked:

Shame on us. If this happened under the Jews, they would have turned the site into a museum.

Yes, all is not well under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas for the Christian minority.

It is no secret that a growing number of Christians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip feel that they are being systematically targeted by both the PA and Hamas for being Christians.

The ravaging of the ancient Byzantine church in Gaza is just one example of the disrespect with which the Palestinian Authority and Hamas deal with their Christian residents.

In yet another incident that has enraged Christians, the PA police last week arrested a prominent Christian businessman in Bethlehem, 60-year-old Raja Elias Freij.

The Palestinian Authority claims that Freij was arrested for threatening a merchant from Bethlehem — a charge he, his family and many other Christians strongly deny. Last weekend, several Christians staged a protest in Bethlehem’s Manger Square to demand the release of Freij, and accused the PA of religious discrimination against him.

The plight of Palestinian Christians does not interest the international community. That is because Israel cannot be blamed for demolishing the antiquities. If the current policy against Christians persists, the day will come when no Christians will be left in Bethlehem, and pilgrims visiting the city will have to bring their own priest with them to lead the prayers.

April 12, 2016 at 5:00 am | by Khaled Abu Toameh | gatestoneinstitute.org "Palestinians: Erasing Christian History"
Share

Hamas’s New Way of Poisoning the Minds of Palestinian Children

4cm Newsfeed Master feature

• The preachers, who belong to the Hamas-controlled Wakf (Islamic trust) Ministry in the Gaza Strip, enter schools and ensure, through the exorcism rite, that the children are repentant and faithful to Islam.

• These are the children who are later recruited as “warriors” in the jihad against Israel and the “infidels.”

• The Gaza City school video captures on camera the Palestinian leaders’ brainwashing and abuse of their own children.

• Now the peace process in the Middle East awaits an exorcism of its own.

Hamas has spent years poisoning the hearts and minds of Palestinian children. The Islamist movement is now trying a new brainwashing tactic: exorcism.

The practice, which aims to cast out “demons” that might have wormed their way into the children’s souls, has shocked many Palestinians.

This newest Hamas-perpetrated child abuse was exposed in a video that was leaked to Palestinian social media. The cruelty of the behavior has caused an uproar among Palestinians.

The video shows hysterical children in the company of exorcising preachers belonging to the Hamas-controlled Wakf (Islamic trust) Ministry in the Gaza Strip. This humiliating and invasive rite is being practiced at the Al-Nil School in Gaza City.

Three boys cry as they undergo an exorcism ritual at the Al-Nil School in Gaza City, performed by preachers belonging to the Hamas-controlled Wakf (Islamic trust) Ministry.

The preachers belong to a group called The Ship of Missionary Salvation. They enter schools in the Gaza Strip and ensure, through the exorcism rite, that the children are repentant and faithful to Islam.

The group is managed by the Wakf Ministry’s General Administration for Preaching and Guidance.

Thriller movies come to mind as the video unfolds, shedding light on the nature of religious indoctrination performed by Hamas on schoolchildren in the Gaza Strip.

One of the Hamas preachers is heard in the video declaring that, “We did not come to enact a theater scene, but to expel the devil from the hearts and minds and enter the satisfaction of Allah into hearts.”

The video features terrified teenagers kneeling in the school yard, while others are crying out loudly. At the same time, the Hamas preachers hold microphones and shout the Islamic battle cry, “Allahu Akbar!” [“Allah is Great!”].”

The Hamas abuse of schoolchildren is far from new, and far from a surprise to those who have long been following the Islamist movement in Gaza. These are the children who are later recruited as “warriors” in the jihad (holy war) against Israel and the “infidels.”

Since its violent takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, Hamas has been using children as human shields and “soldiers” in the fight against Israel. Children dressed in military uniforms and brandishing automatic rifles and knives have become an integral part of Hamas’s military parades and rallies.

Caught on camera, Palestinian children are taught to hate those who are perceived as enemies of Islam. This is how new generations of Palestinians are raised on the glorification of suicide bombers and jihadists.

PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi expressed revulsion over the video, noting that the preachers’ sermons were full of intimidation and horror. This behavior, Ashrawi, stated, demonstrates the “reactionary nature” of the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip, which would have a negative impact on the development of society and the values of Palestinians. Ashrawi also denounced the practice as a blatant violation of conventions protecting children rights.

Even the Marxist terrorist group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), has come out against the video. The group voiced outrage at the “inhumane practices” against the children and called for an immediate inquiry into this form of mental torture and degradation. The group also warned against brainwashing the children and indoctrinating them through religious bigotry.

The Gaza City school video captures on camera the Palestinian leaders’ brainwashing and abuse of their own children.

It also captures the march of Palestinian society towards endorsing the tactics and ideology of radical Islam and groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Now the peace process in the Middle East awaits an exorcism of its own.

April 8, 2016 at 5:30 am | by Khaled Abu Toameh | gatestoneinstitute.org "Hamas's New Way of Poisoning the Minds of Palestinian Children"
Share

European Union Declares War on Internet Free Speech

• Opponents counter that the initiative amounts to an assault on free speech in Europe. They say that the European Union’s definition of “hate speech” and “incitement to violence” is so vague that it could include virtually anything deemed politically incorrect by European authorities, including criticism of mass migration, Islam or even the EU itself.

• Some Members of the European Parliament have characterized the EU’s code of online conduct — which requires “offensive” material to be removed from the Internet within 24 hours — as “Orwellian.”

• “By deciding that ‘xenophobic’ comment in reaction to the crisis is also ‘racist,’ Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people… into ‘racist’ views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as ‘racist.'” — Douglas Murray.

• In January 2013, Facebook suspended the account of Khaled Abu Toameh after he wrote about corruption in the Palestinian Authority. The account was reopened 24 hours later, but with the two posts deleted and no explanation.

The European Union (EU), in partnership with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft, has unveiled a “code of conduct” to combat the spread of “illegal hate speech” online in Europe.

Proponents of the initiative argue that in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels, a crackdown on “hate speech” is necessary to counter jihadist propaganda online.

Opponents counter that the initiative amounts to an assault on free speech in Europe. They say that the EU’s definition of “hate speech” and “incitement to violence” is so vague that it could include virtually anything deemed politically incorrect by European authorities, including criticism of mass migration, Islam or even the European Union itself.

Some Members of the European Parliament have characterized the EU’s code of online conduct — which requires “offensive” material to be removed from the Internet within 24 hours, and replaced with “counter-narratives” — as “Orwellian.”

The “code of conduct” was announced on May 31 in a statement by the European Commission, the unelected administrative arm of the European Union. A summary of the initiative follows:

“By signing this code of conduct, the IT companies commit to continuing their efforts to tackle illegal hate speech online. This will include the continued development of internal procedures and staff training to guarantee that they review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.

“The IT companies will also endeavor to strengthen their ongoing partnerships with civil society organisations who will help flag content that promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct. The IT companies and the European Commission also aim to continue their work in identifying and promoting independent counter-narratives [emphasis added], new ideas and initiatives, and supporting educational programs that encourage critical thinking.”

European Commission

Excerpts of the “code of conduct” include:

“The IT Companies share the European Commission’s and EU Member States’ commitment to tackle illegal hate speech online. Illegal hate speech, as defined by the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law and national laws transposing it, means all conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin….

“The IT Companies support the European Commission and EU Member States in the effort to respond to the challenge of ensuring that online platforms do not offer opportunities for illegal online hate speech to spread virally. The spread of illegal hate speech online not only negatively affects the groups or individuals that it targets, it also negatively impacts those who speak out for freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination in our open societies and has a chilling effect on the democratic discourse on online platforms.

“While the effective application of provisions criminalizing hate speech is dependent on a robust system of enforcement of criminal law sanctions against the individual perpetrators of hate speech, this work must be complemented with actions geared at ensuring that illegal hate speech online is expeditiously acted upon by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame. To be considered valid in this respect, a notification should not be insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated.

“The IT Companies, taking the lead on countering the spread of illegal hate speech online, have agreed with the European Commission on a code of conduct setting the following public commitments:

• “The IT Companies to have in place clear and effective processes to review notifications regarding illegal hate speech on their services so they can remove or disable access to such content. The IT companies to have in place Rules or Community Guidelines clarifying that they prohibit the promotion of incitement to violence and hateful conduct.

• “The IT Companies to review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.

• “The IT Companies and the European Commission, recognising the value of independent counter speech against hateful rhetoric and prejudice, aim to continue their work in identifying and promoting independent counter-narratives, new ideas and initiatives and supporting educational programs that encourage critical thinking.”

EU code of conduct

The agreement also requires Internet companies to establish a network of “trusted reporters” in all 28 EU member states to flag online content that “promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct.”

The EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, Vĕra Jourová, has defended the initiative:

“The recent terror attacks have reminded us of the urgent need to address illegal online hate speech. Social media is unfortunately one of the tools that terrorist groups use to radicalize young people and racists use to spread violence and hatred. This agreement is an important step forward to ensure that the internet remains a place of free and democratic expression, where European values and laws are respected. I welcome the commitment of worldwide IT companies to review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.”

Vĕra Jourová

Others disagree. The National Secular Society (NSS) of the UK warned that the EU’s plans “rest on a vague definition of ‘hate speech’ and risk threatening online discussions which criticize religion.” It added:

“The agreement comes amid repeated accusations from ex-Muslims that social media organizations are censoring them online. The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain has now begun collecting examples from its followers of Facebook censoring ‘atheist, secular and ex-Muslim content’ after false ‘mass reporting’ by ‘cyber Jihadists.’ They have asked their supporters to report details and evidence of any instances of pages and groups being ‘banned [or] suspended from Facebook for criticizing Islam and Islamism.'”

National Secular Society (NSS)

NSS communications officer Benjamin Jones said:

“Far from tackling online ‘cyber jihad,’ the agreement risks having the exact opposite effect and entrapping any critical discussion of religion under vague ‘hate speech’ rules. Poorly-trained Facebook or Twitter staff, perhaps with their own ideological bias, could easily see heated criticism of Islam and think it is ‘hate speech,’ particularly if pages or users are targeted and mass reported by Islamists.”

Benjamin Jones

In an interview with Breitbart London, the CEO of Index on Censorship, Jodie Ginsburg, said:

“Hate speech laws are already too broad and ambiguous in much of Europe. This agreement fails to properly define what ‘illegal hate speech’ is and does not provide sufficient safeguards for freedom of expression.

“It devolves power once again to unelected corporations to determine what amounts to hate speech and police it — a move that is guaranteed to stifle free speech in the mistaken belief this will make us all safer. It won’t. It will simply drive unpalatable ideas and opinions underground where they are harder to police — or to challenge.

“There have been precedents of content removal for unpopular or offensive viewpoints and this agreement risks amplifying the phenomenon of deleting controversial — yet legal — content via misuse or abuse of the notification processes.”

Breitbart London

A coalition of free speech organizations, European Digital Rights and Access Now, announced their decision not to take part in future discussions with the European Commission, saying that “we do not have confidence in the ill-considered ‘code of conduct’ that was agreed.” A statement warned:

“In short, the ‘code of conduct’ downgrades the law to a second-class status, behind the ‘leading role’ of private companies that are being asked to arbitrarily implement their terms of service. This process, established outside an accountable democratic framework, exploits unclear liability rules for online companies. It also creates serious risks for freedom of expression, as legal — but controversial — content may well be deleted as a result of this voluntary and unaccountable take-down mechanism.

“This means that this ‘agreement’ between only a handful of companies and the European Commission is likely in breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (under which restrictions on fundamental rights should be provided for by law), and will, in practical terms, overturn case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the defense of legal speech.”

European Digital Rights and Access

Janice Atkinson, an independent MEP for the South East England region, summed it up this way: “It’s Orwellian. Anyone who has read 1984 sees its very re-enactment live.”

Even before signing on to the EU’s code of conduct, social media sites have been cracking down on free speech, often at the behest of foreign governments.

In September 2015, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard on a live microphone confronting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on what he was doing to prevent criticism of her open-door immigration policies.

In January 2016, Facebook launched an “Online Civil Courage Initiative” aimed at Facebook users in Germany and geared toward “fighting hate speech and extremism on the Internet.”

Writing for Gatestone Institute, British commentator Douglas Murray noted that Facebook’s assault on “racist” speech “appears to include anything critical of the EU’s current catastrophic immigration policy.” He wrote:

“By deciding that ‘xenophobic’ comment in reaction to the crisis is also ‘racist,’ Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people (who, it must be stressed, are opposed to Chancellor Merkel’s policies) into ‘racist’ views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as ‘racist.’ This is a policy that will do its part in pushing Europe into a disastrous future.

Douglas Murray

Facebook has also set its sights on Gatestone Institute affiliated writers. In January 2013, Facebook suspended the account of Khaled Abu Toameh after he wrote about corruption in the Palestinian Authority. The account was reopened 24 hours later, but with the two posts deleted and no explanation. Abu Toameh wrote:

“It’s still a matter of censorship. They decide what’s acceptable. Now we have to be careful about what we post and what we share. Does this mean we can’t criticize Arab governments anymore?”

Abu Toameh

In June 2016, Facebook suspended the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestone’s Swedish expert, after she posted a Gatestone video to her Facebook feed — called “Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic.” In an editorial, Gatestone wrote:

“After enormous grassroots pressure from Gatestone’s readers, the Swedish media started reporting on Facebook’s heavy-handed censorship. It backfired, and Facebook went into damage-control mode. They put Ingrid’s account back up — without any explanation or apology. Ironically, their censorship only gave Ingrid’s video more attention.

“Facebook and the EU have backed down — for now. But they’re deadly serious about stopping ideas they don’t like. They’ll be back.”

Ingrid Carlqvist

This week, the EU, in partnership with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft, unveiled a ‘code of conduct’ to combat the spread of ‘illegal hate speech’ online in Europe. The next day, Facebook suspended the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestone’s Swedish expert, after she posted a Gatestone video to her Facebook feed — called ‘Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic.’

Share

Meet the First Muslim Mayor of London

• Conservative Party candidate Zac Goldsmith accused Khan of giving “platform, oxygen and cover” to Islamic extremists. He also accused Khan of “hiding behind Britain’s Muslims” by branding as “Islamophobes” those who shed light on his past.

• “The questions are genuine, they are serious. They are about his willingness to share platforms with people who want to ‘drown every Israeli Jew in the sea.’ It’s about his having employed someone who believed the Lee Rigby murder was fabricated. It’s about his career before being an MP, coaching people in how to sue the police.” — Conservative Party candidate Zac Goldsmith.

• In 2008, Khan gave a speech at the Global Peace and Unity Conference, an event organized by the Islam Channel, which has been censured repeatedly by British media regulators for extremism. Members of the audience were filmed flying the black flag of jihad while Khan was speaking.

• “I regret giving the impression I subscribed to their views and I’ve been quite clear I find their views abhorrent.” — Sadiq Khan.

• “A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. I suppose this is hardly a shock, though. The native English are a demographic minority (and a rapidly dwindling one) in London, whilst Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh are a rapidly expanding demographic.” — British politician Paul Weston.

Labour Party politician Sadiq Khan has been sworn in as mayor of London. He is the first Muslim to lead a major European city.

Khan, 45, is the London-born son of Pakistani immigrants. His father was a bus driver and he grew up with seven siblings in a government-subsidized apartment. He studied law, became a university professor and served as chairman of the civil liberties pressure group Liberty. He was elected to Parliament in 2005. Khan’s supporters say he is the epitome the Muslim immigrant success story.

Khan — who won 57% of the ballot, or 1.3 million votes, a number which happens to be roughly equal to Muslim population of London

— has promised to be

the British Muslim who takes the fight to the extremists.

Others are not so sure. During the election campaign, Khan faced a steady stream of allegations about his past dealings with Muslim extremists and anti-Semites.

Khan’s opponent, Conservative Party politician Zac Goldsmith, drew attention to Khan’s past career as a human rights lawyer that included repeated public appearances alongside radical Muslims.

Goldsmith accused Khan of giving “platform, oxygen and cover” to Islamic extremists. He also accused Khan of “hiding behind Britain’s Muslims” by branding as “Islamophobes” those who shed light on his past.

In an interview with the London Evening Standard, Goldsmith said:

“To be clear, I have never suggested he [Khan] is an extremist but without a shadow of doubt he has given platform, oxygen and cover to people who are extremists. “I think he is playing with fire. The questions are genuine, they are serious. They are about his willingness to share platforms with people who want to ‘drown every Israeli Jew in the sea.’

“It’s about his having employed someone who believed the Lee Rigby murder was fabricated. It’s about his career before being an MP, coaching people in how to sue the police. “It just goes on and on and on. To pretend those are not legitimate questions, to pretend that by asking those questions newspapers, Londoners or my campaign are engaging in Islamophobia is unbelievably irresponsible.

“It is just obscene that somebody who wants to be the mayor of the world’s greatest city, to be in charge of our police and security, should behave not only with such bad judgment but in a way that is totally shameless.”

Goldsmith also drew attention to Khan’s ties with Suliman Gani, a Muslim cleric in Tooting, the constituency in South London where Khan is an MP. “To share a platform nine times with Suliman Gani, one of the most repellent figures in this country, you don’t do it by accident,” Goldsmith said.

Goldsmith was referring to a Sunday Times exposé, which revealed that between 2004 and 2013, Khan had spoken alongside Gani on at least nine occasions, “even though Gani has called women ‘subservient’ to men and condemned homosexuality, gay marriage, and even organ transplants.”

Gani — who has ties to the extremist Islamist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir, and has rallied in support of Shaker Aamer, an al-Qaeda terrorist who was detained at Guantanamo Bay — is also linked to the London-based Tayyibun Institute, which the British government says “tolerates or promotes non-violent extremism.”

According to the Times, on the night of the Paris attacks in November 2015, Gani appeared at an “Islamic question time” event in Bedford, where speakers reportedly told British Muslims to “struggle” for an “Islamic state.”

Khan and Gani first shared a platform in August 2004 at an event organized by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American imam who was killed in 2011 by a CIA-led drone strike in Yemen.

According to the Times, Khan spoke at least four times at events organized by Stop Political Terror, which has since merged with CAGE, a group that called the Islamic State butcher Jihadi John a “beautiful young man.”

In an interview with the Times, Davis Lewin, deputy director of the Henry Jackson Society, an anti-extremism think tank, said:

“Gani has campaigned on behalf of convicted terrorists, appeared at events designed to undermine government counter-radicalization strategies, including sharing platforms with a pro-terrorist organization such as CAGE, and is said to hold repugnant views about women and the lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans community.

“Given that the UK, and London in particular, is a major target for Islamist-inspired terrorist attacks, it is intolerable to see any politician, much less one seeking such a vitally important office as mayor of London, associate with an individual such as this.

“Mr Khan’s reportedly repeatedly sharing a platform with this man, whose views are widely available, is deeply alarming.”

Khan also spent years campaigning to prevent Babar Ahmad from being extradited to the United States on charges of providing material support to terrorism. Ahmad, who admitted his guilt, later said that his support for the Taliban was “naïve.”

In 2002, Khan represented the leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan. Khan tried to reverse a decision by the Home Office, which had banned Farrakhan from entering the UK due to fears that his anti-Semitic views would stir up racial hatred. Farrakhan has called Jews “bloodsuckers” and referred to Judaism as “a gutter religion.”

At the time, Khan said: “Mr. Farrakhan is not anti-Semitic and does not preach a message of racial hatred and antagonism.” Khan added:

“Farrakhan is preaching a message of self-discipline, self-reliance, atonement and responsibility. He’s trying to address the issues and problems we have in the UK, black on black crime and problems in the black community. It’s outrageous and astonishing that the British Government is trying to exclude this man.”

Khan now says: “Even the worst people deserve a legal defense.”

In 2004, Khan was the chief legal advisor to the Muslim Council of Britain, a group linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. Khan defended Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian-born Islamist who has been banned from entering the UK. Al-Qaradawi has expressed support for Hamas suicide bombings against Israel: “It’s not suicide, it is martyrdom in the name of Allah.” According to Khan, however, “Quotes attributed to this man may or may not be true.”

Also in 2004, Khan shared a platform with a half-dozen Islamic extremists in London at a political meeting where women were told to use a separate entrance. One of the speakers was Azzam Tamimi, who has said he wants Israel destroyed and replaced with an Islamic state. Another speaker was Daud Abdullah, who has led boycotts of Holocaust Memorial Day. Yet another speaker was Ibrahim Hewitt, a Muslim hardliner who believes that adulterers should be “stoned to death.”

In 2006, Khan attended a mass rally in Trafalgar Square to protest the publication of cartoons of Mohammed by Western newspapers. One of those present at the rally was Tamimi, who told Sky News: “The publication of these cartoons will cause the world to tremble. Fire will be throughout the world if they don’t stop.” Khan defended Tamimi: “Speakers can get carried away but they are just flowery words.”

In 2008, Khan gave a speech at the Global Peace and Unity Conference, an event organized by the Islam Channel, which has been censured repeatedly by British media regulators for extremism. Members of the audience were filmed flying the black flag of jihad while Khan was speaking.

Also in 2008, Khan wrote that Turkey should be allowed to join the European Union in order to prove that the bloc is not a “Christian Club” that discriminates against Muslims:

“Muslims across Europe will see the question for Turkish admission to the EU as a clear test of European inclusion. If the door is slammed shut it will be understood by 20 million Muslim citizens of the EU that the basis of the decision to treat Turkey differently to new members like Bulgaria or Romania has been made on the basis that Europe is a ‘Christian Club.’

“Some will see this as a clear indication that Muslims can never be a part of the story of Europe or the West. That will undermine everybody working to say that of course one can be British, European and Muslim, or French, European and Muslim.”

In 2009, when Khan was the Minister for Community Cohesion in charge of government efforts to eradicate extremism, he gave an interview to the Iran-backed Press TV. He described moderate Muslims as “Uncle Toms,” a racial slur used against blacks to imply that they are too eager to please whites.

In the same interview, Khan expressed support for boycotts of Israeli products: “You know, there’s nothing wrong, and I encourage people to protest, to demonstrate, to complain, to write into newspapers and TV, to, if you want to boycott certain goods, boycott certain goods — all lawful means open in a democratic society.”

In 2012, Khan addressed and praised the Federation of Student Islamic Societies (FOSIS), an umbrella group founded by activists from the Muslim Brotherhood. The British government has criticized FOSIS for promoting Islamic extremism.

In 2014, Khan expressed support for Baroness Warsi, who resigned from Prime Minister David Cameron’s cabinet because she felt that Cameron was insufficiently critical of Israel. In an essay for the Guardian, (which has now been removed from the Guardian’s website) Khan wrote:

“Warsi must be listened to when she says, ‘our response to [Gaza] is becoming a basis for radicalization that could have consequences for us for years to come’ […] The government’s failure to criticise Israel’s incursion is not just a moral failure — it goes directly against Britain’s interests in the world and risks making our citizens less safe as a result.”

Commentator Anthony Posner wrote:

“Although Khan has assured Londoners that he would not use the mayoral office as ‘a pulpit to pronounce on foreign affairs,’ one wonders if he would really be able to remain neutral if London was once again dealing with large anti-Israel demos. On the basis of his response to Warsi’s resignation, it seems unlikely that he would show restraint.”

In March 2016, Khan was pressured to fire a top aide, Shueb Salar, after the Daily Mail revealed that Salar was sending misogynistic messages on social media: “Along with homophobic and sexist comments, Salar jokes about rape and murder, claims Bengali people ‘smell’ and said he thought the slaying of soldier Lee Rigby by extremists in 2013 may have been fabricated.”

In May, a close ally of Khan, Labour politician Muhammed Butt, apologized for sharing a Facebook post which compared Israel with Islamic State.

In an election debate aired by the BBC on April 18, Khan said he had “never hidden” the fact that he had represented “some pretty unsavory characters.” When asked if he regretted sharing a platform with extremists, he said: “I regret giving the impression I subscribed to their views and I’ve been quite clear I find their views abhorrent.”

Labour MP Rob Marchant said he was worried about Khan’s links to extremists, but that he should be given the benefit of the doubt:

“While this dabbling with Islamist politics may well have been more to do with a streak of ruthless populism in Khan in building political support, than a genuine meeting of minds with the Islamists, it does cast some doubt upon both his judgement and his values.”

By contrast, British politician Paul Weston, who has long cautioned about the Islamization of Britain, warned that Khan’s rise is a harbinger1)http://www.dictionary.com/browse/harbinger [anything that foreshadows a future event; omen; sign ie. UK is being incrementally taken over by Islam] of things to come:

“The previously unthinkable has become the present reality. A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. I suppose this is hardly a shock, though. The native English are a demographic minority (and a rapidly dwindling one) in London, whilst Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh are a rapidly expanding demographic…..

“In a couple more decades Britain may well have its first Muslim Prime Minister, and I think we can safely assume he will be of the same ideological stock as Sadiq Khan…. Reality cannot argue with demographics, so the realistic future for Britain is Islamic.”

May 8, 2016 at 5:00 am | by Soeren Kern | http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8011/sadiq-khan
Share

References   [ + ]

1. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/harbinger [anything that foreshadows a future event; omen; sign ie. UK is being incrementally taken over by Islam]