Tag Archives: INFIDEL

Video: Wahhabi Cleric Says Killing Women And Children Acceptable If Happens During Aim Of Killing Infidels

A Saudi Wahhabi preacher who appeared on Saudi “al-Thaminah” TV stated that the killing of Muslim women and children is permissible according to his sources when it’s done as collateral damage resulting from the “lawful” aim of killing infidels. These Wahhabi preachers are the ones providing fatwas to combatants in Syria regarding what they view as religiously approved rules of war. Civilians in Syria have been indiscriminately targeted by Wahhabi terrorists supported by Saudi Arabia, all done under the justification of fighting an “infidel regime”.

 Wahhabism is the hardline political Islam practised in Saudi Arabia and encouraged by the Saudi ruling elite.

The same Saudis who are funding new mosque construction, Islamic schools and other ways of stealth jihad in the non Muslim lands to push Islam with oil money. Specifically its their version of Islam being pushed, Wahhabism. This kind of Muslim mentality is why infidels need to oppose all kinds of Islamization we are subjected to. 

Source: Al-Thaminah TV (Saudi Arabia)

British Woman Jailed In Dubai “I Was Told To Keep Quiet Or They’d Stone Me To Death’

Every week thousands of Brits jet off to the gulf state of Dubai under the mis-guided impression that it is some kind of Middle Eastern Ibiza, where they can party carefree 24/7. The truth is Dubai is nothing like the Balearic Island in terms of what’s acceptable and what’s not. Dubai is a strict Islamic state where the backwards and barbaric sharia law is enforced to the letter. 

As non Muslims visiting there you are instantly seen as second class in the eyes of the locals and in the law. Even worse should you also happen to be a female as Muslim women are regarded as little above a servant so imagine the opinion they think of infidel women. Un married couples even risk being locked up for sharing a bed. Any kind of affection in public such as kissing or holding hands is putting yourself at risk of arrest. Away from the safety of the hotel women need to dress ‘Islamic’ and cover up(even if it is 100 degrees plus). Not only do you risk being sexually assaulted by perverse Muslims but you also risk jail.

Unlike the western non Islamic world where we allow Muslims to dress and act how they please. The intolerant Muslims do not allow that same luxury back. If your thinking of going to Dubai or any Islamic nation. Do yourself a favour and look into what their out dated sharia law demands of you. Failure to do so and you risk a spell in a cockroach infested prison cell with the real dregs of their Muslim society.

‘I was told to keep quiet or they’d stone me to death’: British woman wrongly jailed in Dubai for having sex outside marriage lied about husband to avoid adultery charge

  • Rebecca Blake was thrown in jail in the Arab state
  • 30-year-old sentenced to 41 days in prison for having sex outside marriage
  • Ended up serving 95 days because ‘they forgot’ about her


PUBLISHED: 02:13, 20 October 2013 | UPDATED: 09:42, 20 October 2013

A woman has told of her ordeal in a Dubai prison after being imprisoned for having sex outside marriage.

Rebecca Blake, from Surrey, was jailed for a crime she did not commit and ended up serving 95 days in a ‘filthy’ cell.

Speaking to the Sunday Express, the 30-year-old said she was forced to lie about being married or she would face a more severe punishment for adultery and could have been stoned to death.

Rebecca Blake outside the Dubai Court Embarrassing: Rebecca Blake has said how difficult it was to tell her parents of the charges  The recruitment consultant was accused of having sex in the back of a taxi with her friend Conor McRedmond 28, from Tullamore, Co. Offaly and they spent a year fighting the allegations. Rebecca Blake outside the Dubai Court
Embarrassing: Rebecca Blake has said how difficult it was to tell her parents of the charges  The recruitment consultant was accused of having sex in the back of a taxi with her friend Conor McRedmond 28, from Tullamore, Co. Offaly and they spent a year fighting the allegations. Embarrassing: Rebecca Blake has said how difficult it was to tell her parents of the charges

The recruitment consultant was accused of having sex in the back of a taxi with her friend Conor McRedmond 28, from Tullamore, Co. Offaly and they spent a year fighting the allegations.

Ms Blake said her lawyer told her to keep the fact she was already technically married, from six years ago, a secret as if the authorities knew she was married she could be charged with the more serious crime of adultery.

Now back in Britain, Ms Blake said: ‘It feels like a surreal nightmare. I still wake up in the night panicking, thinking I’m back in that cell.’

Blake and McRedmond  were arrested on May 4 last year after meeting at a brunch then going on a drinking binge – getting a taxi together at 10pm.

Taxi driver Qaiser Khan, 30, claimed within minutes of getting in, Blake had taken her top off and was writhing on top of McRedmond while ‘making the sounds of a woman having sex’.

He told prosecutors earlier this year: ‘They kept having sex for four minutes. The man’s shirt was open, his trousers were down to his knees and the woman was not wearing any underwear.’

The taxi driver alleged Blake offered him ‘a lot of money’ to tell prosecutors they had been kissing rather than having sex, but he refused.

They said the allegations had been made up after they rowed with the taxi driver about taking a longer route home.

Their lawyer Shaker al Shammary yesterday said the statements of the two witnesses were inconsistent, adding: ‘They threatened to complain about the taxi driver and he beat them to it – yet there is no mention of their dispute in the Supreme Court judgment.

‘The medical records show what the witnesses said was not true but this was not taken into account in the ruling.’

Rebecca Blake (left) and Conor McRedmond (centre) walk with their lawyer Shaker al-Shammary outside the Dubai CourtRebecca Blake (left) and Conor McRedmond (centre) walk with their lawyer Shaker al-Shammary outside the Dubai CourtRebecca Blake outside the Dubai Court Embarrassing: Rebecca Blake has said how difficult it was to tell her parents of the charges  The recruitment consultant was accused of having sex in the back of a taxi with her friend Conor McRedmond 28, from Tullamore, Co. Offaly and they spent a year fighting the allegations.  Fired: A tearful Miss Blake emerges from the building, carrying a box under her arm

Blake was sacked from her £100,000-a-year job as a recruitment consultant for Manpower in Dubai following the scandal

McRedmond had said earlier this year: ‘We find ourselves in exactly the same position we were in after the original verdict but thousands of pounds poorer.

‘Any court in the world would accept the medical evidence above all else. I love Dubai and wanted to carry on living here but I am left without a choice.’

There were fears their failure to clear their names was part of a crackdown from Dubai authorities on expats flouting their strict rules.

Vince Acors and Michelle Palmer, a British couple caught having sex on a beach, were treated more leniently in 2008 when they were convicted on the same charge of indecency and ordered to serve three months in prison, but received a suspended sentence on appeal.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2468324/Imprisoned-having-sex-outside-marriage-British-woman-tells-ordeal-Dubai.html#ixzz2iGcTxI00

Middle England must listen to Tommy Robinson (Reblog)

This post is a piece on another blog,written by a lawyer that i read and thought i would share. Very good read

Reblog from : The Blog of The Re-Enlightenment

Middle England must listen to Tommy Robinson

Posted on July 9, 2013

Robinson2Wake up and smell the jihad, kuffar.

I wrote a post last week called “Time to be honest about the English Defence League”, in which I expressed some frank views about the EDL and its leader Tommy Robinson, and since then I’ve been regretting it. Not because I was too honest but because I wasn’t honest enough.

I’ve spent quite a bit of time thinking about everything more carefully and I’ve watched a number of clips of Robinson on YouTube. In short I’ve been completely blown away by his bravery, his commitment, his intelligence and his integrity. I really think it’s about time everyone started taking him seriously for what he is, which is a political activist of the highest calibre.

There are dozens of things on the internet but these are the ones I watched. I really hope you commit some of your time to watching them (the second one is audio only). If you don’t then I can’t see how you can dismiss Robinson so lightly.

Robinson is completely committed to defeating Islamism. We all know he has a dodgy past but that’s nothing unique amongst the general population and it’s certainly nothing unique amongst political activists. His past doesn’t disqualify him from speaking out against Islamism and it doesn’t make his opinions any less valid.

We forget that taking part in an institutional system of rules-based theft is no disqualification to sitting in either of our legislative chambers, or that being violent in a Houses of Parliament bar (twice) merely makes an elected public official an eccentric character, or that committing criminal damage as an undergraduate at Oxford University provided you’re wearing a nice suit and you’ve had the finest education money can buy, and smoking cannabis at Eton College, is no disqualification to becoming prime minister of the United Kingdom. Yet criminal convictions are an automatic bar to disapproving of ruthless, totalitarian ideologies.

Robinson’s real crimes are not actual crimes, though. I can’t stand class-based victim narratives but even I have to conclude Robinson has committed the ultimate crime of being a working class white lad and expecting to have an opinion on Islamism, which will be the defining issue of the century people reading this blog post will die in. I dismissed Robinson because of his background and because of the EDL’s image. I should have known better than to be such a snob.

Do we not believe people can change? We welcome with open arms reformed Muslim extremists like the brilliant Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation precisely because we believe people can change, but we refuse to let Robinson escape his past – and Robinson can hardly be called a former “extremist” anyway.

At this point you might expect the self-appointed champion of the working classes Owen Jones to chime in with his Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class thesis, but don’t hold your breath. That’s because you can’t possibly apply that narrative to a white working class lad from Luton who wants to talk about Islamism. Robinson has repaid his debts to society and as far as I can see he’s now amassing a gigantic credit account.

In case you’re wondering whether Luton is significant or insignificant, it’s significant: it’s where the four 7/7 bombers started their rail journey into London. Oh you do remember 7/7, don’t you? I do because I got the Tube to work that day. I was sitting at my desk, probably surfing the internet or pretending to look busy when I heard a massive bang. That bang was the sound of my fellow Londoners being murdered in Russell Square.


Here’s something you might not know about Robinson: because of the numerous death threats against him and his family he was offered a new identity and a new location by the state. He refused. If that doesn’t represent moral and physical courage of the highest possible order then someone can tell me what does. He refuses to leave his home town through intimidation.

The death threats aren’t a figment of his imagination: he has been given a number of“Osman warnings”, which are warnings of a death threat or high risk of murder that are issued by the police. And a few weeks ago six jihadis were sentenced to over 100 years in total for plotting to bomb an EDL rally.

In his videos I’ve seen in Robinson a greater understanding and commitment to our fundamental civil liberties than I’ve detected amongst 99% of the lawyers I’ve worked with in my career. Robinson is warning everyone of the storm that’s already here and yet people refuse to listen to him through a combination of snobbery and a fear of being associated with this country’s Great Unwashed Underclass.

Yes, the EDL has an image problem and so does Robinson. So what? Are we hoping Islamism will be defeated by a perfectly manicured group of PPE students with Double Firsts from Oxford whose highest calling in life is to become a faceless Special Advisor in the Ministry of Lies?

There isn’t a huge field of candidates willing to speak out against the backward ideology that is Islamism because the consequences are so severe. We’re not just talking about physical danger from Islamists; we’re also talking about the perpetual slurs from their apologists and also the instinctive assumption from everyone else that anyone who’s white (and especially working class) can’t possibly be approaching this from anything other than a racist and hateful angle. You really can’t be too picky when looking for people to defeat Islamism. You pretty much have to take who you get. We’re lucky to have anyone, let alone someone as good as Robinson.

I’m sure there are thugs in the EDL and I know Robinson does too. But I have much more confidence in Robinson’s ability and willingness to root out his thugs and condemn their actions unequivocally than I do in Muslim leaders to do the same with theirs – and with people whose appetite and willingness to commit violence far exceeds that of EDL supporters.

One of Robinson’s arguments, which I agree with entirely, is that Muslims themselves aren’t doing enough. This is indisputably true. Condemnation of violence is more often than not followed by the word “but”. It’s always someone else’s fault, always. When Muslims don’t do enough or do anything I get very nervous.

Muslims must do more. They must do a hell of a lot more. We’ve become so accustomed to them not doing enough that we seem to have just accepted it. A few weeks ago, for example, I was speaking to a female Muslim colleague who is very liberal and secular. In fact she’s an Ismaili Muslim, a sect that has traditionally been given a very rough time from within Islam (precisely because they’re generally liberal and secular).

We were talking about France’s ban on the veil and she told me she was “secretly very pleased”.

Excuse me? Why secretly? Why can’t she say these things openly? She makes it ten times harder for us – not to mention her poor Muslim sisters who are forced to wear this cloak – to speak out about the veil or Islamism when she chooses to remain silent and just greedily enjoy the rights that western liberal democracy has given her on a plate. Unbelievable.

Last week a Muslim TV channel was fined £85,000 by the media regulator Ofcom for allowing its airwaves to be used by a hate preacher to incite the murder of those who insult the Prophet Mohammed. As yet there’s no word of criminal charges against the individual preacher. Can you imagine the reaction if Robinson were ever to suggest that so much as one Muslim should have so much as one of their hairs repositioned? Robinson can be forgiven for referring to a “two-tier” policing system because he’s absolutely correct. Robinson was warned by the police not to retweet death threats against him on the basis it was causing distress to people.


In one of his videos Robinson said he was hoping Middle England would follow. Well I’m a privately educated, second generation immigrant, middle class lawyer who lives in a big house with a small mortgage. If I’m not Middle England then Anjem Choudary is a moderate. I don’t agree with everything Robinson says but his message has got through to me. Has it got through to you? If it hasn’t then why? Is it because you think Robinson is a racist? On what basis? Is it because you don’t trust white working class lads? Or is it because you simply haven’t bothered listening to a word he’s been saying because you’ve already been told a hundred times how terrible he is? It’s time to think for yourself for a change.

People need to grow up and they need to listen to Robinson. Just watch some of those links. Robinson is living with death threats. The least you can do is watch a few YouTube clips in safety.

To many people Robinson is evil personified whereas the likes of Anjem Choudary have almost become harmless pantomime villains (boo, hiss, he’s behind you, etc). People are more scared of Robinson and the EDL than they are of Choudary and Islamism. This isabsurd. One of these men is committed to non-violence and preserving our fundamental civil liberties and the other is committed to toppling democracy and replacing it with Sharia. Go figure.

If you still feel uncomfortable supporting the EDL or Tommy Robinson then how about at least resisting the impulse to dismiss them as far-right racist thugs? At least just stay silent. Don’t add to Robinson’s problems because he has enough already. I’m just an anonymous keyboard warrior sitting behind an old, shitty laptop which has a power problem but at least I’m doing something. What are you doing? Are you making things better, are you leaving them the same or are you making things even worse by demonizing Robinson for no real reason other than because everyone around you is doing the same?

It’s so easy to be a snob. I know because I am one. The EDL are in the main a bunch of white working class lads who like football. It’s perfectly fair to say grammar and spelling are not their strong suits. These are crimes of the century, obviously, and yet another reason why they’re not allowed a view on Islamism.


As a secularist I’m not particularly wild on the EDL’s occasional references to Christianity, or the Christian imagery, but then again I’m not particularly bothered about it either. I have no reason to believe they want to replace one form of violent theocracy with another. They basically just want Islamism to be defeated, the law to be applied equally to everyone, and our civil liberties and way of life to be preserved, and those are all fine objectives that any secularist should be able to embrace.

I don’t expect the EDL to get too excited about issues like bishops in the House of Lords because that’s not why the EDL exists. If I want the latest on that debate I can check out the websites of the National Secular Society or the Christian think tank Ekklesia. And although I want Christianity to lose its power and privileges I don’t want that to happen violently or through fear, and I certainly don’t want our state religion to be replaced with one that’s a thousand times as hideous.

Robinson might not always emphasise the distinction between Islam and Islamism but that’s not particularly important.  The case against Islamism doesn’t succeed or fail if you don’t use those terms correctly each and every time.

In fact the distinction between Islam and Islamism is becoming increasingly meaningless anyway (and for an excellent discussion of the “blurry line between Islam and Islamism”see Rod Liddle in The Spectator here). In practice it’s almost impossible to pinpoint where Islam ends and Islamism begins. The crucial point is that people have rights butideologies don’t. Ideologies aren’t capable of having rights.


The scale of the task Robinson has taken on was well demonstrated in the BBC3 link above. It was basically a drowning Robinson versus a whole TV studio audience and panel. He kept asking people why they were calling him a racist and a bigot and no-one could provide a convincing answer. He explained that he and his family had received numerous death threats, to which the former Apprentice contestant Saira Khan replied,“well stop being a racist and a bigot then!” Cue delirious laughter and applause from smug metropolitan wankers who probably think Freedom is a brand of sanitary towels or the latest boy band.

The reaction to Khan’s response is deeply troubling on a number of levels. Firstly, no-one could explain to Robinson why he was a racist or a bigot in the first place; they just assumed he was. Secondly, since when has being a racist or a bigot justified a death sentence in the United Kingdom anyway, morally or legally? And thirdly, notice the not-so-subtle shift of culpability from perpetrator to victim here. This, ladies and gentleman, is Sharia and Islamism in one easy nutshell. Don’t want death threats? Well don’t criticise Islam then. Don’t want to get raped? Well cover up then. Don’t want to be executed for apostasy? Well don’t leave Islam then.

It’s simple really. As long as you do absolutely everything Islam demands and you never criticise it then you’ll be…well you won’t be safe but you will buy yourself some time while Islamists concentrate on more troublesome opponents. If you’re lucky you might just buy yourself enough time for a nice little life. As for your kids, who knows. Who cares. That’s their problem. Robinson readily admits he’s terrified about what Islamism has in store for his children. Aren’t you?

The second link above is a radio clash between Robinson and the renowned apologist for Islamism, Respect Party MP George Galloway. Galloway persisted in asking Robinson why he has used different names. It’s because of death threats. Is that a good enough reason for you, George?

Robinson explained how he had once gone to a Respect Party meeting with a female companion only to discover there was gender segregation, but Galloway wasn’t too concerned about that. Instead he picked up Robinson on his use of the word “bird” to describe a female. Yes, this is George Galloway, apologist for Islamism, an ideology that barely gives women animal rights let alone human ones, and who has some pretty sketchy views on rape to boot, in his new role as Fearless Conqueror of Misogyny.

Galloway was also interested in how Robinson had become leader of the EDL (which is a non-membership organisation) and he questioned Robinson’s commitment to democracy on the basis there wasn’t an election to appoint him. So in order to speak out against Islamism, an ideology which is rotten to its very core and which is fundamentally anti-democratic, you apparently now need to win an election.


Just as the Middle East has demonstrated it might finally be separating Islam and power(and check out this heart-warming link featuring a 12-year old Egyptian kid), here we are embracing Islamism in the United Kingdom. We’re self-censoring out of “respect”. And we’re selling out brave individuals like Robinson on a truly epic scale. This is shameful.

What have we become? I’ll tell you. We’ve become consumers who have been binge-eating freedom to the point where we’ve become sick. We’ve forgotten that our freedoms are valuable. We’ve forgotten that they’ve been incredibly difficult to obtain and that the currency for obtaining them was unquantifiable amounts of human blood and guts. We haven’t got a clue how difficult it is to get freedoms back once they’re gone. And along comes a working class white lad from Luton who isn’t prepared to let these freedoms die quietly and who understands the importance of freedom of speech, the right to protest and freedom of association. Someone for whom these freedoms are not obscure academic concepts but real, valuable things. Someone who is willing to take a stand against religious brutality whatever the cost to him may be. And yet somehow hardly anyone is willing to accept that defending and exercising those sacred freedoms in the face of violence and intimidation is a worthwhile use of an Englishman’s time. There is no more worthwhile use of an Englishman’s time than this.

And at the same time, our politicians sob pathetically into the bottom of their whisky tumblers and complain how “young people just aren’t interested in politics these days”. Believe me, they are. They’re just not interested in politicians these days. If taking a stand against violent theocracy and exercising priceless civil liberties in the face of danger isn’t demonstrating an interest in politics then nothing is. Politicians have demonstrated zero commitment to dealing with or even acknowledging the problem of Islamism. Now we have the EDL. They’re far from perfect but they’re far better than nothing. As Robinson says, he doesn’t want to be leader of the EDL. Who would want death threats? I don’t want there to be a need for the EDL. But there is.


I imagine some people have become involved with the EDL for the wrong reasons, maybe just wanting a ruck every now and then. It’s possible that some people who have become involved for the wrong reasons are now involved for the right reasons because they’ve been educated along the way by Robinson. Remember, people can change. People can learn. People can educate themselves on the hoof. Yes, this also applies to white working class lads. People awaken politically in all sorts of ways, for all sorts of reasons, and the path is not always straightforward or sanitised. Not everyone’s political awakening takes place in an Eton College dorm room or a Political Science lecture at the London School of Economics.

People dismiss the EDL and Robinson because of their image and because of their own snobbery. I admit the image is uncomfortably close to skinhead gangs and “Paki-bashing”. Not one decent person in the United Kingdom wants a return to nightmare days of fear, segregation and violence. But fear, segregation and violence is exactly what Islamism has already delivered by the bucketload.

The problem of image is just a problem of image, it is not one of substance. Wearing overpriced Stone Island clobber and going to football matches are not crimes in the United Kingdom, yet.

We can no longer dismiss the many Hindu, Sikh, Jewish, black and LGBT supporters of the EDL as mere political PR stunts designed to deflect criticism. Are all those people racist thugs? Are all those people nothing but easily led fools who have been cynically manipulated by the Bond villain Robinson? Do you really think that or do you just reallywant to think that?

The stakes in the battle against Islamism are incredibly high. They are unimaginably high. Every single freedom which is a pre-condition for your way of life and which you take for granted on a daily basis is currently under sustained attack from Islamism. But that’s fine, let’s just wait until someone with a better image comes along, shall we? There’s no hurry. After all, what’s the big deal with suicide bombers on the London Underground, newspapers self-censoring cartoons of prophets through fear of violence, widespread female genital mutilation, women and young girls being covered up so they don’t getblamed for being raped, women being treated like dogs in Sharia councilsMuslim sex gangs considering non-Muslims “the other”, and a British soldier with the name Lee Rigby having his head cut off in a London street in the middle of the day while his attacker shouts “Allahu Akbar”, allegedly.



Tommy, I hope you’re reading this. I’ll direct the remainder of this post to you. I have enormous respect for what you’re doing. I beg of you to remain as committed to non-violence and opposing racism as you are to defeating Islamism.

I imagine there are two types of people who support the EDL: decent people who aren’t racist or violent, and others. It’s vital you root out the bad apples and disassociate yourself from them unequivocally, or successfully educate them, extremely quickly.

You were born to do this. You have a gift for communication. I saw you talking about Shia/Sunni bloodshed on Twitter the other day and someone asked you what that was, and you said, “basically Luton v Watford”. That’s the kind of communication skills money just can’t buy. (Did I sound like a patronising middle class wanker just then? That’s probably because I’m a patronising middle class wanker. But I imagine it makes a nice change from the death threats.)

From what I can see you get grief from pretty much everyone. From Islamists, from their hard-left apologists like Unite Against Fascism, from their soft-left “liberal” champagne socialist apologists, from Middle England, from other people who want to defeat Islamism but who won’t touch you because you’re too hot to handle, and even from EDL supporters when demos don’t go according to plan and they ask you for their money back! Wankers! As you said in one of your videos, after demos when other people go back to their normal lives you don’t because your life is now a demo. That sent a shiver down my spine.

Tommy, to quote the apologist George GallowayI salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability. It’s unfortunate this country needs the EDL but it does.

And the EDL needs you.

Your friend in Middle England.


Kafir Crusaders New Facebook Page ,Back On FB After Crybabies Got Last 1 Deleted

Kafir Crusaders is now back on Facebook. The last page was deleted thanks to commie crybabies and Islamo-moaners not being able to handle the truth about Islam being told.  

New Facebook Page : https://www.facebook.com/kafircrusaders1 

KC will never be silenced from telling the truth about the evils of Islam no matter how much it hurts. The more Muslims and far left extremists try to stop it the truth being told, only makes more determination to say it

Video: Saudi Cleric Claims Bin Laden Had More Honour In Death Than Any Infidel

Saudi Cleric Saleh Al-Maghamsi: In Death, Bin Laden Has More Sanctity and Honor than Any Infidel
Qatar TV,

The average Muslim look to Islamic clerics for guidance in virtually all aspects off life. That is how they are brought up from birth in Islam. They see the religious mullahs as an authority in virtually everything because they have studied the Quran. Come to think of it the Muslim clerics also believe  they are experts in every field even though they are far from it. Yet still they have a great deal of sway in everyday actions of Muslims. If a high ranking imam said to Muslims Allah wants you to stick your hand in the fire and you will be rewarded with 10 virgins in paradise, then chances are we would be seeing more than a few Muslims walking around with their hands bandaged up. So when a deluded ‘not the religion of peace’ cleric comes out with utter rubbish like saying ” In death, Bin Laden has more sanctity and honour than any Infidel ” Then all the brainwashed Muslim cult members literally take that as the truth. 

UK Muslim TV Channels Preach Hate And Violence

Reports that Islamic TV channels on the UK’s Sky network preach hate and violence to its viewers comes as little surprise to me. Muslim channels Peace TV, Noor TV, DM Digital and Takbeer Tv were among the channels guilty of preaching hateful and extremist views to British Muslims sat at home lapping it all up. All four of them feature renowned Muslim hate preachers who spout evil promoting murder, jihad and other violence, homophobia as well as anti Christian and Jewish views. The not so relevantly named ‘Peace TV’ is co owned by Zakir Naik, a Muslim extremist cleric who calls for the murder of gays and jihad on a regular basis. He is currently banned from entering the UK because of his radical views.

Time and time again, these so called religious scholars show the Muslims claim of being ‘The Religion Of Peace’ for the taqiyya that it really is. If those Islamic preachers who teach this hate cant behave civilly and rational. What chance is there that their disciples will act in any other way than that of their peers. Personally i dislike even calling Islam a religion because that’s insulting  to the followers of other peaceful faiths. Its nothing more than an evil cult.

Preachers of hate who spread their violent word on British TV channels

Muslim fundamentalists have used British television channels to preach in favour of violent crime and killing “apostates”.

Mohammed Farooq Nizami told NOOR TV that "Whoever shows disrespect for Prophet Muhammad will be given death penalty"
Mohammed Farooq Nizami told NOOR TV that “Whoever shows disrespect for Prophet Muhammad will be given death penalty”
Zakir Naik said on the "Dare to Ask" program on Peace TV that if a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim and propagates his new faith against Islam, the death penalty should be applied
Zakir Naik said on the “Dare to Ask” program on Peace TV that if a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim and propagates his new faith against Islam, the death penalty should be applied

The communications watchdog, Ofcom, has made a series of rulings against channels which allowed “inflammatory” material to be broadcast in breach of rules which forbid extreme opinions gaining a platform on British television.

The cases, disclosed today, include examples of an imam telling viewers that those who disrespect the prophet Mohammed should be killed, and another broadcaster saying homosexuals should be beaten and tortured.

The stations were found to have committed serious breaches of the broadcasting code by allowing the extreme opinions to be aired unchallenged.

Last night experts warned that the extent and seriousness of the broadcasting breaches raises questions over whether extreme Muslim speakers who were previously confined to small audiences in mosques are able to reach thousands more people by broadcasting intolerant teachings on television.

Although the channels have tiny audiences compared to the mainstream, they are targeted at Muslim communities, including people of Pakistani background, with some of the content being broadcast in Urdu and other languages.

The cases identified by Ofcom include:

* An Islamic scholar who told viewers: “It is your duty … to kill those who insult Prophet Mohammed.”

* A preacher banned from coming to Britain who used the channel – which he co-owns – to say anyone who left Islam should be put to death.

* A phone-in presenter who advocated “eliminating” anyone who disrespected Mohammed.

In some cases the channels had also breached a rule which states that they must keep recordings of all their output, raising the possibility that other inflammatory material has been broadcast but cannot be traced.

With the exception of one radio broadcaster, the channels ruled against by Ofcom are broadcast on the satellite provider Sky. It has no legal responsibility for what is broadcast on the channels it carries. It is up to the stations themselves to make sure they meet Ofcom’s standards and they can be fined or taken off the air if they do not.

The disclosure of the rulings by the broadcasting regulator comes despite a report in 2010 which warned that extremist material was being broadcast.

Tala Rajab, the researcher who wrote the report for Quilliam, the anti-extremist think-tank, said the fresh findings by Ofcom raised serious questions over the regulation of broadcast material.

“Some of these recent incidents have been quite shocking,” he said.

“If this had happened in a mosque the police would be right in pursuing a criminal investigation. But because they are being broadcast on television channels for some reason there seems to be little appetite for looking into these extreme messages.

“If these kind of comments were made against black people, for example, you can imagine a channel being shut down overnight, particularly if they had incited violence against a minority.”

The 2010 report found that the Islam Channel, Britain’s largest Islamic broadcaster, had continued to ignore Ofcom rules about impartiality and allowed controversial viewpoints to be aired despite a fine and other sanctions being imposed. It is not among the subjects of the five Ofcom rulings disclosed today.

In December a Leeds radio station, Radio Asian Fever, was fined £4,000 for breaching broadcasting rules in programmes involving a presenter called “Sister Ruby Ramadan”.

She told listeners that homosexuals should be beaten and tortured.

“If there are two such persons among you, that do this evil, the shameful act, what do you have to do? Torture them; punish them; beat them and give them mental torture,” said the presenter.

Jabbar Karim, the station’s managing director, said: “We are very embarrassed. This was a one-off incident which will never be repeated.”

Takbeer TV, based in Nottingham, has been found in breach of the code twice in 18 months for programmes which denigrated the minority Ahmadi Muslim sect. Founded in the 19th century its followers are considered by some mainstream Muslims to be misguided or even heretical.

Contributors to the most recent programmes investigated by Ofcom said Ahmadis had a “disease” and “monstrous” intentions.

Ofcom said Takbeer TV had subjected the sect’s followers to “abusive treatment” and that they would now consider an appropriate sanction such as a fine.

An Ofcom spokesman said: “The majority of Islamic channels comply with our rules. However, where we identify issues through our monitoring or complaints we investigate fully and take firm enforcement action.”

He said it was Ofcom’s duty to regulate licence holders rather than the responsibility of carriers such as Sky. However, carriers are free to decide which channels they offer, he added.

A Sky spokesman said: “Sky operates an open and regulated platform. This means any broadcaster with an appropriate Ofcom licence is free to seek distribution over the satellite platform.”

There are 14 Muslim TV free-to-air channels in Britain but their audiences are not measured by BARB, the source of viewing figures.

Takbeer TV failed to respond when asked to comment.

Preachers of hate on British TV: what they said that broke the broadcasting rules

Muslim fundamentalists have been found breaching the strict rules on what can be broadcast on the airwaves in Britain, by inciting violence and intolerance.

Abdul Qadir Jilani, left, told viewers Islamic texts authorised killing those who had left the faith

Abdul Qadir Jilani, left, told viewers Islamic texts authorised killing those who had left the faith

By David Barrett, Home Affairs Correspondent

9:00PM GMT 09 Feb 2013

Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, has made a series of new rulings against minority channels, which are disclosed here for the first time.

The broadcasters and stations which broke the rules are:

Name: Dr Zakir Naik

Channel: Peace TV

Programme: Dare to Ask

Date: March 8, 2012

What was said: “One group of scholars, they say that if a Muslim, if he becomes a non-Muslim [inaudible] he should be put to death.

“There is another group of scholars who say that if a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim and propagates his new faith against Islam then he should be put to death.

“I tend to agree more with the second group of scholars, who say that a Muslim, if he becomes a non-Muslim and propagates his new faith against Islam, that is the time this penalty is applied.”

What Ofcom ruled: “In Ofcom’s view it is potentially offensive for any service to broadcast comments suggesting that it is acceptable to apply a ‘penalty’ and kill any individual for renouncing their faith. Broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context.”

Dr Naik was banned from entering Britain in 2010 by Theresa May, the Home Secretary, after she ruled his presence was “not conducive to the public good”.

He had been due to give a series of lectures at arenas in Wembley and Sheffield. Mrs May said she was excluding him because his “numerous comments” were evidence of “unacceptable behaviour”.

The decision, later upheld by the High Court, was based on a sermon the Mumbai-based preacher had posted on the internet in 2006 which said “every Muslim should be a terrorist” and which went on: “Beware of Muslims saying Osama bin Laden is right or wrong. I reject them … we don’t know. But if you ask my view, if given the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him.”

However Dr Naik is the co-owner of Peace TV, a channel which is funded by a charity called the Islamic Research Foundation International.

In March last year he said in a programme he was presenting that it was appropriate to crucify, dismember or exile those who “wage war against Allah” under sharia law.

He also said it was correct to kill former Muslims who “propagate his new faith against Islam”.

Ofcom ruled Dr Naik’s show breached part of the code which states that offensive comments should be “justified by the context”.

A spokesman for PeaceTV said:”We are disappointed by Ofcom’s ruling, especially when the programme in question is an exposition of certain teachings from the Quran, which we felt were justified by the context, and didn’t attract a single complaint from a viewer.

“That said, we take our responsibilities extremely seriously and the programme will not be broadcast again.”

Name: Muhammad Farooq Nizami

Channel: Noor TV

Programme: Paigham-e-Mustafa (“Message of Mustafa”)

Date: May 3, 2012

What was said: “There is absolutely no doubt about it that the punishment for the person who shows disrespect for the Prophet is death. No one disagrees about this.

“Whoever shows disrespect for Prophet Muhammad will be given death penalty. In the whole world, there should be slaves of Mustafa [Muhammad] everywhere, and disrespectful people should be eliminated.

“One has to choose one’s own method. Our way is the peaceful way but when someone crosses the limits, faith-base emotions are instigated.”

What Ofcom ruled: “The breaches in this case … are regarded by Ofcom as serious breaches of the code.

“Ofcom is very concerned that Al Ehya [Noor TV’s parent company] still does not appear to recognise the very serious issues raised by the broadcast of Mr Nizami’s comments.”

In its ruling, Ofcom highlighted the Danish cartoon case from 2005, in which death threats were made after a newspaper published 12 images of Mohammed, and the murder of Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh in 2004 after his film Submission was condemned by Islamic clerics.

Ofcom told Noor TV’s owners in December that it is considering imposing a fine.

A Noor TV spokesman said: “We have appointed some new directors and implemented a whole range of new training, including having the Ofcom rules translated into Urdu.”

Al Ehya Digital Television Limited, the owner of Noor TV, said Ofcom was taking a “prejudiced view” of the programme.

Noor TV is also shown across Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia. In 2011, the channel was fined £75,000 by Ofcom for a number of breaches of the code, including soliciting £1,000 donations in exchange for prayers which it said would improve health and good fortune.

Dr Mohammed Iqbal, a pharmacist from Nottingham who is a director of Noor TV, said: “We are trying to get our house in order. We are sending out messages of peace. Anything else is unacceptable to anybody.”

Name: Abdul Qadir Jilani

Channel: DM Digital

Programme: Rehmatul Lil Alameen (“Mercy unto the Worlds”)

Date: October 9, 2011

What was said: “The matter of insulting the prophet does not fall in the category of terrorism.

“Those who cannot kill such men have no faith.

“It is your duty, the duty of those who recite the holy verse, to kill those who insult Prophet Mohammed.

“Under the guidance from Islamic texts it is evident that if a Muslim apostatises, then it is not right to wait for the authorised courts; anyone may kill him.

“An apostate deserves to be killed and any man may kill him.”

What Ofcom ruled: “The statements … did amount to direct calls to action and were likely to incite or encourage crime or to lead to disorder.”

Mr Jilani is an imam at the Dar-ul-Uloom mosque in Walthamstow having studied in Pakistan, where he was born, and Saudi Arabia.

Dr Liaqat Malik, 54, the chairman of DM Digital, accused Ofcom of bias towards ethnic minorities and said the comments were taken out of context.

“I think Ofcom interpreted his comments wrongly. He wasn’t saying people should kill. He was talking about Pakistan’s blasphemy law,” said Dr Malik.

“We wouldn’t allow anyone to use our TV channel to talk about killing like that. It’s not religious TV, it’s educational, community TV.

“There are cultural differences and I think Ofcom doesn’t understand that. Some of the Ofcom committee members should be picked from the Muslim community.”

Merry Christmas Infidels

Id just like to wish fellow infidels and patriots a Merry Christmas. Make the most of the Christian tradition while you can before the Muslim fascists  and their leftist pc appeasers manage to get it wiped from the calender. I will be doing plenty of harem activities like drinking lots of alcohol, eating pork products and gambling. Enjoy the holidays and most of all stay safe. Peace and Lovism.    KC

No Surrender



Brit loses Job at Sharia Run Bank because he wasn’t Muslim

A Brit claims he lost his job at Sharia Run Bank because he wasn’t Muslim. There is good chance this was the motive behind him being made redundant by Muslims at Gatehouse bank. This is how Muslims are expected to behave. Islam and Sharia is highly discriminatory against Infidels like  James Bagshawe. Deluded Muslims are made to believe that they are far superior than those of us that choose not to join the cult of Islam. A quick search on google for religious fatwa’s regarding the workplace and non Muslims, while bring up numerous results of Muslim clerics telling cult members  that they should never be under a kafir. If there is a Muslim capable of doing the work,the job should be given to the fellow Muslim. In the event of no Muslim being experienced enough then the non believer can do the job temporarily while a Muslim trains up for the position.

‘I lost my job because I wasn’t Muslim’: Kuwaiti bank made British boss redundant from six-figure salary job because of his religious beliefs

  • James Bagshawe was made redundant from his six-figure salary job at the Sharia-run Gatehouse Bank in August 2011
  • Mr Bagshawe claims he was dismissed because of his race and religion
  • The bank insist position was cut because there was no longer a need for it


PUBLISHED: 20:48, 21 November 2012 | UPDATED: 09:24, 22 November 2012Employment tribunal: James Bagshawe claims he lost his position as chief operating officer at Gatehouse Bank because he wasn't Muslim

Employment tribunal: James Bagshawe claims he lost his position as chief operating officer at Gatehouse Bank because he wasn’t Muslim

A British banker claims he lost his £185,000-a-year job with a Kuwaiti-owned investment bank because he wasn’t a Muslim.

James Bagshawe, 53, was the Chief Operating Officer of the Gatehouse Bank when he was suddenly made redundant while on holiday in August 2011.

He claims he was replaced by the less experienced Twalha Dhunno, who was a Muslim.
Mr Bagshawe, from Gravesend, Kent, who was a founding member of the bank, said: ‘I feel that I have been badly treated by Gatehouse and its Board.

‘I was a founding member of the executive team when Gatehouse was set up and for over four years I committed a great deal of time and energy to trying to make it succeed.

‘The manner of my dismissal on holiday can only be described as an unnecessary and vindictive, and it leaves a very sour taste in my mouth.’

At an Employment Tribunal in London yesterday Mr Bagshawe, from Kent, admitted the bank had struggled as a result of the credit crunch and staff had been laid off.

Despite Gatehouse never making a profit during the four years he spent at the bank Mr Bagshawe was paid more than £1m in salary and bonuses over the period.

The bank operated under Sharia law, which has strict rules over issues such as charging interest on loans.

He claimed his relationship with his bosses began to turn sour when he raised concerns about a proposed £100m investment from the Kuwaiti Investment Agency (KIA).

He said the deal was done by the bank’s chairman, Fahed Boodai, and Mr Dhunnoo who was at the time his junior. He claimed he and other UK-based executives were kept in the dark about what was going on.

Enlarge James Bagshawe claims he was made redundant from his £185,000 a year post as chief operating officer at Sharia-run Gatehouse Bank in August 2011 because of his race‘Race discrimination’: Investment banker Mr Bagshawe claims a Muslim employee took over his role at Gatehouse Bank after he was made redundant

He claims he raised concerns about the deal with the Financial Standards Authority which made him unpopular with the bank.

Mr Bagshawe said: ‘I do not make an allegation of discrimination lightly.

‘However the fact remains that Mr Boodai, as a Muslim, chose to involve Mr Dhunnoo, another Muslim, in the KIA investment, to the exclusion of his UK based executive team, none of whom are Muslim.’

Mr Bagshawe who has 25 years of experience in banking working for JP Morgan and Flemings, is claiming to be whistleblower and so can be awarded unlimited damages if he wins the case.

He claims Mr Dhunnoo should also have been considered for redundancy.

Mr Bagshawe said: ‘Based on my assessment of our respective experience and skills I did not see there was any rational reason for the difference in treatment.

‘I remain of the view that my race, nationality, ethnic background or religion or belief may have been a factor in my dismissal, and do not believe that Gatehouse has provided any evidence to rebut this view.’

Gatehouse Bank deny the allegations and say Mr Bagshawe’s position remains redundant a year after he left the company and there are no proposals to appoint a successor.

It also claims the FSA did not recognise his approach to them as ‘whistleblowing’ and that Mr Bagshawe had agreed the KIA investment at a board meeting.

They also say there is no evidence that Mr Bagshawe has been discriminated against because of his race or religion.

The tribunal continues and is expected to last 12 days.

Last night a spokesman for the bank said: ‘Mr Bagshawe was made redundant by the CEO a Christian. His appeal was heard by a non-executive director, another Christian. His redundancy was supported by the Board comprised equally of Christians and Muslims.

‘The Bank categorically denies that there was any relationship whatsoever between Mr Bagshawe’s religion and the decision to make him redundant.

‘As COO, Mr Bagshawe was well paid during his 4 year term, earning in excess of £1million. Yet by December 2010, during his tenure, the company was eroding £1million per month of its working capital.

‘The company all but halved its headcount from 40 in November 2009 to 25 in June 2011. Nonetheless, Mr Bagshawe received an enhanced redundancy package and pay in lieu of notice in compensation for his loss of office, equivalent to double the average Londoner’s annual salary.

‘He was also entitled to keep over a third of a million shares.

‘Gatehouse Bank had, and has, a diverse workforce including individuals who hold the Christian, Muslim and Hindu faiths, among others. Claims that Mr Bagshawe has been discriminated against or that he “blew the whistle” are strongly contested.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236508/Kuwaiti-bank-British-boss-redundant-figure-salary-job-wasnt-Muslim.html#ixzz2CyTJ1jq6

Terror documents-accused Umer Farooq admits charges

Another British based Muslim preparing to slaughter innocent Brits in the name of Allah


Terror documents-accused Umer Farooq admits charges

A man from Greater Manchester has admitted possession of terrorist documents containing details of how to make explosives, poisons and mines.

Umer Farooq, of Stockport, appeared at the Old Bailey by videolink admitting 14 counts of possession of material that could be useful to a terrorist.

The material included copies of al-Qaeda magazine Inspire and the Terrorist Handbook Of Explosives.

Farooq, 34, was remanded in custody until 16 November for sentencing.

Other documents included information about “home-made” C4 explosives, guns with silencers, “home-built mines” and “silent killing”.

One computer file contained information about the collection of evidence at crime scenes, while another bore the title “Black medicine: the dark art of death”.

via BBC News – Terror documents-accused Umer Farooq admits charges.