THE UMMAH AND OSAMA BIN LADEN

Yvonne Ridley, British convert to Islam, writes in the Muslim Observer:

...It mattered not the al-Qaida leader was unarmed – that detail was kept back as hugely distorted stories zoomed around the globe about how the evil Arab used his wife as a human shield while firing off rounds at the heroic soldiers who risked their all for Uncle Sam.

The naked display of uncontrollable gung-ho emotion was bad enough but then a smug-looking Obama began sounding like Glenn Ford in a scene from High Noon as he lectured the world about “justice being done”....

Read the rest HERE.

Of course, we should consider the source when reading the above essay. Information about Yvonne Ridley:

Yvonne Ridley (born 1959, Stanley, County Durham, England) is a British journalist, war correspondent and Respect Party politician best known for her capture by the Taliban and subsequent conversion to Islam after release, her outspoken opposition to Zionism, and her criticism of Western media portrayals of the War on Terror. Ridley currently works for Press TV, the Iranian-based English language news channel.

[...]

According her own account after her release, during her captivity she was asked by one of her captors to convert to Islam; she refused, but gave her word she would read the Qur'an after her release.

In freedom, she kept this promise, as she said partly to find out why the Taliban treated women as they do. She said it changed her life.

The Qur'an, she says describing the holy book of Islam, is a "magna carta for women".

How many converts like Yvonne Ridley live among us in the West? With the death of Osama bin Laden, we may well find out just how great their numbers are as the some of ummah attempt to exact revenge for the death of Osama bin Laden.

Meanwhile, Obama is planning more outreach to the Islamic world. Dhimmitude marches on.

UK BUREAUCRACY STANDS IN THE WAY OF A MOROCCAN IMMIGRANT WHO WANTS TO RETURN HOME

So far, Rashid Ali has cost the UK taxpayers £250,000.

Pure idiocy.

From this article in the Mail Online:

Like thousands of others arriving here [to the UK], Rashid Ali dreamt Britain would be a land of opportunity. But when he failed to gain asylum, he just wanted to go home to Morocco.

With no money, job or passport, the illegal immigrant resolved to flee Britain by stowing away on cargo ships.

Yet after six failed attempts he is still here – because the UK authorities have forced him to stay. He was supposed to have been deported in 2005 after he was caught stowing away for the fifth time and was jailed for stealing a coat and some food.

But instead the 30-year-old was then held at an immigration detention centre for three years – at a cost to the taxpayer of £250,000.

Now he could be jailed again after being caught hiding on another boat two days after being released. Yesterday a judge said it beggared belief that the Home Office had failed to repatriate him....

The following words from Bristol Crown Court, Judge Michael Hubbard the Royal Crown Court sum up his frustration with government bureaucracy:

'It beggars belief that during that time in detention it wasn't sorted out for him to return home. Can we not use this court to kick some backsides and have something done?'

MUSLIM INBREEDING

On August 25, 2007, here at The Astute Bloggers, Reliapundit posted information about Muslim inbreeding. The warnings as to the dangers of such inbreeding were clear in that posting and backed up by scientific data!

Now (Too late?) the UK is issuing an official warning about Muslim inbreeding. According to this February 10, 2008 article in the Times Online,

A government minister has warned that inbreeding among immigrants is causing a surge in birth defects - comments likely to spark a new row over the place of Muslims in British society.

Phil Woolas, an environment minister, said the culture of arranged marriages between first cousins was the “elephant in the room”. Woolas, a former race relations minister, said: “If you have a child with your cousin the likelihood is there’ll be a genetic problem.”

The minister, whose views were supported by medical experts this weekend, said: “The issue we need to debate is first cousin marriages, whereby a lot of arranged marriages are with first cousins, and that produces lots of genetic problems in terms of disability [in children].”

Woolas emphasised the practice did not extend to all Muslim communities but was confined mainly to families originating from rural Pakistan. However, up to half of all marriages within these communities are estimated to involve first cousins.

Medical research suggests that while British Pakistanis are responsible for 3% of all births, they account for one in three British children born with genetic illnesses....

I have some firsthand knowledge of the dangers of inbreeding. The maternal side of my family hails from East Tennessee, an area of the United States with a high percentage of inbreeding since the area was settled. When my mother was growing up, she saw evidence every day of the dangers of inbreeding. To the credit of my mother's family for many generations, members traveled to find their spouses, so as to avoid the results of first cousin to first cousin breeding. Spouses from the outside were not as easily acceptable by the hillbilly clans, but the result was not one since instance of genetic defect in the family!

Outside of my family, of course, I've seen for myself the offspring of such close inbreeding. Case in point, one of my mother's brilliant teachers had two severely retarded brothers, for whom that teacher had to care for her entire life. "The Boys," her older brothers and her only siblings, lived in a cabin next to her house in a small town in East Tennessee. Miss H managed to outlive "The Boys." Barely. And she was smart enough not to produce offspring herself. She knew the scientific data! She also knew the burden of bearing bad genes.

Today many Western societies, even that backwoods area of the East Tennesse hills from which my mother's family hailed, have legislation preventing first cousin to first cousin inbreeding. I don't know about the UK's legislation in that regard. After all, the "blueblood" idea still prevails in the upper echelons of British society.

Story after story out of the British press indicates that financial burden on the UK's national health care system is being increased by all sorts of causes, too many of them related to the plethora of Muslim immigrants, who jump right onto the rolls of free healthcare. The NHS is going to have a difficult time supporting one in three children with genetic defects--preventable genetic defects.

We have a lot of Muslim Pakistani immigrants here in the United States. How many of THEM are practicing the same inbreeding?

RELIAPUNDIT ADDS: GREAT POST AOW: GLAD WE'RE STAYING UP ON THIS ISSUE - WHICH I HAVE BLOGGED ON MANY TIMES - FIRST HERE - WAY BACK ON 8/18/2005 - YEAH, THREE (3) YEARS AGO!):

ARAB MUSLIMS AND ENDOGAMOUS MATRIMONY

The Arabs prefer endogamous matrimony -- that's marriage with first cousins or second cousins. (In fact, refusal to marry cousins (or regret at having done so) is one common reason that many Arab Muslim women become victims of "honor killing.")

In most societies - thoughout all of human history, most people think that the "in-law" relationship is the most troublesome in their lives; (it's one of the most popular and enduring sources of humor; America's most popular TV comedy in decades - EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND - was based on it). WELL: Because of the preference and prevalence of endogamous matrimony many Arabs are so inter-married that NOT ONLY are they everybody's in-laws, every Arab is his own in-law! No wonder they're so effin' nuts! Heh!

SERIOUSLY: More HERE on how Arab endogamous matrimony is a type of in-breeding which is leading the Arab Muslim "gene pool" to become dominated by defects and disease.

Permalink - Posted by Reliapundit @ 10:51 AM

MORE HERE AND HERE.

UNDERMINING HYGIENE

Right now, the outcry of outrage over the archbishop's remarks has British citizens all fired up. One can only hope that they hold onto that anger. Maybe then the politicians will understand that the people, including many Muslim immigrants, want British law in the UK — not shari'a law.

On February 3rd - six days ago - Punditarian of THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS posted on another facet of CREEPING SHARIA IN THE UK, one which threatens the health of the everyday person in the UK. His source was the UK Telegraph; here's an article from another source also from February 3, 2008:

Muslim women working at U.K. medical facilities are increasingly refusing to comply with the basic hygiene standard of rolling up their sleeves when their washing hands, it was reported.

According to the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph, female workers are ignoring Britain's Department of Health rules requiring medics to be "bare below the elbow" because they consider showing any skin — outside the hands and face — immodest.

The guidelines were put into place to stave off the spread of infectious killer bugs like MRSA and Clostridium difficile, which have been implicated in the deaths of hundreds of hospital patients, according to the paper.

Hygiene experts said the standard should hold for all workers— even if it goes against their religion.

"I don't think it would be right to make an exemption for people on any grounds. The policy of bare below the elbows has to be applied universally," Dr. Mark Enright, professor of microbiology at Imperial College London told the Telegraph.

Some fear the enforcing the rules will open the door to lawsuits charging discrimination against female Muslims working within the medical professions.

The Islamic Medical Association, for one, has issued a statement that "no practicing Muslim woman — doctor, medical student, nurse or patient — should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow," according to paper.

Western countries are going to have to make some unnegotiable decisions and stick to them if all of us are not to be endangered even further. Otherwise, we are headed for a New Dark Age, just as Mark Alexander has been warning.

MUSLIM POLYGAMY

Just how far in the UK willing to go in appeasing Muslims? According to this article in the Telegraph, Muslim polygamy will be recognized, with all "wives" getting full benefit:

Husbands with multiple wives have been given the go-ahead to claim extra welfare benefits following a year-long Government review...

Even though bigamy is a crime in Britain, the decision by ministers means that polygamous marriages can now be recognised formally by the state, so long as the weddings took place in countries where the arrangement is legal.

[...]

New guidelines on income support from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) state: "Where there is a valid polygamous marriage the claimant and one spouse will be paid the couple rate ... The amount payable for each additional spouse is presently £33.65."

Income support for all of the wives may be paid directly into the husband's bank account, if the family so choose. Under the deal agreed by ministers, a husband with multiple wives may also be eligible for additional housing benefit and council tax benefit to reflect the larger property needed for his family.

The ruling could cost taxpayers millions of pounds....

Shari'a law allows for Muslim men to have a harem of up to four.

So, the UK is going to allow for and fund its own Islmamification by demographics? Not to mention that bigamy has been against UK and Western law for centuries!

As noted by Punditarian here at THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS on Sunday, February 3, in "Britain Capitulates to Polygamists":

[T]he British will surrender the sovereignty of British law within the borders of Britain, and grant cultural extra-territoriality to Muslims. With Muslim areas no-go for infidels, including the police, and the Labour government falling over itself to allow Muslims to govern their lives according to shariah, Britain is rapidly becoming a colonia of the Ummah. How long will it be until British law no longer even holds for infidels?

For well over two years, I have been attempting to catalogue, at least in part, the Islamification of the West. But never in my wildest imagination approaching paranoia did I ever dream that the UK, a country firmly rooted in Judeo-Christianity for the past several centuries, would recognize Muslim polygamy and fund it as well.

Some days, I dread turning on my computer!

ISLAM: LONDONISTAN

A segue to this posting by Reliapundit:



From the YouTube link for the above video:

More and more Muslims are moving into so-called "parallel communities"-- communities where there's little hint of Western culture.

In the majority of these communities, Islam and the Islamic way of life dominate.

The debate over the Muslim veil comes at a time when an alarming number of British-born Muslims are being indoctrinated to hate the very country that they live in. "These young men are willing to kill thousands of men, women, and children," said terrorism analyst M.J. Gohel...

Appeasement cannot result in assimilation. Can't the political leaders of the UK understand that fact?

THE BIBLE IS "UNCLEAN"

Excerpt from this January 15, 2008 article in the UK's Daily Express, via this posting at Infidel Bloggers Alliance:

A MUSLIM store worker refused to serve a customer buying a children’s book on Christianity because she said it was “unclean”.

Shopper Sally Friday felt publicly humiliated at a branch of Marks & Spencer when she tried to pay for First Bible Stories as a gift for her young grandson.When she put the book on the check-out counter, the young assistant refused to touch it, declared it was unclean and summoned another member of staff to serve instead....

There's been an outcry, of course, and from several sides:

Last night politicians and religious leaders supported her in condemning the high street giant and reigniting the debate over religious beliefs in the workplace.

Conservative MP Philip Davies said the refusal to serve Mrs Friday, 69, was “unacceptable” and “damaging” to community relations.

Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, described the assistant’s comments as “offensive” and called for Marks & Spencer to carry out a thorough investigation.

The sensitivities of Muslim employees are not limited to Marks & Spencer:

Mrs Friday’s treatment is just the latest example of Muslim staff refusing to serve customers on religious grounds.

In October 2006, Lloyds chemist was forced to apologise to mother Jo-Ann Thomas after a Muslim pharmacist refused her a morning-after contraceptive pill on religious grounds in Rotherham.

A smoker was refused cigarettes at a Cambridge store in January last year because the Muslim shop assistant said it was against her religion to sell tobacco.

Islamic checkout staff at Sainsbury’s who refuse to sell alcohol are allowed to opt out of handling bottles and cans of drink by calling other staff to take their place.

Other staff have refused to work stacking shelves with wine, beer and spirits and have been found alternative roles in the company.

Odd that these incidents involving Muslims' sensitivities keep cropping up in Western countries: a UK dentist who refused to treat a female patient if she didn't wear a hijab, UK doctors demanding alcohol-free germicides, Minneapolis cab drivers who refuse to transport liquor in their taxis, a clerk who refused to check out bacon at her cash register in an American grocery store. A more detailed list is HERE, at The Amboy Times. And the list keeps growing.

Could it be that Muslim sensitivities are becoming more and more obvious because firm stands against such self-righteous behavior exhibited by some Muslim employees? Or is there another reason?

Challenging Shari'a Law

Photo credit
Recently, Saudi Arabia defended the sentence passed on a nineteen-year-old Muslima who was gang raped. Originally she was sentenced to ninety lashes, but upon review the Saudi General Court in Saudi increased her sentence to 200 lashes. The woman had defied shari'a law in that she was in the company of an unrelated male. According to this November 21, 2007 article in the Washington Post,

The attack occurred in 2006. The victim says she was in a car with a male student she used to know trying to retrieve a picture of her. She says two men got into the car and drove them to a secluded area where she was raped by seven men. Her friend also was assaulted.

Justice in Saudi Arabia is administered by a system of religious courts according to the kingdom's strict interpretation of Islamic law.

Our State Department has "expressed astonishment" over the barbarism of punishing the victim. Hello, State Department? Are you unaware of how Saudi enforces shari'a law? Are you aware of how all-encompassing shari'a law is in some Muslim countries?

Read the rest at Always On Watch.