Recently in United Kingdom Category

This report also details the ongoing use of so-called "charities" to fund jihad. "Extremist preachers now radicalising young Muslims in private homes, says senior Government security adviser," by Christopher Hope for the Telegraph, February 9:

Third world charities set up to raise money to help people in Pakistan and Bangladesh are also being used as front organisations to fund terrorism, according to the Home Office’s top anti-terrorism adviser.

Charles Farr, the Director General of the Office for Security and Counter Terrorism, also said that Al-Qaeda was now at “its weakest state” since the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Mr Farr, who was once tipped as a future head of MI6, added that it was “possible to talk of the demise of parts of Al Qaeda” because the revolutions in the Middle East had weakened support for them.

The news came amid the continuing row over the European Court of Human Rights' refusal to allow Britain to extradite Abu Qatada - once described as “Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe” - to Jordan to face terror charges.

Mr Farr said extremist Muslim preachers could no longer radicalise young people at mosques and universities because of the increasingly effective activities of the Security Services on mainland Britain.

He said that increasingly "it takes place in private premises, simply because the people who are doing the radicalising are now much more aware of the activities that we are conducting.

“There has been a trend towards much greater use of private venues, simply because for obvious reasons they feel that they are much more secure.”

He said that radicalisation often “rapidly migrates into a private house where people are brought together, usually under the excuse of there being a faith-based meeting, and the discussion rapidly develops into something much more about terrorism and the legitimacy of violence.”

There was some radicalisation going on in Britain, but in “no more than one or two per cent” of the mosques in the UK, he said. Charities were also being used as fronts to raise money to fund terrorism.

Mr Farr said: “We can see some activity going on in charitable organisations, often with the pretext of raising funds to be sent overseas for good works, for example to Pakistan or indeed Bangladesh.”...

Another day, another plot, another "misunderstanding" that is remarkably like the "misunderstandings" that have gone before it, not only in the U.K. but in places far removed from it. More on this story. "Nine jailed over bomb plot and terror camp plan," from BBC News, February 9:

Nine men who plotted to bomb the London Stock Exchange and build a terrorist training camp have been jailed.

Three of the men - all members of an al-Qaeda inspired terror group - received indeterminate sentences for public protection at London's Woolwich Crown Court.

The court heard they had planned to raise funds for a terrorist camp in Pakistan and recruit Britons to attend.

The nine come from Stoke-on-Trent, Cardiff and London.

In sentencing, the judge described all the men - who are British nationals of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin - as Islamic fundamentalists.

The three to receive indeterminate sentences for the terror camp plan included Mohammed Shahjahan 27, of Stoke-on-Trent, who was jailed for a minimum term of eight years and 10 months.

Usman Khan, 20, and Nazam Hussain, 26, also from Stoke-on-Trent, were ordered to serve at least eight years.

Judge Mr Justice Wilkie said these three were "the more serious jihadists" and said they should not be released until they were no longer a threat to the public.

The court heard they planned to establish the terrorist camp on land in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir owned by Khan's family and encourage a "significant" number of British Muslims to undergo training there.

Khan and Hussain planned to travel to the camp and receive military instruction themselves before "obtaining first-hand terrorist experience in Kashmir", the hearing was told.

Passing sentence, Mr Justice Wilkie said this was a "serious, long-term venture in terrorism" that could also have resulted in atrocities in the UK.

"It was envisaged by them all that ultimately they and the other recruits may return to the UK as trained and experienced terrorists available to perform terrorist attacks in this country, on one possibility contemplated in the context of the return of British troops from Afghanistan."...

"The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)." -- Bukhari 7.62.88

In Islam, Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur'an 33:21). Thus he is exemplary even in his marriage to a child: Muslims take this seriously and imitate Muhammad in this. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: "Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed."

The Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl "a divine blessing," and advised the faithful: "Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house."

Time magazine reported in 2001: "In Iran the legal age for marriage is nine for girls, fourteen for boys. The law has occasionally been exploited by pedophiles, who marry poor young girls from the provinces, use and then abandon them. In 2000 the Iranian Parliament voted to raise the minimum age for girls to fourteen, but this year, a legislative oversight body dominated by traditional clerics vetoed the move. An attempt by conservatives to abolish Yemen's legal minimum age of fifteen for girls failed, but local experts say it is rarely enforced anyway. (The onset of puberty is considered an appropriate time for a marriage to be consummated.)"

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) reports that over half of the girls in Afghanistan and Bangladesh are married before they reach the age of eighteen. In early 2002, researchers in refugee camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan found half the girls married by age thirteen. In an Afghan refugee camp, more than two out of three second-grade girls were either married or engaged, and virtually all the girls who were beyond second grade were already married. One ten-year-old was engaged to a man of sixty.

Muslim clerics in Yemen say that to oppose child marriage makes one an apostate.

The above video from December 2009 was just sent to me by Jihad Watch reader Carol. It illustrates an important point: we are constantly assured that no Muslims, none, want to bring the elements of Sharia that are incompatible with Western law into Western countries. We are compelled to believe this on pain of charges of "Islamophobia." But here is clear evidence that at least some Muslims believe that their coreligionists there should push for the legalization of pedophilia.

And note that this is advanced in the video as a human rights cause, a matter of compassion for Muslim men and their families. If such a movement begins in Britain, there is no doubt whatsoever that it would proceed the way attempts to assert Sharia provisions in the West are already proceeding: by claiming "racism" and "bigotry," asserting that all opposition is "hate" and "Islamophobia," and calling for equal rights, human rights, etc. (Don't miss also the brief tu quoque: the photo of Warren Jeffs.) If Britain and the U.S. and other non-Muslim countries do not call a halt to this mau-mauing and insist on their own laws and own cultures, those laws and cultures will certainly be overwhelmed and Islamized.

We already knew that Islamic polygamy is robbing the welfare system blind, and we have seen other cases of jihadists milking the system for benefits (see also: Anjem Chaudary). Here is another.

An update on this story. "Terror Trial: London Plotters 'Told To Claim Benefits To Fund Jihad Training'," from the Press Association, February 7 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

An al Qaeda-inspired extremist called on British Muslims to claim benefits to raise funds for a terrorist training camp, a court has heard.

Usman Khan, 20, was secretly recorded talking about plans to recruit UK radicals to attend the camp in Kashmir, London's Woolwich Crown Court was told.

He said there were only three possible outcomes for him and his fellow jihadists: victory, martyrdom or prison.

Khan's home in Persia Walk, Stoke-on-Trent, was bugged as he discussed plans for the firearms training camp, which was to be disguised as a legitimate "madrassa", an Islamic religious school, the court heard.

Discussing terrorist fundraising, he said that Muslims in Britain could earn in a day what people in Kashmir, a disputed region divided between Pakistan and India, are paid in a month.

He went on: "On jobseeker's allowance we can earn that, never mind working for that."

During the late-night meeting on December 4, 2010, Khan contrasted the action he was planning in support of jihad with the passive approach of Muslims like radical cleric Anjem Choudary.

"Brothers like Anjem, they ain't going nowhere," he said.

Khan said he could only see three results: "There's victory, what we hope for, there's shahada (death as a martyr), or there's prison."

It looks like it was Door Number 3!

Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC, opening the case for the Crown on day two of a sentencing hearing, said: "Mr Khan, the prosecution say, reveals his intention to supply money and people to something which he describes in this as an existing set-up.

"He has recently returned from Pakistan, and the inference is he's been there, and is going back there within a few weeks.

"That set-up from the outside will appear like a normal madrassa, but the inference is clear from that conversation that that's indeed the place where firearms training will be available."

He added: "It is also quite clear that the hope is that there will be a significant number of UK citizens who will attend there."

Mr Edis said those who underwent training at the camp in Kashmir could have returned home and carried out attacks in Britain.

"When running a training camp of this kind, the prosecution say, they create a risk that they themselves or other graduates of it will commit acts of terrorism wherever they find themselves to be, using the skills they have acquired," he told the court.

Hey hey hey! It's Fat Abu! (In an image banned by the BBC)

How clueless and compromised is the mainstream media? This clueless and compromised: "BBC tells its staff: don’t call Qatada extremist," by Neil Midgley and James Kirkup in the Telegraph, February 7 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

The BBC has told its journalists not to call Abu Qatada, the al-Qaeda preacher, an “extremist”.

In order to avoid making a “value judgment”, the corporation’s managers have ruled that he can only be described as “radical”.

Journalists were also cautioned against using images suggesting the preacher is overweight.

A judge ruled this week that the Muslim preacher, once described as “Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe”, should be released from a British jail, angering ministers and MPs.

Adding to the row, Kenneth Clarke, the Justice Secretary, yesterday insisted that Qatada “has not committed any crime” and said his release has nothing to do with the European Court of Human Rights.

A British court has called Qatada a “truly dangerous individual” and even his defence team has suggested he poses a “grave risk” to national security.

Despite that background, BBC journalists were told they should not describe Qatada as an extremist. The guidance was issued at the BBC newsroom’s 9.00am editorial meeting yesterday, chaired by a senior manager, Andrew Roy.

According to notes of the meeting, seen by The Daily Telegraph, journalists were told: “Do not call him an extremist – we must call him a radical. Extremist implies a value judgment.”...

BBC staff were also cautioned against using library images suggesting the cleric is overweight, because he has “lost a lot of weight”....

Al-Qaeda did not invent the jihadist ideology that drives it, but it is an effective transmitter of tactics to distant theaters of jihad, most notably in the case of suicide bombings. Here, a tactic associated with the Palestinian jihad and the Chechen "black widow" jihadists threatens to make inroads in Britain. "Al-Qaeda bid for Brit girl bombers," by Graeme Wilson for The Sun, February 6:

Al-Qaeda is trying to recruit women to carry out suicide bombings in the UK, MPs warn today.

It is using extremist websites to radicalise the angels of death, says their chilling report.

The Commons home affairs committee says it has heard evidence the terror group is "specifically launching and targeting women for violent acts".

It is already a deadly tactic in the Middle East, where growing numbers of Palestinian women are volunteering for suicide missions against Israel. The MPs' report comes days after four Islamic extremists admitted plotting to bomb the London Stock Exchange.

Woolwich Crown Court heard how the gang — who also had London mayor Boris Johnson on a hit list — had been brainwashed by the twisted ideology of Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Qaeda leader until the US killed him in Yemen last year.

His attempts to recruit UK Muslims were exposed by The Sun. Last night the committee chairman, Labour's Keith Vaz, said the gang's admissions show "we cannot let our vigilance slip"....

An update on the absurd and surreal saga of Abu Qatada. "Abu Qatada to be released within days," by Tom Whitehead for the Telegraph, February 7:

Abu Qatada, a radical Muslim cleric accused of posing a grave threat to Britain's national security, will be back on the streets within days after judges granted him bail.

Mr Justice Mitting released Qatada despite the Home Office arguing he remains a risk to national security.

His defence team had argued his detention of six and a half years while fighting deportation was unlawful because he did not face any imminent prospect of being removed.

The cleric is wanted in Jordan to stand trial for alleged terror offences and Home Secretary Theresa May battled to keep him behind bars while British diplomats continue to seek assurances from the Jordanian authorities that evidence gained through torture would not be used against him.

Ed Fitzgerald QC, representing Qatada, who is being held in high security conditions, said his client had now been held for six-and-a-half years while fighting deportation - more than anyone else in such a position.

He told the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) that that was "against a background of almost nine years detention without charges on the grounds of national security"....

He's done alright for himself, however, at one point enjoying an £800,000 home and government benefits. It now appears at this point that he may remain a ward of the British state he so despises for an indefinite period.

The release date is described as an unfortunate coincidence, but it underscores massive task ahead of authorities to secure the London Olympics from Islamic supremacist disruption in any number of forms. "'Shoe-bomb' terrorist to be released from jail on opening day of the Olympic Games," by Emma Reynolds for the Daily Mail, February 6:

The notorious terrorist who plotted a shoe-bomb attack on a plane is to be freed from jail just hours before the Olympic Games begin.

Saajid Badat's release will only add to security fears at the high-profile event in London, which opens on July 27.

The 32-year-old was jailed for 13 years in 2005 after conspiring with two other radical Muslims to blow up a passenger jet - but he will be released after serving just eight years and eight months.

The religious teacher from Gloucester admitted to conspiring with Brit Richard Reid and Belgian terrorist Nizar Trabelsi to blow up flights to the U.S. in 2001.

But now he is due to be freed two-thirds of the way through his sentence on the official opening day of the biggest sporting event in the world, according to the Daily Mirror.

'People are furious this guy is being released on that day but it’s just a quirk of fate,' said a security source.

'You can be sure people will be watching him very carefully and taking note of who he associated with in prison.'

Badat is believed to have been trained for the plot by al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

He was arrested when he was found with a bomb designed to be placed in his shoes in order to evade airport security.

He had even booked a ticket for a flight from Amsterdam to the U.S., but he had a last-minute change of heart and never boarded the plane.

His fellow plotter Reid was overpowered by fellow passengers on a flight from Paris to Miami while trying to detonate the bomb in his shoes, and is now serving a life sentence in America.

The extremists were linked through phone cards found on Reid used to contact Trabelsi, who is serving time in Belgium.

Adviser to the British State

Predictably, Abu Hamza told these witless dhimmis that "radicalization" is caused by various alleged enormities that the kuffar have committed -- such that if they take his advice, they will curtail the freedom of speech and bring British foreign policy into conformity with the Islamic agenda. The MP's, for their part, decided that tacking "Islamophobia" would prevent "radicalization" -- so in essence, if they show the Islamic supremacists that they're doing nothing to resist the jihad or even identify it as such, that in itself will stop the jihad in its tracks.

Meanwhile, focusing on the "Internet" as a cause of "radicalization" is like focusing on magazines as a cause of pornography.

One wonders how these MP's successfully feed themselves.

"Internet biggest breeding ground for violent extremism, ministers warn," by Alan Travis for The Guardian, February 5 (thanks to Warren):

The internet now plays a part in most, if not all, cases of violent radicalisation and is a more significant recruiting ground than prisons, universities or places of worship, according to report by a cross-party group of MPs published today.

The Commons home affairs committee says internet service providers need to be as effective at removing material that promotes violent extremism as they are in removing content that is sexual or breaches copyright....

The report stresses, however, that no single pathway leads to radicalisation and emphasises that direct, personal contact is also significant. It adds that although convicted terrorists have attended British universities and prisons there is seldom evidence that they were radicalised there. The report says recruitment activities have retreated to private homes as the authorities have targeted public arenas.

The MPs, however, heard in private an assessment from Charles Farr, the Home Office's head of the Office of Security and Counter-terrorism, that "sympathy for violent extremism is declining rather than increasing". The MPs contrast this with the situation in 2007 when MI5 said there were "at least 2,000 people" in the UK who posed a threat because they supported terrorism – a figure that had increased by 400 the previous year.

The MPs do conclude that there may be growing support for nonviolent extremism within the Muslim community, fed by feelings of alienation and a sense of grievance, and this is a challenge for society and the police.

They are not allowed (by the strictures of political correctness) to consider the possibility that there might be growing support for "nonviolent extremism" for reasons arising from core Muslim beliefs.

They recommend that tackling Islamophobia and demonstrating that the British state is not antithetical to Islam should constitute a big part of the official Prevent strategy designed to counter the ideology that feeds violent radicalisation.

The MPs talked to the radical preacher Abu Hamza in the maximum security unit at Belmarsh prison in London, who told them the main drivers of radicalisation were grievances, especially concerning Palestine and Afghanistan, a sense that the prophet was being mocked, guilt and capability.

He said unemployment was not a source of grievance.

Keith Vaz MP, the committee's Labour chairman, said: "The conviction last week of four men from London and Cardiff radicalised over the internet, for a plot to bomb the London stock exchange and launch a Mumbai-style atrocity on the streets of London, shows that we cannot let our vigilance slip. More resources need to be directed to these threats and to preventing radicalisation through the internet and in private spaces. These are the fertile breeding grounds for terrorism."

Cab drivers who refuse service according to Islamic strictures are engaging in false advertising if they style themselves as a regular taxi service, which would be expected to admit service animals. They may well also be in breach of contract with their licensing authority. "Muslim cab driver refuses guide dog in Letchworth," from The Advertiser, February 2 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A blind man says he was refused use of a taxi in Letchworth because the Muslim driver would not allow his guide dog in the car.

Stevenage resident Sean Dilley had been at Letchworth Sports and Tennis Club in

Muddy Lane with his guide dog Chipp on Sunday evening for a blind tennis demonstration.

Friends had organised for a taxi driver to pick up the 29-year-old after the event and take him back to Letchworth rail station.

But when the driver arrived shortly after 7pm to pick him up, he refused to let Sean and Chipp in the car.

"The driver turned up and said you are more than welcome but I’m not taking your dog," said Sean, who has been blind for 15 years.

"He said it was because he was a Muslim. I was horrified. This sort of thing happens all the time and it’s not acceptable."

The debate between Sean and the driver was caught on camera by a friend.

It has been reported that some strands of Islam teach that dogs should be avoided because the animal's saliva is considered to be impure.

Sean is a freelance broadcaster and parliamentary lobby correspondent for talkSPORT and last year made a film for the BBC’s Daily Politics show highlighting how many businesses and restaurants refused entry to guide dogs.

He called the taxi firm Gary’s Taxis to complain but was told the driver was within his rights.

But Sean believes that the driver was breaking disability discrimination law by refusing to take them and has reported the matter to North Herts Council, which licenses taxis in the district.

"I have a lot of energy and I know the law, and yet I find battling this sort of thing exhausting," he said.

"There must be many elderly or vulnerable people who can’t do that and just put up with it.

"Often it’s difficult to prove what happened though but this time we’ve got video evidence of what happened."

The Advertiser was unable to contact the taxi driver and Gary’s Taxis would only say "It’s a matter between the council and the driver."

Cllr Bernard Lovewell, the council’s portfolio holder for housing and environmental health, said: "We are currently investigating a complaint regarding an alleged incident with a North Herts licensed hackney carriage driver and a customer with a guide dog.

"Until we have concluded the investigation we cannot comment further.

"We would like to reassure residents that council-licensed taxi drivers should not refuse a blind or partially sighted person from getting in to their taxi on the grounds that they wish an assistance dog to accompany them."

Should not, or must not?

Still more converts to Islam misunderstand their new, peaceful religion. And yet, despite the frequency of such instances, no one, anywhere, is calling upon Muslims to institute instruction classes for converts to Islam to help safeguard them from this curious misunderstanding. "German converts plead guilty to smuggling bomb instructions into Britain," by Duncan Gardham for the Telegraph, February 2:

Two German Islamic converts have pleaded guilty attempting to smuggle the same bomb-making instructions used by the London Stock Exchange bombers into Britain.

Christian Emde, 28, and Robert Baum, 24, from Solingen in Western Germany were stopped as they entered the country on a ferry to Dover in July.

Sources told the Daily Telegraph the men were on a watch list because they were active in extremist circles in Germany.

They eventually told police they were traveling to London and Birmingham to meet unnamed individuals.

A search of their rucksacks revealed a large quantity of extremist literature stored on a hard drive and a laptop computer, including an article called “How to make a bomb in the kitchen of your Mom,” from the al-Qaeda magazine, Inspire.

The same recipe for a pipe bomb was used by the four men who pleaded guilty this week to plotting to blow up the London Stock Exchange.

The men were said to have a “passion for guns” and their backpacks contained numerous gun manuals written in English, Arabic and German.

Other articles included “39 ways to support jihad” by Anwar al-Awlaki, one of the former leaders of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsular who was killed in a drone attacks last year.

Another article was entitled “The Ultimate Mowing Machine” and described how blades could be fixed to a truck to cut down pedestrians.

Emde had “vast quantities of Jihad and terrorism booklets and pamphlets” an earlier hearing was told and Baum had “similar but fewer articles.”

Both men are Islamic converts. Emde converted in 2003 and Baum two to three years ago.

Emde was the moderator of a website in Germany which opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He was said to have an “interest in terrorism” but claims he did not download the material to distribute it or for the purposes of terrorism.

Timothy Green, for Emde, said the material was "freely available" on the internet and was thought not to be illegal in Germany.

At their preliminary hearing, the men refused to stand up to face the charges.

Speaking through an interpreter Baum said: "To stand up would be an act of worship which is forbidden in Islam.”...

Sitting down in an Infidel court is an act of piety, as is murdering Infidels.

Still more misunderstanders of the Religion of Peace

Will the Islamophobia never end? "Terrorists admit plot to bomb London Stock Exchange and US Embassy," by Duncan Gardham for the Telegraph, February 1 (thanks to David):

Four al-Qaeda inspired terrorists have pleaded guilty to plotting a Christmas bomb attack on the London Stock Exchange, the American embassy and the home of London Mayor Boris Johnson.

Two of the men conducted a surveillance trip around central London and also talked about launching a Mumbai-style attack on Parliament.

A “target list” was found at the home of the ring-leader which listed the names and addresses of Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, as well as two Rabbis and the American Embassy. It had on it the letters ‘LXC’ for London Stock Exchange.

Torn pieces of paper showed a sketch of what is believed to be a car bomb.

Three other men met with the plotters and planned to travel abroad to get more training before returning to launch further attacks. Another two men pleaded guilty to associated charges.

The men, from London, Stoke and Cardiff, were inspired by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsular (AQAP) and used their English-language magazine Inspire as a guide.

In Stoke the gang talked about attacking local pubs and clubs but decided to travel abroad to get more training.

In East London, Mohammed Chowdhury, 21, the ring leader, and Shah Rahman, 29, were under surveillance as they toured central London sites for six hours between 3.30pm and 9.30pm on November 28 2010.

They got off a bus in Trafalgar Square and walked along Whitehall towards Westminster. They were observed looking at Big Ben, Westminster Abbey, the Houses of Parliament, the London Eye, Blackfriars Bridge and the Church of Scientology on Queen Victoria Street.

After visiting a McDonalds restaurant on Cannon Street in the City of London, the two men boarded a bus back towards East London.

In the bedroom at Chowdhury’s flat in the Isle of Dogs, police found a handwritten target list on a folded piece of A4 paper on the computer desk.

The Stoke group have their origins in Pakistan, while the London and Cardiff groups were originally from Bangladesh.

The three groups were inspired by Anwar al-Awlaki, one of the leaders of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsular, who died in a drone attack last year.

The defendants made contact with each other through dawah – proselytising - or by Paltalk or other internet messaging.

Meetings took place in November and December 2010 at which the defendants planned to use explosive devices to attack significant locations in London and around the country.

Their plans could be carried out without much preparation and were very difficult to intercept, sources said.

The London and Cardiff groups were keen to act quickly, at first talking about sending mail bombs through the Royal Mail and then deciding on a plan to set off bombs in the toilets of the stock exchange.

The Stoke group talked about persuading others to take bombs into pubs in their area so that they would explode.

Abdul Miah, 25, said to be at the centre of the Cardiff gang, and his brother Omar Latif, 28, pleaded guilty to taking part in the Stock Exchange plot. Gurukanth Desai, 30, pleaded guilty to attending meetings.

Mohibur Rahman, 27, from Stoke pleaded guilty to possession of a document containing information useful to a person preparing an act of terrorism.

The charges relate to two editions of al-Qaeda’s English language Inspire magazine.

Usman Khan, 20, Mohammed Shahjahan, 27, and Nazam Hussain, 26, all from Stoke pleaded guilty to preparing acts of terrorism....

Nine. There's that number again. Now, everyone knows only the greasiest of greasy Islamophobes retail the notion that the practice of marrying girls as young as nine has something to do with Muhammad marrying Aisha when she was six and consummating the marriage when she was nine, and he was six times her age at fifty-four. So, all of these people continuing the practice in the remotest, most undeveloped areas Afghanistan and Yemen out of Islamic piety must actually be reading American or European blogs, right?

Wrong. For example, there is Sahih Bukhari 7.62.88: "The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)."

It is Islam's own texts and traditions that cause the practice to persist in places far removed from one another, and to appear where it had previously been unimaginable -- for example, Britain. "Islington girls forced into marriage at the age of nine," by Pavan Amara for the Islington Tribune, January 27:

An alarming number of under-age girls – some as young as nine – are being forced into marriage in Islington, according to a leading campaign group.

The Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO) claim that at least 30 girls in the borough were forced into marriage in 2010.

The practice was condemned by the Imam of Finsbury Park Mosque, who said such marriages were against Islam and “unacceptable”.

He pledged to invalidate any marriage which he said were carried out by “back-street Imams”.

IKWRO, which made headlines last month when they revealed there had been almost 3,000 “honour-based” violence cases in 2010, has shown the Tribune records which revealed at least three 11-year-old girls and two nine-year-olds had been forced into marriage with older men within Islington. The oldest girls involved were 16.

They have warned that hundreds of Islington girls could be suffering sexual, emotional and physical scars as a result of the child marriages every year and are calling for teachers, social workers and police to be better trained to spot and manage the abuse.

Information from the Ministry of Justice, following a Freedom of Information request, revealed that 32 Forced Marriage Protection Order applications were made for children under 16 in Britain last year.

Six of these were made for under-16s within Islington at the Royal Courts of Justice, although these were not necessarily made for Islington residents.

At the Islington court, “five or fewer” orders were made to protect children between the ages of 9-11.

The orders are a form of injunction that threaten legal punishment if marriage takes place due to emotional or physical force.

In most cases, the children fear they will be killed if they reveal the truth to anybody, while others believe they will be separated from their families and taken into social services’ care.

Dianna Nammi, director of IKWRO, explained that the girls are married in a mosque’s sharia court. This means they are not legally married according to British law, rendering the Home Office unable to recognise or prove the abuse.

“They are still expected to carry out their wifely duties, though, and that includes sleeping with their husband,” she said.

“They have to cook for them, wash their clothes, everything. They are still attending schools in Islington, struggling to do their primary school homework, and at the same time being practically raped by a middle-aged man regularly and being abused by their families. So they are a wife, but in a primary school uniform.

That's not being "practically" raped. The practice will diminish when the law comes after the "husbands" and families with the force with which they would pursue child molesters and human traffickers. This is rape, and it is human trafficking.

“The reason it doesn’t get out is because they are too terrified to speak out, and also the control their families have over them is impossible to imagine if you’re not going through it. The way it is covered up is so precise, almost unspeakable.”

Ms Nammi said that one 13-year-old had to sneak out of a maths lesson to contact the group, because she was being monitored so closely by her family.

“Her teacher didn’t notice because she said she’d gone to the toilet, but when she got home that day she was beaten,” she said.

“Her father knew she hadn’t been in maths because he had sent an uncle to spy on who she was talking to through the classroom window.”

Ms Nammi said that the girls are married off to family friends or family members to stop them from losing their virginity to anyone not chosen by their father.

As young as nine. Heaven knows they're all going to become wild party animals at age 10.

However, the incentive is also often financial.

The financial aspect supports the human trafficking angle:

“The girl automatically becomes her husband’s property, so he takes financial responsibility for her,” said Ms Nammi.

“In fact, often the husband has to start contributing to the girl’s family, so it becomes a way of bringing in another salary.

“Who are girls going to tell? Often they feel like teachers at school won’t understand what their families are like. They will think they’re like Western families, and won’t understand that if they pass on anything at all that they’ve been told to the family, then the girl will be killed. So they just chose not to tell at all.”....

Greasy Islamophobes in Britain once again impede a Muslim's expression of the beautiful Religion of Peace.

"Asim Kausar jailed over ricin recipe find," from the BBC, January 27 (thanks to David):

A man who downloaded a recipe for the deadly poison ricin and documents about how to make bombs has been jailed for two years and three months.

Asim Kausar, 25, from Bolton, kept the information on a computer pen drive.

The material only came to light after Kausar's family suffered a burglary and the memory stick was handed in to police.

Kausar pleaded guilty to four charges under the Terrorism Act at Manchester Crown Court.

The memory stick contained details about ricin, assassination and torture techniques, and how to construct improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

Police had been given it so officers could view CCTV images of the break-in stored on the device.

They then came across the terror-related information....

Whoops!

The documents were entitled Improvised Munitions Handbook and Unconventional Warfare Devices and Techniques.

Kausar told officers he had downloaded the information out of "curiosity and a thirst for knowledge".

Yeah, sure, that's it. Work on your "war is deceit" act, there, Kausar.

The court heard Kausar had "scoured the internet" between January 2009 and June 2011 and the information he downloaded ran into thousands of pages of documents.

Sentencing him, the Recorder of Manchester Judge Andrew Gilbart QC said there was no evidence that the offending went beyond collecting information.

However he said he was satisfied Kausar's actions "went beyond mere idle curiosity"....

When Kausar's bedroom was searched, police found what appeared to be a "shopping list" of munitions, said Riel Karmy-Jones, prosecuting, with prices marked down next to entries of various weapons and ammunition.

His mobile phone was also seized which contained a photograph of Kausar posing with an AK rifle - believed to have been taken in Pakistan.

The court was also told about a letter written by Kausar in which he said: "I want to fight jihad for Allah".

The letter also asked "whether he would be able to fight and whether his martyrdom would be accepted".

Those who wage jihad to impose Sharia push a circular argument: Sharia is the only way to peace and security because it is the only condition under which they will allow peace and security to take hold. They try to prove the supposed necessity of Sharia by attempting to create it, through harassment, sexual assaults, and acts of terrorism.

It is this man's mindset that also likely explains some of the reported surge in sexual assaults in the Maldives, and in Scandinavia as well. When you are a second class citizen, as women and unbelievers are under Sharia (women become perpetual minors, and unbelievers are dhimmis), you bear a disproportionate burden to keep the peace by knowing your "place." If you are found to be out of that place, you forfeit your protection, such as it is.

"'Strict Muslim' raped four women at knifepoint to 'punish them for being on the streets at night'," Nick Enoch for the Daily Mail, January 25:

A Muslim man who raped women to 'teach them a lesson' for being on the streets at night was jailed indefinitely today because of the danger he poses to women.

Sunny Islam, 23, who comes from a strict Muslim family, dragged his terrified victims - including a 15-year-old - from the street at knifepoint, bound and assaulted them during a two-month reign of terror.

Police fear that Islam may have attacked many more.

Three of the assaults took place close to his home in Barking, east London, while a fourth occurred in nearby Forest Gate.

Judge Patricia Lees, sentencing him to a minimum of 11 years, said: 'The harm you have done to your victims is incalculable.

'The nature and extent of these offences drives me to the conclusion that you represent an extreme and continuing danger to women, particularly those out at night.'

He was traced through the number plate of his girlfriend's car after he kidnapped and raped the 15-year-old in September 2010.

He grabbed her from behind as she walked home with a friend and bundled her into the car at knifepoint before driving to a secluded spot where he raped her twice despite her claiming she was only 11 years old.

Judge Lees said: 'You told her you were going to "teach her a lesson", and similar things were said to the other women.

'Those words are a chilling indictment of your very troubling attitude towards all of these victims.

'You seem to observe women out at night as not deserving respect or protection....

What anti-Islam press? The mainstream media in both the U.K. and the U.S. has been for years and remains completely unwilling to discuss jihad and Islamic supremacism. When mainstream reporters are forced to report on jihad activity, they regularly ascribe it to other factors or obscure its motives. Thus we hear about "militants," "insurgents," and "youths" in connection with violent jihad activity, while being endlessly regaled with articles designed to intimidate people into thinking that concern about the stealth jihad and creeping Sharia is "Islamophobia."

This initiative is designed to shut down the last vestiges of truth-telling about jihad and Islamic supremacist in the British mainstream media. Note also that among the signers is not only once-fashionable Leftist Bianca Jagger, but Moazzam Begg, an apologist for Anwar al-Awlaki. That's right: the fox is demanding that the farmer stop his anti-fox activity of guarding the henhouse.

"We need an inquiry into anti-Islam press," from The Guardian, January 23 (thanks to Steven):

Over the past decade, a number of academic studies have indicated a worrying and disproportionate trend towards negative, distorted and even fabricated reports in media coverage of the Muslim community. Recent research at Cambridge University concludes that "a wider set of representations of Islam would signify a welcome change to reporting practices. Muslims deserve a better press than they have been given in the past decade." And according to a recent ComRes poll, one in three people in Britain today believe that the media is responsible for "whipping up a climate of fear of Islam in the UK".

The Leveson inquiry has so far failed to adequately address unfair media coverage as it relates to less prominent cases, including those relating to Muslims and Islam, focusing as it does on the impact of phone hacking on celebrities and other high-profile individuals.

An alternative inquiry is necessary to investigate what many regard as widespread and systematic discriminatory practices in reporting on Muslims and Islam in the British media. Victims – whether prominent or not – of alleged discriminatory media coverage have a right to have their testimonies catalogued and examined thoroughly by credible, independent assessors. Recommendations can then be made to improve ethical standards in the reporting of not solely the Muslim community but of all sections of society.

Imran Khan Human rights solicitor
Bianca Jagger Chair, Bianca Jagger Human Rights Foundation
Michael Rosen Writer
Jeremy Corbyn MP
Jemima Khan
Navnit Dholakia Deputy leader, Liberal Democrats, House of Lords
Mohamed Ali Harrath Islam Channel
Hajj Ahmad Thomson Barrister
Jenny Jones Assembly member (Green), London Assembly
Andrew Boff Assembly member (Conservative), London Assembly
Rabbi Janet Burden
Walter Wolfgang
Hugh Lanning Chair, Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Sanum Ghafoor, blogger
Jean Lambert, MEP, London
Peter Murray Former president, NUJ
Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari Chair, East London Mosque
Dr Omer El-Hamdoon Muslim Association of Britain
Massoud Shadjareh Islamic Human Rights Commission
Sunny Hundal Liberal Conspiracy
Ahmed J Versi The Muslim News
John Rees Counterfire
Vivien Lichtenstein
Anas Altikriti Cordoba Foundation
Miriam Margolyes
Farooq Murad Muslim Council of Britain
Sarah Colborne Director, Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Dr Daud Abdullah Middle East Monitor
Moazzam Begg Cageprisoners
Phil Rees Out of Office Films
Nabil Ahmed Federation of Student Islamic Societies
Abdullah Faliq Islamic Forum of Europe
Rabbi Jeffrey Newman
Cllr Larry Sanders Oxfordshire county council
Diana Neslen
Shemiza Rashid Director, The Creative Muslim Network
Na'ima B Roberts Editor, Sisters Magazine
Asa Winstanley The Electronic Intifada
Richard Peppiatt Writer and former tabloid reporter
Shazia Arshad Human rights campaigner
Myriam Francois Cerrah Activist
Murtaza Shibli Journalist and author
Lindsey German Stop The War Coalition
Murad Qureshi Assembly member, London Assembly
Cat Smith Chair, Next Generation Labour (pc)
Robert Pitt Islamophobia Watch
Dr Alana Lentin University of Sussex
Robin Richardson Insted Consultancy
Cat Boyd Coalition of Resistance Glasgow
Baroness Pola Uddin
Sean Rillo Raczka University of London Union
Chris Nineham Enough Coalition Against Islamophobia
Mark McDonald Barrister
Dan Poulton Journalist
Yasmin Khatun Producer
Frances Legg Producer
Chris Bambery Journalist
Sadiya Chowdhury Journalist
Supporters of the The Alternative Leveson inquiry

Will the Islamophobia never end?

"Man in Cardiff counter-terror raid told police he would 'cut your head off and machine gun the lot of you', court told," by Ian Caleb for Walesonline, January 22 (thanks to Twostellas):

A MAN arrested in a police counter-terrorism operation told an officer he would “cut your head off and machine gun the lot of you”, a court has heard.

Mohammed Abdin, 21, will be sentenced in Cardiff Crown Court next month after admitting throwing furniture and threatening officers when they stormed a meeting in Canton Community Centre, Cardiff, on Thursday.

See also: Anti-terror police raid ‘extremist’ meeting in community hall

But despite the sting being prompted by concerns the group were associated with outlawed organisation Muslims Against Crusades, Abdin’s solicitor Derek Gooden argued that a peaceful community group had been wrongfully broken up because of unsubstantiated fears.

Mani Ranauta, prosecuting, told Cardiff magistrates’ court yesterday how Abdin, of Clare Road, Grangetown, Cardiff, already had a four-month suspended sentence for affray he had committed during a protest about 9/11 last year.

“At Canton Community Centre on Thursday, January 19, at 8.10pm, officers arrived with the intent to issue a dispersal order to the group, fearing there was going to be a breach of the peace,” she said.

“When they entered, they were immediately met with hostility.

“Out of the 25 in attendance, 12 were aggressive individuals, with tables and chairs being upturned and thrown in the direction of officers.

“The defendant lunged at the officers several times, in an attempt to grab the camera they were filming with.

“Attempts were made to calm the group down, but the defendant continued, shouting “I’m going to cut your head off and machine gun the lot of you” and specifically pointing at officers saying “I’ve seen your face.”

The court heard that when cautioned, Abdin told an officer: “F*** off you white ****.”

In response, Derek Gooden, defending, said the “flowery words” Abdin had used were prompted by what they believed to be an unwarranted police invasion.

Adding that emotions had clearly been running high as a result of the intrusion, Mr Gooden said: “A number of individuals gathered at a community centre to discuss their religion. There is nothing to suggest there is a link to terrorism, as the local press has indicated.

“Those 25 individuals mentioned included women and children and this was nothing more than a meeting of Muslims to discuss the Qur’an.

“Jewish people were welcome, Catholic people were welcome, Protestant people were welcome, because all they are doing is discussing the Qur’an.”

Referring to the previous count of affray, Mr Gooden said Abdin and a number of individuals were lawfully demonstrating and airing their views, when a larger group of people from the English Defence Front had begun to make their presence felt.

Abdin had then used force to prevent a colleague from being hurt, he said.

“Mr Abdin has not been charged with being part of an extremist organisation. He wasn’t a part of the group for the previous incident, he was merely protesting with them, and there is nothing to suggest otherwise,” he said.

“This was no more than a lawful assembly in a community centre. I hope we are not living in a day where it is unlawful to discuss religion or politics, however distasteful we find the discussion, and have the fear of that being broken up.”

No, we're just living in a day where it is unlawful to threaten to behead police officers.

This is nothing new, of course, but only a continuation of an already well documented phenomenon. As Ronald Reagan once said, if you want more of something, subsidize it.

And if you want behavior to be repeated, reward it. "A third of inmates at Feltham youth jail are Muslims... and more convert to get better food," from the Daily Mail, January 21 (thanks to Zulu):

A third of inmates at one of Britain’s most notorious youth jails are Muslims and the religion is attracting a large number of converts.

There are 229 Muslims out of a total of 686 youngsters detained at Feltham Young Offenders’ Institution in West London, according to Ministry of Justice figures.

There are now so many worshippers at Friday prayers that they have to be split between Feltham’s mosque and its gym.

Sources claim that converts are attracted by the chance of better food and a more comfortable regime.

But there are also fears that some are being radicalised.

During Ramadan, Muslim prisoners are given food in separate hot and cold containers so they can eat what they choose at the end of their daylight fast.

A source revealed: ‘Over the last few years there has been a huge surge in those attending Muslim services.

‘The popularity of the faith has surprised people. We are seeing a large number of inmates converting to Islam.'

He added: ‘There is a difference between mainstream believers and extremists, but the fear is that some in the jail are being radicalised.

'Others convert for protection or to have what they believe is an easier lifestyle.’

Prison insiders say most non-Muslims are locked up during Friday prayers because so many guards are needed to monitor the lunchtime service.

The Ministry of Justice said: ‘The Prison Service is committed to ensuring the religious needs of prisoners of all faiths are met.’

One of them earlier explained: "My intention was to do my duty as a Muslim, to inform people of God’s word and to give the message on what God says about homosexuality."

There are still many Muslims in Britain who believe the same way. Ultimately the U.K. is going to opt for multiculturalism, adopt Islamic law regarding gays and drop prosecutions like this, thereby leading to the brutalization of innocent people, or else reject it decisively. But the confrontations between British law and Sharia are just beginning.

"Three Derby men guilty over gay hate leaflets," from the BBC, January 20:

Three men have been found guilty of a gay hate crime after handing out leaflets calling for homosexual people to be given the death sentence.

Ihjaz Ali, 42, Kabir Ahmed, 28 and Razwan Javed, 27, were found guilty of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.

They distributed a leaflet titled Death Penalty? at a mosque and through letterboxes, Derby Crown Court heard.

This is an unconscionable infringement on the freedom of speech, and an indication of the dismal state of affairs in England today: a conference on Sharia and human rights in a London university is canceled after an Islamic supremacist thug photographs and threatens the participants that he will kill them if they say anything he dislikes about Muhammad.

English authorities should have arrested this man and should be keeping him and the group he was with under close scrutiny. They should have provided police in sufficient numbers both to allow this conference to go on, and to protect the participants and their families, as well as to track down and prosecute the Muslim thug and his comrades. Yes, this would be a huge expense. It would also be a statement: that this kind of thuggery will not be tolerated, and the freedom of speech will be protected.

It was ironic that this happened at a One Law For All conference. One Law For All is the project of Maryam Namazie, who is just another kind of freedom-hating thug. Her opposition to Sharia does not stem from a commitment to genuinely free societies, for as a Marxist, although she may oppose those who behead people while shouting "Allahu akbar" and post the video to YouTube, she doesn't oppose those who enslave people in gulags and shoot them in the back of the head for being "enemies of the people." Her opposition to Sharia is not a fight for freedom; Hitler and Stalin fought each other, too, but that didn't make either one of them freedom fighters.

Indeed, Namazie has targeted those who are actually working to protect the freedom of speech and the principle of equality of rights of all people against Sharia and Islamization. She has libeled me and others with outright lies, which she refuses to retract, about what we have said and what we stand for. She has retailed Palestinian jihadist propaganda about Israel, claiming that it engaged in "genocide" in Gaza -- thereby spitting in the face of all genuine victims of genocide and advancing an antisemitic lie that was crafted in aid of the jihad against Israel.

And so one gang of thugs has targeted another. The freedom of speech should in all cases be protected, but the conflict between these Muslim thugs and Maryam Namazie's gang is not one between the enemies of freedom and its defenders. It's just a turf war.

"Islamist stops university debate with threats of violence," from the National Secular Society, January 17 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A talk on sharia and human rights by NSS Council Member Anne Marie Waters' at Queen Mary University of London was cancelled at the last moment because of an Islamist who made serious threats against everyone there.

Ms Waters was due to give a talk on behalf of the One Law for All Campaign on 16 January but before it started, a man entered the lecture theatre, stood at the front with a camera and filmed the audience. He then said that he knew who everyone was, where they lived and if he heard anything negative about the Prophet, he would track them down.

The man also filmed students in the foyer and threatened to murder them and their families. On leaving the building, he joined a large group of men, apparently there to support him. Students were told by security to stay in the lecture theatre for their own safety.

Jennifer Hardy, President of Queen Mary's Atheism, Secularism and Humanism Society, who organised the event said: "This event was supposed to be an opportunity for people of different religions and perspectives to debate, at a university that is supposed to be a beacon of free speech and debate.

"Only two complaints had been made to the Union prior to the event, and the majority of the Muslim students at the event were incredibly supportive of it going ahead. These threats were an aggressive assault on freedom of speech and the fact that they led to the cancellation of our talk was severely disappointing for all of the religious and non-religious students in the room who wanted to engage in debate."...

"Somewhat unsurprisingly the threats perpetrated by extremist Muslims cover an array of appalling crimes including obscene sexual offences ... [the women] are frequently accused of 'destroying Islam' or “corrupting our women'."

Qur'an 4:34 makes violence against disobedient women lawful. Whatever other rationalizations one trots out, at the end of the day, Allah says you can hit (yes, hit) your wife. Here, again, is the allegation that any change to improve the lot of women will only serve to corrupt, create prostitutes, and so on.

The home is a microcosm of society. If one believes there can only be either tyranny and fear, or licentiousness, it is not the building block of a free and democratic society. "The New Muslim suffragettes of the United Kingdom," by Charlotte Rachael Proudman for the Independent, January 18 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

An increasing number of Muslim women activists are receiving death threats, fatwas and even hate-mail from extremist male and female Muslims. Their crime: Rescuing fellow Muslim women from violent and life threatening situations.

With heightened media sensitivity surrounding forced marriage, honour based violence and domestic violence we are all too aware of the suffering experienced by vulnerable and marginalised Muslim women. But we know little about the Muslim women activists who risk their lives to fight for the rights of oppressed Muslim women. These women are the New Muslim Suffragettes (NMS) of The United Kingdom.

As wives and mothers themselves, they stand alone in their communities and apart from other prominent Muslim organisations, in offering sanctuary and support for vulnerable and marginalised women. The NMS provide refuge, advocacy and access to the British legal and welfare system for women whose daily lives consist of beatings, imprisonment, torture and even marital rape, as well as the mental health ramifications that unfold over time.

In fact there has been an exponential growth in Muslim women activists in the form of charitable women rights organisations. These organisations have emerged post 9/11 as a response to misogynist and extremist views which are contaminating the Muslim community. Like the suffragette movement in the late 19th and early 20th century, Muslim women activists are collectively gaining momentum in fighting for women’s rights in oppressive and patriarchal contexts. But facing fierce patriarchal resistance - akin to that experienced by the early Suffragettes – sympathy for the NMS does not always convert to action.

In seeking justice for Muslim women whose human rights have been eroded through hyper-conservative interpretations of Islam, the NMS turn to British Law. But in affording marginalised Muslim women their rights the NMS are perceived by extremist Muslims as “feminists”, a term loaded in the Muslim world with connotations of modernity, resistance and westernisation, and perhaps more importantly a term which challenges the patriarchal underpinning of Islam dictated by extremist Muslims.

So they face a backlash in the form of persecution, intimidation and death threats. Fearing for their lives the NMS are forced into hiding and prevented from undertaking the very work they set out to achieve – to highlight and prevent the gross abuse of human rights many Muslim women suffer. Instead the NMS risk becoming the vulnerable and marginalised Muslim women that they originally set out to help and support. It’s time for the public to be aware of the plight of the NMS in the United Kingdom. This is their story.

My mobile phone rang, I could hear heavy breathing and a deep male voice – “I know where you live, I’m going to find you, and then I’m going to chop your legs off for taking my daughter away from me”. This NMS received this threat along with a threat to bomb her car after she rescued a young woman from forced marriage and domestic violence. Fearing for her life, this NMS must check her car for bombs each day and cannot leave her home without a panic alarm.

For the NMS, life has become intolerable. Sara Khan, from the counter-extremist and gender equality consultancy Inspire and Shereen Williams from the Henna Foundation spoke about the persecution perpetrated against them and work colleagues often directed at family members. According to Diana Nammi founder of the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), the main motive behind the death threats is an extremist belief that the work of the NMS is shaming and dishonouring the Muslim community, particularly in cases where women are supported by the NMS in seeking legal redress for the wrongs inflicted upon them often by their own family members.

Somewhat unsurprisingly the threats perpetrated by extremist Muslims cover an array of appalling crimes including obscene sexual offences, which have become an increasing problem in the blogosphere and according to Shaista Gohir (MBE) the NMS are frequently accused of “destroying Islam” or “corrupting our women” and like the Suffragettes over a century ago – they are accused of being “mad”. While these accusations may appear banal and mundane to secular ears, they are devastating to women activists of faith who are accused of being apostates. In this case, these accusations lead to threats of Shaista Gohir’s throat being slashed...

"In the absence of any assurance by Jordan that the torture evidence would not be used against Mr Othman, the Court therefore concluded that his deportation to Jordan to be retried would give rise to a flagrant denial of justice..." Never mind "Mr. Othman's" own flagrant attempts to deny justice to innocent people by depriving them of their lives.

"Abu Qatada wins Jordan deportation appeal," from the BBC, January 17 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Radical cleric Abu Qatada has won his appeal against deportation from the UK to Jordan, at the European Court of Human Rights.

The judges accepted the UK's deal with Jordan to protect the cleric from abuse was sound.

But the court said he should not face trial for terrorism on evidence obtained by the torture of others.

Home Secretary Theresa May said the European judges' decision was "not the end of the road".

The British government can make a final appeal before the judgement becomes binding in three months' time. If it does not appeal, the cleric will have to be released from detention.

Abu Qatada, whose real name is Omar Othman, is one of the most influential Islamist clerics in Europe, supporting jihadist causes. British judges have described him as "truly dangerous".

He has never faced trial in the UK, but has been detained without charge and had his movements restricted by a control order, a form of house arrest.

The Palestinian-Jordanian preacher has been convicted in his absence of involvement in two major terrorism plots in Jordan.

But he says that those convictions were based on evidence extracted by the torture of co-defendants and he would face similar treatment if returned. He originally fled to the UK in 1993 after being tortured twice.

The government signed a memorandum of understanding with Jordan as part of its efforts to expel him, one of a number of deals with foreign regimes which are designed to protect the human rights of anyone deported from the UK.

In the ruling, the Strasbourg court accepted that diplomatic assurances given by Jordan to the UK meant that the cleric would be protected from torture if he were returned.

But it added that the deportation had to be stopped because Abu Qatada was likely to face retrial in Jordan - and that torture had been used to gather the evidence against him....

Strasbourg said that it was highly probable that the "decisive" evidence against the preacher had come from abusing these defendants.

"In the absence of any assurance by Jordan that the torture evidence would not be used against Mr Othman, the Court therefore concluded that his deportation to Jordan to be retried would give rise to a flagrant denial of justice in violation of [his right to a fair trial]"....

The literature apparently gets some of its material from Minhaj al-Muslim, reminding one again of the comment-box apologists we've encountered who have insisted they've never heard of this book and we must have picked it out of the clear blue sky to tar Islam's reputation.

Then this guy must be a total Islamophobe. Or an Islamohomophobe. Or a Homoislamophobe? "'I was doing my duty as a Muslim,' says father who handed out leaflets saying gay people should be hanged," by Lucy Buckland for the Daily Mail, January 16 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A father has told a court he was only doing his duty as a Muslim by handing out leaflets calling for gay people to be executed.

Kabir Ahmed, 28, said he handed a leaflet called Death Penalty? to a policeman and stuffed them through letterboxes across Derby because he was spreading the word of God as taught by Islam.

He said: 'My intention was to do my duty as a Muslim, to inform people of God’s word and to give the message on what God says about homosexuality.'

Married Ahmed, who has a nine-month-old daughter, is on trial with four other men at Derby Crown Court charged with inciting hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation, the first prosecution of its kind since legislation came into force in March 2010.

At the opening of the trial last week jurors were shown the Death Penalty? leaflet, which shows an image of a mannequin hanging from a noose and says that homosexuality is punishable by the death penalty under Islam.

He said it.

The leaflet states: 'The death sentence is the only way this immoral crime can be erased from corrupting society and act as a deterrent for any other ill person who is remotely inclined in this bent way.'

It goes on: 'The only dispute amongst the classical authorities was the method employed in carrying out the penal code,' and then goes on to offer burning, being flung from a high point such as a mountain or building, or being stoned to death as suitable methods.

There it is: "Gay people should be thrown head first off high buildings and if not killed on hitting the ground, they should be then stoned to death." - Minhaj al-Muslim (The Way of the Muslim)

Giving evidence today Ahmed, wearing a pair of grey trousers and a black shirt, said he had handed one of the Death Penalty? leaflets to PC Stephen Gregory on July 2 2010 as he was passing by the area of the Jamia Mosque in Rosehill Street following Friday prayers.

He told the court he felt it was his duty as a Muslim to inform and advise people wherever they may be committing sins, he would be failing if he did not. [...]

Calling for anyone to be put to death is quite different from expressing disapproval of any kind of behavior.

Prosecutor Bobbie Cheema told the court the Death Penalty? leaflet was not educational or informative but was simply 'threatening, offensive, frightening and nasty.'

Yet no one, least of all Western feminists, seems in the least concerned about Sharia's institutionalized discrimination against women. "Growing use of Sharia by UK Muslims," by Divya Talwar for the BBC, January 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The use of Sharia, or Islamic religious law, is growing in Britain, with thousands of Muslims using it to settle disputes each year, but women's groups and some others are objecting.

''You must speak the truth, sister. Because Allah is listening to your every word, you can lie to us but not to Him.''

The bearded sheikh is instructing his first client of the day to explain why she is unhappy in her marriage.

Sitting behind a small desk in the back room of a converted terrace house, Sheikh Haitham al-Haddad is a representative of the Islamic Sharia Council, the largest Sharia body in the UK, based in Leyton, east London.

The woman has come to the council for an Islamic divorce because her husband refuses to grant her one.

''I'm not happy. He's never at home and I've seen messages from other women on his phone. He doesn't even give money to help support the kids,'' the woman tells the sheikh.

It is easier for a Muslim man to end a marriage in Islam, but a wife must persuade the judges to grant her a dissolution if her husband is opposed to divorce.

The case is typical of those case dealt with by Sharia councils, as thousands of Muslims are turning to them to help resolve family, financial and commercial problems in accordance with Sharia principles.

Growing demand

An estimated 85 Sharia councils could be operating in Britain, according to a 2009 report by the think tank Civitas.

Several bodies like the Islamic Sharia Council have seen a large increase in their cases in the past five years.

''Our cases have easily more than tripled over the past three to five years," says Sheikh al-Haddad.

''On average, every month we can deal with anything from 200 to 300 cases. A few years ago it was just a small fraction of that.

''Muslims are becoming more aligned with their faith and more aware of what we are offering them,'' he explained.

The principles of Sharia govern all aspects of a Muslim's life. It is derived from a combination of sources including the Koran, the Hadith, which is based on the example of the prophet Muhammad, and fatwas, which are rulings of Islamic scholars.

Saba Zia is a practising Muslim who lives in Reading with her three children. She became a single mother when her husband walked out on her after 13 years of marriage.

"He went to Pakistan for three years and stopped paying the bills and the mortgage.

"I let myself and my kids go. I started starving myself. I would go on average three days not eating anything at all. I remember on one occasion it was seven days. I even started cutting myself. I was aware of what I was doing but I had no control."

Two and a half years after her husband left her, Saba asked him for an Islamic divorce. It was more important to her than her civil divorce.

"I just picked up the phone and said to him: 'Give me a divorce.' But he wasn't going to make it easy for me. That's when I went to the Sharia council."

The Sharia council supported Saba and helped her get the religious divorce she was seeking.

"For me the religious divorce, the Talak, was the first port of call, the most important. The civil divorce was something that could come later. I had to have closure in the eyes of God first.

"I felt like I wasn't alone. They recognised my rights and they helped me move on with my life."

Sharia has been operating in the UK, managed by locally-appointed councils, in parallel to the British legal system since 1982.

But the informal councils have no legal powers and they cannot impose any penalties.

They deal with civil cases alone, but many Muslims are choosing to voluntarily accept rulings made by the scholars.

Omar Hannan, 28, from Solihull, turned to Sharia instead of the British courts after an ownership dispute broke out between the British Muslim partners at his industrial cleaning company.

''It fulfilled my Islamic spiritual principles which was the main reason I went to a Muslim tribunal.

''But it was also very quick. We resolved it in three to four months,'' he said.

''It only cost a couple of hundred pounds, and you can imagine how much it would have cost through the English legal system,'' he added.

As a demand for Sharia thrives, a number of British law firms are starting to tap into the booming market.

Muslim Lawyer Aina Khan has launched one of the first Sharia departments at her London-based law firm.

She offers clients advice that is in keeping with both English and Islamic law.

''I am surprised that the majority of people that I am dealing with are under the age of 50. They are British Muslims who want to satisfy their British identity as well as their Muslim one.

''So I give them solutions to their problems that satisfy both legal systems all under one place.''

Despite the growing demand for Sharia law in Britain, there is also increasing opposition by some groups who argue that the practice discriminates against women.

The Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (IKWRO) is campaigning to bring an end to the practice.

''We have spoken to many women and all of them tell us the same story; Sharia law is not providing them with the justice they seek. The councils are dominated by men, who are making judgements in favour of men,'' said Diana Nammi.

Concerns such as these have led crossbench peer Baroness Cox to introduce a bill before the House of Lords, aimed at introducing regulation of Sharia organisations in the UK.

The bill has received its first reading and is expected to get a second reading later this year.

But for groups like IKWRO the bill does not go far enough.

''We think there shouldn't be any religious law practising in Britain - all Sharia bodies should be banned. That is the only way we can ensure equality of justice for all women," argues Diana Nammi....

Indeed.

On one hand, he's an ambassador in an interview with an Egyptian newspaper. Habits of decorum prevent him from saying "Well, frankly, I think it's all going to be a train wreck" if that were his opinion. That, and, saying the wrong thing could summon a potentially unstable gaggle of protesters to the British embassy.

On the other hand, there was a mostly missed opportunity (save for the mention of the EU's position on capital punishment) here to send a message that Britain's relationship with the new regime depends on its handling of human rights. The end of the report mentions that Britain and other EU countries plan to extend financial assistance to Egypt in the near future.

In extending aid, we in the West have leverage that we are not currently using. Any future aid to Egypt must be made contingent on substantive, verifiable, and continuous improvements in:

- The treatment and legal rights of non-Muslims, the right to build churches, and reciprocal rights of conversion and visibility in public life.
- Women's rights.
- The eradication of female genital mutilation.
- Transparency and good government, due process, and rights in custody for anyone detained by the police or army.

"Hope is not a method," as the military adage goes, and it is well worth insisting on these points now, rather than waiting for another thug regime to get entrenched and comfortable. "British ambassador: Muslim Brotherhood parliamentary majority not worrying," from Al Masry Al Youm, January 14:

The Muslim Brotherhood's majority in Egypt's next parliament is not a source of worry for Britian, said British Ambassador to Egypt James Watt.

In an interview with Akhbar al-Youm, Watt said the results of the parliamentary elections reflect the choice of Egyptians and Britain will have to deal with these results.

He added that he has met with several Brotherhood leaders and the meetings have left a good impression on him. He added that he is optimistic about the future of Egypt and the formulation of policies that will achieve freedom and development.

Asked about whether Britain will hand over former Finance Minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali to Egypt, he said that Egypt has submitted a request for Boutros-Ghali, but there is no extradition treaty between Egypt and Britain. Ghali's status is being examined by the Home Office, though, he said.

Asked about funds former President Hosni Mubarak holds in Britain and the possibility of returning them to Egypt, he said that Britain has received requests, but the lack of accurate account information has impeded progress in this regard.

Mubarak's trial is an internal Egyptian affair, he said, but as a member of the EU, Britain is against capital punishment because it is considered a violation of human rights. If Mubarak is sentenced to death, that may cause disagreement between the two countries, he said.

Watt also said that Britain intends to provide financial assistance to Egypt in the near future, through its membership in the EU, the G8 and other donor institutions.

Egypt needs investments rather than assistance in this stage, he said.

You can't buy good government by throwing money at it. You can buy plenty of the opposite that way.

Britain is the biggest foreign investor in Egypt, with US$30 billion investments over the past five years.

On the remarkable and unprecedented pretext that halal meat "is offensive to many of their non-Muslim colleagues" -- a fact that if one brings up in the U.S., one is immediately charged with "bigotry" and "hate." We are all supposed to eat halal meat, even when it is not labeled as such, and like it, on pain of charges of "racism" and "Islamophobia."

In 2012, SIOA will be working for truth-in-labeling provisions that will ensure that people aren't served halal meat unwittingly.

"We won't eat halal meat, say MPs and peers who reject demands to serve it at Westminster." by Chris Hastings for the Daily Mail, January 1 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Muslim MPs and peers have been told they cannot have meat slaughtered in line with Islamic tradition because the method – slitting an animal’s throat without first stunning it – is offensive to many of their non-Muslim colleagues.

The stance has infuriated some parliamentarians who have eaten meat in the Palace’s 23 restaurants and cafes, having been assured that it was halal.

Lord Ahmed of Rotherham said: ‘I did feel misled. I think a halal option should be made available.’

In 2010, the Mail on Sunday revealed schools, hospitals and restaurants were serving halal meat to unwitting customers.

Waitrose, Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Somerfield and the Co-op all said they stocked meat slaughtered according to Islamic tradition without letting customers know.

Fast-food chains including Domino’s Pizza, Pizza Hut, KFC, ­Nando’s and Subway are also using halal meat without ­telling customers, it was revealed.

How exactly are the people in question "Britons" at all? Some or all were born there, and maybe a few like fish and chips or soccer, but in what way is their outlook on life in any recognizable sense "British"? These men are jihadis, plain and simple. Their outlook on life is an Islamic one that disdains national distinctions and non-Muslim jahili polities. But Andrew Mitchell has no conceptual framework in which he can fit such people except ones that are irrelevant for any useful analysis of their motives and goals. A massive paradigm shift is needed among the British and American governing elites, but no such thing is in the offing.

And meanwhile, what is being done in Britain itself to prevent Muslims and converts to Islam from being "radicalized" to the extent that they go to Somalia to wage jihad? Nothing much beyond outreach to stealth jihadi Islamic supremacist groups who pay lip-service to anti-jihad efforts while aiding and abetting such efforts inside mosques and madrassas.

"More Britons terror-training in Somalia: minister," from the Associated Press, December 22 (thanks to Block Ness):

LONDON: Britain’s international development minister says there are now more people from the UK training for terrorism in camps in Somalia than anywhere else in the world.

Andrew Mitchell said Thursday that Somalia poses a major threat, which may now be greater than the risks once posed by camps in Pakistan’s border regions.

Mitchell said “there are probably more British passport-holders engaged in terrorist training in Somalia than in any other country in the world.”...

It is rather astounding that hyperdhimmi England moved on this case, as "Islamophobic" as it would be to take any official notice of the risk to this child. But Muslims are responsible for 91 percent of honor killings worldwide, and that is no accident, since Islamic law stipulates no penalty for a parent who kills his child. Apparently sometimes even dhimmi officials can't ignore that. But no worries, mate: the adopting couple is, of course, Muslim as well. Placing the child in any other setting would have overloaded the British officials' "Islamophobia" meter.

"Muslim baby was at risk of 'honour killing,'" from Reuters, December 20 (thanks to Maxwell):

LONDON (Reuters) - A baby at risk of becoming the victim of an "honour killing" because she was born as the result of her unmarried Muslim mother's secret affair must be adopted to keep her safe, the Court of Appeal ruled on Wednesday.

Three senior judges rejected a bid by the one-year-old girl's natural father to have her live with him and his wife.

The child's natural mother is in favour of adoption so that her own family will not find out about the birth.

Lord Justice Munby, Lady Justice Black and Lord Justice Kitchin said in a joint judgment the case involved "exceptionally difficult adoption proceedings," the Press Association reported.

The judges imposed unusually wide reporting restrictions banning the publication of all names and locations linked to the case because of the continuing dangers faced by mother and child.

The appeal court rejected an appeal by the father "F" against a decision last July refusing him a residence order allowing the baby to live with him.

The judge ordered that "baby Q" should be adopted by a couple, also Muslim, from the same country as the mother, but from a different community.

She found there would be "a very significant risk of two and two being put together" if the child went to the father because Q was quite obviously not the child of his wife, who had a child of her own.

If the child's maternal grandfather found out about the affair "it would be a matter of intense almost unimaginable shame to him and his family," said the judge.

The appeal court said on Wednesday: "It was plainly the judge's view that this might provoke action to preserve the family's honour."...

A "terrorist document." The mind reels. What could that be? A document detailing a jihad plot? Or a document inciting to terrorism? Was he perhaps carrying a holy book that exhorts believers to hate, subjugate and kill the infidel -- you know, like the Bhagavad Gita?

"Foreign student, 22, arrested at Brimingham Airport on suspicion of 'carrying terrorist document,'" by Damien Gayle for the Daily Mail, December 20 (thanks to Paul):

A 22-year-old student was arrested last night at Birmingham Airport on suspicion of carrying with him a terrorist document.

Police seized the Pakistani national - who lives and studies in the UK - after he got off a flight from Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates.

A West Midlands Police spokesman said he was held on suspicion of being in possession of a document likely to be of use to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.

Last night he was being questioned by officers from West Midlands Police's Counter Terrorism Unit....

In September, the National Transitional Council firmly declared the case to be closed. As this report notes, however, there is no timetable just yet for British police to travel to Libya. When or if there is, will Megrahi take another impeccably timed sudden turn for the worse?

"Libya to allow UK police to probe Lockerbie: minister," by Adrian Croft for Reuters, December 15:

LONDON (Reuters) - The Libyan government will allow British police to go to Libya to investigate the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and the unsolved 1984 killing of a policewoman in London, a British minister said on Thursday.

Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt, who held talks with Libyan ministers in Tripoli last week, said the Libyan government had given permission for British police to carry out fresh investigations into the two shadowy episodes that occurred under the rule of late strongman Muammar Gaddafi.

"I have absolute confidence that the police from Dumfries and Galloway (in Scotland) and the Metropolitan Police (in London) will be going back to Libya to get their investigations going again and they will be given a positive opportunity to do so by the Libyan authorities," Burt told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Burt, the Foreign Office minister responsible for North Africa and the Middle East, said no date had been set yet for a police visit, noting that Libyan authorities had a lot of other issues to deal with in a turbulent post-Gaddafi transition.

But he said that in his talks with Libyan Interior Minister Fawzi Abd al All and Foreign Minister Ashour bin Hayal, both had recognized the importance of the so-called "legacy" issues.

They include the bombing of a U.S. airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, the killing of policewoman Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in London and Libyan aid for Irish Republican Army guerrillas during 30 years of violence in Northern Ireland.

Fletcher, 25, died after being hit by a shot fired from the embassy during a demonstration against Gaddafi. After an 11-day siege, 30 Libyans in the embassy were deported and no one was ever charged with her killing.

Libyan Abdel Basset al-Megrahi was convicted in 2001 of playing a "significant part in planning and perpetrating" the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie that killed 270 people, including 189 Americans.

He was sentenced to life in prison with a minimum jail term of 27 years but was returned to Libya in August 2009 after being freed from a Scottish jail on the grounds he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer. He remains alive today.

The decision angered many victims' relatives and strained traditionally strong ties between Britain and the United States, with some U.S. politicians asking whether it had been designed to help oil giant BP secure contracts in Libya.

Prime Minister David Cameron, who took office in May 2010, has called the release a mistake. However, Scotland has responsibility for its own legal system following devolution in 1999.

In August, a British newspaper said Libyan officials knew the whereabouts of a former diplomat wanted for Fletcher's killing. In the same month, officials from Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC) gave conflicting statements about whether they would permit any suspect to be tried abroad.

Gratitude:

Britain played a leading role in the NATO air campaign that helped NTC fighters topple Gaddafi in August.

Here are some more lovely and inspiring Qur'an selections they could feature:

Qur'an 98:4-6: "Nor did the People of the Book make schisms, until after there came to them Clear Evidence. And they have been commanded no more than this: To worship Allah, offering Him sincere devotion, being true (in faith); to establish regular prayer; and to practise regular charity; and that is the Religion Right and Straight. Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures."

Qur'an 5:14: "From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done."

Qur'an 4:171: "O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender."

Qur'an 5:116: "And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden?"

Qur'an 19:35: "It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is."

Qur'an 9:30-31: "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they! They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!"

Qur'an 9:29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Meanwhile, where are the mosques featuring Bible readings?

"Royal Holloway College holds Islamic Christmas Carol Service," from the Archbishop Cranmer blog, December 15 (thanks to Twostellas):

[...] But even grimmer for Anglicans are ‘inclusive’ Christmas carols services – you know, the sort that bend over backwards to be all things to all people in order that by any means possible none may be offended. In fact, it is these sort of gospel-lite and theology-free services which are largely responsible for people not finding Christ – even at Christmas.

Royal Holloway College, in the University of London, held its Christmas carol service in its own College Chapel, presided over jointly by the College's Chaplain – an Anglican vicar, the Rev'd Cate Irvine, and a Roman Catholic chaplain from the local church, Fr Vladimir Nikiforov.

And what did the assembled festive throng hear? The prophecy of of Isaiah? 'For unto us a child is born...'? The Gospel of Luke? 'There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus...'? A reading from Micah, perhaps? 'But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto Me that is to be Ruler in Israel'?

No, none of the above. Instead, they got the Qur'an:

Behold! the angels said "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus the son of Mary held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah.

"He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity and he shall be of the company of the righteous."

She said: "O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth; when He hath decreed a plan He but saith to it 'Be' and it is!

"And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom the Law and the Gospel.

"And (appoint him) an Apostle to the Children of Israel with this message: I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I make for you out of clay as it were the figure of a bird and breathe into it and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave; and I heal those born blind and the lepers and I quicken the dead by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.

"I have come to you to attest the Law which was before me and to make lawful to you part of what was before forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah and obey me.

"It is Allah who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a way that is straight." (Qur'an 3:45-51)

Fantastic, eh? Perhaps we should be grateful that the Rev’d Cate and Fr Vladimir didn’t select this reading:

That they rejected faith: that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge. That they said in boast "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary the Apostle of Allah"; but they killed him not nor crucified him but so it was made to appear to them and those who differ therein are full of doubts with no (certain) knowledge but only conjecture to follow for of a surety they killed him not. (Qur'an 4:156-158)

Perhaps they’re saving that for Easter....

You'll want to read this one sitting down. Under no other circumstances in the known universe would anyone dream of applying this appalling double standard. If "sorry, I was drunk and my alcohol tolerance isn't that great" became a viable defense for violent crimes, the system would be overloaded with appeals tomorrow. But these defendants are apparently "more equal than others" before the law.

Virtually no one at all seems to care about the victim, who is still suffering panic attacks and undergoing counselling. Justice for her does not appear to be any sort of priority. "Girl gang who kicked woman in the head while yelling 'kill the white slag' freed after judge hears 'they weren't used to drinking because they're Muslims'," by Andy Dolan and Katherine Faulkner for the Daily Mail, December 6 (thanks to all who sent this in):

A gang of Muslim women who attacked a passer-by in a city centre walked free from court after a judge heard they were ‘not used to being drunk’ because of their religion.

The group – three sisters and a cousin – allegedly screamed ‘kill the white slag’ as they set upon Rhea Page as she waited for a taxi with her boyfriend.

Shouldn't that be enough to establish a racial hate crime? Oh, wait: more equal than others, yes.

Miss Page, 22, was left with a bald patch where her hair was pulled out in the attack and was left ‘black and blue’ after suffering a flurry of kicks to the head, back, arms and legs while motionless on the pavement.

Ambaro Maxamed, 24, students Ayan Maxamed, 28, and Hibo Maxamed, 24, and their 28-year-old cousin Ifrah Nur each admitted actual bodily harm, which carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment.

But Judge Robert Brown gave them suspended jail terms after hearing mitigation that as Muslims, the women were not used to being drunk. The Koran prohibits Muslims from consuming alcohol, although Islamic teachings permit its use for medicinal purposes.

Any remorse? Perhaps not:

After the sentencing, Ambaro Maxamed wrote on her Twitter account: ‘Happy happy happy!’, ‘I’m so going out’, and ‘Today has been such a great day’.

Yesterday Miss Page, a care worker, called the sentence ‘disgusting’ and said the gang deserved ‘immediate custody’.

‘It’s no punishment at all,’ she said. ‘And for them to say they did it because they were not used to alcohol is no excuse. If they were not supposed to be drinking then they shouldn’t have been out in bars at that time of night.

‘Even after the police came and they all ran away, one of them came running back to kick me in the head one last time.

‘I honestly think they attacked me just because I am white. I can’t think of any other reason.’

Miss Page was treated for bruises and grazes after the attack in June last year as she walked to a taxi rank with boyfriend Lewis Moore, 23, in Leicester city centre.

At the time she worked caring for people with autism and learning difficulties but gave up the job after repeated absences because of stress and flashbacks.

She is still having counselling and suffers panic attacks.

She said: ‘We were just minding our own business but they kept shouting “white bitch” and “white slag” at me. When I turned around one of them grabbed my hair then threw me on the ground.

Hate crime? Anybody? Bueller?

‘They were taking turns to kick me over and over. I thought they were going to kill me.’...

The Daily Mail headline goes straight for the elephant in the room: this is largely a phenomenon within Muslim communities in Britain. Indeed, Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide; honor killings are encouraged by Sharia's inconsistency on whether parents can be held accountable for the death of their child. There is also the letter and spirit of Qur'an 4:34, which makes violence (yes, violence) an acceptable recourse for dealing with "disobedient" women.

Apologists are bound to point out that domestic violence exists in all societies, including the U.S. and Britain. That is true, but here is the difference: in those societies, it is actively denounced and combated, not covered over, denied, and excused, or even praised. In the report below, it is noted that the culprits are hailed as heroes in their communities.

The report, and reports about it, are sure to be denounced as "Islamophobic," even though it was an Iranian and Kurdish women's organization that compiled it. "Alarming rise of Muslim 'honour attacks' in the UK as police reveal thousands were carried out last year," from the Daily Mail, December 3 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Nearly 3,000 so-called honour attacks were recorded by police in Britain last year, new research has revealed.

According to figures obtained by the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (Ikwro), at least 2,823 incidents of 'honour-based' violence took place, with the highest number recorded in London.

The charity said the statistics fail to provide the full picture of the levels of 'honour' violence in the UK , but are the best national estimate so far.

The data, taken from from 39 out of 52 UK forces, was released following a freedom of information request by Ikwro.

From the BBC report on this topic: "A quarter of police forces in the UK were unable or unwilling to provide data and communities have often been reluctant to talk about the crime, Ikwro said."

In total, eight police forces recorded more than 100 so called honour-related attacks in 2010.

The Metropolitan Police saw 495 incidents, with 378 reported in the West Midlands, 350 in West Yorkshire, 227 in Lancashire and 189 in Greater Manchester.

Cleveland recorded 153, while Suffolk and Bedfordshire saw 118 and 117 respectively, according to the figures.

Between the 12 forces able to provide figures from 2009, there was an overall 47 per cent rise in honour attack incidents.

Police in Northumbria saw a 305 per cent increase from 17 incidents in 2009 to 69 in 2010, while Cambridgeshire saw a 154 per cent jump from 11 to 28.

A quarter of police forces in the UK were unable or unwilling to provide data, Ikwro said.

The report stated: 'This is the first time that a national estimate has been provided in relation to reporting of honour-based violence.

'The number of incidents is significant, particularly when we consider the high levels of abuse that victims suffer before they seek help.'

'Honour' attacks are punishments usually carried out against Muslim women who have been accused of bringing shame on their family and in the past have included abductions, mutilations, beatings and murder.

Ikwro director Diana Nammi told the BBC that families often deny the existence of the attacks.

She said: 'The perpetrators will be even considered as a hero within the community because he is the one defending the family and community's honour and reputation.'....

Details about the apparent level of organization and tactics that were employed support widespread allegations that the "demonstrators" and "students" were in reality led by members of the Basij brigades. The invaders certainly appear to have gone in with a plan. The two reports below give a clearer sense of the magnitude of this thuggish violation of international agreements, and further explain the extent of the British response and decisions made by other countries in solidarity with the UK regarding their own diplomatic presence in Iran.

"UK envoy tells of fear as mob rampage in Iran embassy," by Adrian Croft for Reuters, December 2:

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's ambassador to Iran described Friday how he took refuge while a mob rampaged through his embassy in Tehran, smashing windows, tearing up portraits and starting fires, while seven staff were seized by protesters at a second compound.

Speaking three days after the attack by protesters on the British embassy in Iran that sparked a crisis in British-Iranian relations, Dominick Chilcott said he had feared he might be taken hostage as U.S. diplomats were in 1979.

Britain responded by shutting its embassy in Tehran and ordering the closure of Iran's embassy in London, expelling all Iranian diplomats who left the country Friday.

Chilcott told how protesters rampaged through the embassy building, removing a picture of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, mutilating portraits of previous British monarchs, damaging furniture, writing graffiti on walls and smashing up rooms in what he called "spiteful, mindless vandalism."

Protesters also took mobile phones and computers "anything that might give information about who you were talking to or what you were doing," he told Sky News.

Chilcott said Tuesday's protest was different to previous demonstrations at the embassy because the police stood back, adding that it was clear the demonstration had state support.

"It was quite frightening. In our compound we were locked in to the chancery building. We were up on the top floor in our safe area and the mob failed to get into the building," Chilcott, now back in Britain, told the BBC.

"We'd heard them trying to smash the doors and the windows down below but they couldn't get into our part of the building, except in one point where they got into one of the consular offices and started a fire. In the end it was the fire and the smoke ... which forced us out," he said.

By the time he and his staff came downstairs, the protesters had lost interest and moved to other buildings, he said.

Asked if it had occurred to him that he might suffer the same fate as 52 Americans held hostage for 444 days by hardline students at the U.S. Embassy in Iran from 1979, Chilcott said: "It would be untrue to say that those thoughts don't go through your mind, of course, and you hope that that is not going to happen."

"We were in a completely new situation and how it was going to end was not predictable and the behaviour of the police was so strange that we weren't sure whose side they were on, if you like, and that didn't really give us much comfort," he said.

Chilcott said seven of his staff, among employees and relatives who had been sent to the embassy's residential complex in the north of Tehran for their safety, were seized by protesters.

Embassy staff at the second compound went to safe areas, known as "keeps," and locked themselves in.

"One of our staff was on his own in his keep and he barricaded the door with a heavy safe and a bed, and braced himself against the wall. And for 45 minutes he could hear people bashing down the door, smashing the windows and trying to get in," Chilcott told Sky News.

45 minutes, meaning the siege went on longer than that.

"It must have been a very frightening experience - until eventually the door gave way and they got him," he said.

"Then our staff, in the end there were seven altogether, were taken to one of the properties and they were made to sit silently, they were not allowed to talk in the room by the invaders, without really knowing what was going on."

"It must have been a troubling experience. They were quite roughly handled, one or two of them, as well."

More: "Iranian diplomats expelled from London arrive home," by Ali Akbar Dareini for the Associated Press, December 2:

[...] Britain's ambassador to Iran, Dominick Chilcott — now back in Britain — offered new details about the attacks, saying the experience had been "frightening."

"We had no idea how it was going to end," he said, describing how the mob trashed rooms, damaged furniture, scrawled graffiti and tore up a portrait of Queen Victoria, as staff took shelter in a secure area of the embassy.

"It felt like very spiteful, mindless vandalism, but it wasn't quite mindless," Chilcott said. "They removed anything that was electronic — mobile telephones, personal computers — anything that might give information about who you were talking to or what you were doing."

Ahmadinejad and Khamenei are now addicted to Angry Birds.

At one point, the intruders started a fire inside the chancery building, forcing the staff to leave the safe area, climb down a fire escape and exit the building. A small number of police escorted them to a building on the edge of the compound and told them to lie low.

"We turned all the lights out and we sat in the dark and we could hear the noise of the intruders going on around us," he said.

He said seven staff at a separate residential compound that was also attacked were seized and "quite roughly handled" by the invaders.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague has led the accusations that the rioters had a green light from Iranian authorities, including the powerful Revolutionary Guard. On Thursday, he said the attacks were "clearly premeditated" by high-ranking officials....

Laura Wilson was used, abused, and thrown away -- in keeping with the Islamic relegation of women to the status of commodities. And clearly Asghar's calling her a "kaffir bitch" reveals that they thought of her primarily as an unbeliever -- someone who had no rights and was at their disposal, until she proved inconvenient to have around. "Groomed for sex at 12, stabbed to death at 17: Shocking life of white teenage mother murdered after Asian lover rejected her child," by Rob Cooper for the Daily Mail, December 2 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A teenage student stabbed to death and dumped in a canal was groomed for sexual exploitation by adults from the age of 12, it has been revealed.

Laura Wilson, 17, had been tracked by social services since 2005 after she was identified as being 'at risk' of sexual exploitation by British Pakistani men.

But their work focused on other girls who were more closely associated with abusers in Rotherham, South Yorkshire.

The white teenager was the victim of a cycle of sexual abuse and little was done to help her, Laura's family have claimed.

Rather than removing her from the situation, social services only carried out 'preventative' work to stop her falling into the clutches of abusers.

The student was murdered in October last year after bringing 'shame' on two Asian families.

She had a brief fling with married Ishaq Hussain, now 22, and became pregnant with his child while she was in a sexual relationship with Ashitaq Asghar.

A few days before she was murdered and dumped in the canal she had revealed to the two families that she had had affairs with both men.

After being informed of the relationship, Asghar's mother apparently hit Laura with a shoe. she said her son would never have a baby with a white girl and called Laura a 'dirty white b****', and she should 'keep her legs closed'.

The teenager had become pregnant just a month after she turned 16 and gave birth to Hussain's child in June last year.

Asghar pleaded guilty to murder in May, while yesterday a Sheffield Crown Court jury cleared 22-year-old Mr Hussain of Laura's murder after deliberating for nearly 11 hours.

Prosecutor Nicholas Campbell QC told the trial that Mr Hussain and Asghar mounted a 'mission to kill' Laura.

They adopted the language of the cult British film 'Four Lions', a dark comedy about Islamic terrorists plotting an attack which was filmed in Sheffield and which they had both seen.

Asghar sent a series of texts to Mr Hussain using language from the film.

Asghar talked about buying a 'shooter' for £400 and he boasted about bringing his 'hit list' out. In fact, said Mr Campbell, the murder weapon of choice turned out to be a knife.

In one message, Asghar said to Hussain the day before she died which read: 'I'm gonna send that kaffir (non-Muslim) b**** straight to hell'.

Mr Campbell QC described Laura as 'embracing life with gusto and she was an attractive and popular girl'....

Trying to take out al-Qaeda is "anti-Muslim." "UK arrests 22 in drone demonstration," from AP, December 1 (thanks to Block Ness):

LONDON: British police say 22 people have been arrested outside of the US Embassy in London during a protest over the American use of drones in Pakistan.

Scotland Yard confirmed the arrests on Friday at the demonstration, organised by a group calling itself ”United Ummah.”

Police said 20 people were arrested on suspicion of being members of a group banned by the Home Office. It would not say what group it believed the suspects belong to. One other person was arrested for violent disorder and another for obstruction.

”United Ummah” does not appear on the Home Office’s list of banned groups, but prescribed organisations have rebranded themselves in the past after they were featured.

The demonstration was advertised online – on YouTube, Twitter and various forums – and in a publicity video as a gathering to expose ”the recent spate of anti-Muslim drone strikes that have been launched by the US government against innocent Muslims.”

US and Pakistan diplomatic relations hit a new low following US-led Nato strikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last week, with officials from both countries offering different accounts of how two Pakistan army posts were attacked before dawn on Saturday....

Gee, didn't see that coming. An update on this story. "Iran releases students who stormed British Embassy," by Nasser Karimi for the Associated Press, December 1:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran has released 11 hardline protesters detained for storming the British Embassy and diplomatic compounds in Tehran this week, the semi-official Fars news agency said Thursday.

The "softline" protesters stayed home and waved sporks at the television. Not very useful, that crowd.

Fars said 11 people, described as students, were set free late on Wednesday, a day after they were arrested for storming and ransacking the embassy and British diplomatic compounds in Tehran.

Never apologize, never explain -- that's for infidels:

There was no immediate explanation for the release. Under Iranian law, damaging property carries a prison term of up to three years. It could, however, indicate the 11 have high-level protection from circles within the Iranian establishment.

The storming of the compounds was preceded by an apparently state-approved rally outside the British Embassy to denounce Britain's support for the latest round of U.S. sanctions on Iran over its controversial nuclear program.

The incident has deepened Iran's isolation and significantly escalated tensions with the West.

It prompted Britain to pull its diplomats out of Iran, shutter the ransacked embassy and order all Iranian diplomats out of the U.K. within 48 hours. Germany, France and the Netherlands have recalled their ambassadors in solidarity.

Tuesday's rampage went on for hours, with the mob hauling down Union Jack flags, torching a vehicle and tossing looted documents through windows. Protesters replaced the British flag with a banner in the name of a 7th-century Shiite saint, Imam Hussein, and one looter showed off a picture of Queen Elizabeth II apparently taken off a wall.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has remained silent on the incident but Iran's foreign ministry expressed regret and called the embassy assault "unacceptable."

Someone in the government has to realize the magnitude of the incident, and that Iran has shot itself in the foot here.

However, hard-liners have spoken out in support of the protesters. Mohammad Mohammadian, a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, praised the attackers, saying they had targeted the "epicenter of sedition."

And Iran's Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said the "wrath of (the protesters) resulted from several decades of domination-seeking behavior of Britain."

The storming of the embassy came two days after Iran's parliament voted to reduce ties with Britain following London's support for the recently upgraded U.S. sanctions on Tehran.

British Foreign Minister William Hague claimed those involved in Tuesday's attack were members of a student group allied with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's paramilitary Basij organization, which recruits heavily on university campuses.

Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot and this happened to an Iranian embassy:

Hague told Parliament the private quarters of staff and Britain's ambassador were trashed in the attack and that diplomats' personal possessions were stolen.....

The elephant in the room here is the role of Islamic jurisprudence in perpetuating the practice:

"Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna [commendable according to the word or example of Muhammad, but not obligatory], while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband." - Umdat al-Salik e4.3.

The Shafi'i school of jurisprudence, which is present or dominant in many of the countries mentioned below, holds it to be obligatory.

As this report notes, the girls' risk is heightened by the fear of addressing the subject over the possibility of being branded a "racist," but the cruelly ironic result is a racist double standard: if there were not cultural "sensitivities" clouding the issue, the practice would be eradicated "yesterday," as it ought to be.

"3,500 girls are at risk of mutilation in the capital," by Anna Davis for the Evening Standard, November 28 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

More than three thousand London girls are at risk of genital mutilation every year, experts warned today.

The report by black and ethnic minority women's organisation Imkaan found that in the city 3,500 baby girls are born every year to mothers who have suffered female genital mutilation, and therefore are at risk themselves. This is an increase of 65 per cent in 10 years.

Imkaan is calling for all school teachers to be trained to help girls who are facing violence and is calling on David Cameron to tackle the issue.

Marai Larasi, director of Imkaan, said: "It is not acceptable that in 2011 many girls and women living in Britain face extreme, violent threats to their safety and even to their lives. These issues are neglected because of fears of being labelled at best culturally insensitive and at worst racist.

Tragically true:

"There would be outrage and a national scandal if this were happening to little white girls. Every girl should be protected, no matter her background."

The report's authors said girls from African families, as well as Afghan, Turkish, South Asian, Kurdish, Arab and Irish traveller families are among those who could be at risk, and stressed that education for health professionals is needed to tackle "a dangerous postcode lottery of support services for girls and women should they try to find help".

The report also noted that hundreds of women could fall victim to forced marriage every year. The Forced Marriage Unit dealt with 330 cases of women and girls at risk of forced marriage in London last year.

They so badly want a repeat of the U.S. embassy takeover. A member of Iran's assembly suggested it while commenting on Sunday's resolution that called Britain "worse than the devil" and called for the expulsion of its ambassador. He said "The British government should know that if they insist on their evil stances, the Iranian people will punch them in the month, exactly as happened against America's den of spies." Another legislator called for the embassy to be padlocked.

Two days later, willing minions have tried to oblige and take over the embassy. "Iranian protest leads to embassy incursion," from CNN, November 29:

Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian students stormed the British Embassy in Tehran Tuesday, breaking down the door, throwing around papers and replacing the British flag with an Iranian one.

Iran's state-run Press TV reported that police had the incident under control, but Britain's Foreign Office called the situation "fluid" and said "details are still emerging."

"There has been an incursion by a significant number of demonstrators into our Embassy premises, including vandalism to our property," the Foreign Office said. "We are outraged by this. It is utterly unacceptable and we condemn it."

The Foreign Office added that "under international law, including the Vienna Convention," the Iranian government has "a clear duty to protect diplomats and Embassies in their country and we expect them to act urgently to bring the situation under control and ensure the safety of our staff and security of our property."

They may notice that adherence to international conventions signed by past generations seem to mean less and less in certain Muslim countries. Another such example is the invasion of the Israeli embassy in Egypt, in a 13-hour rampage during which the head of the Supreme Council of Armed Forces curiously "could not be reached," and which required the intervention of the highest levels of the U.S. government in addition to Israel's.

The incursion happened during a protest demanding that the British ambassador be sent home immediately.

A crowd of about 1,000 people gathered near the embassy for the anti-British demonstration, and had been peaceful before some participants stormed the building. A CNN producer saw students throwing stones at the embassy's windows.

The Iranian Parliament voted Sunday to expel the ambassador and reduce diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom in retaliation for newly-imposed Western sanctions, according to Iran's official IRNA news agency. The vote must still be approved by the Guardian Council, the body that determines if laws passed by parliament are compatible with Sharia law, or Islamic law.

The Foreign Office called the Iranian Parliament's vote Sunday "regrettable."

"This unwarranted move will do nothing to help the regime address their growing isolation or international concerns about their nuclear program and human rights record," the office said in a statement. "If the Iranian government acts on this, we will respond robustly in consultation with our international partners."....

More fallout from Libya, along with the now-standard concerns about al-Qaeda's potential cooperation with al-Shabaab and Boko Haram. "U.K. warns of growing al-Qaeda risk in North Africa," from the Associated Press, November 28 (thanks to Kenneth):

LONDON (AP) – Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague says there is a risk mercenary fighters driven out of Libya could switch allegiance to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

Hague told the House of Commons on Monday that Britain is also concerned that weapons from unguarded stockpiles in Libya may have fallen into AQIM hands following dictator Moammar Gadhafi's fall.

He warned that the al-Qaeda affiliate had established ties to Boko Haram, the Nigeria-based extremist group waging a bloody sectarian fight against the African nation's weak central government.

Hague said there was an escalating threat across the entire Sahel region, which stretches from Mauritania to Chad.

Britain is "stepping up our efforts to counter terrorism in the Sahel," Hague said.