London Terror Attack: Islam In A Picture

2017 London Muslim terror attack. Paramedics try to save the life of evil Islamic terrorist responsible

They say a picture speaks a thousand words. This one certainly does, it is Islam in a picture  

The cowardly Muslim murdering bastard lay on a stretcher having been shot by armed police. Only minutes earlier he had taken the lives of five innocent people and injured scores of others. People going about their everyday business in the wrong place at the wrong time when this Islamic savage decided to kill as many people as possible in the name of his bloodthirsty god Allah.

Yet despite the atrocities he had just committed. Members of our emergency services still give it their all to try to save the cold-blooded killers life.

This is representative of Islam in the UK. Brits go out of their way, often bending over backwards to accommodate Muslims and keep them happy. Muslim groups looking after Muslim only needs get taxpayer money thrown at them like it is going out of fashion. Halal foods are becoming increasingly more common just to please Muslims despite the animal cruelty issues. Local authorities go against local residents wishes and approve countless mosque applications that would never get passed had the constructions been anything else. Appeasing the minority Muslim population so they can freely practice their alien religion. The complete opposite to how other religions are treated in Muslim lands. Do they appreciate it….. No do they hell, yet still the Muslim appeasement continues.

Just like the vile Muslim vermin in the picture who carried out the heinous attack in London. All the efforts to accommodate Muslims and hospitality shown is thrown back in our faces. No matter how much any of us kafir does it will never be good enough. It will never be appreciated by ungrateful Muslim who will always hate us no matter what. Cowardly terrorist acts are the way they repay the nation who took them in. Because selfishness, hate and violence are Islam in a nutshell.


Muslim Living In Bolton Loses Extradition Appeal Over India Bombing Attacks

Muslim Hanif Mohammed Umerji Patel who was arrestted in Bolton on terrorist charges has lost his high court appeal against being extradited to India to face justice for his role in anti Hindu terrorist attacks 20 years ago. I dread to think how much of the legal aid fund he has used up trying to avoid justice with his claims that he can’t remember that far back. To right he can remember that far back and his involvement in the killing of innocent people including an 8 year old girl. How can you forget a horrendous act like that.

Its every week that some Muslim or another is in court trying to avoid deportation for their heinous acts. It makes you wonder how many other Muslim terrorists are in Britain. Its about time the powers that be grew some balls and stopped the UK being a safe haven for Islamic fundamentalists. In fact for uncivilized uneducated Muslim immigrants full stop for that matter.

Man loses extradition appeal over India bombing attacks

1:22pm Thursday 18th April 2013 in News

A MUSLIM man arrested in Bolton accused of involvement in bombings against Hindus in India two decades ago today lost a High Court battle against extradition from the UK.

Two judges in London rejected challenges brought by Hanif Mohammed Umerji Patel.

The Home Secretary ordered his extradition to India in June last year.

Patel, who is also known as Tiger Hanif, was arrested in Bolton in February 2010 after an extradition request from India.

Mr Justice Kenneth Parker, who dismissed Patel’s case along with Lord Justice Moses, said he was “accused of being involved in two bombings which led to loss of life and extensive property damage” in Surat, Gujarat, in 1993.

The judge said: “The information provided in the request describes how, following an attack on a mosque in December 1992, internecine hostilities broke out between the Muslim and Hindu communities in Gujarat.

“The requesting state’s case is that the appellant was part of a Muslim group which obtained explosives, guns and other weapons and then carried out revenge terrorist attacks on the Hindu community, including two explosions which resulted in loss of life, injury and damage.”

The first explosion was in January 1993 in a market on the Varacha Road in Surat which killed an eight-year-old girl and “caused many injuries”.

The second explosion was in April 1993 at Surat railway station and “caused many injuries and significant property damage”.

He said: “The appellant is alleged to have been a principal conspirator in relation to these two bomb attacks, and to have been part of the Muslim group which acquired firearms and ammunition.”

Part of the unsuccessful action brought by Patel was a challenge against the May 2012 decision of a district judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court — he rejected the grounds advanced in opposition of extradition and sent the request to the Home Secretary for her decision on whether he should be extradited.

Arguments put forward at the High Court by Patel, who is in his 50s, included claims that the continuing pursuit of extradition by the Government of India “for the purpose of an unviable prosecution” was an “abuse of the process of the court”, that there was a real risk his trial would constitute a flagrant denial of justice and that there was “a real risk of torture” in the light of new evidence.

Dismissing the challenge against the decision of the district judge, Mr Justice Kenneth Parker said in relation to the torture ground that there was “nothing” in the further material relied upon by Patel that would “tend to undermine the conclusion reached by the district judge that the appellant has failed to provide substantial evidence that he would be at real risk of torture” if extradited.

The judge also ruled that Patel could not rely on the passage of time to avoid extradition.

He said: “There is nothing to suggest that the appellant is now no longer able to recall the events in question, or that the court in India would be unwilling or unable to consider the extent, if any, of any prejudice to the fairness of the criminal trial by reason of the passage of time.”

Patel’s action in relation to the decision of the Home Secretary also failed.