Very nicely timed to coincide with the 7/7 atrocity Coroner’s Inquest for maximum publicity, tooA Muslim artist has sparked outrage with his depiction of the ripped-apart bus destroyed in the 7/7 terror attacks.
The artwork shows four angels flying above the bombed number 30 bus – the same number of Al Qaeda terrorists who took part in the atrocity which left 52 commuters dead and maimed hundreds more on London’s transport network.
Also seen are scores of ghostly souls shooting from the bus, which was travelling through Tavistock Square when it was devastated by suicide bomber Hasib Hussain.
The artwork shows four angels flying above the bombed number 30 bus – the same number of Al Qaeda terrorists who took part in the atrocity.
The artist has also used photo trickery to write the message ‘Outright terror… bold and brilliant’ on the side of the bus.
Sickeningly, the £3,500 artwork, called Age of Shiva, is on display just one mile from where the 13 innocent commuters were killed as they travelled on the bus through central London.[More..]
kinda of a “hahaha look what my co-religionists did to you, and Im going to profit from it, in your face brits”
To protest a cartoon of Muhammad dressed as a bomber, Omar Khayam dressed as a bomber in protest.
The radical Islamist Omar Khayam was arrested and sent sent back to jail in 2006 to serve the rest of his sentence for selling crack, an offense which carries a mandatory death sentence in some Muslim countries:
Omar Khayam is a British Muslim who is known to have been a drug dealer in Bedford, England. He was convicted in 2002 of selling crack cocaine, and sentenced to six years imprisonment. Released on parole in 2005, having served half of his sentence, he hit the headlines after attending protests against the Muhammad cartoons in London dressed as a suicide bomber, less than a year after the 7 July 2005 London bombings which killed dozens of people.
He was featured extensively in news reports, such as on the front page of The Sun who initially asked for his identity amid outrage against his protest endorsing the deaths in London. When tracked down, he initially refused to apologise saying his protest was justifiable. However, apparently following criticism from local Muslims, he came out and apologised alongside local Labour MP Patrick Hall.
After his apology it did not take the newspapers long to find out about his conviction for selling drugs, which are haram (prohibited under Islam), and which carry a mandatory death sentence for trafficking in several Muslim countries.
Khayam was recently arrested again. He was a $4 million crack dealer.
Luton Crown Court was told two police officers stumbled across a heroin and cannabis factory in Ashburnam Road in Bedford on December 3 last year.
They had gone to arrest a man for an unrelated offence. He was not there but they noticed powder on the floor and objects covered by large plastic bags.
Steep sentence: Khayam has received 13 years in prison for his part in the drugs conspiracy
Prosecutor Natalie Carter said the officers returned with colleagues seven minutes later and searched the flat. Two men that were there had escaped through a window.
They recovered 26.2kg of heroin, along with 24.5kg of caffeine and 4.5kg of paracetamol to be used as ‘bash’ to cut the drugs. There was also a third of a kilo of crack cocaine with a street value of £17,500 and £124,795 in cash…
…The street value of the heroin, once it had been cut, was £2.6million. The haul of drugs is believed to be the largest ever seized in Bedfordshire .
Great Britain sinks in the multicultural quicksand…
(Daily Mail) — Two members of the Somali pirate gang that held Britons Paul and Rachel Chandler hostage for 388 days are believed to have family in the UK.
One of the pirate leaders says he plans to travel to the UK to join his wife and two children, who have claimed political asylum and live in London.
The extraordinary revelations come as intelligence and security officials in the UK and Kenya investigate links between Britain and Somali pirates after the couple were freed from the 13-month ordeal in return for a ransom.
A second pirate involved in the seizing of the Chandlers is suspected to have lived in Britain and to have family living in London. It is unclear whether his family has also claimed asylum and whether either family receives benefits.
Both men are said to have received a ‘cut’ of the estimated £625,000 ransom paid for the release of Mr Chandler, 60, and his 57-year-old wife.
Investigators say the revelations raise the possibility of pirates travelling to Britain and of part of the ransom money being transferred to family members in the UK.
muslim gang rape in england
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is a founding member of British Muslims for Secular Democracy. A native Ugandan of Indian ancestry, she came to England in 1972, shortly before the ruthless dictator Idi Amin officially expelled Uganda’s Asian population. She married a British man, Colin Brown, and is a popular author, journalist and lecturer.
Alibhai-Brown is a woman of the Left, who opposed the war in Iraq and has been called an avatar of political correctness. All that said, she is at least unwilling to tiptoe around controversy, including last week’s shocking news about the Derbyshire gang led by Abid Saddique and Mohammed Liaqat that sexually exploited dozens of girls as young as 12.
This was one of several similar cases in recent years, and a report on the case by a Derbyshire youth agency identified “culture, ethnicity and identity” as a “critical factor” in making the girls (most of whom were white) vulnerable to the predators. The report said those issues were “worthy of wider consideration, possibly on a national basis,” and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown addresses those issues in her latest column for the British Independent:
The official inquiry into the case concluded that the care agencies were ill-equipped to deal with the scale of the abuse being perpetrated by the gang. But it also concluded that there needs to be an honest national conversation about how exploitation in some places intersects with “culture, ethnicity and identity”.
Let’s begin then. Because without such an open conversation, prejudices fester and millions of Britons come to believe that serious offenders from certain ethnic and religious groups have protected status within our country.
The Cornwall and Derby villains who used girls as sex toys believed that their victims had “asked for it”, which in our permissive age is an easy excuse. Very young girls are sexualised in the social environment, so paedophiles must feel they are only helping themselves to the goodies that are on offer. But in the case of the Asian men, disgusting cultural beliefs further validate their acts and their uncontrollable lechery is, in part, a symptom of repressed sexuality and sick attitudes.
Most Asian men do not go around raping young white girls and women; many have happy and equal relationships with white partners. However, an alarming number of Asian individuals, families and communities do believe that white females have no morals, are free and available, deserving of no respect or protection.
Up in Bradford a few years back, I met Muslim pimps, some wearing mini Koran pendants on heavy, gold chains. “Not our girls,” they reassured me, “just them white girls from the estates, cheap girls. They love it man, all the money they make! What else will they do with their lives? We’re helping them make a career.”
Much laughter, until I asked them what they would do if a white pimp groomed their daughters. They would kill the pimp and the girls too, they said. They would too.
What Alibhai-Brown exposes here is not merely a sexual double-standard, but also an ethnic or religious double-standard, where Muslim men have one standard for “our girls” and another standard for white girls, who are categorically presumed to be immoral.
If Alibhai-Brown has been willing to address the vicious attitudes among (some) British Muslim men that helped foster the environment in which the Derbyshire rape-gang flourished, wouldn’t it behoove someone to examine the problems among British whites that contributed to this horror?
The pimps in Bradford who talked to Alibhai-Brown about “cheap” white girls from “the estates” — British vernacular for government low-income housing, what we Americans would call “the projects” — weren’t just making up a stereotype out of thin air. In 2008, 45% of British births were to unmarried women and, in some low-income areas, the illegitimacy rate was as high as 68%. Such figures certainly indicate that a casual attitude toward pre-marital sex is commonplace in the U.K.
It isn’t just Muslim men who regard promiscuous women as “cheap,” you know. Wouldn’t it be rather hypocritical to stigmatize as “cheap” the lower-class girls in the estates who drop their knickers for every Tom, Dick and Mohamed, when similarly immoral behavior is exhibited by those at the top of British society?
And I do mean, the top.
Prince Charles reportedly spent his 20s hopping from the bed of one mistress, Camilla Parker-Bowles, to another, Kanga Tryon — both of whom were married to friends of his — and kept up his extramarital affairs after he and Diana were wed in 1981. After Charles and Di divorced in 1996, Diana took up with Dodi Fayed, in whose limousine she was riding when she was killed in an accident the next year. Charles recently married Camilla. Princess Ann has been married, divorced and remarried, and let’s not even start with Andrew and Fergie, eh?
Well, what about the rising generation of royals? William recently announced his engagement to Kate Middleton, whom he’s been stringing along since 2003. The couple have been shacking up together for months. And, by all accounts, Wills is the quiet one. It’s Harry that’s the wild child — heaven knows how many notches on his belt by now. He recently split with his on-again-off-again girlfriend of six years, reportedly because of Harry’s “desire to stay a bachelor for many more years.”
Here, then, you have the spectacle of “Royals Gone Wild.” Queen Elizabeth’s four children have gone through three divorces, accumulating a total of six spouses among them, and the young scion of the House of Windsor is shacked up in Anglesey with his bride-to-be.
A fine example, don’t you think, for the poor girls in the estates?
So much, then, for the royals. What about British celebrities — pop singers, TV stars, footballers and the like? Are they less “cheap” than the girls pimped out in Bradford and Derby?
A fish rots from the head down, and if Britons aren’t concerned by the putrid odor of moral decay in their society, they should be. It’s all fine for Yasmin Alibhai-Brown to condemn the “disgusting cultural beliefs” of men like Abid Saddique and Mohammed Liaqat, but to what extent are those beliefs — “that white females have no morals,” as Alibhai-Brown says — an accurate reflection of 21-century British decadence?
And given that a quite similar decadence is evident in American culture, isn’t Bob Belvedere correct to warn that what’s happening now in the U.K. foreshadows what the future holds for us?
Punish these monsters. Make them conform to OUR culture, not the other way around.”
And I suppose I should make my prejudices clear before I go further: I’m a huge champion of American immigration in all its forms. My philosophy is that people follow the jobs, and if the jobs are there, let the people come to fill them, whether legal or illegal. If the people abide by the norms and rules of the “host culture”, and don’t expect taxpayer subsidization, then they’ll have no bigger champion than myself. I can envision a time in the future where national borders cease to be meaningful, and I like the sound of a world in which that’s the case. Oh, and I’m also a raging atheist. I also, uh, dislike terrorism very much, and am willing to go out on a limb and culturally profile the perpetrators of 21st-century terrorism as overwhelmingly Muslim. I sympathize with a Europe that sees its liberal traditions and even its physical well-being as being under assault by Muslim immigration, while being bemused and even a little alarmed at the simultaneous withering of those liberal traditions in response to it.
So cutting to the chase, Christopher Caldwell’s recent book, “REFLECTIONS ON THE REVOLUTION IN EUROPE – Immigration, Islam and The West” is a fascinating, if flawed read. If you’d like to get a sense of how Europe got to its current quandary around immigration – a combination of loose rules, half-truths, religious decline, demographic decline, general apathy and a surfeit of political correctness – this is great book to tackle. Caldwell nails the well-meaning approach to immigration in Europe over the past 40 years, and how it rapidly accelerated and started violently confronting European norms about 15 years ago. His best writing regards how Europe slowly woke up to the key differences between Muslim immigration to Europe, and quick-assimilating immigrants to the United States:
The marital behavior of immigrants and their children (not to mention the entire history of colonization) shows that you can migrate to a place while being hostile to it, or at least while holding it in no special regard. Yes, immigrants “just want a better life”, as the cliché goes. But they don’t necessarily want a European life. They may want a Third World life at a European standard of living. They may want to use the cosmopolitanism made possible by Western rule of law to secure citizenship for their nonfeminist brides and their pre-Enlightenment ways.
This is what Europeans are waking up to in all sorts of funny and sometimes even enlightened ways. The Muslim immigrants, by and large, are replicating their home countries’ ways of life, just on European soil, and often at European taxpayers’ expense. Caldwell blames Europeans’ abandonment of their traditional culture, and of Christianity, in favor of the very liberal social consensus that rules the continent now as being part & parcel of why it was so easy for, say, Algerian or Turkish culture to gain such a strong foothold in, say, France and Germany. He loses me when he puts too fine a point on this thread – particularly the religious part. One can admire the values that are attributed to Judeo-Christian traditions, without fully buying into them being divinely inspired (I certainly don’t). If only Europeans got some religion again, he seems to say in various spots, Europe would have an effective bulwark against its centuries-long foe, Islam. I don’t buy it. I think Europe’s secular evolution is one of its post-WWII strengths, and I tend to agree with the assassinated Dutch politician Pym Fortuyn and his protégés, who argued that Europe had created a culture of liberal tolerance, enlightenment and intellectualism that was very much worth fighting for and defending.
Islam has the upper hand as things stand today, at least as portrayed by this book. It knows what it stands for, and it knows what it stands against. It is rapidly gaining in numbers both in Europe and around the globe as European population declines. Caldwell believes, as I do, that “moderate Islam”, while being something that exists for millions of people, is a red herring for cultural relativists who prefer to see peace and harmony where there is actually war, fear and religious antagonism.
from Gates of vienna
An EDL protester was recently fined £200 for “making offensive comments about Allah” during a demonstration in Leicester. Even though police officers and the EDL were the only ones able to hear what he said, the prosecution said people were “likely to be offended” and the police were “likely to have been alarmed”. His words were considered “threatening, abusive or insulting” and likely to cause “harassment, alarm or distress”.
The convicted man said he did not think he would offend anyone.
But suppose he had intended offense? Why is that a legal issue?
Why is offending someone the sole basis for prosecution in countries that supposedly uphold civil liberties for their citizens?
Vlad Tepes and I discussed the issue for a while and devised the following response: