Infidel Bloggers Alliance UK

test

2007-03-20T20:26:00.001Z

test

Veiled Christmas Speech

2006-12-25T15:49:00.000Z

It's was all so predictable really wasn't it? The usual fare. Britain needs to be more tolerant. She's against the war in Afghanistan. She doesn't want a single person to die. That of course would include the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and possibly Bin Laden himself. She didn't state that but unless she has subnormal intelligence, this is exactly what she means.

She asserted the usual lies that Islam is a religion of peace. No aknowledgement that British Muslims have any responsibility WHATSOEVER. However, mainstream Britain needs to be more tolerant. Riiiight.

She was complaining about the media just focusing on the extremists, saying why can't they concentrate more on the moderates like her. Which for the first part I agree, however somebody who wears the niqab and thinks the war on the Taliban is wrong is not a moderate.

Channel 4's Extreme Christmas Interview

2006-12-25T13:51:00.000Z

Cop Killer Flees Britain Using Border Loophole

2006-12-21T09:51:00.000Z

You really couldn't make this stuff up. A wanted criminal, cop killer to be specific, one of the most hunted men in the country, fled the UK's stringent border controls without using any fancy "Face Off" type surgery, or fake passport. He simply donned an Islamic ninja outfit/niqab, culturally worn by some Muslims and walked straight through the border without any officers checking to see if the girl in the passport, the criminals sister, was the same person cloaked away under the costume.
I'd ask whether the sister would be prosecuted for aiding a wanted criminal, but hey, I'm sure she knew nothing about it :

Mustaf Jama. Cop Killer Who Fled The UK Dressed As A Muslim Woman

An inquiry into Britain's shambolic border controls was demanded last night after a wanted man allegedly left the country disguised as a veiled Muslim woman.

David Davis, the shadow foreign secretary, said passport checks should require all travellers to show their faces whatever the religious sensitivities of doing so.

The row broke out after the disclosure this week that Mustaf Jama, who is wanted in connection with the murder of Pc Sharon Beshenivsky, may have escaped by dressing in a niqab, which covers the whole face except the eyes.

Jama, 26, is believed to have left for his native Somalia using his sister's passport. Although ports had been alerted, it is unlikely a veiled woman would have been asked to show her face during passport checks. Inspections are no longer carried out by immigration officers on a routine basis for departees.

Jama, whose brother, Yusuf Abdillh, 20, was convicted of Pc Beshenivsky's murder earlier this week, is believed to have fled over Christmas last year after the shooting in Bradford.

Mr Davis said: "The idea that under any circumstances you could be let through passport control wearing a veil is barely credible.

"Doing so when an all-points bulletin for murder has been issued demonstrates that our borders are not just porous but non-existent." He added: "The July 21 bombing plot suspect Osman Hussain also left the country when there was a bulletin out for him and went to Italy."

Shahid Malik, the Labour MP for Dewsbury, also called for an inquiry, saying: "This has got nothing to do with the veil. If it's true, which we don't yet know, and if it did happen, heads must roll."

Liam Byrne, the Home Office immigration minister, said: "It is standard practice for immigration officers to ask people to lift the veil — more than that, if immigration officers have got suspicions they fingerprint people and check them against our databases."

However, he admitted: "We don't have exit controls around the clock, around all of our borders; what we do make sure we do is respond immediately to police requests for those exit controls."

Airlines and airport staff carry out their own passport checks, however, they are not interested in border control but whether a passenger is likely to pose a risk on board.

A member of the airport staff or an airline employee does not have the power to ask a woman suspected of an offence to remove her veil.

The Home Office yesterday said ''intelligence-led" checks continued.

Last month they stopped 750 immigration offenders trying to leave Heathrow. The Government is proposing to reintroduce embarkation controls by 2009 to obtain a more accurate record of who enters or leaves.

Before the system was scrapped, about 60 per cent had their passports inspected. Most of those people leaving the country faced scrutiny to ensure they had not overstayed their visas and had fulfilled the conditions of their stay.
Link...

Rampant Islamohobia in Britain

2006-12-18T13:08:00.000Z

Jews are 4 times more likely to be attacked than Muslims in Britain. Yes thats right, sinster silver-tongued fascists bastards like Muhammed Abdul Bari, the head of the Muslim Council of Britain have been lying to us. No surprise for bloggers here.

Abdul Bari compares the British government to the government of Nazi germany, with respect to it's treatment to Muslim communities.

Yet after self-proclaimed Muslims slaughtered 52 innocent people in the capital of the UK - JEWS are 4 times more likely to be attacked than Muslims.

And where are these anti-Jewish attacks most prevalent? In the most Muslim areas of the country. Again no surprise here for the bloggers.

Words fail. If you want a trip into a fantasy land (a rather twisted one at that, read all of Mr Bari's insane and threatening diatribe linked to above).

This man claims to represent British Muslims. What an utter, utter fucking blinded hypocrite. In short, what a lying cunt.

The Channel 4 Brush Off

2006-12-06T19:22:00.000Z

I have received a reply to my Furious post from Channel 4, apparently from a Max Whitman

Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries.

We felt it fitting that the Alternative Christmas Message should be from a British Muslim woman in a year in which issues of religious and racial identity and freedom of expression have dominated the news agenda.

If you require further information, feel free to email me back or visit http://help.channel4.com/tv.

Max Whitman
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries

How noble! Freedom of expression! Here's my reply for what it's worth

Dear Mark,

With respect, please answer the questions. Most of the British public think it is far from "fitting". This brush off really is quite outrageous. Channel 4 did not publish the Mohammed Cartoons or Theo Van Gogh's Submission film. These have been far more prominent on the news and the "freedom of expression" agenda.

It's easy pickings to offend non-Muslims. If you really want to talk about freedom of speech you should be giving a voice to moderate muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq who are being slaughtered by religious fascists whilst walking to school, or those women in Iran who get beaten by religious authorities for demonstrating for equal rights.

Or perhaps all those British Muslims who have come out in opposition to the burqa and the niqab in Britian, and those normal Muslism who don’t go and pray in the mosque every week, and sometimes even, mix with strangers of the opposite sex.

Channel 4 seems to be consistently presenting the case for literalist and extremist Islam. When will Channel 4 embrace the real moderates? It seems Channel 4 is trying to be controversial. It has certainly achieved that, but it has consistently played the safe bet of offending non-Muslims only.

I await your answers with anticipation.

Furious

2006-12-06T07:45:00.000Z

I am furious at Channel 4's decision to screen an Islamic alternative Christmas message with a women in a full face veil.

I have some questions for Channel 4's chief executive Andy Duncan

1. Why do Channel 4 go out of their way not to offend ethnic minorities, specifically the Muslim community, when Channel 4 is happy to offend large swathes of the british public - on the traditional Christian holy day of christmas - with a muslim women in a full Islamic veil?

2. Will Channel 4 be inviting beer swigging naked women to introduce Ramadan or the Eid festival next year? Or is it just open season on the british public?

3. As a non-muslim I find the veil offensive, so why aren't my views taken into account? Does political correctness only extend to minorities?

4. Why has Channel 4 never screened Submission by Theo Van Gogh? Why has Channel 4 never screened the satirical mohammed cartoons?

5. Can Channel 4 not see that is is fueling extremism, resentment and antagonism against Britiains Muslim community by deciding to air the voice of an Islamic extremist - I use the word extemist since only 1% of Britains muslim population wear the full face veil?

'We wish you a dhimmi Christmas...'

2006-12-05T22:57:00.000Z

'& a jihadi new year!'.. from cheery Channel 4.

Desperate to make up for crap Christmas ratings, Channel Fwors weally weally wadical Alternative Christmas speech for 2006 will be hosted by a woman in a niqab.

Previous years this show has been hosted by comedians, eccentrics and Jamie Oliver. But ratings arent great and the Queen still has the edge on the Christmas speech giving.

So is this a joke? Is this a Private Eye moment? Prepare to hit the off switch faster than ever at Xmas. Or find some leftovers to chuck at the screen.

It is possible of course that 'Khadija' will rock up as shown here. If not this will be about as welcome as watching a nativity with Osama and pals playing the shepherds or something. Outstanding Channel 4! Honestly, Khadija's best bet would be to trot over for a Trinnie and Susannah makeover on 'What Not to Wear'.

A veiled Muslim woman will deliver this year's alternative Christmas speech on Channel 4, the broadcaster has said. Khadija, a Zimbabwean-born British citizen who has been wearing the full veil - or niqab - for 10 years (good for her eh?!), has been given the slot. The message will reflect a year in which the wearing of religious clothing and symbols have "dominated the news agenda", said a Channel 4 spokesman.
Channel 4's spokesman also said that the controversy has "generated a debate about multiculturalism, secularism and integration - a debate in which British Muslims have played a key role and one that will shape the future of British society". (So they drag out another fundamentalist...well done)

Backlash Against Muslims After 7/7 Exaggerated

2006-12-04T21:49:00.000Z

Say what? You mean to tell me that all the warnings from the taqiyah masters and useful dhimmi's telling us about the brutal backlash against Muslims after the July 7th Islamic terror attacks was all talk? Too bad, the victim card was working so well :

LONDON (Reuters) - Fears that the country's Muslim community would be become the target of widespread race hate crimes in the aftermath of the July 7 London bombings last year have proved exaggerated, prosecutors said on Monday.

Figures from the Crown Prosecution Service showed that while there had been a blip in attacks against Muslims and Asians after four Muslim extremists detonated bombs on the underground and a bus, there had been no major backlash.

"The fears of a large rise in offences appear to be unfounded," said Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald.

"Although there were more cases in July 2005 than for any other month, the rise did not continue into August and overall in 2005-2006 there was an increase of nine cases compared to the previous year."

"From the summary case reports sent to me for religiously aggravated offences, we have noted 12 such cases for the month ... after July 7 and in six of those cases the defendants referred specifically to the London bombings," he added in a statement.

In the weeks after the suicide attacks which killed 52 and wounded 700, some Muslim groups had said crimes against Muslims and Asians had risen by as much as 600 percent in the immediate aftermath.

Macdonald said the figures revealed charges for racially aggravated offences rose 28 percent to nearly 7,500 defendants although prosecutors only pursued court cases against 6,123 individuals.

As for religiously aggravated crimes, the increase was 26.5 percent to 43, although only 41 cases actually ended up in a court.

Out of the 43 cases, the actual or perceived religion of the victim was known in only 22 incidences of which over 80 percent were Muslim.
Link...

Can the West defeat the Islamist threat? ten reasons why not

2006-12-02T15:44:00.000Z

1) Western Incoherence: The first is the extent of political division in the non-Muslim world about what is afoot. Some reject outright that there is a war at all; others agree with the assertion by the US President that “the war we fight is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century”.

2) Underestimating the Threat: The second reason why, as things stand, Islam will not be defeated is that the strengths of the world community of Muslims are being underestimated, and the nature of Islam misunderstood. It is neither a “religion of peace” nor a “religion hijacked” or “perverted” by “the few”.

2.5) Underestimating the ‘Religion’: Islam is not even a religion in the conventional sense of the term. It is a transnational political and ethical movement that believes that it holds the solution to mankind’s problems. It therefore holds that it is in mankind’s own interests to be subdued under Islam’s rule.

3) Crap Western Leadership: Indeed, the third reason why Islam will not be defeated, as things stand, is the low level of Western leadership, in particular in the United States. During the half-century of the Islamic revival, it has shown itself at sixes and sevens both diplomatically and militarily.

4) ‘Islamophobes’ & ‘Apologists’: Next is the contribution to the disarray of Western policy-making being made by the egotistical competitiveness, and in some cases hysterics, of “experts” and commentators on Islam. They include hyperventilating Islamophobes as well as academic apologists for the worst that is being done in Islam’s name.

5) Leftist Guilt: The fifth disablement is to be found in the confusion of “progressives” about the Islamic advance. With their political and moral bearings lost since the defeat of the “socialist project”, many on the Left have only the fag-end of anti-colonial positions on which to take their stand.. Moreover, to Islam’s further advantage, it has led most of today’s “progressives” to say little, or even to keep silent, about what would once have been regarded as the reactionary aspects of Islam: its oppressive hostility to dissent, its maltreatment of women, …. Mein Kampf circulates in Arab countries under the title Jihadi.

6) Trojan Horses: The sixth reason for Islam’s growing strength is the vicarious satisfaction felt by many non-Muslims at America’s reverses. Those who feel such satisfaction could be regarded as Trojan horses, a cavalry whose number is legion and which is growing..

7) Moral Poverty: The seventh reason lies in the moral poverty of the West’s, and especially America’s, own value system. Doctrines of market freedom, free choice and competition — or “freedom ’n’ liberty” — are no match for the ethics of Islam and Sharia, like them or not…

8) Propaganda: The next indication that Islam’s advance will continue lies in the skilful use being made of the media and of the world wide web in the service both of the “electronic jihad” and the bamboozling of Western opinion by Muslim spokesmen.

9) Dependency: The ninth factor guaranteeing Islam’s onward march is the West’s dependency on the material resources of Arab and Muslim countries. In April 1917, Woodrow Wilson, recommending to the US Congress an American declaration of war against Germany, could say that “we have no selfish ends to serve”. American levels of consumption make no such statement possible now. The US is, so to speak, over a barrel.

10) Powerful Retrograde Force: Finally, the West is convinced that its notions of technology-driven modernity and market-driven prog- ress are innately superior to the ideals of “backward” Islam. This is an old delusion. In 1899, Winston Churchill asserted that there was “no stronger retrograde force in the world” than Islam.

Shortened version - Full article in The Times

David Selbourne is the author of The Losing Battle with Islam, which was published in the United States in November last year

Like a famous Belgian, a moderate Muslim is devilishly elusive

2006-11-30T10:05:00.000Z

Moderate is a word that many claim and all too few deserve
Like a famous Belgian, a moderate Muslim is devilishly elusive. It has become the media's holy grail to discover a sort of SDP of Islamic fundamentalism. Every time we anoint some cove the 'voice of moderation', he turns out quietly to favour female genital mutilation or a spot of light bombing.

LOL

So it is back to the phone book for TV producers after this newspaper's fascinating revelation that BBC pin-up Asghar Bukhari sent a donation to the Hitler-apologist David Irving. We mediaistas overuse the word 'shocking', but how else to describe Bukhari's anti-Jewish rant?
Sure, criticise Israel. I felt decidedly queasy reading interviews with British Jews serving in Israel's army in Gaza. They can return here as respected citizens, yet a Brit who fights for the Palestinians might be spirited away to a privatised, off-shore torture camp on behalf of MI6. There is a moral distinction between Israel's army and, say, Hamas, but it is not absolute.

Ok so it's a Guardianista lefty, they are compelled to talk rubbish and moral equivalence in order to get a bit of street cred, y'all, in the Islington bruschetta orthodoxies (to nick a phrase). Anyho...

So I hope you accept I am no Knesset propagandist. But to be so blinded by hatred of Israel is irrational. Should Bukhari and his Muslim Public Affairs Committee be grounded from BBC airspace?
Perhaps not. If - and it is an if - he represents a chunk of Muslim opinion, we should try to understand him. But, please, don't besmirch the word by billing him a 'moderate'.

How Islamophobic! He's bound to get an award over at the communist-Islamist alliance over at the Islamophobia blog. As a rule of thumb, if you make it on there, you must be doing something right.

Published on Sunday at The Guardian's Comment if Free

Sharia Gaining Ground In The UK

2006-11-29T23:15:00.000Z

London, Nov. 29 (ANI): A BBC Radio 4 programme titled 'Law in Action' [click here to listen to the radio programme] has suggested that British Muslims are exhibiting a preference for referring their disputes to Sharia laws as an alternative to English criminal law to get justice.

According to the Daily Mail, the sharia is gaining an increasing foothold in parts of Britain because it is derived from several sources, including the Koran.

Though the Sharia has no binding status in Britain, the tendency to use it, is not being objected to by either Scotland Yard or the courts.

A spokesman for Scotland Yard said it is quite common for police not to proceed in assault cases if the victims decide not to press charges.

A recent stabbing incident involving a Somalian resulted in him seeking justice from the laws of his country of birth i.e. Somalia, which practices the Sharia, rather than the laws of Britain, his adopted country.

According to British Muslims, the Sharia's great strength is its effective penalties.

Lawyers have welcomed what they term as "legal pluralism".

Dr Prakash Shah, a senior lecturer in law at Queen Mary University of London, said such tribunals "could be more effective than the formal legal system".

In his book Islam in Britain, Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, says "Sharia courts now operate in most larger cities, with different sectarian and ethnic groups operating their own courts that cater to their specific needs according to their traditions."

Faizul Aqtab Siddiqi, a barrister and principal of Hijaz College Islamic University, near Nuneaton, Warwicks, said this type of court had advantages for Muslims.

"It operates on a low budget, it operates on very small time scales and the process and the laws of evidence are far more lenient and it's less awesome an environment than the English courts," he says.

However, he predicts that there would be a formal network of Muslim courts within a decade. (ANI)
Link...

MPACUK Asks : Should British Muslims Be Allowed To Fight Alongside Islamic Terrorists?

2006-11-27T17:32:00.000Z

Just what is it that MPACUK doesn't understand about the difference between a legitimate army and terrorist organisations?

Asif Hanif and Omar Sharif. Two "British" Muslim Terrorists Who Carried Out Mass Murder Against Israeli Civilians In The Name Of The Islamic Death Cult. MPACUK's Suggestion Would Encourage More "British" Muslims To Do The Same

Extract from MPACUK article : Since the Government, MPs, Journalists and Commentators watch this website, to access the feelings and opinions of many British Muslims we want to continue the debate and raise an important question. This issue is especially significant given the debate about extremism in the British Muslim community. If Zionists are legally allowed to fight for Israel every year in the IDF, allowed to kill innocent Palestinian children, be welcomed back as war heroes and bring back the hatred they have fostered, should Muslims then be allowed to serve with Palestinian fighters?
Link...

Included in the link is the usual propaganda of a video of dead babies and the blood libel accusations MPACUK regularly throws at Israel.

Islamic Factions Divide In British Jail

2006-11-27T14:50:00.000Z

A "potentially explosive" dispute between Muslim factions inside Wandsworth prison has been revealed by an independent watchdog.

The Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) published a report last week detailing a "schism" that had emerged in the prison between Asian Muslims and those from North Africa and Afro-Caribbean areas.

A particular imam was said to have caused deep division among the prison's 265 Muslim prisoners and there was a warning that some inmates were pressuring others to adopt "more militant lifestyles and belief systems".

IMB chairman David Jamieson said the dispute centred on the interpretation of the Koran.

He said: "The situation is volatile but is being resolved. It concerns the way the Koran is interpreted within the Sunni Muslim sect."

The report, which reflected the fears of the Prison Officers Association that there was no national strategy to tackle the radicalisation of young Muslims in prisons, continued: "We are concerned that unless sensitively managed, this issue could become even more emotional and potentially explosive."

A Prison Service spokesman said the imam referred to in the report, which covered July 2005 to June 2006, has since been replaced and added that "any signs of radicalisation at the prison are firmly dealt with by a pro-active chaplaincy team."

But the report also highlighted the inadequate prayer facilities inside Britain's largest jail, which houses 1,451 prisoners.

Currently Muslims have to walk through the Christian chapel to reach their place of worship, "exacerbating at times inherent tension".

The facilities are struggling to cope with a recent surge in Muslim inmates at the prison, which is home to 73 different nationalities.

More than 200 people are thought to regularly attend Friday prayers in the sports hall, while 240 took part in the recent Eid meal.

As a solution, the prison plans to spend £20,000 converting the Anglican chapel into a mosque and then opening up the Catholic chapel to all of the prison's Christians.

The report also mirrored recent Home Office research, suggesting many prisoners use religious services as a venue for dealing in drugs and illegal mobile phones.

Mr Jamieson said a "major influx" of drugs and phones were "slipping through the net", while the use of dogs to detect drugs was almost non-existent.

However, his call to introduce jamming of mobile phones throughout the prison is unlikely to happen soon, because the Prison Service has been unable to find a solution that only effects the prison and not motorists travelling past.
Link...

Oh the horror. The Muslim prisoners have to walk through the Chapel of the "unclean" Christians, "exacerbating tensions". Well, what else to do but turn the chapel into a Mosque. Wouldn't want to upset any ROP'ers.

UK Muslims Freest In Europe

2006-11-26T13:12:00.000Z

But? You guessed it, it's still not enough :

Until countries such as India, Egypt and Malaysia gained independence, millions of Muslims lived under British rule.

Now the United Kingdom is a new homeland for more than two million Muslims from former colonial territories and elsewhere.

Until London was hit by terrorist attacks in July 2005, British Muslims were living in relative peace and freedom.

Many Muslims living in Islamic countries were envious of this free environment in the UK.

The libertarian British model was shown to contrast France’s prohibitive understanding of secularism.

There was a freedom of expression that allowed even the most radical religious discourse. Muslims were able to set up their own parliaments, open their own schools and receive financial aid from the state, albeit little.

Muslims also had broad liberties in clothing. Muslim women were able to wear all manner of headscarves, veils and even burqas.

Things have changed however.

The debate on the Muslim veil still continues, first ignited by remarks from former Foreign Minister Jack Straw.

Almost every day, newspaper headlines talk about a problem with Muslims. A terrorist who reportedly plans to blow the London subway occupies the newspaper pages…

The newspapers talk about a “Muslim Threat.”

Muslims in the UK are complaining about the British press.

Khurshid Ahmed from the British Muslim Forum said that constant negative press on Islam was causing reactions in society and making people more radical.

Andleen Razzaq, a young Pakistani Muslim, said, “The press does not prefer to talk to a modest Muslim like me; instead they want to talk to an extremist. They do not care that they are instigating mutual hatred.”

Even still, some say those living in the UK are still the luckiest Muslims in the West.

We asked London-based Pakistani journalist Shahed Sadullah, who frequently appears on the BBC, to compare the UK with other European countries.

“The UK still is the country where Muslims live the most comfortably in the West,” he responded.

When we asked whether the situation in the UK was better than the one in the United States, he stressed that it was, “a millions times better.”

It is not merely a subjective opinion that Muslims have benefited from civil liberties in Britain.

When we visited the Muslim College in London, founded by Dr. Zaki Badawi'nin, we were told that there had been a Sharia council in Britain since 1978.

The council has the right to judge legal and divorce issues of Muslims.

The right to apply to such councils, for many denominations, was granted in 1920.

Now, attempted terrorist attacks by several British-born Muslims have apparently disrupted this atmosphere.

The British government is taking more severe measures against terrorism with new laws while at the same time it is trying to establish closer relations with the Muslim community and limit the number of extremists.

Government working out solutions to radicalism

The British government attaches great importance on advertising its policies against terror and a growing radicalism among youngsters.

This was the main objective of the British foreign ministry program organized for 12 foreign journalists from places like Austria, the United State, Pakistan and Bahrain.

During the week-long program, we got the chance to hear how Britain and Muslims view terrorist attacks.

Ethnic minority groups make up nine percent of the 60 million people in the UK, including over two million Muslims.

A British Council media guide tells us that Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Indians make up half of the ethnic population. Other major groups are Algerians, Nigerian, Turks, Iraqis and Afghans.

The guide stated that 14,200 Britons had converted to Islam, such as Yusuf Islam, formerly known as Cat Stevens.

Media foments problems

Andleen Razzaq, member of the City Circles, a debate platform for local administrations, is also complaining about the media.

Razzaq said a careless media had disfigured Muslims: “Quality newspapers such as the Guardian and the Independent pose no problem. However, others never interview ordinary Muslim youth like me, while there are so many extremists to quote because sensational news brings in ratings. They do not care that such publications foment mutual hatred, make life harder for Muslims and push them to defensive position through constant pressure.”

During our one-week stay in Britain, Muslims were featured in the headlines almost every day.

Discussion on the Jack Straw veil debate was still ongoing.

Suddenly an alleged terrorist attack on the London subway was foiled.

Later a racist letter sent to voters by a female member of the conservative party was revealed. This was followed by the removal of a Muslim police officer who was guarding Prime Minister Tony Blair’s office.

Moreover, the chief of the British intelligence service MI5 stated that 1,600 terrorist suspects were being monitored.

A newspaper headline proclaiming a “Muslim threat” was quite depressing.

Two weeks after the July 7 attacks on London, attacks on Muslims increased seven fold.

Lack of legal regulations regarding Muslims has an impact on the rise of verbal and physical attacks.

The 1976 law foresees severe punishment for racial discrimination, but it is not applicable to crimes against Muslims. The law only covers Jews and Sikhs because they are recognized as race.

A notable case was that of Nick Griffin, leader of the conservative BNP party tried for insulting Muslims who was acquitted in November thanks to this loophole.

Abdurrahman Cafer, member of the Muslim Council of Britain, stressed certain problems were caused by mistakes in the implementation of recently enacted anti-terrorism laws.

Three youngsters were arrested and kept in prison for three months, but released by the court for lack of evidence. The same youngsters were later arrested for a credit card problem.

Tomorrow: We tell the youth about peace, but they only see war on television.
Link...

Ok, so we need more Dhimmi pro-terror papers like the Guardian and Independent and more laws stopping critisism of Islam. Then we will become the true Britainistan the Ummah have always dreamed of.