"In one call, they warned they would dig up parents' graves and bury her there instead."
"Brit-Muslim leader forced to dress conservatively after receiving threatening calls," from Asian News International, March 7 (thanks to Watling):
London, Mar. 7 (ANI): A progressive Brit-Muslim woman councillor was forced to dress more conservatively after receiving death threats and sexually harassing phone calls.
Shiria Khatun, 38, told the police that callers threatened to kill her and her four young children.
In one call, they warned they would dig up parents' graves and bury her there instead.
The Labour councillor in the controversial borough of Tower Hamlets is considered one of the area's most progressive politicians.
She was elected in 2006, worked for Ken Livingstone as a transport adviser at London's City Hall and frequently campaigns for more Muslim women to enter politics.
However, over the past year she has been the victim of a "sick" harassment campaign.
At first she was "too embarrassed" to call the police, but when the threats, mostly made in the Bangladeshi dialect Sylheti, targeted her family she decided to act.
"As a councillor I'm meant to be a strong woman and I didn't want to show that I was bothered, but it's gone too far," the Daily Express quoted her, as saying.
"They're really disgusting. They would talk about my Western clothes, my tight jeans and my body parts," she added.
It's not like she was spread eagle on a queen-size bed in a centerfold, coast to coast, and post to post - just jeans.
Then again, male tennis players in Iraq were killed (decapitated?) for wearing shorts.
Jew Lover
Unfortunately, she clearly fell foul of the "you're not Muslim enough" edict of the local "brothers" at the mosque.
Yet another example of the "wonderful" Qur'an. If you are not considered to be sufficiently Muslim then you are no better than an infidel and, worse still, an apostate. The punishment for which is......death.
I wonder how long it will take the zealots of the Tower Hamlets council to go to the next stage of their campaign for supremacy? I can envisage them using their authority to "advance Islam and Muslims" wherever they can. Perhaps:
1) Halal food in all schools for all students.
2) Muslim-only council employees - in case they have to go into Muslim homes.
3) A new "dhimmi-grade" service for non-Muslim council residents. One week later than the service to Muslims and subject to cancellation if Muslims take priority.
4) Planning decisions skewed in Muslim's favour. Planning applications by Muslims = Granted. Planning applications for non-Muslims = Refused.
5) All council procurement to favour Muslim suppliers.
6) Regular opportunities for council employees to "denounce" coworkers and residents as "apostates" and "infidels".
7)School educational visits must not include non-Muslim venues.
The potential list is endless.
Any resistance would, undoubtedly, be denounced as "Islamophobia".
Memo to Shiria Khatun.
You might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb: how about going All the Way and apostasising?
That was what Magdi Allam did. He was trying to practise a peaceful, infidel-friendly Islam and he got so many dreadful death threats from so many zealous Muslims accusing him of being an Evil apostate and an Infidel, etc, etc, that in the end he realized Islam was so broke it was unfixable, and dumped it altogether.
Just ring up Canon Sookhdeo, or Magdi Cristiano Allam, or call up Fr Zakaria Botros' show, or visit Hannah Shah's website, or Ali Sina's, or Ibn Warraq, or even Ms Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and ask them for some advice on how best to make the break, and how to 'disappear' once one has taken the plunge.
I think most of the seven points you list are already in operation in one form or another and not only in Tower Hamlets.
1.) Halal food is reported to have been introduced in several places to avoid duplication of provision.
2.) "Positive discrimination" has been going on for years.
4.) More usually muslims just ignore Planning regulations and we were instructed to ignore all illegal building work we found unless it was actually dangerous.
5.) Not quite, but the guy who does heating work for me told me he had a muslim trainee who was reasonably competent. He had just finished training at 22 when the Council was instructed to give X% of its work to "ethnic minority" contractors. He set up on his own and as the only "ethnic minority" heating engineer in town he was given a contract for 30-40 houses. At 26(?) he is riding round in a Merc something his mentor does not consider fair as he does not have one.
"However, over the past year she has been the victim of a "sick" harassment campaign"
make that an "Islamic" harassment campaign....carried out by members of her chosen Religion...Islam...feel the love?
What else can you say but: Disgusting.
England you are so dumb. Stop importing your enemy! Duh!
Enoch Powell suffered a lot for his anti-immigrant (Muslim) views, but hey England - HE WAS RIGHT, WASN'T HE?
"No compulsion in religion"...?
It's hard to believe the apologists have the gall to periodically site that passage. The entire religion is based on compulsion.
Several papers call her a secular Muslim. Surely that's the same as apostate?
Can there be such a thing as a secular Muslim?
"She (sic) frequently campaigns for more Muslim women to enter politics."
I'm not sure if this should be a cause for concern in itself. Just because mozoid women can become politically active doesn't mean that that their activism is not against us. I'm sure that the mozoid males who govern their every move would appreciate having their "liberated" chattel do their jihadi bidding when their chattel hold powerful public office positions. A very disturbing prospect.
"No compulsion in religion"...?
It's hard to believe the apologists have the gall to periodically site that passage. The entire religion is based on compulsion."
Not to mention that's an abrogated Meccan verse. I.e. Null and Void.
I read stories like this and I can't thank the NRA enough for protecting our 2nd Amendment.
people, the so called moderate or secular Muslims are the most dangerous Muslims of all. They are the foot soldiers of Islamic jihad. no, they are not likely to kill you. They work under the radar undermining the society. They may not know the Koran but they will defend the Koran and Islam most vocifarly. They will have 4-10 children, they will vote for Islamic or Islam friendly candidates, they will fight for sharia laws. and one day they are skirt wearing hair un covered alcohol drinking secularist but next time you see them they are wearing hijab, baggy, clothing, and not talking to strange males. Don't tell me I am just BSing. I have seen this with my own eyes with former secular Muslims male and female friends.
Can I revisit a comment I posted a few months ago. It seems appropriate here.
The British press are fond of using different terms to describe our Muslim population, placing great stress upon the term 'moderate' meaning peaceful, as opposed to 'extremist' or 'radical' meaning violent. We need to remember that these definitions have meaning only to non-Muslims and that no such distinction exists within the religious understanding of the Islamic community.
It is entirely inaccurate to think of the extremists as being extremist or radical. They are not extreme, they are following the pure core teachings of islam and its commandment to jihad. So-called 'radical' or 'extremist' Islam is more correctly nothing more than traditional Islam, a return to the doctrine of jihad documented in Islamic scripture and history.
The jihadis claim to be more devout in their faith than the so-called moderates and, indeed, regard the moderates as non-practising Muslims. The notorious Anjem Choudary tells us there are three types of Muslim - those in prison, those on their way to prison and those who are not practising.
So to the jihadis, the great mass of peaceful muslims are relevant only as a source of recruits for warfare. From this large population, all of whom have received their basic Islamic indoctrination in the mosques and madrassas, the jihadis can identify those men and women who are more religiously minded. All it takes is for them to feed an extra dose of Islamic doctrine to these individuals in order to create more jihadis. In other words, it doesn't matter that the large Muslim communities in our countries are peaceful, it is the very presence of these docile masses that threatens our lives and our way of life, because it is from this pool of humanity that the jihadis draw their soldiers.
I have no doubt that most Muslims are indeed peaceful, but I wouldn't be the first to point out that the populations of communist Russia and China also lived perfectly peacefully, yet these states were responsible for the deaths of many millions. The peaceful majority were irrelevant and in no way deflected or restrained the evils carried out in their name. In the same way, the Muslim so-called moderates also render themselves irrelevant because of their silence.
We must not make the mistake of taking the so-called moderates as being politically moderate, as we would understand that to mean, in terms of holding politically moderate views. After all, in the West one can hold passionately moderate political views. However, in Muslim terms these moderates are merely quiescent, passive followers of the same hostile political/religious doctrine which drives their more militant co-religionists. Surveys show that the vast majority of these so-called moderates would still like to convert our countries to Islam and enact Sharia law.
Things are actually much simpler than they may seem, if we just sharpen up our way of thinking. It is more accurate to think of 'extremists' as 'active' and 'moderates' as merely 'inactive' but we must be mindful that we have no way of knowing, or reliably predicting when an inactive may choose to become active. Because of this dynamic, we have no choice but to view all Muslims as potentially dangerous. Indeed, not to do so would be irresponsible and dangerous. This is not our choice, it is not our doing, the responsibility lies with them. We are merely looking at the problem objectively and defending ourselves appropriately.
Rather than regard Islam as a religion, we should see it for what it really is, a hostile political movement dedicated to the overthrow of our society, and Muslims are either active or inactive within that political movement. If they are active, they must be neutralised and destroyed. If they are inactive, they are simply irrelevant. But the assertion that most muslims are peaceful does nothing to safeguard our security and is certainly no reassurance that we are in any way safe.
BBC Radio 4 is currently running an archive programme "Hate Against Hope"* which you can listen to on line for the next few days. It tells of the establishment of the Bengali/Bangladeshi's in Tower hamlets in the 1970's and how the left helped them in the face of National Front attacks.
Posters might be amused to know that it also includes interviews with white working class people from the 1970's who "Were still using racist language" e.g. "Why do they not dress like us?"
Looks like the tables have turned but don't expect the BBC to devote an hour to Bangladeshi racism.
* This is an interesting title as "Hope Against Hate" is an offshoot of the Government and Union funded Searchlight organisation.
Thanks Hard Rain, for your magnificent post. I agree with you. Now I am thinking how to bring that message, conviction over to the Muslims and Political Correct people that I speak about Islam & Democracy from time to time and in broader terms in the political arena.
Geert Wilders is saying that he is against Islam, not Muslims. But I concede that in the whole picture and long run this is not a logical, coherent strategy. You are more right. And at some point we have to achieve great clarity and consensus about the 2 competing systems, of Democracy and Islam, pinpointing the glaring opposites in them.
Then demand absolute loyalty to the Democratic system of vast majority of Muslims. We can discuss whether absolute neutrality can be considered, only that is all too easily faked. If Muslims in vast majority openly are stating, that they are for the enemy system, in the end it must mean war.
Having said that, Wilders may still have a good enough strategy. Heavily pressured and maligned as racist by the Political Corrects. Who, just as the Muslims, do not accept his distinction between Islam and Muslims. It can be a good start, because he can claim that Islam is just as manmade as his own "ideologies" and therefore is to be just as hard criticized as he is. Without condemning whole persons just because of their beliefs.
But I think that the Political Corrects incredibly, stupidly, really have convinced themselves that Islam is NOT the problem, that all Muslims must be considered innocent until proven guilty. And that our society is obliged, out of respect, love and for unity, to trust them just as much as everybody else is trusted. How horrible!
And the Muslims are a confused, divided lot. Most of them are so ignorant of their own religion that many have said that Democracy and Islam ARE compatible. And if that WERE true and the vast majority of Muslims COULD be persuaded to be loyal to and promoting Democracy, after Education of course, then the whole controversy would be over.
But of course, it is as you say. The crucial thing is now how to bring our conviction publicly so strong that more & more people see the truth and logic of it.