The Fruits of Arab Islamic Democracy

An article in the Huffington Post spoke of the 19 Indigenous Egyptian Christians who were killed by Muslim mobs, as well as the security forces. And riots broke out in the city of Aswan over the "unauthorized" construction of a church, even after the church officials agreed to remove the "offensive" cross from public view. Those who are familiar with the history of the middle east are aware that the few regimes in which the lives and property of Christians were respected, were secular, authoritarian regimes, such as Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Assad's Syria and to a lesser extent Mubarak's Egypt. In virtually every instant, the democratization of an Arab-Islamic nation was accompanied by a sharp deterioration in the status and safety of Christians. Such are the fruits of Arab Islamic Democracy. And to those who believe that all cultures and peoples are suited for democracy, I will order you a ticket via expedia.com to the place were most progressives dwell: fantasyland.

Egypt Riots: Christian Protesters Attacked, At Least 19 Dead

CAIRO — Flames lit up downtown Cairo, where massive clashes raged Sunday, drawing Christians angry over a recent church attack, Muslims and Egyptian security forces. At least 24 people were killed and more than 200 injured in the worst sectarian violence since the uprising that ousted Hosni Mubarak in February.

The rioting lasted late into the night, bringing out a deployment of more than 1,000 security forces and armored vehicles to defend the state television building along the Nile, where the trouble began. The military clamped a curfew on the area until 7 a.m.

The clashes spread to nearby Tahrir Square, drawing thousands of people to the vast plaza that served as the epicenter of the protests that ousted Mubarak. On Sunday night, they battled each other with rocks and firebombs, some tearing up pavement for ammunition and others collecting stones in boxes.

At one point, an armored security van sped into the crowd, striking a half-dozen protesters and throwing some into the air. Protesters retaliated by setting fire to military vehicles, a bus and private cars, sending flames rising into the night sky.

After midnight, mobs roamed downtown streets, attacking cars they suspected had Christian passengers. In many areas, there was no visible police or army presence to confront or stop them.

Christians, who make up about 10 percent of Egypt's 80 million people, blame the country's ruling military council for being too lenient on those behind a spate of anti-Christian attacks since Mubarak's ouster. As Egypt undergoes a chaotic power transition and security vacuum in the wake of the uprising, the Coptic Christian minority is particularly worried about the show of force by ultraconservative Islamists.

Prime Minister Essam Sharaf, addressing the nation in a televised speech, said the violence threatened to throw Egypt's post-Mubarak transition off course.

"These events have taken us back several steps," he said. "Instead of moving forward to build a modern state on democratic principles we are back to seeking stability and searching for hidden hands – domestic and foreign – that meddle with the country's security and safety."

"I call on Egyptian people, Muslims and Christians, women and children, young men and elders to hold their unity," Sharaf said.

The Christian protesters said their demonstration began as a peaceful attempt to sit in at the television building. But then, they said, they came under attack by thugs in plainclothes who rained stones down on them and fired pellets.

"The protest was peaceful. We wanted to hold a sit-in, as usual," said Essam Khalili, a protester wearing a white shirt with a cross on it. "Thugs attacked us and a military vehicle jumped over a sidewalk and ran over at least 10 people. I saw them."

Wael Roufail, another protester, corroborated the account. "I saw the vehicle running over the protesters. Then they opened fired at us," he said.

Khalili said protesters set fire to army vehicles when they saw them hitting the protesters.

Ahmed Yahia, a Muslim resident who lives near the TV building, said he saw the military vehicle plow into protesters. "I saw a man's head split into two halves and a second body flattened when the armored vehicle ran over it. When some Muslims saw the blood they joined the Christians against the army," he said.

Television footage showed the military vehicle slamming into the crowd. Coptic protesters were shown attacking a soldier, while a priest tried to protect him. One soldier collapsed in tears as ambulances rushed to the scene to take away the injured.

At least 24 people were killed in the clashes, Health Ministry official Hisham Sheiha said on state TV.

State media reported that Egypt's interim Cabinet was holding an emergency session to discuss the situation.

The protest began in the Shubra district of northern Cairo, then headed to the state television building along the Nile where men in plainclothes attacked about a thousand Christian protesters as they chanted denunciations of the military rulers.

"The people want to topple the field marshal!" the protesters yelled, referring to the head of the ruling military council, Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi. Some Muslim protesters later joined in the chant.

Later in the evening, a crowd of Muslims turned up to challenge the Christian crowds, shouting, "Speak up! An Islamic state until death!"

Armed with sticks, the Muslim assailants chased the Christian protesters from the TV building, banging metal street signs to scare them off. It was not immediately clear who the attackers were.

Gunshots rang out at the scene, where lines of riot police with shields tried to hold back hundreds of Christian protesters chanting, "This is our country!"

Security forces eventually fired tear gas to disperse the protesters. The clashes then moved to nearby Tahrir Square, the epicenter of the uprising against Mubarak. The army closed off streets around the area.

The clashes left streets littered with shattered glass, stones, ash and soot from burned vehicles. Hundreds of curious onlookers gathered at one of the bridges over the Nile to watch the unrest.

After hours of intense clashes, chants of "Muslims, Christians one hand, one hand!" rang out in a call for a truce. The stone-throwing died down briefly, but then began to rage again.

In the past weeks, riots have broken out at two churches in southern Egypt, prompted by Muslim crowds angry over church construction. One riot broke out near the city of Aswan, even after church officials agreed to a demand by ultraconservative Muslims known as Salafis that a cross and bells be removed from the building.

Aswan's governor, Gen. Mustafa Kamel al-Sayyed, further raised tensions by suggesting to the media that the church construction was illegal.

Protesters said the Copts are demanding the ouster of the governor, reconstruction of the church, compensation for people whose houses were set on fire and prosecution of those behind the riots and attacks on the church.

Last week, the military used force to disperse a similar protest in front of the state television building. Christians were angered by the treatment of the protesters and vowed to renew their demonstrations until their demands are met.

PHOTOS:

On "Moderate" Malaysia

Of course intolerance and extremism are found in all cultures and religions, but I am starting to suspect that Islamic culture is the least inclined towards tolerance and pluralism. Malaysia is often cited as an example of a nation of "moderate" Islam, but churches have been firebombed and the government seized 20,000 bibles because it referred to G-d as "Allah." Just once I would like to hear a preacher of multiculturalism admit the obvious: "In this day and age, Western, Judeo-Christian culture in general and American culture in particular are most propitious towards the promotion of peace, prosperity and tolerance."

2 more churches in Malaysia firebombed in 'Allah' row

January 10, 2010 -- Updated 1337 GMT (2137 HKT)

A police officer looks into a gutted church building in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on Friday.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Sunday bombings bring total to six since Friday
• Violence erupted after court ruled that non-Muslims can use word "Allah" for God
• Government and many Malaysians believe word should be reserved for Muslims

(CNN) -- Two more churches in Malaysia were firebombed Sunday, bringing the total to six since a court ruled that non-Muslims can use the word "Allah" as a term for God.

No one has been hurt in the attacks, which began Friday. They follow a high court's ruling that Christians can use the word "Allah" in literature printed in the country's official language, Malay.

In Malay, the word for God is "Allah," as it is in Arabic.

But many in the predominantly Muslim country, including the government, believe the word should be exclusive to Islam.

The government has banned the use of the word in Christian literature, saying it is likely to confuse Muslims and draw them toChristianity.

It has also appealed the high court's ruling.

The bombings may be an attempt to intimidate judges to overturn the decision, said the Rev. Hermen Shastri, general secretary of the Council of Churches in Malaysia.

Political leaders from a range of parties deplored the attacks on the churches.

Video: Protests over 'Allah' ruling

RELATED TOPICS

• Malaysia
• Islam
• Christianity

Prime Minister Najib Razak visited one of the targeted churches on Saturday and called for calm.

Emphasizing his resolve to maintain ethnic and racial harmony in society, Najib also said the Muslim faith prohibits insulting other religions or destroying their sanctuaries.

In recent months, authorities in Malaysia have seized more than 20,000 Bibles because they refer to God as Allah.

The seizures have fed fears among minority groups, which see signs of encroaching Islamic fundamentalism in the predominantly Muslim but multiracial country.

A Roman Catholic weekly newspaper, The Herald, challenged the ban in court after the government threatened to revoke the newspaper's license for using the word in its Malay edition.

Hearings on the case went on for two years before the high court's ruling last week.

Malaysia has some of the tightest government restrictions on religion in the world, according to a study published last month by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. The country was among the 10 most restrictive countries out of 175 in the survey.

But it had relatively low levels of social tension between religious groups, the report found. The Pew study covered events from mid-2006 to mid-2008.

CNN's Kathryn Tancos contributed to this report.

Why Did The Press Remains Silent About Gay Bashing in Amsterdam?

A few years ago, a fashion show in Amsterdam that was set up to raise awareness for gay rights was attacked by a group of 10 Muslim immigrants. Interestingly this story was not broken in the United States by the mainstream media or even by the gay rights oriented newspapers and websites, but by the conservative website http://www.gaypatriot.net/. We can be certain that if members of the dreaded "Christian Right," were responsible for this revolting act of intolerance, it would have received ample press coverage. I suspect this is because the press is uncomfortable presenting news that departs from the dominant liberal narrative that presents Muslim migrants and other minorities as victims, rather than perpetrators of hate crimes.

Muslims Attack Gay Model at Amsterdam Fashion Show, American Left Silent


Posted on June 6, 2008 by Rob Taylor

On April 30th a fashion show in Amsterdam which was supposed to raise awareness for gay rights was disrupted by a group of ten Muslim youths who pulled openly gay model Marc DuPree down from the catwalk and brutally assaulted him. When another model attempted to intervene that person was also assaulted. The organizer of the event, Jennifer Delano, has gone on record saying she would never organize another fashion show there and that Amsterdam was “no longer a tolerant city.
As Gay Patriot, who found this story, points out there has been no mention of this story in the MSM or the American gay media. It’s been over a month and none of the people who supposedly cover news important to gays wrote a word about this blatant display of gay bashing.

Gay patriot has translations of two Dutch articles, the first of which is sensational enough that you’d think the cable news channels would be all over a story like this:

Amsterdam : On Queen's Day [national holiday, birthday of the late Queen Juliana of the Netherlands], in a side street of Rembrandt Square, a gay fashion show was severely disrupted. The model was dragged down from the catwalk by ten young guys.

The homosexual model Mike du Pree was dragged down from the catwalk by ten young guys. When he wanted to defend himself he got hit several times. A bystander stood up for the victim and a fight evolved. The show was organized precisely to promote tolerance towards homosexuals.

Before things got out of hand, the atmosphere was already tense. The public made comments about the outfits and a couple of models were insulted. The attack on Du Pree was the worst moment. "Mike got dragged down by his arm," says the organizer Jennifer Delano. They pinched him, he defended himself and then the guys of immigrant background started to hit him. According to her it was a group of ten young guys of Muslim background. The fight didn’t last long, but the police was too late.

Delano doesn't  know yet whether she will organize a fashion show for tolerance ever again. "I first need to recover from what happened, the initiator says." According to her, "Amsterdam is no longer a tolerant city." She will officially report the incident to the police and she considers to take legal action against the perpetrators. They are still free to roam.

May 1, 2008. Gay Krant [Gay Newspaper]

A fashion show that devolves into a mini-riot? Where the victim of a vicious gang assault is a gay man? This is news gold, yet the left leaning American media and the netroots are virtually silent. I wonder why?

And one would think that the Gay Pride movement would be up in arms over the very public attack of a gay man by a group of homophobes. But I guess Gay Pride really means never having to take a strong stand against the people who want you dead.

As “right winger” I’m often called a homophobe even though I support the rights of gays to get married in civil unions, think all Americans should be treated equally and believe hatred of gays is as un-American as Communism. And this will be one of the few blogs where you read about this story.

I think my gay friends should remember that next time some lefty blog implies “The Right” hates gays. At least we on the right want justice for the ones brutalized by gangs, even if it’s a gang made up of people from the “oppressed” classes.

Can your lefty “friends” say the same?

Why Should We Be Surprised (That Women Are Harrassed In London)?

The Indian Express published an article that spoke of the harrasment of women who did not don the islamic headscarve, in the Tower Hamlets area of London. Why should we be surprised? In the name of multiculturalism, a series of British governments introduces a large population of individuals with a distinct culture into its midst, makes no efforts to assimilate them towards British norms and values and becomes surprised when some of their members maintain the more dubious practices of their homeland? When people move to a neightborhood or nation, most will bring their culture, which entails far more than their cuisine, clothing and music. They bring their age old norms and practices, which are often compatible with those of the host neighborhood or nation. But, others are not. An honest discourse on the promises and perils of multiculturalism should not be the sole domain of the far right, but part of a thoughtful discussion that involves broad segments of society.

London Taliban' target women, homosexuals


Mon Apr 18 2011, 16:22 hrs

London:

Women who do not wear headscarves are being threatened with violence and even death.

By Ashoka Kumar Jha

Women who do not wear headscarves are being threatened with violence and even death by Islamic extremist group Taliban, in a bid to impose Sharia Law in Britain.

According to police investigations in the Tower Hamlets area of London, other targets of these Islamist extremists include homosexuals.

Some incidents have been reported that include the placing of stickers on public walls, which state it is a ''gay-free zone'' and the daubing of paint on posters for clothing shops featuring women in bikinis.

In response to such incidents, Ghaffar Hussain, of the anti-extremism Quilliam Foundation, said that the intimidation was the work of ''Talibanesque thugs''.

“This minority think they have the right to impose their fringe interpretation of Islam on others,” the Daily Mail quoted Hussain, as saying.

Police official Paul Rickett said that three men have been charged with religiously-aggravated criminal damage in connection with some of the incidents, which have mirrored crude attempt at censorship in Birmingham.

“I am saddened that there are a small minority of people who do not wish to respect the lifestyle choices of others,” said Rickett.

“We work closely with faith leaders in the community, the Tower Hamlets interfaith forum, our partner agencies and the local community to ensure that people feel safe in the borough,” he added.

Firebrand Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary said that he was aware of individuals who would speak up if they saw a Muslim woman without a headscarf, but insisted they were only giving advice about their views of Islam.

Why the Pope should call for the return of the Hagia Sophia

I wish I could say that I was the author of this very thoughtful article. He discusses the lack of cultural confidence of (large segments of) the west, which is increasingly leading to an asymmetrical relationship, in which we are (justifiably) apologetic for our colonial transgressions, while we do not demand that the Islamic world address their past and (more importantly) present abuse of their Christian and Jewish minorities. Owing to widespread historical illiteracy of the current generation of Americans and Western Europeans this article will probably not resonate with many readers. Such individuals are unaware that while the Crusades were filled with much bloodshed, it was in response to an ongoing jihad that has seized vast stretches of territory that formed the spiritual and economic heartland of Christendom. And for over a thousand years at the heart of this land was the magnificent Hagia Sophia that was forcibly converted into a mosque by the Ottoman Turks, along with 100's of other churches. After a long lull, this process accelerated during the Genocide of Armenians in 1915, in which hundreds of historical monasteries and churches were converted or razed to thee ground. The fact that so few westerners are concerned, let alone aware of the ongoing destruction of Jews and Christians in the middle east is a testament to an erosion of culture and identity. Read, enjoy and learn!

December 7, 2007


Holy Wisdom
Why the Pope should call for the return of the Hagia Sophia.

by Bruce S. Thornton

Many in the West are congratulating Pope Benedict XVI’s recent trip to Turkey, where in the Blue Mosque he prayed facing Mecca and made other gestures meant to salve the wounds raised by his references to Islam’s history of violence. Personally, I found the whole scene a depressing exhibit of the West’s terminal failure of nerve, one particularly distressing given this Pope’s documented understanding that what we call the “war on terror” is in fact the latest episode in the centuries-long struggle with a militant Islam.

In the Pope’s visit and the media response to it, we once again witnessed the one-way street of “religious tolerance” and “respect.” In other words, the West is supposed to respect and tolerate Muslims and Islam, all the while that no such respect is afforded to Christians and Jews. The West is supposed to feel guilty and obsess over its putative crimes against Islam, all the while that the longer chronicle of Islamic assault against the West is forgotten. Hence the ridiculous ignorance of those who think the Crusades were “holy wars” akin to jihadic aggression. Somehow it’s forgotten that the Holy Land was Greco-Roman and Hebraic and Christian for centuries before the armies of Allah destroyed that cultural continuity and imposed a new culture and religion at the point of a sword.

This double standard was particularly obvious given the backdrop of the Pope’s visit –– the city of Istanbul. Once known as Constantinople, this was one of the great cities of Classical and Christian culture, home to one of Christendom’s most magnificent churches, Hagia Sophia, the church of the Holy Wisdom. On May 29, 1453, Constantinople ceased to exist, falling to the armies of the Sultan Mehmet II: “By noon,” John Julius Norwich writes, “the streets were running red with blood. Houses were ransacked, women and children raped or impaled, churches razed, icons wrenched from their golden frames, books ripped from their silver bindings. . . . In the church of St. Saviour in Chora the mosaics and frescoes were miraculously spared, but the Empire’s holiest icon, the Virgin Hodegetria, said to have been painted by St. Luke himself, was hacked into four pieces and destroyed. The most hideous scenes of all, however, were enacted in the church of the Holy Wisdom. Matins were already in progress when the berserk conquerors were heard approaching. Immediately the great bronze doors were closed; but the Turks soon smashed their way in. The poorer and more unattractive of the congregation were massacred on the spot; the remainder were lashed together and led off to the Turkish camps, for their captors to do with as they liked. As for the officiating priests, they continued with the Mass as long as they could before being killed at the high altar.”

Ancient history, you say, irrelevant to the present? But do not the Muslims repeatedly invoke the historical crimes of the West to justify terrorism? Are not the sins of colonialism and imperialism continually cited, even though France and England’s 150 years in the Middle East and North Africa are dwarfed by Islam’s several centuries in Spain and the Balkans and the cradle of the West, Greece? Is there some statute of limitations on conquest and the transfer of territory that attends it, so that the conquests of Islam are legitimized by time, while those of the West can never be?

Why do we accept this double standard? Why are the continuing persecution of Christians today, despicable anti-Semitic slanders, and the desecration of temples and churches in Muslim lands shrugged away in the West, while trivial cartoons and mere statements of historical fact are met with hysteria, violence, and threats? Why are churches disappearing throughout the lands of Christianity’s birth and growth, while huge mosques are going up in London and Milan? Why are Christians and Jews forbidden entry into Saudi Arabia, while Muslims in Europe demand special privileges and recognition of their faith?

Nowhere is this insane, groveling capitulation of the West more obvious than in its treatment of Israel. By all rights, when Israel recaptured Jerusalem from Jordan –– in a defensive war Israel did not want, a war Israel literally begged Jordan to stay out of –– Israel could have razed the Aqsa mosque and rebuilt the temple on the site it had stood on for centuries before Islam even existed. Instead, the Temple Mount is still controlled by Muslims, who are free to worship in the mosque all the while they allow the children of Allah to throw stones on the Jews who come to worship at the few scraps of the temple wall, all that is left to them of their holiest site. Meanwhile the countries of the West decry the “illegal occupation” of Jerusalem and Judea and Galilee, refuse to put their embassies in the capital of Israel, and continually demand more and more concessions to a people who have made it clear that their conquest of Jerusalem is legitimate, that Israelis, not they, are the interloper in the Jews’ historical homeland, and that violence against innocents is justified to undo a history deemed to violate Allah’s will.

When will we learn that this forbearance is not a testimony to our strength but rather a sign of our cultural sickness? Would that the Pope had stood in Hagia Sophia and asked the Turks to restore this Christian monument to the Orthodox Church, as a sign that Turkey is sincere about entering the modern world and accepting its canons of reciprocal tolerance, not to mention showing the sort of regret for its ancestors’ crimes that the West is continually dunned to show. What do you think the reaction would have been? How many Christians would have died in the ensuing riots by the adherents of the “religion of peace”? And how many Western commentators would have scourged the Pope for his blinkered intolerance and insensitivity?

No, the enemy knows that what we pretend to be “tolerance” and “respect” are merely the camouflage of spiritual exhaustion and fear. We have fewer and fewer men like those who created the West in the teeth of Islamic aggression, men like the Byzantine Greek Lucas Notaras. After the sack of Constantinople, the Sultan demanded Notaras’s beautiful 14-year-old son for the royal harem: “When Notaras still defied the Sultan,” Steven Runciman writes, “orders were given for him and the two boys [his son and son-in-law] to be decapitated on the spot. Notaras merely asked that they should be slain before him, lest the sight of his death should make them waver. When they had both perished, he bared his neck to the executioner.” As Nestor says in the Iliad, “Men like those I have not seen again, nor ever will.”

©2006 Bruce Thornton

Do Diversity and Multiculturalism Breed Intolerance?

Pictured above: Gary Smith, a British teacher savagely beaten for teaching his students about Islam.

Champions of diversity and multiculturalism pride themselves on tolerance, yet paradoxically, in some cases they have to led to greater intolerance. This is seen in the London borough of Tower Hamlets, in which homophobic attacks, harassment of secular Muslims and anti-Semitic rhetoric are on the rise, driven by the growth of fundamentalist Islam. In a recent incident, a school teacher was savagely beaten for teaching about Islam in a comparative religions class. Of course, this is NOT to say that all Muslims are dangerous fundamentalists. Rather, this clearly this is indicative of the failure of British multiculturalism, which eschews the value of assimilation into the majority culture and unconditionally defines diversity as a social good. 

Had the bureaucrats who determine England's selection of immigrants valued assimilation, they would have focused on the selection of individual Muslims who fit a profile (educated, secular, etc.) that indicated a high probability of rapid assimilation towards the values and norms of British society. And they would have sought to allow a number of Muslim immigrants that would be more conducive towards healthy assimilation. Or, if they dared breach the barriers of political correctness, they would have focused on admitting groups with a higher capacity of assimilation, such as Indian Hindus. Let's be honest, we have yet to see Hindu Immigrants blow up trains or planes. Secondly, the educational elites are to blame, because the multicultural curriculum that they propagate do little to encourage assimilation and address the bigotry, homophobia and antisemitism that are prevalent among segments of England's Muslim migrants. Nor have they promoted distinct British values and identity. And we even see that the police are reserved about even admitting the existence of such issues, in order to avoid being labelled "Islamaphobic." We know this to be true, because acts of intolerance committed by native born Brits elicits a strong official response.

The answer is not to exclude diverse populations from England, but rather to approach diversity and multiculturalism with a critical eye. Such an approach would honestly assess the values, norms and institutions that make England (and other western nations) places that are attractive to immigrants in the first place and seek to promote them among native born and newcomers alike. A daring and intellectually honest exploration of culture, would also ask what are the values and norms that have contributed to the endemic corruption, intolerance and poverty that make other countries (like Pakistan) places that so many people want to flee. It's essential to note that a critical approach to culture would draw a sharp distinction between individuals and cultures. In other words, prejudice against individuals would be staunchly opposed, while a rational critique of other cultures would not. Why? Because, while we can say with confidence that traditional Islamic Culture is hostile to freedom of speech, equal rights for non-Muslims and gay rights, we have absolutely no right to make assumptions about the values and conduct of an individual simply because he is a Muslim. A culturally confident England or United States would declare:

 "we respect the right of the people of all cultures to live by their values, norms, traditions laws and institutions, but if you choose to do so, it only makes sense that you remain in your nation of origin. But, if you come to our nation, we insist that you respect and adopt our culture and way of life, they are fundamental aspects of the peace, prosperity and democracy that draw you and millions of others to our shores. Since we are a liberal society, we welcome your right to adhere to any tradition that does not contradict our own. Celebrating Ramadan and your rites of passage, enjoy your wonderful cuisine and music, but leave the intolerance, corruption and excessive statism in Pakistan. Being part of our nation and culture means that you must tolerate speech that you find offensive, rather than slash the throat of Theo Van Gogh or other critics of Islam. If you agree to this and are committed to economically and socially contributing to our great nation, we welcome you aboard. If not, we ask that you take at least one of our progressive multiculturalists with you, because we trust that a year in your nation will help them gain an appreciation for their own civilization."

Police 'covered up' violent campaign to turn London area 'Islamic'

Police have been accused of “covering up” a campaign of abuse, threats and violence aimed at “Islamicising” an area of London.

By Andrew Gilligan

12 Jun 2011

Victims say that officers in the borough of Tower Hamlets have ignored or downplayed outbreaks of hate crime, and suppressed evidence implicating Muslims in them, because they fear being accused of racism.

The claims come as four Tower Hamlets Muslims were jailed for at least 19 years for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls.

The Sunday Telegraph has uncovered more than a dozen other cases in Tower Hamlets where both Muslims and non-Muslims have been threatened or beaten for behaviour deemed to breach fundamentalist “Islamic norms.”

One victim, Mohammed Monzur Rahman, said he was left partially blind and with a dislocated shoulder after being attacked by a mob in Cannon Street Road, Shadwell, for smoking during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan last year.

“Two guys stopped me in the street and asked me why I was smoking,” he said. “I just carried on, and before I knew another dozen guys came and jumped me. The next thing I knew, I was waking up in hospital.”
“He reported it to the police and they just said they couldn’t track anyone down and there were no witnesses,” said Ansar Ahmed Ullah, a local anti-extremism campaigner who has advised Mr Rahman. “But there is CCTV in that street and it is lined with shops and people.”

Teachers in several local schools have told The Sunday Telegraph that they feel “under pressure” from local Muslim extremists, who have mounted campaigns through both parents and pupils – and, in one case, through another teacher - to enforce the compulsory wearing of the veil for Muslim girls. “It was totally orchestrated,” said one teacher. “The atmosphere became extremely unpleasant for a while, with constant verbal aggression from both the children and some parents against the head over this issue.”

One teacher at the Bigland Green primary school, Nicholas Kafouris, last year took the council to an employment tribunal, saying he was forced out of his job for complaining that Muslim pupils were engaging in racist and anti-Semitic bullying and saying they supported terrorism. Mr Kafouris lost his case, though the school did admit that insufficient action had been taken against the behaviour of some pupils. The number of assaults on teachers in Tower Hamlets resulting in exclusions has more than doubled from 190 in 2007/8 to 383 in 2008/9, the latest available year, though not all are necessarily race-related.

Tower Hamlets’ gay community has become a particular target of extremists. Homophobic crimes in the borough have risen by 80 per cent since 2007/8, and by 21 per cent over the last year, a period when there was a slight drop in London as a whole.

Last year, a mob of 30 young Muslims stormed a local gay pub, the George and Dragon, beating and abusing patrons. Many customers of the pub told The Sunday Telegraph that they have been attacked and harassed by local Muslim youths. In 2008 a 20-year-old student, Oli Hemsley, was left permanently paralysed after an attack by a group of young Muslims outside the pub. Only one of his assailants has been caught and jailed.

Even during meetings of the local council, prominent supporters of Tower Hamlets’ controversial directly-elected mayor, Lutfur Rahman – dropped by the Labour Party for his links to Islamic fundamentalism - have persistently targeted gay councillors with homophobic abuse and intimidation from the public gallery.

The Labour leader, Josh Peck, was attacked with animal noises and cries of “Unnatural acts! Unnatural acts!” when he rose to speak. The Conservative leader, Peter Golds, was repeatedly heckled as “Mrs Golds” and a “poofter”.

Mr Golds said: “If that happened in a football stadium, arrests would have taken place. I have complained, twice, to the police, and have heard nothing. A Labour colleague waited three hours at the police station before being told that nothing would be done. The police are afraid of being accused of Islamophobia. Another Labour councillor said that the Met is now the reverse of what it must have been like in the 1970s, with a complete lack of interest when white people make complaints of harassment and hatred.”

In February this year, dozens of stickers appeared across Tower Hamlets quoting the Koran, declaring the borough a “gay-free zone” and stating that “verily Allah is severe in punishment.”

The Sunday Telegraph has learned that during a routine stop-and-search at the time police found a young Muslim man with a number of the stickers in his possession. He was released without charge on the advice of the Crown Prosecution Service. Police also had CCTV images of a second unidentified Muslim youth posting the stickers at a local railway station, but refused to release the pictures for several weeks.

Peter Tatchell, the gay human rights campaigner, said: “The police said no-one was allowed to talk publicly about this because they didn’t want to upset the Muslim community. We’ve made very clear the difference between the Muslim community as a whole and these particular fundamentalists, and the fact that the police wouldn’t publicly say what they knew was an absolute disgrace.”

When the CCTV footage was finally released, in early April, the culprit was quickly identified as 18-year-old Mohammed Hasnath, who last week pleaded guilty to a public order offence and was fined £100. Jack Gilbert, of the Rainbow Hamlets gay group, said a more serious charge should have been brought. “The vast majority of the community saw the material as threatening, but the police were not willing to accept it as threatening,” he said.

Hasnath’s “interests” on his Facebook page include Khalid Yasin, a hate preacher who describes Jews as “filth” and teaches that homosexuals must be killed. Yasin has spoken at least four times since 2007 at the East London Mosque, Tower Hamlets’ most prominent Muslim institution. Although the mosque claims to be against extremism, discrimination, and violence, it has hosted dozens of hate, extremist or terrorist preachers and also hosted a “Spot The Fag” contest.

In the same week that it issued a press release condemning the anti-gay stickers, the mosque was also due to host a “gala dinner” with Uthman Lateef, a homophobic hate preacher.

The mosque is controlled by a fundamentalist group, the Islamic Forum of Europe, which says that it is dedicated to changing the “very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed ... from ignorance to Islam.”

The IFE’s community affairs co-ordinator, Azad Ali, is chairman of the Muslim Safety Forum, an organisation officially recognised by the Met as its “principal [liaison] body in relation to Muslim community safety.” Mr Golds said: “This relationship may explain the police’s feebleness.” The IFE also has close links to the Tower Hamlets mayor, Mr Rahman.

There is no suggestion that any mosque official has been personally involved in any act of violence or intimidation. However, in an email obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, one IFE activist, Abu Talha, used the name of the group to threaten a local Muslim woman who ran a dating agency.

“I am asking you kindly to stop these activities as it goes against the teachings of Islam,” he wrote. “Let me remind you that I have a huge network of brothers and sisters who would be willing to help me take this further…If by tomorrow you haven’t changed your mind … then the campaign will begin.” The dating agency has now closed and the woman has left the area.

Mr Ahmed Ullah said: “There has been a gradual increase in these kinds of attacks, that’s for sure.” A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said: “When any allegation of crime is made to us, we investigate appropriately. We will always take action against hate crime in accordance with, and within the confines of, the law.”

Can You Imagine What Would Happen If Israel Did This?

Since the onset of the "Arab Spring" two churches have been burned down in Egypt and attempts to reopen churches have assaulted in attacks by Moslem mobs. Not surprisingly, the majority of those who were arrested were the Christians who were defending themselves. Can you imagine what would happen if Israel did this to a mosque or a church? Can you imagine the protests that would erupt in the middle east and in university campuses across Europe and (to a lesser extent) the United States? Apparently the "free palestine crowd" is very selective in whose suffering is worthy of sympathy and whose misdeeds are worthy of censure.

Muslims Surround Church in Egypt, Prevent Its Reopening


5-24-2011

(AINA) -- On the morning of May 19 two Coptic priests went to St. Mary and St. Abraham Church in Ain Shams and opened it together with some of the Coptic residents, but later in the day thousands of Muslims surrounded the church to protest its opening, hurled stones at the church building and the Copts, who responded by throwing stones. The army and the police stood there watching and did not intervene (video).

Unable to secure the church, the army and police closed it and arranged for a "reconciliation" meeting between the Coptic priest and the Salafi sheikhs. They also arrested eight Copts, one of them 13-years old, and three Muslims. They were all charged with rioting, violence and causing injury to citizens. Three Copts were also charged with having cartridges but no guns and one 15-year-old boy with possessing two knives. The 3 Muslims were charged with throwing stones at the army.

Father Filopateer Gameel, one of the organizers of the Maspero sit-in, said that during a meeting with the Minister of Interior he was told he cannot choose the churches to be reopened because it was all "planned with the Salafis and the security authorities so that when we go, there will be no problems." He confirmed the minister had himself suggested the names of the three churches to be reopened.

The "reconciliation" session was held in a tent by the Islamist imam Kerdassi, the main opponent of the reopening of the church, who also recently built a mosque facing the church. Next to the tent was another one hosting Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi sheikhs, among them the renowned Salafi sheikh Hassan and over 3000 guests all chanting "Islamic, Islamic."

The session lasted for 5-hour, and was attended by sheikhs, imams, priests, lawyers and members of the Muslim Brotherhood, in which the Muslims insisted the church was a factory and the Christians explained that it was a church, although it has no dome or bell, and has been used as a place for worship and has a consecrated alter.

The Coptic diocese bought the building, which used to be a clothes factory, in 2004 and used it for worship until November 22, 2008, when it was closed by State Security after nearly 3000 Muslims surrounded the church, pelting it with stones and terrorizing thousands of parishioners inside.

"The atmosphere of the meeting was belligerent," said attorney Ashraf Edward, "and one of the sheikhs threatened us by saying that should the church be opened without their permission it would end up like the church in Soul which was demolished by Muslims." He said the church was offered a larger place to relocate to away from the Muslim families as the imams said. "They presented us with a petition from the Muslim families against the opening of the church."

The representative of the Ministry of Endowment suggested the church be closed until permission is granted for its opening from the relevant authorities, to which all sides agreed.

At the end of the session a joint statement was read by the Imam Kerdassi, which said "It was decided to close the place and no Christian prayers is to take place there until permission is granted. If there is permission then we should respect it and since there is no permit at present then all parties agreed to close the place permanently, no one to approach it and no one of us to harm it until the authorities have issued a ruling. We all have to love each other, so that Egypt would remain strong and secure as Allah wanted it to be."

The Muslims demanded that should the church be reopened, it should be without cross and dome.

Coptic attorney Dr. Ihab Ramzy said the army and the police did not participate in the "reconciliation" meeting. "This shows the government is ignoring the problem. Am I there to get the Salafis' permission to open the church? If they say no, does this mean I should not open the church?"

"The joint statement linked the opening of the church with the consent of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces," said activist Mark Ebeid, "so the military council has to know that if the church is not opened, this means the dignity of the State has been lost in front of the Salafis. Everyone believes the government should have carried out its decision to open the church whatever the outcome. The big question now is will the government give us a written permission or not?"

By Mary Abdelmassih

© 2011, Assyrian International News Agency. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use.

Balanced Explanation of Terrorism

In his essay Do Terrorists Hate Our Freedom? conservative commentator Jack Hunter presents one of the most compelling and balanced explanations of the causes of terrorism. He starts off by dispelling the mantra of GW Bush that terrorists are solely motivated by a jealousy of America's freedom and prosperity. Mr. Hunter takes the (typically) left wing belief that our largely unwelcome military and political intrusion in the affairs of the Islamic Middle East is the main culprit. The Invasion of Iraq was the best give that one could offer Al Qaeda's recruitment department. Not only has this offended their sense of sovereignty, it has allowed the Islamic World to blame the United States for their political and economic ills. This is especially true considering that the internet has allowed, dispersed Al Qaeda cells are able to communicate and coordinate their efforts from the cities of Western Europe, our Saudi Arabian "allies" and even the United States.

He then challenges liberals who pretend that Islam is not a factor in the equation, stating the obvious: while the majority of Muslims are "decent, law abiding citizens," it is not by chance that the majority of terrorists are Muslim. He then questions the wisdom of multiculturalism and promoting mass Muslim immigration in Europe asking us if anyone believes that "if 2,000,000 Southern Baptists planted roots in the heart of liberal San Francisco, that their presence would not create serious religious, political and cultural tensions...the same is true of Islam in Europe." A clash of cultures only can occur when people of incompatible cultures and values are brought together, in the case of Europe this occurred because millions of Muslims were invited into their backyard, whereas the United States "invited itself into the backyard of the Islamic World." Rather than seek to convert Muslim nations abroad and Muslim immigrants at home to secular, market oriented democracy, we should promote an amicable separation.

Regulating Shoe Bombers & Financial Institutions

Flying has become more tedious and time consuming since passengers to remove their shoes as part of airport security. As most people are aware, this policy was put into place after Richard Reid, an amateur terrorist tried to set off a shoe bomb in an airplane. This highlights some fundamental problems with government regulation that are applicable to financial regulations. While the goals of terrorists are almost always irrational, their methods are not. When planning attacks, they take existing security measures into account, which means that the chances that they will utilize are shoe bombs are slim to none. Aspiring terrorist will now seek other means to terrorize air travellers or they will seek softer targets like sports stadiums and museums. And while intelligence operatives may be swift and effective, bureaucrats never move and change as fast as the individuals and organizations that they seek to regulate. By the time they have planned and implemented a new regulation, such as airport shoe checks, that regulation has already become outdated. And hence its only achievement will be to make air travel slower and more costly for airlines and travellers alike.

On a deeper level this represents the distinctly American obsession of seeking to eliminate uncertainty and risk by continuously expanding laws and regulation. In some instances these endeavors are successful, but a great many social and economic phenomena are by their nature in a constant state of flux and are beyond the control of static rules and regulations. In these cases, our focus should be on covert enforcement based on sound intelligence gathering. In other words, rather than burden all travellers with ineffective, security pantomimes, we should focus our monitoring and disrupting terrorist networks. And we must focus limited attention and resources on individuals who statistically pose a greater risk. This does not mean we should harass all Muslims; frisking an Elderly, Iranian Woman, just because she wears a hijab would be a waste of resources, because on three counts (age, national origin & gender) she does not pose a statistical risk. However, young men, like Richard Reid who attended radical mosques and madrases in London and Lahore fit the profile to a tee.

How do these principles apply to financial institutions? Take the real estate crash; by the time regulators made the mortgage market more "safe & secure," fraudulent or reckless investors had moved on to "softer targets." Crooks and excessive risk takers know that utilizing mortgages to realize illicit, high return gains is equivalent to a terrorist using a shoe bomb after the Richard Reid incident. In both cases, regulators are focusing their attention on preventing a specific set of behaviors. Knowing this, terrorists and financial criminals will seek new means or entirely new targets, leaving a rattled public to bear the costs of new regulations. While they may be warranted, such regulations will not protect the public from the next bomb or financial bubble. And if anything, in response to the financial meltdown, most banks are now erring on the side of caution, to the detriment of the general economy.

Numerous commentators cited the Bernie Madoff scandal as proof positive that we desperately needed more regulation of financial institutions. But, a closer look at the Madoff story shows that the problem was not a lack of laws, but failure to enforce existing laws. According to Wikipedia:

"Concerns about Madoff's business surfaced as early as 1999, when financial analyst Harry Markopolos informed the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that he believed it was legally and mathematically impossible to achieve the gains Madoff claimed to deliver. According to Markopolos, he knew within five minutes that Madoff's numbers didn't add up, and it took four hours of failed attempts to replicate them to conclude Madoff was a fraud.[81] He was ignored by the Boston SEC in 2000 and 2001, as well as by Meaghan Cheung at the New York SEC in 2005 and 2007 when he presented further evidence. He has since published a book, No One Would Listen, about the frustrating efforts he and his team made over a ten-year period to alert the government, the industry, and the press about the Madoff fraud."

Rather than subject travellers and financial consumers, to new and more onerous laws, there are three things that government can do to protect the public from criminals and terrorists, be they corporate or Islamic in nature:

1) Profile: a business, such as Madoff's that consistently produced unsustainable rates of growth, over extended periods of times warranted a serious federal probe. To those who looked, the red flags abounded, much like they did with the shoe bomber.

2) More Responsive Investigators: If the SEC had responded to Mr. Markopolos's concerns in 1999, the Madoff scandal could have been avoided and investors may have exercised greater caution. We can assume that a combination of institutional sloth and a cosy relationship with investors contributed to the SEC's ineffectiveness. The same can be said of British Intelligence; why did they not better monitor Richard Reid and the other alienated young men who attended the Finsbury Mosque and later radical madrases in Pakistan?

3) Punishment: Corporate fraud and white collar crimes should be treated as harsh, if not harsher than less destructive street crime. The same should be done for any individual or organizations preaching violence in the name of Islam.

Of course we must always strive to put wise regulations into practice, to minimize risk and protect the public. But, we must avoid illusions that we can maintain safety and security by imposing undue burdens on the general public. Our efforts must be focused on intelligence gathering and targeted enforcement and avoid needlessly multiplying the number of regulations and bureaucracies that govern American life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(shoe_bomber) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff

Coptic Christians: The Other Side of Egypt (Part III)

Few westerners are aware of the denigration that religious minorities experience, even in "secular" Muslim majority nations like Egypt. To this day churches in Egypt are governed by the Hamayouni Decree of 1856, which states that the construction of a new church requires a presidential decree and even minor repairs, like repairing a broken window require the special permission of a governor. Not surprisingly, these restrictions do not apply to mosques. In practical terms, this means that some Coptic Christian communities have waited years for government permission to repair their churches. And when out of frustration they decide to undertake the repairs without government permission, the same lethargic state rapidly responds with crushing force. In a recent incident, 4 Copts were wounded, 68 injured, 200 were arrested and construction supplies were seized. Many Copts believe that their status would deteriorate if the Mubarak Regime were replaced by a more democratic government, because such a government would almost certainly be more Islamic.

EGYPT:Four Copts killed in clashes outside Giza church

3rd December, 2010

Four Copts were killed and at least 50 were hurt last week when members of a church in Talbiya, Giza, clashed with security officials trying to stop their building work.

The violence began at 3am on 24 November when nearly 5,000 security officers surrounded a site where a community centre is being built on the property of St Mary's Church.

This was the security forces' third attempt to stop construction in less than a fortnight and 200 Copts, including women and children, were keeping a vigil inside the church.

Security forces first attacked the site of the Coptic Church of St Mary and St Michael on 11 November and stopped construction work at its community centre. The church is situated in Talbiya in Giza, south of Cairo, and serves an area that is densely populated by Christians but does not have enough church buildings to accommodate them. The reason given by the authorities for the stoppage was that the work was not in accordance with the drawings presented. The church leaders insist that they have all the necessary construction permits.

Construction work was in the final stages, with the builders completing the roof. A spokesman of the ruling National Democratic Party said that the local authorities took action when they saw "a dome" rising over the building. Priests and members of the church were inside when the security forces surrounded it. The authorities eventually withdrew.

On 22 November, security forces stormed the church a second time to stop construction, besieging the building from midnight to 6am. They confiscated four concrete mixing vehicles containing mixed concrete, all of which was spoiled, at great cost to the Coptic community. The security forces withdrew after a standoff. One of the building contractors said, "for the police officers and district officials to come so late at night, shows that what they are doing is wrong."

The crisis escalated on 24 November. Security forces surrounded the site at 3am, while builders were working on the roof and 200 people were keeping vigil inside. The security forces used tear gas, rubber bullets and live ammunition, and angry Christians hurled stones. Four church members were killed and 68 were wounded, many seriously. The medical care provided to some of them has been very poor.

It is estimated that at least 2,000 local Copts came to demonstrate after they heard that the security forces had halted the construction work. At least 200 Christians were arrested, accused of possession of explosives, attempted murder of police, sabotage and assault. They have been denied access to lawyers. About 20 police officers were injured.

The authorities claim that the church leaders have a permit to expand property owned by the church, but not to erect a church building: they consider that the appearance of the extension suggests that it will be used as a place of worship, which would require a separate permit. Because of the difficulty in obtaining church building permits in Egypt, the extension of church property to form places of worship is sometimes resorted to, and has been tolerated by some local officials.

The President of the Egyptian Union of Human Rights, Dr Naguib Ghobrial, issued a statement on 22 November, calling for the dismissal of the local authority chief who issued the order. "The church has all the permits," he said. "By this behaviour the chief of the local authority is encouraging Islamists to fight with the Christians because of the Church and therefore causing sedition." (AINA, Almasyalyoum, AP, Assist News Service, Irish Times, Middle East Concern, Release International)

http://www.churchinchains.ie/node/378

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamayouni_Decree