Victory Mosque declines generous offer to move it farther from GZ

In case anyone on planet earth does not think this is a provocation, its worth noting that this area is pretty much strictly a business area, and very few people actually live there. So there is not a lot of bars or churches and so on in the area. There has already been an admission that it has to draw its people from outside the area so this facility, should it be built, is not serving any actual need by any community at all.

Just thought I would point that out. Thanks Sherri for sending me this link from FOX

Offer Rejected to Move Mosque Away From Ground Zero to ‘State Property’

Gov. David Paterson has offered state help if the developers of a proposed mosque near ground zero agree to move the project farther away from the site of the Sept. 11 attack (AP).

The developers of the so-called Ground Zero mosque rejected New York Gov. David Paterson’s offer to provide state property if the project is moved farther away from where the twin towers once stood.

In an effort to appease disputing parties, Paterson had said Tuesday that he would provide state help to the group sponsoring the Cordoba House if the developers opt to move it elsewhere.

“Frankly, if the sponsors were looking for property anywhere at a distance that would be such that it would accommodate a better feeling among the people who are frustrated, I would look into trying to provide them with the state property they would need,” Paterson said.

While Paterson has “no objection” to the mosque being built a few blocks away from Ground Zero, he said he’s “very sensitive to the desire of those who are adamant against it to see something else worked out.”

But Paterson said Wednesday that the developers told his office they weren’t interested in moving. Continue Reading →

The facts behind New York City’s new ‘Victory Mosque’s’ Imam

From Hudson New York

The Mosque at Ground Zero: Who Is Behind It?

by Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
July 30, 2010 at 5:30 am

The Imam behind the controversial mosque at Ground Zero dreams of Islamizing United States, as exposed in his book, which has two titles: one in English,m and one in Arabic

In the U.S., his book is called, ‘What’s Right with America Is What’s right with Islam.”

The same book, published in Arabic, bears the title, “The Call from the WTC Rubble: Islamic Da’wah {Proseletism}from the Heart of America Post-9/11.”

Here we get exactly the Imam, who is assigned to “spread Islam right from the WTC rubble.”

Now, let us have some glimpse over the funders and backers of this mosque project. According to information, a scholar and charity head appointed to President Obama’s White House Fellowships Commission is closely tied to the Muslim leaders behind this proposed controversial Islamic cultural center to be built near the site of the Sept. 11 attacks. The White House fellow, Vartan Gregorian, is president of Carnegie Corp. of New York.

Gregorian also serves on the board of the Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum. The museum is reportedly working with the American Society for Muslim Advancement, whose leaders are behind the mosque, to ensure the future museum will represent the voices of American Muslims.

“[The Sept. 11 museum will represent the] voices of American Muslims in particular, and it will honor members of other communities who came together in support and collaboration with the Muslim community on September 11 and its aftermath,” stated Daisy Khan, wife of the founder of the society and chairman of the of the Cordoba Initiative, Imam Faidal AbdulRauf Khan, and executive director of the society.

The future Sept. 11 museum’s oral historian, Jenny Pachucki, is collaborating with the society to ensure the perspective of American Muslims is woven into the overall experience of the museum, according to the museum’s blog.

Daisy Khan’s husband, Feisal Abdul Rauf, is the founder of the society as well as chairman of Cordoba Initiative.

With Gregorian at its helm, Carnegie Corp. is at the top of the list of society supporters on the Islamic group’s website. Carnegie is also listed as a funder of both of the society’s partner organizations, Search for Common Ground and the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations. Gregorian was a participant in the U.N. body’s first forum, as was Rauf.

Rauf is vice chairman on the board of the Interfaith Center of New York, which honored Gregorian at an awards dinner in 2008.

Gregorian, born in Tabriz, Iran, served for eight years as a president of the New York Public Library and was also president of Brown University. He is the author of “Islam: A Mosaic, Not a Monolith.”

According to a book review by the Middle East Forum, Gregorian’s book “establishes the Islamist goal of world domination.”

A chapter of the book, “Islamism: Liberation Politics,” quotes Ayatollah Khomeini: “Islam does not conquer. Islam wants all countries to become Muslim, of themselves.”

Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, is quoted stating it “is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its laws on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.”

Gregorian himself recommends for Muslims a system he calls “theo-democracy,” which he defines as “a divine democratic government” that, according to the book review, “would have a limited popular sovereignty under the suzerainty of Allah.”

Recently, World Net Daily reported that Rauf refused during a live radio interview to condemn violent jihad groups as terrorists. Rauf also repeatedly refused on-air to affirm the U.S. designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization or call the Muslim Brotherhood extremists.

The Brotherhood openly seeks to spread Islam around the world, while Hamas is committed to Israel’s destruction and is responsible for scores of suicide bombings, shootings and rocket attacks aimed at Jewish civilian population centers.

During that interview, Rauf was also asked who he believes was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks.

“There’s no doubt,” stated Rauf. “The general perception all over the world was it was created by people who were sympathetic to Osama bin Laden. Whether they were part of the killer group or not, these are details that need to be left to the law-enforcement experts.”

Rauf has been on record several times as blaming U.S. policies for the Sept. 11 attacks. He has been quoted refusing to admit Muslims carried out the attacks.

Referring to the Sept. 11 attacks, Rauf told CNN, “U.S. policies were an accessory to the crime that happened. We [the U.S.] have been an accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. Osama bin Laden was made in the USA.”

Madeline Brooks, a regular contributor of Weekly Blitz and anti-Jihadist columnist, who attended a sermon this year by Rauf, quoted the Islamic leader as stating “some people say it was Muslims who attacked on 9/11.”

An unidentified group with unknown sponsors has purchased building with US$ 4.85 million cash steps away from where the World Trade Center once stood — to turn it into potentially one of the largest New York City mosques or Islamic Mecca right inside USA.

The Imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, told the New York Times — which put the story on its front page — that he has assembled several million dollars to turn it into “an Islamic center near the city’s most hallowed piece of land that would stand as one of ground zero’s more unexpected and striking neighbors.”

The 61-year-old Imam said he paid $4.85 million for it — in cash, records show. With 50,000 square feet of air rights and enough financing, he plans an ambitious project of $150 million, he said.

Most US mosques, including many in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx are funded directly or indirectly by Saudi Arabia the country to which 15 of the 19 hijackers who bombed the World Trade Center belonged. The UAE, Qatar and Iran are other major sponsors across the USA.

The source of money matters: a significant part of the hundreds of mosques being built and already erected in this country double up as cultural Islamic centers for distributing literature– Islamist propaganda in fact—from Bay Ridge Brooklyn to Detroit, and for schooling growing Muslim minorities. They house Imams of unknown origin and education, many of whom do not speak a word in English but preach in Arabic and Urdu — radical messages, it often turns out.

While Imam Faisal is gradually moving ahead with his master plan of constructing the Mecca of Islam in NYC, unknown patrons are continuing to put huge amount of cash in gradually having a strong Islamist grip over world media.

In United Kingdom, newspapers like Islamic Times, The Muslim News, The Muslim Weekly, or radio stations like Radio Apni Awaz, Radio Dawn or TV channels like Islam Channel, Muslim TV are only few examples. According to information, Muslim “‘entrepreneurs” are gradually buying shares in several news outlets in UK with money received from unknown sources. Hundreds of millions of dollars are flowing into such projects, with the ultimate goal of virtually waging Islamic Jihad over global media.

There are a few dozens Islamic TV channels already on air. Peace TV [run by notorious Zakir Naik], ARY TV, Q-TV, Islamic TV, Muslim TV; and Islam Channel – UK:

Commenting on Britain’s most popular Islam Channel, Britain’s Office of Communications, OFCOM, in a report found that a number of presenters with extremis tendencies were regularly given the opportunity to air their opinions on the network.

The report also condemned a channel headquartered in London for being demeaning to women, saying that programs instructed women that they could not refuse to have sexual relations with their husbands. Under British law — and recently in the US in a case which was later overturned — a husband who forces his wife to have sex with him can be charged with rape.

The report added that on one program, women were told that they should not leave their homes without their husband’s consent, and should always have a male escort. Another suggested that women who used perfume were prostitutes. Concerns were also raised in the report over a religious advice program in which viewers were told that “the majority of people in hell will be women” because they are the cause of “calamities, hardship and suffering” in Western society.

The channel was accused of promoting the speeches of Anwar al Awlaki, an extremist preacher who has been linked to al Qaeda, and the views of Hizb ut-Tahrir, a fundamentalist organization which the former Prime Minister Tony Blair had tried to ban.

The Islam Channel is watched by an estimated 59 per cent of the UK’s two million Muslims. It is also available as a satellite channel across Europe and Africa.

New Islam TV – Africa:

In Africa, a company named Multichoice has launched a channel named New Islam TV, which is added in DStv bouquets, reaching millions of people. The channel offers choice news and current affairs, children and women’s programs, as well as Quran recitals in Arabic with English subtitles, Islamic values and doctrine.

Azhari TV – Egypt

Egyptian Al Azhar University is set to launch a satellite based television channel in months targeting “1.5 million Muslims and non-Muslims alike in the world.”

Head of Al Azhar, Sheikh Mohamed Sayed Tantawi, commenting on this channel, which is funded by a Libyan businessman named Hassan Tatanaki said, “in the Age of Obama we realized it was time to look at new ways to deliver our message.”

Hassan Tatanaki placed an initial investment of US$ 2.7 million in this project. Several news sources claim that the real amount of investment in the channel is much higher than shown in the document. The channel will feature a daily sermon from Sheikh Mohamed Tantawi, documentaries relating to al-Azhar, talk shows and an animated series on the Koran. The channel will broadcast 75 percent of its output in Arabic, with the rest initially in English and French. Other languages will be added in 2011.

Another Islamic TV channel named Al Sufiya Wa Atasawaf will also be launched from Egypt in several months.

Al Falah TV – Malaysia

An Islamic television channel named Al Falah TV has been launched by a Malaysian company, World Islamic Television Network. Its chairman, Khairuddin Abu Hassan. said, “This channel will act as a hub for the collection of television programs from Islamic nations and export the same to Europe, the United States and East Asia.”


Mainstream Islamic organisations ‘share al-Qaeda ideology’

Many apparently mainstream Muslim groups have the same ideology as violent Islamists, according to a secret report from the think tank Quilliam. The Telegraph:

H/T Snaphanen

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent
Published: 2:59PM BST 05 Aug 2010

The report, sent to the government’s Office for Security and Counter Terrorism (OSCT), was not intended for publication but has now been leaked on the internet.

Entitled “Preventing terrorism, where next for Britain?” it says the ideology of non-violent Islamists is “broadly the same as that of violent Islamists” adding “they disagree only on tactics.”

It produces a list of those it believes are “non-violent Islamists” and adds: “These are a selection of the various groups and institutions active in the UK which are broadly sympathetic to Islamism.

“Whilst only a small proportion will agree with al-Qaeda’s tactics, many will agree with their overall goal of creating a single ‘Islamic state’ which would bring together all Muslims around the world under a single government and then impose on them a single interpretation of sharia as state law.”

The document adds that if the government engages with such groups “it risks empowering proponents of the ideology, if not the methodology, that is behind terrorism.” Continue Reading →

Parents’ fury at council plans for halal-only menus in primary schools

Leftists please take note: When there are only a few Muslims in a free nation, they are of course, and as they should be, free to bring their own dietary needs so long as those products do not violate local laws on food handling, preparation, ingredients and animal welfare. The fact that Halal food usually violates all of these not withstanding, once you have a few more Muslims they demand that schools provide Halal, (food stuffs prepared in the Islamic manner) and other public institutions must supply and pay for it, for the Muslims who go there.

Up to now, some leftists may go along with it all, as so many have no real understanding of what freedom of religion was supposed to mean, namely, people being free to practice their religion, free of state persecution, but not free to break laws or impose it on others. But now we see as soon as Muslims feel they have enough percentage to get away with it, they impose their lifestyle choices on the rest of us. This is a critical shift. Having granted Muslims the freedom to break local animal welfare laws to slaughter animals in a barbaric fashion, Muslims demand that no one else have the freedom to make their own choices outside of the Islamic set of options.

This is in England. If it happens there, the home of Magna Carta, and arguably the birth place of the very idea of individual liberties, it can, and will, happen here, wherever here happens to be for you.

Eeyore for Vlad T

From The Daily Mail

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 5:33 PM on 5th August 2010

Parents have expressed fury at plans to serve pupils halal-only menus for school dinners.

In a move which has also enraged animal welfare groups, only meat from animals killed and prepared using Islamic teaching may be allowed at 52 primaries in Harrow.

Critics say the plan puts the needs of Muslim children before those of other faiths, while parents say they have not been consulted over the scheme.

Harrow high street: Schools in the borough are to serve halal meat under council plansHarrow High Street: Schools in the borough are to serve halal meat under council plans

Schools are free to opt in to the programme or look elsewhere for their meals from the start of next month, according to Harrow Council.

The local authority is thought to be the first in England to consider insisting on a halal-only menu apparently after recommendations of dietitians.

According to the 2001 Census, Harrow is one of the most religiously diverse areas in Britain with fewer than 50 per cent of the population Christian, a fifth Hindu and 7 per cent Muslim and six per cent Jewish.

The council says the composition of the area’s primary schools is now significantly different, and the Muslim population is larger.

Using the halal method, animals are slaughtered by being slashed across the neck and being left so that the blood drains from the carcass.

The religious ritual, which does not allow the animals to be stunned beforehand, is considered cruel by campaigners and is exempt from animal welfare laws.

Harrow resident Sheila Murphy told the Harrow Observer: ‘I am appalled at Harrow Council’s decision to serve only Halal meat in the borough’s schools.

‘The Farm Animal Welfare Council has lobbied the government in the past to get the Kosher and Halal method of slaughter banned.

‘The Halal method, in which animals are slaughtered by a single slit to the throat, is the only way of killing livestock allowed under Islam but this method is deemed cruel by some animal-lovers, who object to the slow death it involves.

‘Harrow Council’s decision is also taking away the choice of children and their parents over what meat they eat and I urge Harrow residents to make their views known to Harrow Council and get this decision overturned.’ Continue Reading →

CAIR on FOX with a comment or two by yours truly.

The spokesman for CAIR defending the 911 victory mosque  was so awful on FOX that I thought I would add my 2 cents into the debate. In retrospect, I could have and should have said far more. But here it is. This is the same video of CAIR on FOX being debated by the Fireman from 911 but just with a few comments of mine added.

Eeyore

Shariah Comes to the Supreme Court: Elena Kagan’s Decisions

Shariah Comes to the Supreme Court: Elena Kagan’s Decisions Big Peace.Com

Posted by Christine Brim Aug 4th 2010 at 8:57 am in Justice/Legal, Obama, Uncategorized | Comments (0)

The Senate should not confirm Elena Kagan, because her views render her the first Supreme Court Justice who actively favors the introduction of Shariah law into national Constitutions and legal systems.  To excuse themselves for voting for her confirmation, Senators of both parties have told themselves this vote for Kagan’s confirmation will result in a harmless swap:  the substitution of one liberal justice for another.

The reality is far more threatening and unprecedented in American history.  A vote to confirm Elena Kagan’s nomination will bring a liberal, pro-Shariah justice to our highest Court.  And if she is confirmed, her behavior as Obama’s Solicitor General indicates she will refuse to recuse herself on any Shariah-related decision but instead will lead the charge to legitimate Shariah law in America.

Senators have told themselves they have little evidence on which to evaluate Kagan, because other than her work as Obama’s Solicitor General, she has no judicial experience.

But Kagan has made repeated and very public decisions about a judicial system – Shariah – and Senators should be obligated to take into account those decisions when they vote for her.  Her 2003-2009 career as Dean of Harvard Law School is a history of those decisions, and every one of them  shows her “deep appreciation” of Shariah law.

Every vote for Kagan is a vote to bring a pro-Shariah view to the Supreme Court.  Here are five reasons to vote against Kagan’s nomination:

1. PRO-SHARIAH MISSION: With Kagan’s direction,  Harvard’s Islamic Legal Studies Program developed a mission statement (here on 9/2008, also 6/2009) dedicated “to promote a deep appreciation of Islamic law as one of the world’s major legal systems.”  That mission statement guided her actions and those whom she directed as Dean. Continue Reading →

NER: ‘What is a mosque? Interview with Sam Solomon

This is an interview quite similar to the one Vlad Tepes did of Mr. Solomon on June 7th of this year. Here is a written transcript of that interview from The New English Review:

What is a Mosque? An Interview with Sam Solomon

by Jerry Gordon (August 2010)


Gordon: Greetings Mr. Solomon and thank you for consenting to this interview. Let us start with the simple question, what is a mosque and what is its basic function in the Muslim community?

Solomon: A mosque, totally unlike a church or a synagogue, serves the function of orchestrating and mandating every aspect of “life” in a Muslim community from the religious, to the political, to the economic, to the social, to the military. In Islam, religion and life are not separate. They are indivisible. In Islam religion is not just a part of life, but “life” is absorbed and regulated to the tiniest detail by religion (See Figure 1). In other words every aspect of a man or woman’s life must be defined and governed by religion. So there is no concept of personal choice whatsoever, or in theological terms, there is no “free will,” but only limited preferences between prescribed courses of action. In addition, there is no concept of a personal relationship between the person and the entity being worshiped, so “worship” itself, is of a different nature than that performed in a church or synagogue.

Figure 1: Comparison of Non-Islamic vs Islamic views of one’s freedom of choice and options in life.So we see that a mosque is a seat of government. A mosque is a school. A mosque is a court. A mosque is a training center. A mosque is a gathering place, or social center. It is not a place of “worship” per se as understood and as practiced in Western societies.
Specifically, how is a mosque a threat to the community within which it is built?

Every single mosque in the world, by definition, is modeled on the mosque of Muhammad in Medina in accordance with the Sunnah. The Sunnah interprets the Qur’an by reporting exhaustively on everything that Muhammad said, did, or consented to. Therefore, his Medina mosque, the first mosque, was a place where he gave judgments, where he decided who would be executed, where he instituted policy—domestic and military— where Jihad war strategies were designed. Consequently, it was a storage place for arms, a military training base, and was where troops were blessed and dispatched. Literally they were sent to conquer – first the whole of Arabia, and then the rest of the known world. Therefore if the present-day mosque is modeled as per the Sunnah of Muhammad then there should be very serious concern. As is well-known, Muslims are required to follow the example (Sunnah) of Muhammad—and according to Sura 33:36 it is not an option or a matter of opinion: “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.”  This explains and establishes beyond doubt why arms have been found in mosques in various countries, and in different capital cities.
In addition to the undisputed significance of the Medina mosque as the role model for all Mosques, there is also the Islamic policy of establishing strategic Mosques as beachheads with interconnected networks. Taken together, these two policies do constitute a clear and present danger—and a need for concern.
For example, when Abu Hamza[1] was the Imam of the Finsbury Park mosque in the United Kingdom, he trained people, he sent out terrorists  and British authorities found arms stored there.  He was well within his Islamic mandate as these activities were sanctioned by Islam. He didn’t find it wrong because it is in the Islamic manuals. Another prime example of a mosque being found to have engaged in high-level political, military and intelligence activities is the Munich Mosque, which is now considered by Islamists to be on a par with some  of highest-ranked Mosques in Muslim countries.[2]

What comment do you have on the significance of the Ground Zero Mosque set to open on 9/11, 2011?

First of all, the sponsors and supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque insist that the significance of the building of this mosque is that it constitutes a refutation of the radical “fringe” within Islam, and as such, is a gesture of peace and reconciliation toward America and the victims of 9/11.
But, it is ludicrous for anybody to accept that this is a gesture of peace in the Western sense—rather it is a different definition of “peace.” It is the Islamic definition of “peace” as a suspension of “struggle” which is ultimately said to emerge once opposition ceases, and Islam reigns supreme as Muhammad has stated, “Islam rises and nothing rises above it.”
The rationale of the sponsors is that acts of terrorism are being carried out by misguided “radicals” rather than true Muslims and that as a consequence, Islam itself has been victimized and defamed and needs to be defended. Their solution is to appear to decry all “radicalism”, and to take the bold symbolic act of erecting a 13 to 15-story Mosque—ostensibly representing true Islam—on the site itself, in their words, to “bridge and heal this divide.” [3]

So, if allowed to be built, this mosque would consolidate, solidify, and embody a fallacious and pernicious interpretation of what really happened at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.[4]

In one fell swoop, it will be a re-writing of American history with American cooperation, and will achieve another major Islamic goal of setting a high profile beachhead at a strategic location in the seat of American economic power. Continue Reading →

Anjem threatens “Rivers of Blood” and one Brit comedian.

I wont bother to repost that emetic moron’s blathering but here it is if anyone wants to read it. I just think its interesting that he is clearly trying to stimulate a massive civil war of cultures and ideologies in the UK. I hope for the sake of the western world, if he is to get his wish, he gets it soon enough that those who have shaped England actually win it. If they wait much longer to do anything, England will be a haunted island indeed.

H/T Snaphanen

Canada: Air security won’t ask Muslims to lift veils to prove ID

From The Toronto Sun

Lifting the veil on airport security

Air security won’t ask for veiled Muslims to prove ID

By Brian Lilley and Bryn Weese, Parliamentary Bureau

Last Updated: August 1, 2010 5:16am

OTTAWA – Frequent flyers know the drill: take off your shoes, surrender your tweezers and pack your shampoo in those little plastic baggies before lining up for the naked body scanners. But lift your niqab? Apparently not.

QMI Agency can reveal that neither airlines nor security services are asking Muslim women to lift their veils and prove that the face beneath matches their photo ID.

The issue came to light through a video taken by Mick Flynn of Bradford, England. Flynn was boarding a flight at Montreal’s Trudeau International Airport when he witnessed two women with their faces covered board an Air Canada Heathrow bound flight without being asked to remove their veils.

In fact, in the video that Flynn has posted online, a man traveling with the group hands in all the passports and is the only one to interact with airline staff while two veiled women simply walk through.

“I complained at the desk — and again as I boarded the plane — asking if the pilot was happy that two women boarded without being identified,” Flynn told QMI Agency. “Both members of staff whom I spoke to were flustered and clearly embarrassed.”

Flynn’s communication with Air Canada and his video posting have resulted in a threatened lawsuit from the airline. As for answers from the company about security procedures, their response reveals holes in Canada’s air security.

“Airline passengers have already undergone multiple security checks before arriving at the boarding gate,” Air Canada spokesman Peter Fitzpatrick told QMI. “A final check is made at the gate prior to boarding in order to confirm passengers on the flight.”

Air Canada says it is capable of checking identification in a private room away from the check-in counter, but said the real responsibility for security measures lies with CATSA, the Canadian Air Transport Security Agency.

Not so, says CATSA.

Greg MacDougall, a spokesman for CATSA, tells QMI that their guards are primarily looking for metal, weapons or other banned material, not ensuring that veiled faces match passport photos.

“We don’t have concerns with that. We have concerns with the fact if the person has any metal under their clothing,” MacDougall said.

A former CATSA employee, who, until recently worked as a frontline screener, tells QMI: “We were never allowed to ask anyone with a veil to lift it. It is their religion.”

Frontline workers for several airlines say that any checks, if they happen at all, would likely happen at the check-in desk, not at boarding or security.

Most airports have wide gaps between where baggage is checked and the secure portions of the airport.

Transport Canada says there should be no confusion: “The airline must be able to verify the identity of all passengers before they are allowed to board,” the department said in a written statement.

Lawyer David Harris of INSIGNIS Strategic Research says Canadians should be concerned about what he deems preferential treatment.

“Full veiling has been a boon for those participating in criminal and terrorist operations,” Harris said pointing to the story of Mustaf Jama.

Jama, a Somali national with a long criminal record, was wanted in Britain for the 2006 murder of police constable Sharon Beshenivsky. As police closed in to arrest the career criminal, Jama was able to escape back to Somalia by wearing a full veil and boarding a flight at Heathrow airport.

Harris’ call for lifting the veil is backed up by two Muslim groups often at odds with each other, the Muslim Canadian Congress and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Canada.

“You cannot allow a person wearing a mask to be in the perimeter of an airport,” says Tarek Fatah of the Congress. “If you don’t want to take off the mask, take the TTC (public transit) to Cairo.”

“Women who wear the niqab are not constrained by the religious belief from removing their veil for legitimate reasons, and security is one of them,” said Ihsaan Gardee, executive director of CAIR-CAN.

Gardee admits that Canadian officials may be reluctant to deal with this issue head-on due to concerns about political correctness. “It’s something that needs to be addressed,” Gardee said.

Gardee says it would be preferable if female staff were able to conduct any screening that involved removing the veil but adds that if female staff are not available, the women must still be forced to remove their niqab.

Gunshots and car burnings in Dudley (over dropping of charges of EDL?)

As this article does not name the people arrested, nor describe any of the circumstances that would normally be included in a news piece like this, I feel safe in guessing that:

1. It was Muslims rioting…

2. It was because the EDL people who were arrested on the rooftops protesting the opening of a megamosque in Dudley that no one wanted and government is forcing on people.

From Dudley news:

VIOLENT disorder broke out in Dudley last night as cars were attacked with baseball bats and reports of gunshots being fired.

The incident happened on the forecourt of the car wash in Stafford Street at around 7pm.

Police were called after witnesses saw a group of men smash cars parked outside premises, just off Wolverhampton Street.

Officers arrested a 37 year-old man at the scene, on suspicion of violent disorder and possession of an offensive weapon. He continues to help police with inquiries this morning.

A second witness later reported that gunshots had been heard in the vicinity around the time of the disorder.

At this stage, it is not thought that anyone was injured during the incident.

Detective sergeant Glenn Marriott from the Sandwell and Dudley team of Force Criminal Investigation Department said: “We are treating this incident very seriously, as it appears that those involved in the disorder were obviously in some kind of dispute and had access to weapons.

“We are continuing to conduct specialist searches at the scene today, and will be interviewing the man arrested at the scene.

“Stafford Street and Wolverhampton Street are busy thoroughfares and I would urge anyone who was passing the area at all from around 7pm last night to come forward and pass on any information you may have to the investigating officers.”

Roads in the area are open as normal this morning, however the affected business premises remains closed.

Sergeant Chris Fox from Dudley police station said: “Incidents such as this cause concern for local people and we will be carrying out patrols in the area to reassure residents and traders over coming days.

“Thankfully, this kind of disorder is unusual and we will be speaking to people in the area as part of inquiries to try and identify those involved.”

Anyone with information to help the police investigation is urged to contact Team 9 of Force CID at Harborne police station on 0345 113 5000 or call the independent charity Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Excellent example of Islamic word games and making marionettes out of leftists

Posting has been light today because I was working on this one post. The clip at the bottom took a great deal of time. I felt it was worth it when I watched the Muslims leading the demonstration in the clip at the top, turn it from a peace rally, to a distinctly different one.

Watch the chants on this protest for peace. Notice how it starts out demanding an end to war and for peace and so on, then changes rather quickly to, “no peace without justice”, a common Islamic rhetorical device. As most in the west do not realize that Muslims redefine common terms to suit their purpose, while knowing full well we non-Muslims are understanding something fundamentally different when we hear that term, (think ‘marriage’ just for one example) I thought it might be useful to explain what Muslims mean by the term, ‘justice’.

Below, some clips from two very important documentaries, Farewell Israel, and Atomic Jihad. I have grabbed a few clips that attempt to explain the Islamic concept of ‘justice’ which have about as much to do with a Western concept of justice as womens rights do in Afghanistan vs. USA