In every instance, the principle remains the same: in Muslim countries, non-Muslims should change their behavior to conform to Muslim sensibilities. And in non-Muslim countries, non-Muslims should change their behavior to conform to Muslim sensibilities.
“Five-year-old girl ‘banned from eating chicken sandwich by nursery staff because it wasn’t halal,'” by Sam Webb, Daily Mail, August 14, 2014:
A mother claims staff at a nursery refused to let her daughter eat a chicken sandwich – because it wasn’t halal.
Yasmin Jackson, 24, claims staff at Kingswood Daycare Nursery in Mitcham, south London, ‘starved’ her five-year-old daughter Amari over concerns about the meat in her packed lunch.
And police are now investigating possible race and religious offences against the nursery after an online campaign surrounding the incident.
She took Amari to the first day of a summer play scheme at the nursery with a packed lunch on Monday, as instructed by Merton Council.
But when she collected Amari in the afternoon, she found her child hadn’t been allowed to eat the chicken salad sandwich, houmous, carrots and a chocolate bar in her lunch box.
Ms Jackson, a single mother and former nursery worker, said: ‘When I picked her up at the end of the day the first thing she said to me was, “mummy I’m really hungry, can I have my lunch now?”
‘I went to speak to the manager and I said “why wasn’t my daughter allowed her lunch” and she said “we didn’t know it was healthy”.
‘And she said “the form was wrong, you weren’t meant to send a lunch as it is provided here. We gave her a small portion of spaghetti pasta and an apple”.
‘And she said we didn’t know if it’s halal.
‘I said we are a Christian family and it was a chicken sandwich.
‘And she said “we don’t allow any non-halal meat in the nursery”. So I thought “this is just ridiculous”.’
Ms Jackson, a single mother and former nursery worker, said: ‘When I picked her up at the end of the day the first thing she said to me was, “mummy I’m really hungry, can I have my lunch now?”‘
Ms Jackson said Amari has a history of eating difficulties which have only recently improved.
Angered by the day’s events, Miss Jackson posted a story on Facebook, where it was shared by friends and went viral. She says her Muslim friends are also angry about the incident.
Following the incident, the nursery has suspended its website and reported racially and religiously aggravated electronic communications to the police.
Afsheen Siddik, nursery manager, said: ‘I deny the untrue and false allegations that have been made against myself and Kingswood Daycare Nursery.
‘As a result I have informed Ofsted and the police who are currently dealing with this matter.
‘We work closely with parents to provide a high standard you would expect for your child.
‘We treat each child as an individual and provide them with equal opportunities and meet all ethical standards.’
She would not comment on the nursery’s packed lunch policy.
Ms Jackson said: ‘I will send Amari to another play centre if the social worker can find her one. But I ‘d rather not have a further incident of my five-year-old starved. I wouldn’t do it to her and I don’t expect anyone else to.’
Kingswood Daycare Nursery provides care for children aged three months to five years and was rated as ‘good’ in the most recent Ofsted inspection.
A police spokeswoman said: ‘I can confirm that officers in Merton have received a complaint of racially and religiously aggravated communications sent to the said location which are also a matter of investigation.
‘At this time officers in Merton are liaising with local partners and Ofsted.’
Merton Council said it is unaware of any complaints made about the nursery. It added: ‘Kingswood Day Care Nursery is run privately. The food policy is decided by the nursery.’
An Ofsted spokesman said: ‘We don’t comment on individual complaints. Our role is to ensure that schools are able to provide a safe and secure environment.’
Keith says
I feel really sorry for the child. If it had happened to my child I would have sent him in the next day with a ham or pork sandwich and a pack of pork scratchings. Then I would have gone round to the playgroup at lunchtime to ensure that he was allowed to eat it.
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
Keith, you’re my kind of guy!
Only I’d have personally brought over barbecued ribs, PLUS the pork rinds.
St. Patrick says
Might as well bring along some piglets and a sow for show and tell..Right on Kath..
Kathy Brown says
The picture is developing beautifully St.! I’m with you.
Oh-and if these slimeballs tried some lawfare a la CAIR? In Re: Oh-how-terrible-you-brought-pork-to-the-daycare? I’d take great pleasure in countersuing their savage rear ends, standing on the 1st Amendment.
And if they think I’m scared of their thugs and murderers, try me. In the meantime I’m armed and dangerous at home-that is, if you want to decapitate/kidnap/rape/torture me.
Bring it. This is still the uncommon United States of America, and I am an AMERICAN WOMAN.
p says
OMG Cathy Brown your turning me on! Will you marry me…lol Keep fighting the good fight sister!
Beagle says
You’d get a custodial sentence for the unlawful possession of pork on Muslim grounds. I’m not joking.
Beagle says
Really, not joking.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-27941589
A teenage girl and 39-year old man who desecrated an Edinburgh mosque by attacking it with strips of bacon have both been jailed.
—
Because you’d be knowingly using a pork product… Madness, on stilts.
gravenimage says
DBM, it *isn’t Jews* who are doing this—just Muslims.
Bro. Nick says
WHY?????? Everyone is entitled to their ‘religious’ beliefs – and what they eat, and their way of preparing and eating of food – whether or not I agree with – or like it.
Would you also knowingly go to a Jewish person or their business and deliberately eat pork?
All that does is to generate further strife and animosity – which there is entirely too much of in this ‘whacky’ and very evil world.
For ALL who are truly converted, blood bought, born again, Biblically saved believers and followers of “the Lord Jesus Christ” – CHRISTians – we should remember:
“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward,
NOT WILLLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH, BUT THAT ALL SHOULD COME TO REPENTANCE.”
(2 Peter 3:9 – KJV)
Beagle says
Muslims not eating pork is fine. It’s the forcing non-Muslim people to treat non-halal chicken as contraband on school grounds which is the issue.
Jews rarely care if other people eat pork. And by “rarely” I am just allowing for the millions of Jews I’ve never met. One of them must get upset somewhere.
Bro. Nick says
@ Beagle – I totally concur with your comment that the followers of Mohammed should not force others to eat as they do.
My comment was about eating my pork, which is OK for me. If I am around anyone, that because of their personal beliefs does not – as a CHRISTian my personal choice would be – out of courtesy – to do as the Apostle Paul said, and not eat pork in front of those faith is not mine:
16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.
(1 Peter 2:16-17 – KJV)
AND – It matters not whether they show similar courtesy or respect in their actions toward me and my CHRISTian faith.
Jessica says
No, a Jew will not get upset, as these laws apply only to Jews. I just don’t want anybody bringing pork into my kitchen and preparing it there. Otherwise, you can eat your packed lunches with whatever you like. We don’t impose our laws on other people.
Avigayil says
I am an Orthodox Jewish woman who worked in a day care center for many years. I fed non-Jewish children all kinds of non-Kosher food every day. I know other Orthodox Jews who have volunteered in community soup kitchens or who have even worked at non-kosher restaurants. There is a major theological difference between Islam and Judaism when it comes to the religious status of people of other religions. A non Jew is considered to be perfectly righteous according to Judaism by being a decent, moral, and just person. We believe that non Jews just have to live by basic laws of humanity. That’s why although Judaism accepts converts, we don’t go looking for them. Just because a person isn’t Jewish, it doesn’t necessarily mean that he or she is spiritually lacking. Islam, on the other hand, believes that the ideal is for everyone to become Muslims and that Muslims should try to spread Islamic practices wherever they go.
Beagle says
Avigayil,
That’s what I thought, but you said it better. And yes “Islamic practices” have even been pushed on our soldiers in Afghanistan by a cowed and dhimmified Pentagon.
Mitch says
So what are you saying, Bro. Nick? That Muslims shouldn’t tell Christians what to eat, but if they do, a good Christian complies?
“As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.”
Um, there is nothing malicious about a chicken sandwich. Except maybe to a chicken (both winged and human).
It is our duty as free people to wear our Freedoms ostentatiously – especially in the face of any who would presume to take them away – lest we lose them.
Bro. Nick says
@ Mitch – Good question. My specific answer was about the eating of pork which the followers of the false prophet Mohammed find offensive – so I would not eat pork in front of them – as a courtesy.
Your comment – ‘That Muslims shouldn’t tell Christians what to eat, but if they do, a good Christian complies?’
Where does abuse on the part of the Mohammadens begin??
WOW – I’ll have to really think about that one – for I had not – Thank You.
voegelinian says
Vivid evidence (if “Bro. Nick” — a nick I dare say we’ve never seen before now suddenly popping up — is telling the truth, that is, which isn’t entirely certain) that being an evangelical Christian is no guarantee against useful idiocy nor an inoculation against the PC MC disease.
gravenimage says
Bro. Nick wrote:
Would you also knowingly go to a Jewish person or their business and deliberately eat pork?
…………………….
For one thing, Nick, there is *no* indication that Kingswood Daycare Center caters only to Muslims.
Further, this was *a little child*. If it was a Jewish daycare center, I very much doubt that they would have let a little kid go hungry if her Gentile of non-observant parents had sent her to school with a BLT.
I’m a vegetarian, and I wouldn’t, either.
And then, there is a big difference between your deciding—on your own—to “respect” the choices of a person with dietary restrictions—it is an *entirely different matter* for them to *enforce* such “respect” *on you*.
And that is *exactly* what Islam does.
gravenimage says
That should have been “Gentile or non-observant…”.
John says
When are we going to say enough is enough to all these lunatics demands ?
Guy Macher says
Why are Christians entrusting worhippers of Satan with their kids?
Bro. Nick says
@ Guy Macher – That is an excellent point.
CHRISTianity is a way of life because of our relationship with “the Lord Jesus Christ”.
To knowingly have your child exposed to the teachings of and about the false ‘god’ Allah by the Satanic followers of Mohammed is wrong.
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
Thank you Bro. Nick! Tho’ you stole my thunder…
Let us not neglect to look at the totality of the picture here. ‘Single mother’ is a euphenism for unwed mother. What is this girl-19? Had her child when she was 14? And of course there’s no father/husband. Perish the thought!
So by the wayside goes any type of comprehensive parenting. Our Blessed Savior created us ‘male and female created He them…go forth and multiply.’ So ‘parenting’ becomes survival. And everyone suffers: The ‘parents’ who lose the joy of anticipating the birth of their children; the children who are ‘brought up’ by hook or by crook.
Which of course includes having to send your child to demon daycare. AKA, that run by Muslims…
Lee Poteet says
you ignore th distinct possibility that she may have been raped and chose to keep the child rather than have it aborted. She identified herself as a Christian but probably not a well instructed one and she seems to be trying to earn a living for herself and her child rather than being on the dole. A little charity here, please.
Ken Ohl says
Read the story. The mother is 24, the child 5. Do the math mother was 19 when she had the child. Nothing unusual about that.
hopkins says
She could very well raise a child on her own if she had wisdom. Wisdom includes teaching a child right and wrong and not instructing them in the way of political correctness by wanting to advertise how enlightened you are by exposing your kids to danger.
Bezelel says
I would like to point out that Christianity does not allow eating meat that has been sacrificed to idols. See the book of Acts. All halal meat is killed in a disgraceful manner and they do so in the name of allah. They worship the idol in mecca. Of all the liberty and grace that Christianity has, we are expected to abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols.
bernie says
How about kosher-prepared meat, though? I agree that this case is preposterous.
Bro. Nick says
@ Bezelel – I had not even thought to research the way in which meat (and other foods?) are declared to be ‘halal’ – Thank you.
The following verses from “the word of the LORD” sure do apply to me:
9 ¶ Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
10 FOR PRECEPT MUST BE UPON PRECEPT, PRECEPT UPON PRECEPT; LINE UPON LINE, LINE UPON LINE; HERE A LITTLE, AND THERE A LITTLE:
(Is 28:9-10 – KJV) – CAPITALization mine for emphasis – Bro. Nick
Bernie – My understanding of ‘kosher’ is a matter of cleanliness and manner of preparation.
Our Jewish cousins would most certainly NOT eat meat prepared to an idol!
Robyn says
All meat is killed in a cruel manner is it not!!! Ha
Halal meat is just even crueler!
Bezelel says
@bernie I have limited knowledge of the Kosher process except for the biggest difference is Kosher does not in anyway involve sacrificing the animal to an idol. I no problem with Kosher as it is by what I understand is Old Testament standards.
Bezelel says
@Robyn, barenakedislam.com has videos from inside halal slaughter houses. They do not stun unconscious any of the animals prior to cutting their throats and the butchering process is begun before the animals have died. You decide.
Doglicka says
You religious nutters are really taking your liberties with this site aren’t you? So it is the Muslims that have an imaginary friend in the sky, but your imaginary friend is the one that exists? It is profoundly nonsensical to disprove one non existent entity with another.
Richie says
Plus given the abysmal way children are treated by Muslims, id be very wary of leaving my child in the care of people who pray to a child rapist, or people who endorse any Muslim beliefs
Rebealimelekh says
Your comment neatly demonstrates the need for a moderator on this website; permitting hate speech by others is almost as bad as speaking it yourself. Pigs are tolerated in Israel, what is at issue is the consumption of non-halal meat other than pork/bacon. Liberal Muslims might reasonably be expected tolerate non-Muslims eating non-halal food just as liberal Jews might tolerate gentiles eating non-kosher, but neither can reasonably be expected to tolerate anyone bringing pork/bacon onto their premises. The Institution here went too far, there is never justification for hate speech, anti-Muslim or anti Jew.
Mo says
@ Rebealimelekh
“The Institution here went too far, there is never justification for hate speech, anti-Muslim or anti Jew.”
Show me the “hate speech” in this story.
Bezelel says
@ Rebealimelekh, Have you ever heard of a Dr. Freud?
gravenimage says
Rebealimelekh
Liberal Muslims might reasonably be expected tolerate non-Muslims eating non-halal food just as liberal Jews might tolerate gentiles eating non-kosher, but neither can reasonably be expected to tolerate anyone bringing pork/bacon onto their premises.
……………………………
What crap. This is a daycare intended for the general public, in a non-Muslim country. The victim’s mother’s social worker secured her a spot.
These are not Muslim “premises” at all.
Kathy Brown says
Rebek: Newsflash! There is no such thing as ‘hate speech’.
I’m a 1st Amendment attorney at law. We bring complaints/lawsuits v. far Left professors in our universities. You know: ‘Professors’ who ask kids to raise their hand if they don’t agree with same-sex marriage? Then tell anyone brave enough to do so, ‘You won’t get better than a C or a D, and your term paper may get lost’? (Actual case; and that’s mild.)
Now: I can’t TELL you how many times one of these academic tyrants has defended their actions to me, and other attorneys, by saying: ‘But of COURSE I said that! Disagreeing with same-sex marriage is HATE SPEECH!’. When told that there is no such thing in law as ‘Hate Speech’; that in fact the 1st Amendment is designed to protect the speech we most dislike-these geniuses have one response: ‘Are you sure?’.
So: Speaking ill-i.e., the truth-about the disgusting ‘Religion of Peace’, is not ‘hate speech’. Because ‘hate speech’ does not exist; except in the minds of the Far Left which uses the designation to silence ANY opinion contrary to their own.
Bezelel says
Kathy, One of the problems their mentality has caused is making telling the truth a crime. I’m sure you know that but so many don’t see the strategy behind it. Can’t someone charge the left with subverting the Constitution?
miner says
Political correctness. They do that to appear “enlightened.” Nobody is speaking loud enough to cause them to see what they are doing.
Islamisdeath says
I doubt they have a choice in the UK because the death cult zombies are in positions of authority everywhere over there.
Really starve a child because they may not be eating the meat of an animal tortured to its death while being consecrated to demon allah?
Bezelel says
Don’t forget they can wash it down with a tall glass of camel piss.
jewdog says
There’s a reason all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence advocate warfare against unbelievers to establish Islamic rule and Sharia: It is a basic goal of Islam to impose Sharia on the world. That’s what Islam is all about. Warfare can only be avoided if infidels voluntarily submit to dhimmi status and pay the jizya, and that’s not always a guarantee, as we see in Iraq and Syria.
The situation should never be tolerated in any civilized country.
Aardvark says
It’s almost impossible to buy non-halal chicken in the UK. The vast majority of slaughter houses are now producing only halal-meat, and most of the meat in all of the supermarkets is halal (albeit not labelled as such), so the nursery could have been pretty sure that the meat was barbarically acceptable.
And it’s typical that any complaint against this despicable religion is then investigated by the police as ‘racially and religiously aggravated’, while the original offence is completely ignored.
This has to change. Soon.
General Pershing says
Buy pork – 100% Halal free
Champ says
> 😀 <
Ann Inquirer says
It is not a secure environment if a child is not allowed to eat since a child would feel threatened that s/he has done something wrong.
Lee Poteet says
Plus, there is also the real possibility that they would allow the child to be sexually molested. The Brits are crazy to entrust this sort of thing to Muslims.
gerard says
“She says her Muslim friends are also angry about the incident.”
Let’s hope this woman learns something from this incident. Her Muslim “friends” won’t teach her anything.
Champ says
Afsheen Siddik, nursery manager, said: ‘I deny the untrue and false allegations that have been made against myself and Kingswood Daycare Nursery.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeez another case of ‘muslim’s lie’ …
I’m so SICK of their lies!
Deb says
Amen to that!!
Tom Goddijn says
Every single day hundreds of people are killed all over the world, in the name of Allah. How can anyone call this religion ?, it’s more like a satanic cult and where are the “good” muslims. Turkey is close to the border of Iraq, how many people have they saved when Isis was, and is, murdering minorities ?
tpellow says
The Islamization of Britain continues on all fronts, with the active assistance of the British Government.
Bro. Nick says
The same is becoming more true here in ‘Amerika’ on a continuing basis – under the administration of Pres. Obama – who is also believed by many of us to be an active follower of the false moon god ‘Allah’ and his Satanic lying prophet Mohammed.
While CHRISTianity and the Jewish people and ISRAEL are being actively discriminated against – because we CHRISTIans and our cousins in faith are ‘people of The Book’.
Fr. Basil says
\\Following the incident, the nursery has suspended its website and reported racially and religiously aggravated electronic communications to the police\\
What race is mahometanism again?
Beagle says
Following the incident, the nursery has suspended its website and reported racially and religiously aggravated electronic communications to the police
—- —-
“racially and religiously aggravated electronic communications”? That sounds like you can’t talk about race or religion, period.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/racially_or_religiously_aggravated_harassment/index.html
Apparently they left off the “harassment” in the article. If I lived in the UK I would simply not talk about race or religion in public, unless I was extremely wealthy. Harassment is largely in they eyes or ears of the beholder. A free person would tend to think it’s fine for you to criticize their beliefs, whereas a Muslim from Pakistan would want to trot you before a sharia court and lash you unto death.
What is amazing about all the sample cases is that not a single Muslim has been charged, it appears, with any of the horrible things they say about indigenous British people. Not even the ones where they call for murder and it ends up happening, like Rigby.
Oceanside says
One important point I don’t see addressed anywhere –if this is a private daycare, are they taking state funds? The mother expects her social worker to provide for her child’s daycare–not a good attitude and certainly not a Christian value. Parents provide for their children, and SHOULD be investigating daycare themselves.
As a single mother apparently on welfare, how is she sending her child to private daycare if the daycare isn’t receiving government funding? and if it is, they have NO business enforcing shari’a.
I don’t have any patience anymore for single moms who like to play the victim role. Good grief–look at the mother’s facial expressions in the photo. Woe is me! I’m a victim!
I don’t suppose the father of the child is involved with her in any way?
Mirren10 says
Everything you say about this woman may very well be true, and I actually agree with you, but the salient point is that this daycare centre should **not** be enforcing sharia dietary rules, irrespective of whether it is state funded or not.
In England, a child should be able to eat any kind of sandwich for lunch, whether it is a mohammedan daycare centre, or not. Were any of the mohammedan children forced to eat the chicken sandwich ? No, they were not.
This is yet another example of mohammedan supremacism at work, and regardless of how feckless this woman may be, I’m very glad she made a stink about this disgraceful situation, and I hope the police charge the nursery.
gravenimage says
Exactly so, Mirren—this is the main point.
Wellington says
This story is just another specific, just another detail, about a very sad modern tale. The bigger story here, far bigger, is that the UK is engaging in a slow but inexorable suicide.
Well, massive amounts of stupid, self-effacing modern liberalism, in combination with significant amounts of mocking one’s culture to death (thanks for nothing, in the final analysis, Monty Python et al.) and massive amounts of Muslim immigration, can produce such a suicidal effect. Count on it in fact. Sure happenin’ in Britain right now.
Anyone care to dispute all this? Go ahead, give it a shot. I say it can’t be done, but, oh yeah, give it a shot if you think you’re able. I indeed would be interested in the “argument” which could successfully exculpate the inveterate derision of one’s own culture, replete with profuse apologias, all the while admitting a totaltiarian culture into your midst with insouciant blindness of the first order.
I say it can’t be done. Prove me wrong.
Bro. Nick says
@ Wellington – Your argument is valid not only in the UK – but in every other country that allows massive immigration of those who follow the Satanic false prophet Mohammed. The real followers goal is to establish a world wide Caliphate – where no other worship will be allowed than that of the false moon god ‘Allah’.
You left out one other very important factor about the followers of Mohammed – the families ordinarily have many children, while the countries that they live in have few – which leads to an ever larger percentage of the followers of Mohammed.
Will the liberal ‘free thinkers’ ever learn – regardless of their country? NO!!!!!!
CHRISTians and JEWS had better prepare for more and more active persecution against our Biblical beliefs.
Wellington says
Well, Bro. Nick, that fact about Muslim fecundity is indeed an important one, though I only left it out (shouldn’t have) because I thought I had already mentioned enough by way of error in the UK and, by extension, all the West.
Yes indeed, Muslims breed like rabbits. They intend to. It’s all part of a the multi-faceted jihad, specifically here the demographic jihad.
Have Muslims in your midst? Have Muslims in your free community? Well, then, learn about Islam because freedom and Islam are completely incompatible. No one stupidly denies this more so than the current crop of Western elites (whether knowingly or unknowlingly can be debated by reasonable and informed minds), who are shaping up, speaking in the aggregate, as just about the most clueless elites in all of history. They have competitors through the ages of time——but not many.
somehistory says
The stupidity of people is painful to see and children are, increasingly, the victims. Is it the *law* in the UK that a mother has to rely on someone else to choose where her child stays during the day? Does the mother work? If she had previously been in the business herself, why is she not aware of places she can place her daughter for care? If she has muslim *friends* is she not aware of the sacrifice of food to their false god?
It makes no sense for someone who claims Christianity to leave their children with a group of people who worship a false god that tells the ones worshiping to persecute Christians, to collect a ransom, cause to convert, or be killed.
Next thing, the day*nocare* will be forcing the kids to do the whole praying thing to the false god and say those awful words about the false prophet.
The devil is certainly having a heyday that, thankfully, will soon end. In the meantime, many suffer, especially children.
pumbar says
Shouldn’t that be a day cair centre?
Wellington says
That’s funny, pumbar. Fine pun.
pumbar says
When we shake their resolve; when we show how stupid they look. When we take the piss out of their pants and raise a laughing figure to their niqab. Mo flew to heaven on a winged donkey? Learn, take the piss, destroy it by sardonic laughter, pathos and genuine piss taking. Good luck mate!
K ANHALT says
This is too easy. Go to another daycare center. End of problem.
HarveyMushman says
No, the “problem” is the daycare center and it would still be there…
gravenimage says
K ANHALT wrote:
This is too easy. Go to another daycare center. End of problem.
…………………………
No, this is *not* the end of the problem.
For one thing, this should not be allowed to happen in *any* daycare in the UK. And what happens to children of parents who are not as concerned as is this mother?
Moreover, chances are that she *can’t* just go to another daycare center, since she was assigned to this one by her social worker.
Now, one can argue that no parent should ever allow themselves to wind up in such a position—but this is a much larger issue.
Right now, Muslims in Britain are hoping to take advantage of the country’s most vulnerable Infidels—and, likely, the British tax payer.
CornHolio says
I think the proper thing for her to have done is not to involve the authorities, but rather to just set an example to this Muslim nursery school.
She should have gone back the next day with her daughter and their pet pot-bellied pig Mo-Ham and say he was for show-and-tell, and let it run around the class and play with the kids and frolic in the teacher’s car and office, and then for lunchtime get out its mobile trough and feed it shredded Qur’ans soaked in bacon grease, and then lead the kids in making a paper mache figure of Muhammad “riding” a female goat out of the remaining grease-covered strips, and then taken the resultant pinata outside and given all the kids Pershing-missile-shaped sticks to have a go at destroying it, whereupon the remaining bits would either be burned or eaten by Mo-Ham, depending on the local fire codes.
And if there were any complaints, she could explain that it’s a “local custom”, and that she hoped there would not be any racially or religiously-motivated criticisms forthcoming, as such would clearly constitute a hate crime.
Kathy Brown says
Hahahahahahaha Cornholio!
This is the PERFECT response. I’m only sorry I didn’t think of it!
Also: Anyone fighting the MuSlimes now and forever should let them know that, when they were killed? They’d be put in shrouds made of pork products. Ergo, no virgins for them.
Champ says
Awesome, Cornholio!!!!! 😀 😀
St. Patrick says
Ya nailed it cornholio. TY
alyn21 says
Rowan Williams former head of the Church of England says that islam is reviving British values. Prime Minister David Cameron says that muslims have made great contributions to his country.
Submitted for your approval my list of muslim contributions to Britain.
1. Female Genital Mutilation
2. Sharia Courts
3. Muslim gangs forcing British girls into prostitution.
4. muslims calling for death to homosexuals.
5. honor killings
6. anti semitism
7. Anjem Choudary
8 . halal meat
9. Sharia controlled neighborhoods
This of course is only a small number of ways that muslims have contributed to the fabric of British society.Perhaps Rowan Williams and David Cameron could add to my list.
Tommy Guns says
I’m Canadian, and I’m shocked by this type of action against children. I’m particularly disgusted because, as usual, it’s muslims dictating to us how we should live. They are arrogant, mannerless, whining, demanding turds. David Cameron, you have let your country down, and when riots break out across London, I hope you’re pleased with youself. Just know Mr. Cameron, you’ll go down in British history as a traitor!!!!!!!!
RICHTHOFEN says
Yes – what Quislings our un-elected, Anglophobic, Heterophobic, Christianophobic EUSSR puppet so-called ‘government’ are – and all the rest except, maybe, UKIP
RICHTHOFEN says
ABSOLUTELY, Alyn21!
GP says
Islam is wholly incompatible with Western civilization, yet here it is. It is here because of mindless immigration policies and touchy-feely multiculturalism. Muslims have harnessed the freedom and liberties enjoyed in the west and used them to achieve their own aberrant goals. They do not want to assimilate into the culture of their host countries. Their goals will be met when sharia is the law of the land and islam the only religion, When the west becomes another one of their wretched hives.
Another favorite slogan of theirs is “Freedom Go To Hell”. So here they are trying to take yours away..They abhor the freedoms and perceived excesses of the West.
Peeved says
You stupid twit, you don’t HAVE any pisslamic friends. They are lying to you. They are not allowed to have Christian friends. Keep your kid at a CHRISTIAN day care or stay home with her.
Cindy Mccoy says
I’ll tell you my daughter and I would have eaten a sandwich the next day in the office of the daycare!! I would be darned if I would let them tell me whatI and my kids could eat. I would eat what I wanted, when I wanted and they would NOT tell me different!!!!
Islamisdeath says
Then you would have been trotted off to jail and your child “given over to care”
FatherJon says
Can’t say I’m surprised. We’re reading and hearing of more and more cases of insidious creeping Islamisation of our norms, in education and public life generally.
I suggest that if these people have difficulty adapting to OUR norms, they pack their kaftans and camel bags and return whence they came!
Charli Main says
That will never happen Father John.
The whole objective of Muslim immigration, into non Muslims countries, is to ultimately force their religion, laws, culture and language on the people of the host country.
Unlike other cultures, Muslims don´t immigrate for a better life for themselves and their families, they invade to spread Islam. The ONLY integration acceptable to Muslims, is Kaffirs converting to Islam.
Koran 21-44
Do they not see us gradually reducing the land, curtailing its borders on all sides ??
It is they that will be overcome.
duh_swami says
Halal jihad has won the food war in UK. Resistance is futile if you eat animal flesh. I wonder if there is any such thing as halal fish? As far as the Mahoundian occupation of the UK, if you invite Drac’ullah into your house, expect to get bit.
Mahoundians will eventually suck all the life blood out of Britain and turn it into Yemen. Allah willing, and he always is…
Charli Main says
Muslims flexing their muscles and reminding British Kaffirs that they are living in a Muslim country.
IAN ROBINSON says
Outrageous! This is a hate crime and must be prosecuted by the CPS!
The big muslim lie is that they must eat halal – well, that is nonsense – their cult’s mantra, the Qu’ran, states quite clearly that when travelling in non-muslim lands, halal is not obligatory – it is not haram to eat non-halal. Why do we let them get away with this corruption of their own 7th century plagiarised hand book of violence, war, hatred, paedophilia, misogyny? Our Quislings have so completely capitulated to this alien invasion, aided and abetted by the EUSSR, that the aliens really believe that we are now a muslim country – and our effete, heterophobic, Christianophobic, Anglophobic un-elected, so-called ‘government’ kow-tow to them and sell us down the river. Just look around the world – we are sleepwalking to oblivion, annihilation, genocide. It will be the end of civilisation if all countries do not proscribe islam and remove this pernicious virus from the face of the earth
flakmusic says
test
Angemon says
Ah, the good old generic-fake-outrage statement 23.C. Equally valid for plenty of situations, including enforcing sharia dietary rules.
Myxlplik says
Clearly the rational thing for the British electorate to do would be to ban Halal, it’s barbaric, in humane, and discriminatory against non-Muslims on many levels. Including the fact that this poor kid was abused.
blake says
the problem is, now everyone is going to feel that the daycare centre are the victims. Muslims are great at playing the victim card.
RICHTHOFEN says
The vermin don’t even care about their own kids – our only saving grace is that their cult will always be embroiled in internecine war, murder, rape and savagery – trouble is, they will destroy civilisation as they annihilate each other’s tribe
Myxlplik says
The pogrom of Halal and Islamization is to marginalize the host culture, bit by bit. The end game of this process always ends with the host culture, many generations later displaced, cornered and out of options.
It ends on Mt. Sinjar.
Assert your culture or die.
thomas_h says
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=wq_lhlIn1e0
I’ve been told the song becomes a hit in the UK.
It would be nice if it did, but somehow I doubt it. Does any of the British posters recognize it?
Juanita says
I blame the UK for letting this get out of control!! The UK is weak!!
Myxlplik says
This is what the final days of the current immigration policy will look like.
http://youtu.be/Xh-0FbMcae8
Ice Star says
How intolerant of them
The Vilest Of Creatures says
Everytime I see something like this I immediately have the urge to head to Jimmy John’s and order the ULTIMATE PORKER……..it’s delicious!
voegelinian says
I think the commenters are missing the point, which can be illustrated by a simple imaginative thought exercise: Imagine a religion, or religious sect, or even cult, that had public schools where they did exactly what the Kingswood Daycare Nursery in Mitcham, south London, did to the little girl Yasmin Jackson — but this religion, or religious sect, or even cult was otherwise NOT a danger to society and none of its members had been involved in rampant terrorism, along with various forms of criminality, civil violence and social disorder over the years reasonably contextualized by us as a part of a concerted supremacist expansionist war they have been waging against our civilization for centuries. Then this case would suddenly recede into a news story of local and family concern, but not of national nor international concern.
Myxlplik says
Great comment, people do instinctually get it, otherwise this wouldn’t even be a story…. Excellent point, you hit the nail right on the head with that.
voegelinian says
Thanks. One of my concerns is that outsiders or fence-sitters may think we object to Muslims for their different ways in a vaguely xenophobic way, rather than because of the violent jihad (and its symbiotic stealth jihad) they are waging against us and the rest of the free world — a double jihad joined at the hip with their culture, since Islamic culture fuses all levels of life, religious, political, legal, social, cultural, family, diet, etc.
Another of my concerns regards the ongoing pedagogy of the Counter-Jihad: I sometimes wonder whether the stubborn persistence among some (many? most?) members of the Counter Jihad of a minimization of the deadly danger Muslims present to our societies stems from their preoccupation of some amorphous antipathy to Muslims on a level of ideas, theology, ethics & aesthetics — rather than the proper priority of the pragmatic level of an alarm at the deadly danger of terrorism and other forms of jihad violence (reasonably presumed to be metastasizing and not stable). Once we factor in the distressing, but unavoidable, fact that we cannot tell the difference between harmless Muslims and dangerous Muslims adequately for the concern of protecting our societies on a macro level (distinct from whether, for example, were we to imaginatively speculate, a Philip Jihadski could claim to tell personally that his face-to-face interactions with some nice and personable Muslim persuade him that that particular Muslim is relatively harmless — a piece of micro information, even if not as dubious as it is ostensibly, not really relevant to our macro concerns), we have a problem Houston that urgently requires a mature and respectful conversation in the Counter-Jihad (as opposed to one where, to pluck one concrete example out of many over the months I could adduce, one of the interlocutors calls the other “Jackass” some 22 times in the span of one comments thread).
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“ Once we factor in the distressing, but unavoidable, fact that we cannot tell the difference between harmless Muslims and dangerous Muslims adequately”
The fallacy here is that one can also not “adequately” tell the difference between the dangerous and harmless white, or black, or hispanic, or catholic, or protestant, or jewish, or atheist people.
“we have a problem Houston that urgently requires a mature and respectful conversation in the Counter-Jihad”
Mature? I guess that leaves out the guy who whined like a 2nd grader because JW regulars didn’t jump out to white-knight him when his posts were being scrutinized. Respectful? I guess that leaves out the guy who responded to criticism by telling the other party was either a “troll” or had “brain damage”.
Myxlplik says
Voegelinian,
I think the idea of deporting all Muslims to the Caliphate is not without historical precedent. It has been done many times in the past, especially in the Balkans. I think the same social pressures which effected the Balkans concerning this issue, will someday be realized in the West, and our future generations will face the same agonizing dilemmas.
I think what upsets people is that Robert has enough on his plate trying to get the word out already, without people calling for the mass deportation of Muslims on his website.
I do however appreciate the historical and cultural merit of such a statement, and think the degree of likelihood that history will repeat itself is high, especially if there is no assertion of western culture and prohibition of free speech on the matter of Islamization.
As far as being able to tell a good Muslim from a bad one, I agree sometimes it can be difficult, but I think it is possible. Nicolai Sennels, has done some interesting work on the psychology of Muslims which might help.
I think the best thing to do would be to realize there is a problem with Islamic culture, so we could quantify it psychologically, screen for it and amend our immigration policy accordingly in the same way that we screen legal immigrants for infectious diseases. There is no reason why mental health should not be just as important or considered as a lesser threat than physical health.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/nicolai-sennels-psychology-why-islam-creates-monsters
thomas_h says
”The fallacy here is that one can also not “adequately” tell the difference between the dangerous and harmless white, or black, or hispanic, or catholic, or protestant, or jewish, or atheist people.”
As long as one can “adequately” tell the difference between the dangerous and harmless groups of people – specifically mohammedans (the dangerous) and white, or black, or hispanic, or catholic, or protestant, or jewish, or atheist people ( the harmless) there is no fallacy here at all.
(That doesn’t necessary mean that I am advocating forcible mass deportation of Mohammedans. I believe there are better – more realistic and doable ways of tackling the problem)
thomas_h says
@Angemon
The fallacy here is that one can also not “adequately” tell the difference between the dangerous and harmless white, or black, or hispanic, or catholic, or protestant, or jewish, or atheist people.
As long as one can “adequately” tell the difference between the dangerous and harmless groups of people – specifically mohammedans (the dangerous group) and white, or black, or hispanic, or catholic, or protestant, or jewish, or atheist people ( or the harmless groups) there is no fallacy here at all.
(That doesn’t necessary mean that I am advocating forcible mass deportation of Mohammedans. I believe there are better – more realistic and doable ways of tackling the problem)
voegelinian says
Thanks Myxlplik. I don’t necessarily balk at your prescriptions; I just fear they will turn out to be too little, too late, what with millions of Muslims inside the West (and those numbers showing no signs of decreasing any time soon — indeed, of positively increasing).
On telling harmless from dangerous Muslims, one can say it’s possible, but this is too serious a matter to be left up to vague assertions (you did not indicate whether your rather sanguine confidence in this regard was factoring in my distinction between the micro and macro levels of the problem). Robert Spencer has noted several times that it is effectively impossible. Anyone who thinks about it carefully (and pays attention to the mountain of data about Islam and Muslims) will agree. As for Sennels, that commenter “LemonLime” in the link you gave me is me; and as you can tell, I find Sennels to be not very useful for this particular exigent problem.
gravenimage says
Angemon wrote:
voegelinian posted:
“ Once we factor in the distressing, but unavoidable, fact that we cannot tell the difference between harmless Muslims and dangerous Muslims adequately”
The fallacy here is that one can also not “adequately” tell the difference between the dangerous and harmless white, or black, or hispanic, or catholic, or protestant, or jewish, or atheist people.
………………………………..
Angemon, I’m afraid the difference is that whites, blacks, hispanics, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and atheists don’t follow a violent, supremacist creed.
Would that we could say the same about Muslims…
Angemon says
gravenimage posted:
“Angemon, I’m afraid the difference is that whites, blacks, hispanics, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and atheists don’t follow a violent, supremacist creed.
Would that we could say the same about Muslims…”
And? You’re sliding into thomas_h’s “muslims = dangerous, non-muslim = harmless” nonsense territory. Do you want a list with certifiably dangerous people who were not muslim?
Look, there’s nothing more insightful or meaningful to saying “we can’t tell the difference between dangerous and harmless muslims” than there is to saying “we can’t tell the difference between dangerous and harmless jews”, “we can’t tell the difference between dangerous and harmless christians”, and so on. You simply can’t tell if the average person you pass by on the street is harmless or dangerous regardless of religion, skin colour or social-economic status.
As for following a violent, supremacist creed, no one is arguing that islam is a religion that teaches the golden rule or to love your neighbour even if he’s not a muslim. However, human nature is everywhere the same, there’s a wide spectrum of fervour, zealousness and adherence to any religion, including islam, and muslims can act as tolerant as anyone else. Heck, you can’t even tell from one’s self-identification as a muslim what they actually know about the quran and the life of muhammad.
voegelinian says
One would think that Angemon and PJ would know by now that the one demographic, Muslims, is unique and ought not be compared, as they do with such glib obtuseness, with all other demographics, none of which constitute innumerable members all over the world waging violent, and stealthy, war on the free world. It’s like they haven’t really been reading Jihad Watch all these years (really reading, as opposed to superficially reading or reading through blinkered glasses).
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“the one demographic, Muslims, is unique and ought not be compared, as they do with such glib obtuseness, with all other demographics”
That’s crazy talk. If we can’t compare muslims with jews, christians, or anyone else then how are we supposed to say “our values are better”? But it’s not like I expect you to back any of your diatribes.
thomas_h says
“ You’re sliding into thomas_h’s “muslims = dangerous, non-muslim = harmless” nonsense territory. Do you want a list with certifiably dangerous people who were not muslim?”
If you still can’t distinguish between the concept of an “individual person” and “group of people”, or societies, united by common creed (or ideology) then you should be careful in spotting nonsense with other people lest you’ll make a fool of yourself.
But let me help you.
The problem caused by criminal individuals are (usually) readily handled by the police. Whereas the problem caused by a group of people (again, united by the common creed or ideology) are of completely different nature and may require actions on the highest governmental level which quite often lead to the use of aircraft carriers.
Angemon says
thomas_h posted:
“If you still can’t distinguish between the concept of an “individual person” and “group of people”, or societies, united by common creed (or ideology)”
Actually, I’ve been doing that very distinction. Islam is one thing, muslims are another. Or did you miss the part where I said “you can’t even tell from one’s self-identification as a muslim what they actually know about the quran and the life of muhammad“?
thomas_h says
” did you miss the part where I said “you can’t even tell from one’s self-identification as a muslim what they actually know about the quran and the life of muhammad“?”
Yes, I did miss it. And no, after a cursory look at the quoted above, I don’t think I missed anything.
gravenimage says
Angemon wrote:
gravenimage posted:
“Angemon, I’m afraid the difference is that whites, blacks, hispanics, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and atheists don’t follow a violent, supremacist creed.
Would that we could say the same about Muslims…”
And? You’re sliding into thomas_h’s “muslims = dangerous, non-muslim = harmless” nonsense territory. Do you want a list with certifiably dangerous people who were not muslim?
…………………………………
*Of course* there are dangerous non-Muslims, Angemon.
But most of them are not dangerous on the basis of a unifying creed—i.e., they are not dangerous because they follow a creed of “whiteness”, or “blackness”, or “protestantness” or “no-religion-ness” that enjoins them to be.
This sort of dangerousness is far more random.
Then there is likelihood—who would not acknowledge, say, that self-identified neo-Nazis are *far* more likely to be violent than, say, self-identified Seventh-Day Adventists or volunteers at animal shelters?
The fact is that the larger the Muslim population, the larger the correlation to violence—it can even be quite precisely tracked as to the violence a society is apt to suffer when it reaches 10% Muslim, or 20% Muslim, or 50% Muslim. And this is true even though there will always be some Muslims who don’t overtly follow the violence of their creed.
More:
Look, there’s nothing more insightful or meaningful to saying “we can’t tell the difference between dangerous and harmless muslims” than there is to saying “we can’t tell the difference between dangerous and harmless jews”, “we can’t tell the difference between dangerous and harmless christians”, and so on. You simply can’t tell if the average person you pass by on the street is harmless or dangerous regardless of religion, skin colour or social-economic status.
…………………………………
With respect, these last two are red-herrings. This is about the embrace of an *ideology*, which is categorically different from the financial status or ethnicity of an individual.
More:
As for following a violent, supremacist creed, no one is arguing that islam is a religion that teaches the golden rule or to love your neighbour even if he’s not a muslim. However, human nature is everywhere the same, there’s a wide spectrum of fervour, zealousness and adherence to any religion, including islam, and muslims can act as tolerant as anyone else. Heck, you can’t even tell from one’s self-identification as a muslim what they actually know about the quran and the life of muhammad.
…………………………………
This is true—as far as it goes.
But *surely* you have noticed that the violence level from Muslims in the West has been *skyrocketing*?
Muslims weren’t beheading people in the street and overtly asserting Muslim supremacy over Infidels forty years ago when the Muslim population in Britain was tiny.
But they are increasingly now—and as the Muslim population grows, this is *bound* to become worse.
We’re seeing the first stirrings of this in places like the US—this ism very roughly, what the UK was like twenty years ago.
Your implication that Muslims are no more apt to be violent than are any other group is—with respect—not borne out by what be can observe.
Angemon says
gravenimage posted:
“*Of course* there are dangerous non-Muslims, Angemon.
But most of them are not dangerous on the basis of a unifying creed—i.e., they are not dangerous because they follow a creed of “whiteness”, or “blackness”, or “protestantness” or “no-religion-ness” that enjoins them to be.”
First of all, the KKK, Black Panthers or Raza Unida would beg to disagree with your assertion. Second, what does that means what when it comes to distinguishing between dangerous and harmless muslims? I’m not arguing that islam is benign or harmless, I’m talking on an individual muslim basis. You can’t tell from one’s self-identification as muslim how much does he know about islam or how dangerous he is.
“This is about the embrace of an *ideology*, which is categorically different from the financial status or ethnicity of an individual.”
Once again: you can’t tell from anyone’s self-identification as a muslim how much do they know about islam. If you could then there would be no discussion about harmless and dangerous muslims, would it? They’d either all be dangerous or harmless.
“But *surely* you have noticed that the violence level from Muslims in the West has been *skyrocketing*?”
And that means what for determining whether any individual muslim is dangerous or harmless?
“Your implication that Muslims are no more apt to be violent than are any other group”
OK, you’re keeping your mind so open that you’re reading things that are not there in the first place. It’s either that or you’re sliding into “leftist smear tactics” territory. When did I try to make a case for muslims not being more apt to violence than any other group? What I did say is that there’s no more merit in saying “you can’t tell between dangerous and harmless muslims” than in saying the same for any other group for the simple reason that under normal circumstances you can’t look at any given person and say they’re dangerous or harmless regardless of them being muslims or not. I also said that you can’t tell from one’s self identification as a muslim what they know about islam and muhammad. Now, do you have any argument with those two assertions or are you going to keep beating around the bush or pretend I’m saying things I didn’t say?
voegelinian says
I wonder if gravenimage has asked herself why Angemon, a seasoned Jihad Watch reader, would be making these points that are refutable in such elementary ways — e.g., his pointing out that there are dangerous non-Muslims as though that’s relevant to Jihad Watch? Something is obviously seriously wrong with his template.
thomas_h says
@Voegelinian
”I wonder if gravenimage has asked herself why Angemon, a seasoned Jihad Watch reader, would be making these points that are refutable in such elementary ways — e.g., his pointing out that there are dangerous non-Muslims as though that’s relevant to Jihad Watch? Something is obviously seriously wrong with his template.”
“…refutable in such elementary ways…”
Indeed, that’s what strikes one immediately.
Otherwise, I think it is quite possible gravenimage did ask herself and arrived at a conclusion that she, being a nice person, would rather not reveal. In other word, we will never know.
voegelinian says
thomas,
And it’s not merely Angemon building their elaborate ripostes on the shaky ground of ignoring elementary logic and facts; it’s also PRCS, PJ, Jay Boo, and others I can’t think of right now. Compounding this, then, we have the more complicated acquiescence in their general softness by others who should know better (graven, Mirren, Wellington) but who apparently refuse to take the time to think these things through.
Jay Boo says
By Golly, — PJ and Angemon are wrong about voeg
I have changed my mind and now agree with voeg
thomas_h has also helped to convince me that voeg is a genius.
I now believe that Muslims are actually an extraterrestrial humanoid species much like the Klingons and the Romulans in Star Trek who are brutish yet possess metaphysical knowledge of the universe and hidden supernatural powers.
Why didn’t I see this clearly before.
Thanks for the volcano full of data voegelinian.
PRCS says
Do tell, Hesp.
Within the constraints of the United States Constitution and U.S. law, how do you imagine the expulsion/deportation of an American born citizen would be accomplished? To what other country would they be deported? What if the individuals just said no? And what if no other country was wiling to play along?
Myxlplik says
A lot of ifs in there, desperation is the mother of invention as they say.
voegelinian says
“Within the constraints of the United States Constitution and U.S. law, how do you imagine the expulsion/deportation of an American born citizen would be accomplished? ”
You fail to factor in the educated realization that can/should/likely will occur — namely, that a Muslim qua Muslim cannot really be a citizen, since their Islam excludes it and rather cultivates and mandates treason to any non-Islamic polity. When this treason is contextualized intelligently through an Islamoliteralism on our part, we see it is directly related to the violent war they are waging against us and against the whole free world (and even against each other). I thought you knew this already, having been reading Jihad Watch for years. The main reason the mainstream doesn’t yet realize this enough to process it for practical purposes is because of PC MC. I would have hoped that Jihad Watchers would not be so similar to the PC MC mainstream in so many important regards.
To what other country would they be deported?
Any country that Muslims identify as part of the Dar-al-Islam — that vast swath of land conquered by Muslims and held by them in various forms (in many ways compromised by Western Colonialism, but still intact now as for the most part the 56 countries collected under the umbrella O.I.C. (Organization of Islamic Cooperation). Why are you asking me this, if you could easily come up with the same answer?
“What if the individuals just said no?”
Give them a complimentary gift basket of hummus and date figs and invite them to Philip Jihadski’s house. You can’t be serious with a question like that.
“And what if no other country was wiling to play along?”
This isn’t a game.
prcs says
1.”You fail to factor in the educated realization that can/should/likely will occur — namely, that a Muslim qua Muslim cannot really be a citizen, since their Islam excludes it and rather cultivates and mandates treason to any non-Islamic polity. ”
That’s what Islam teaches. Now, Could you demonstrate to us JW “softies” how that meshes with current U.S. law?
2. ““What if the individuals just said no?””
“You can’t be serious with a question like that.”
Well, of course I can, Hesp.
What if your fantasy came true, via an executive order or a change in U.S. law, and our nation were to expel American born Muslims and those Muslims just said, “Hell no, we won’t go”.
Then what?
3. “This isn’t a game.”
That’s correct. The issue involves both U.S. LAW and International LAW, and it’s quite obvious that you STILL haven’t fully thought this through.
Kathy Brown says
Reply to P.:
Now that’s one for the record books-a response which is a PROPOSAL!!!!!!!!!
If I said ‘yes’, could we invite all the other patriots on the site to attend? Perhaps we could do a ‘virtual’ wedding, with a ‘virtual’ reception, etc.?
P.: You crack me up! We’ve got to have a little levity here, given the truly horrendous topics we [perforce] explore.
So thank you.
voegelinian says
prcs cf supra
PRCS says
“Where U.S. law defends its citizens from mass murder and destruction of property in the context of an invading army…”
According to the U.S. Constitution and U.S. law those INDIVIDUAL American citizens who engage in mass murder and destruction of property in the context of an invading army should be arrested, charged, tried, and IF convicted, jailed.
Punishment of an individual, not of a group.
Lauren says
Nothing good ever comes from religion or meat-eating. Both practises should be thrown forthwith onto the scrap-heap of history. The West had better wake up to itself and realise that Islam is the biggest threat to civilisation the world has ever known.
The mental illness of religion and the physical decrepitude of meat-eating is destroying us. We need strong, lean bodies and uncluttered rational minds to face the sturm und drang of the 21st century. Filling one’s head with dogma and your mouths with rotting flesh is not going to cut it any more.
We’ve got a culture war to win, let’s get to it!
Mo says
@ Lauren
“Nothing good ever comes from religion or meat-eating.”
Save your equating of religions as all being equal or the same for some other site. It doesn’t fly here.
And people are free to eat meat if they choose. No one’s forcing you to eat it.
“Both practises should be thrown forthwith onto the scrap-heap of history.”
Oh, sure. Let’s throw out those pesky religious concepts like people are created equal, human beings have dignity because they are created in God’s image, doing unto others as you’d have them do unto you, and caring for the poor. Who needs that stuff, right? After all, look at the shining successes cultures and civilizations that have tossed out all these old fashioned have been.
Oh, wait…
“The West had better wake up to itself and realise that Islam is the biggest threat to civilisation the world has ever known.”
What does one thing have to do with the other? Oh, yeah, NOTHING.
“The mental illness of religion and the physical decrepitude of meat-eating is destroying us. We need strong, lean bodies and uncluttered rational minds to face the sturm und drang of the 21st century. Filling one’s head with dogma and your mouths with rotting flesh is not going to cut it any more.”
Yeah, you’ve proven yourself to be oh, so rational, uncluttered of mind and clear of dogma.
Angemon says
Lauren posted:
“Nothing good ever comes from religion or meat-eating. Both practises should be thrown forthwith onto the scrap-heap of history.”
Sheer nonsense. The Western world as we know it today is the direct result of our judaic-christian religious background. And our ancestors have been eating meat for at least 1.5million years. Meat-eating triggered brain development which gave our ancestors an evolutionary boost. If you don’t like religion and meat eating I suggest you go sit on a tree screeching and throwing your feces at strangers.
gravenimage says
Ms Jackson, a single mother and former nursery worker, said: ‘When I picked her up at the end of the day the first thing she said to me was, “mummy I’m really hungry, can I have my lunch now?”
………………………………..
This is *child abuse*. Who licensed this daycare?
More:
‘I went to speak to the manager and I said “why wasn’t my daughter allowed her lunch” and she said “we didn’t know it was healthy”.
………………………………..
This has *nothing* to do with whether the lunch was *healthy*—it has to do with whether it was Islamic.
More:
‘And she said “the form was wrong, you weren’t meant to send a lunch as it is provided here. We gave her a small portion of spaghetti pasta and an apple”.
………………………………..
If this were true, the little girl would not have been so hungry.
More:
‘And she said we didn’t know if it’s halal.
………………………………..
*That* is the crux of the matter. It shouldn’t make any difference to them whether it is halal or not.
More:
‘I said we are a Christian family and it was a chicken sandwich.
………………………………..
Taqiyya-spouting Muslims will sometimes claim that Shari’ah does not apply to non-Muslims, but it is a lie—Infidels can be imprisoned for not fasting on Ramadan in many parts of Dar-al-Islam.
More:
Following the incident, the nursery has suspended its website and reported racially and religiously aggravated electronic communications to the police.
………………………………..
Instant victim-mongering. They abuse this little child on Islamic grounds, then claim that *they* are the victims. So disgustingly common…
bewick says
Some problems with this story.
1. One mustn’t believe everything that the Daily Mail prints.
2. Why did the mother approach the Daily Mail – 15 minutes of fame?
3.It is nigh impossible to buy other than halal chicken (or lamb or beef) in the UK and a muslim would know that.(most indigenous don’t because it isn’t labelled)
4. How could the nursery KNOW, just on sight, that the chicken wasn’t halal?
There is rather more to this story than the Daily Mail has so far printed.
Then again there is rarely smoke without fire but the source of the smoke is yet to be established.
Kathy Brown says
Lee, Ken, Hopkins: I was noting the epidemic of unwed mothers in our society today. It IS an epidemic, and it is contrary to Natural Law, i.e., God’s plan for creation. Which means that it’s against the ‘best interests of the child’ which is supposed to rule in these cases (both in the USA and the UK-oh, except for in the Sharia Courts in the latter).
I don’t care if this young woman has the ‘wisdom’ of Solomon. If she was raped- instead of choosing to give birth out of wedlock as the overwhelming majority of these young woman do-she is a tiny, tiny exception to the rule. And her being 19? Alas! Indeed it is ‘nothing unusual’, here in these United States, for someone to give birth at that age-but NOT as a married woman.
I don’t wish to get too much into the weeds here as the main topic is Islamofascism. However: The situation presented here owes a great deal to all the foregoing. The secular ‘culture’ night and day trumpets the needlessness of men, as husbands and as fathers. This is a lie. And when that lie is persistently ignored, unwed mothers give birth to [already] disadvantaged children: Disadvantaged emotionally, psychologically and monetarily from the jump.
Have Mercy says
Do not let JW admin Marisol catch you saying that. That is challenging Western feminist orthodoxy, and she would not have that. I do not believe in a god, but empirically children do best in life when they are raised by both their biological parents in a stable household. You see empowered Western “Woymen” make the hard decisions on fertility and family and do not need the evil “Patriarchy”.
In other sites she would have been double dinged for not helping the propagation of native Britts. To me she is the classic welfare single mom that the socialists created to destroy national identity, create a class of captive voters, and create chaos and need that they use to entrench their power. Fact- No one in UK politics would last long criticizing the poor choices of women.
Kathy Brown says
Jihadski: You are very kind, and thanks for the complement!
Have Mercy says
I was raised Christian in a Muslim land. I was fed pork from a young age. I never really liked it. Our native pigs were hideous (wild boar looking) and were exclusively fed rotten garbage and carrion. So, the idea did not appeal to me. That is why as a grown up I can only eat pork mixed with beef like in meatballs and sausage. I would not eat a pork chop unless I had nothing else to eat. Years later Muslims used the pretense of fighting the Swine Flu and eradicated all native pigs, causing severe malnutrition among poor Christian kids who had no other affordable source of animal protein, Vietnam D and Iron. These beasts would rather starve kids than have them eat non-halal foods. They enforce Sharia on Muslims and Kuffar alike. Damn the multi-cultists who brought them in to the West and cover up their crimes. Ordinary Muslims every day prove that they would share in their Jihadi brethren’s savagery if given the chance.
SKevin says
This is the email for the school.
info@kingswooddaycarenursery.co.uk
I just sent them this.
“I write in response to the shoddy and cruel treatment of a young Christian girl for not eating a halal sandwich.
The UK is not a sharia compliant country. You have no business enforcing it. Period. I hope your license gets pulled for this harassive action. You do not deserve to be around children.
Why don’t you all move to the Islamic State, where you can get your jollies beheading any child who defies your warped concept of what is proper?
~SKPW”
dumbledoresarmy says
I see a lot of beating-up on this woman because she is a single mum.
All of which is offtopic and totally irrelevant: because what happened to the kid – not being allowed to eat a non-halal chicken sandwich, in a supposedly-secular daycare centre in which the manager and probably some other staff members are Muslims and seem to be throwing their weight around – could **just as easily have happened to the child of a married woman**. Why are people seeming to assume that *only* single mums have kids in daycare??
My four children were all born within wedlock. *My* eldest son spent some time in daycare, because he was born when I was halfway through researching and writing my PhD.