McVeigh, Breivik, and Abortion Clinic Bombings: The Islamists “Smoking Gun”

This page uses material from Murder Has A Religion, WikiIslam's response to Arsalan Iftikhar's "Murder has no religion".

Christian terrorism against abortion providers

Ignoring the perpetrators possible religious affiliations, the number of individuals killed in connection with abortion providers over a period of almost 4 decades does not even reach double figures. In case the reader is interested, the exact figure is 9. 

If we look to other faiths, in the U.K., 92 per cent of terrorist-related prisoners unsurprisingly describe themselves as Muslim, while five are Buddhist, one is a self-described Pagan, and none are Christian.

Does this mean Buddhism is a violent religion? Of course not. It is only natural that there are a few hateful adherents in any religion; it's human nature and you will find this in all groups no matter what world-view they adhere to.

If violent acts perpetrated by Muslims were as rare as it is among adherents of other faiths, then Iftikhar may have a point. Sadly this is not the case.

The number of individuals killed in religiously motivated attacks by the hands of Muslims in 2008 alone numbers 10,779. That's more people killed by Islamists in 2008 than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined. These shocking figures were followed by 9,159 killed in 2009 and 9,175 in 2010.[...] 

There have been several terror attacks in the U.S. since 9/11 and, with little to no help from American Muslims, more than 30 foiled attempts between October 2001 and May 2010. In fact, whilst Muslims represent less than 1 percent of the American population, they constitute more than 80 percent of all US terror convictions. [...] 

Furthermore, no one is arguing that there are no Christian terrorists. Every ideology known to man has had its fair share of extremists, but in the case of Islamic terrorism, the "extremism" is almost always carried out by individuals who hold very orthodox and mainstream Islamic view-points.

Timothy McVeigh, a Christian terrorist?

This is possibly one of the most widely perpetuated myths in the West. Whilst his parents were Catholics, Timothy McVeigh was a self-described Agnostic who said he would "improvise" if it turned out there was an afterlife. He even joked, "If I'm going to hell, I'm gonna have a lot of company."

So unless we are to determine religious affiliation through genetic ties, to describe him as a "Christian terrorist" would be quite a stretch for anyones imagination.

Unlike Nidal Malik Hasan, McVeigh did not cry "Jesus is Greater," or "Buddha is Greater," because he was motivated by his hatred of the federal government, and not by his non-existent religious beliefs.

Anders Behring Breivik, a Christian terrorist?

Today, no-doubt, Iftikhar would also mention Anders Behring Breivik, the perpetrator of the 2011 Norway attacks which left 76 dead. However, in addition to the fact that he was declared insane and in a psychotic state both during and after the twin attacks, Breivik's definition of what makes a person "100% Christian" is a very novel one to say the least, so even this comparison would be faulty. 

The most basic requirement which defines a Christian is someone who believes Jesus is the Christ and accepts him as their "Lord and Savior". This is universal accepted by every denomination of Christianity, but not by Breivik [2083: A European Declaration of Independence (p. 1308)]. 

In his 1,500 page manifesto, "2083: A European Declaration of Independence", Breivik refers to people who are culturally Christian but have no belief in Christ, as "Christian atheists", and goes on to describe himself as a "cultural Christian". Thus his motivations were not religious but cultural [2083: A European Declaration of Independence (p. 1360-on)].

If an Arab Nationalist accepts Islam as a unifying symbol for the Arab states but does not accept Muhammad as a prophet, then he, by the very definition of the word, is not a Muslim and any negative actions by him cannot in anyway be attributed to Islam.

Likewise, the same applies to Breivik, Christianity, and Europe. There is no need to invoke the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, because by the very definition of the word, he is not a Christian.

It could be argued that beliefs do not matter and that self-identification is enough, but then that would by akin to arguing that "The God Delusion" is pro-Christian literature, because even Professor Dawkins has referred to himself as a "cultural Christian".

Furthermore, no one is arguing that there are no Christian terrorists. Every ideology known to man has had its fair share of extremists, but in the case of Islamic terrorism, the "extremism" is almost always carried out by individuals who hold very orthodox and mainstream Islamic view-points.

Further Reading

“Other religions kill, too.” , from TheReligionOfPeace.com:

The so-called “members of other faiths” alluded to by Muslims are nearly always just nominal members who have no active involvement. They are neither inspired by, nor do they credit religion as Muslim terrorists do - and this is what makes it a very different matter.

Islam is associated with Islamic terrorism because that is the association that the terrorists themselves choose to make.

Muslims who compare crime committed by people who happen to be nominal members of other religions to religious terror committed explicitly in the name of Islam are comparing apples to oranges.

Yes, some of the abortion clinic bombers were religious (as Muslims enjoy pointing out), but consider the scope of the problem. There have been six deadly attacks over a 36 year period in the U.S. Eight people died. This is an average of one death every 4.5 years.

By contrast, Islamic terrorists staged nearly ten thousand deadly attacks in just the six years following September 11th, 2001. If one goes back to 1971, when Muslim armies in Bangladesh began the mass slaughter of Hindus, through the years of Jihad in the Sudan, Kashmir and Algeria, and the present-day Sunni-Shia violence in Iraq, the number of innocents killed in the name of Islam probably exceeds five million over this same period.

Keep reading....  

Nigeria Forecasts Famine in Boko Haram Areas in 2012

This is a very sad development. I feel that Africa as a whole has the potential to see itself enter a great era of modernization, but this will never come to pass with Islamic terrorism spreading and intensifying throughout the continent. Only recently, like the Muslims in Pakistan who have destroyed over 5000 schools, they have also targeted schools in Nigeria. Yemen and Kenya have also been devastated economically with the presence of al-Qaeda and al-Shabaab. Deprivation of food, education, and a drop in economic growth, these are what result from the spread of Islam.

From AGI:

Nigeria has warned of a possible famine in the country, and especially in the North-East. The alert was given by the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), the country's equivalent of Italy's Disaster Relief Agency, in its 2012 "Report on Boko Haram Insurgency and Disasters in the North East". "Nigeria may face famine by the end of this year, because most of the small-scale farmers and big-time farmers in the north are threatened by the Boko Haram attacks", the report reads referring to the Islamist militant group whose attacks have left at least 1,200 people dead since 2009.

According to NEMA, over the past three years "more than 65% of such farmers have already migrated to the southern parts of Nigeria, fearing that the insecurity to both lives and property, including their farmlands and livestock". Productions of rice, beans, corn and onions have been the worst hit, but fishing in the Lake Chad area, one of the few options local populations have to integrate and vary their diet, was also affected. On the occasion of the presentation of this report, NEMA senior officials said they had been urged by Nigerian security forces to prepare, a humanitarian plan, working in coordination with the United Nations, in order not to be caught off-guard if the forecast turns out to be accurate. 

RationalWiki on the Irrationality of Islamophobia Watch

From RationalWiki (visit the original page for references):

Islamophobia Watch is a silly blog that claims to be "documenting anti Muslim bigotry". Critics of the site allege that it is simply badmouthing anybody who criticises any aspect of the Islamic world. It is apparently run by Bob Pitt, and has a contributor named Martin Sullivan (who some have suggested is a sock puppet operated by Pitt). According to Pitt the blog was set up by Eddie Truman.

One of the blog's frequently targeted Islamophobes is Richard Dawkins, who referred to Islam as an "unmitigated evil" as recently as May of 2011. In 2008, Dawkins complained that British teachers are tolerating creationist views in Muslim pupils. "[T]here are those of us who would argue that paranoid delusions about the impact on educational policy of a minority faith community who comprise less than 3% of the population of the UK are quite accurately categorisable as Islamophobia", said Martin Sullivan.

Islamophobia Watch has been involved in a lengthy spat with another blog, Harry's Place. Harry's Place made a post in 2005 deconstructing Pitt's definition of "Islamophobia", resulting in a squabble between the two, with Pitt focusing largely on Harry's support for the Iraq war. Sullivan later described Harry's Place as "notoriously Islamophobic".

Other people apparently deemed "anti Muslim bigots" by the blog include Bill Maher, anti-burqa feminist Elizabeth Farrelley, Booker prize-winner Ian McEwan, British comedian Ben Elton, Martin Amis, gay website Pink News, Christopher Hitchens, Philip Pullman, Monica Ali, Philip Hensher, Salman Rushdie, and Polly Toynbee.

A favourite tactic used by the blog is pointing out that somebody's criticism of Islam has been supported by the BNP or some other far-right outfit. A stopped clock is right twice a day, Bob.

Brett Lock, a member of the gay rights group OutRage!, took objection to that group being lumped in with the BNP by Islamophobia Watch for its anti-sharia views. He e-mailed Pitt about Islamic laws on homosexuality and was allegedly told that "it's not homosexuality as such that's an offence but the sexual act itself. And you need four independent witnesses for a conviction." "That’s a great comfort, Bob", replied Lock. "Can you imagine if every heterosexual on the planet were forced under pain of death to be celibate? How would that work? It doesn’t even appear to work for those few (like Catholic clergy) who choose to give it a go. Why does Pitt appear to think that gays and lesbians can live under those conditions?"

The Leicester Secularist blog described Islamophobia Watch's contributors as "homophobic and antisemetic".

Peter Tatchell

One of the blog's favourite targets is gay activist Peter Tatchell. In September 2011 Tatchell attended an anti-EDL rally in Tower Hamlets, carrying a placard reading "Gays & Muslims UNITE! Stop the EDL". Tatchell reported that he received criticism from certain left-wing protestors, "some of whom said explicitly that our placards were 'insensitive…provocative…inappropriate…divisive” and that I am “racist…fascist…anti-Muslim.'" Tatchell added that "There was also hostility from a minority of Muslims who were part of the anti-EDL demonstration, including attempts to snatch and rip my placard... I was surrounded several times throughout the day by angry Muslim youths who ordered me: 'You must remove this placard…You can’t walk here with these words…We don’t allow gays in this area…Gays are not permitted here…We don’t have gays in Tower Hamlets.'"

Islamophobia Watch responded to this account by labelling Tatchell's actions as a "predictably divisive and disruptive... publicity stunt by an attention-seeking narcissist" and pointing out that someone from the EDL asked Tatchell to join them. The fact that Tatchell was attending an anti-EDL rally and carrying an anti-EDL sign and is therefore clearly not an EDL supporter was apparently lost in the confusion.

Johann Hari

British journalist Johann Hari criticised Islamophobia Watch for its reference to Peter Tatchell as "pro-Nazi" and its defence of Muslim homophobe Sir Iqbal Sacranie. "If I write a book calling Sacranie a homophobe and claim it was dictated to me by the Archangel Gabriel, will Pitt defend it as my religious view, and damn everyone who disagrees as 'Johann-phobic'?" he asks. "Islamophobia Watch – and the dense chunk of the hard left that adopts a similar approach – is trying to redefine consistent atheism as a form of racism."

Islamophobia Watch put up a rather feeble response to this, clarifying that its identification of Tatchell as "pro-Nazi" was because he called for the Muslim Council of Britain to be excluded from a Unite Against Fascism conference. Er, that's what qualifies as "pro-Nazi" now?

Later, the blog took Hari to task for describing Dutch Labour Party council member Ehsan Jami as "an intelligent, softly-spoken 22-year-old [who] believes there should be no compromise, ever, on the rights of women and gay people and novelists and cartoonists", Sullivan's objection to this statement being that Jami once co-wrote an anti-Islamic article with Geert Wilders. The same post criticises Hari for being friends with Maryam Namazie, whom it identifies as a "nutter" who accused the Muslim Council of Britain of wanting to execute gays.

"They shamefully call Maryam 'a nutter' for opposing Islamic fundamentalist homophobia, when she has witnessed it first hand in Iran", said Hari in an article about the blog's post. "They then smear Eshan as aligned with Geert Wilders, without pointing out he has in fact condemned Wilders' disgraceful calls for the Koran to be banned, saying instead that 'everyone should read it.' They should be deeply ashamed of their attack on these brave ex-Muslims."

The blog has also stated that "Johann Hari has always been one of our favourite Islamophobes", but acknowledged that "to be fair, he does take a stand against the more egregious examples of anti-Muslim bigotry."

Assimilated Moderate Muslim Nightclub Owners?

At first glance, they are a perfect example of US Muslims who have managed to integrate into non-Muslim society. They are successful businessmen owning multiple nightclubs selling alcohol, and, just like many of the Muslims in the UK who belong to pedophile rings that prey on non-Muslim children, they even have Western nicknames. But scratch beyond the surface and you find links to drug dealing, murder, sexual assault, and financial support for Islamic terrorist groups. And just in case you assume drug dealing could never be motivated by faith in Islam, you'd be wrong.

From the American-Statesman:

Drug deals. Weapons purchases. Ties to a prison gang and a militant Islamic group and even a potential link to an unsolved homicide.

That was the list of allegations federal officials laid out against an Austin nightclub owner and nine of his associates in a dramatic hearing Tuesday.

Arrested last week on money laundering and drug charges, Yassine Enterprises owner Hussein Ali "Mike" Yassine, his brother, Mohammed Ali "Steve" Yassine, and eight others appeared in federal court and heard more details about the cases against them.

Mike Yassine, who owns eight Austin nightclubs, and the other suspects in the case face a variety of charges. Some are accused of cocaine distribution, purchases of guns to be used during drug deals and money laundering dating back to 2007.

Officials linked one suspect to the Texas Syndicate prison gang. They also said thousands of dollars were transferred to a Yassine relative in Lebanon who is reportedly connected to the militant group Hezbollah, considered a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.

Prosecutors for the first time also revealed that Mike Yassine is a "person of interest" in a case being investigated by the Austin Police Department's homicide cold case unit. Austin police declined to provide additional details Tuesday, including the name of the alleged victim.

Mike Yassine might have also threatened witnesses, officials said, and is being investigated as part of a sexual assault case.

Judge Dennis Green denied bail for Mike Yassine and Steve Yassine. Bail for four others — including a third Yassine brother, Hadi Ali Yassine — ranged from $10,000 to $25,000. Bail rulings for the other suspects will be made at a later date, officials said.

Outside the courtroom on Tuesday, their father, Ali Yassine, said his sons are not guilty of the charges against them. "My boys ... everybody's innocent," he said. "They're very good boys."

Also charged in the case are Marisse Marthe "Madi" Ruales, Karim Faiq, Alejandro "Cueta" Melendrez, Edgar Orsini, Nizar "Nino" Hakiki, Amar Thabet Araf and Sami Derder, all Central Texas residents who authorities say have various levels of involvement with the purported crimes.

During raids on the suspects' homes and businesses last week, investigators said they seized more than 400 boxes of evidence.

They also report finding $200,000 in cash in a safe at the Yassine Enterprises offices on West Fourth Street, as well as cashier's checks totaling $45,000 made out to a member of the Yassine family in Lebanon. That man is associated with Hezbollah, IRS agent James Neff testified.

The searches also turned up a bogus University of Texas diploma with Mike Yassine's name, prosecutors said.

The American-Statesman has learned that businesses linked to Mike Yassine currently owe almost $600,000 in state sales and mixed-beverage taxes. His bank accounts have been frozen by the state comptroller's office, his attorney said in court.

Yassine Enterprises, owns eight Austin bars: Pure, Spill, Kiss & Fly, Treasure Island, Hyde, Fuel, Malaia and Roial. They've remained closed since last week's arrests and, officials said, will likely remain that way for the foreseeable future after the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission obtained a court order that blocks all eight nightclubs from selling or serving alcohol.

Mike Yassine is also part owner of Stack Burger Bar, which is still open for business. Its liquor license remains intact, according to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission.

Randel Gillette, an agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, testified Tuesday that an informant who worked for the FBI became involved with the Yassines and their associates in 2007.

Investigators testified that Mike Yassine told the informant, who posed as a drug dealer — and whose accounts have driven much of the case — that he wanted to launder $200,000 to $1 million in narcotics money through his clubs. The informant's name was not released.

Initially, Mike Yassine and Steve Yassine cut the informant checks from Yassine Enterprises for the drugs, but Mike Yassine later wanted the informant to pose as a cleaning service instead to appear more legitimate, investigators said.

The government's evidence against the suspects, Gillette said, includes numerous recorded conversations, videos and surveillance of Steve Yassine and the informant arranging drug transactions, gun purchases and various other illegal activities.

"Steve was very interested in gaining profit from the drug trade," Gillette said. "He seemed very eager to get involved with that."

Steve Yassine first bought 30 grams of marijuana from the informant in late 2007, Gillette said.

The two also tried to buy cocaine from Orsini, a proposition that made the informant nervous because he did not know the man, Gillette said. He said the informant claimed he would disappear if anything went wrong during the deal.

"Steve responded, ‘If that happens, I'll make (Orsini) disappear,' " Gillette said.

Steve Yassine, a legal permanent U.S. resident originally from Lebanon, has not filed a tax return in four years, Gillette said. His income came from doing work for his brother Mike Yassine. He also falsified loan documents on which he said he was a citizen, Gillette said.

Steve Yassine's defense attorney Stephen Orr questioned the charges, saying his client was led on by the FBI informant.

"Every single act he is accused of was initiated by your source," Orr said.

He also asked why his client was not arrested sooner.

"If he's such a dangerous criminal, why not get him off the streets in 2008?" Orr said.

Attorneys for several other defendants, including Mike Yassine, made similar arguments, but Gillette said making the arrests earlier would have jeopardized the investigation.

Neff, the IRS agent, testified that middle brother Hadi Yassine was present during conversations between the informant and his brothers. Hadi Yassine was starting a beverage company called Famous Vodka for which Mike Yassine gave him $100,000 in drug money, Neff said. Hadi Yassine is not a U.S. citizen, Neff said.

Neff testified that Ruales was employed in Yassine Enterprises' corporate office. She had an on-again, off-again romantic relationship with Mike Yassine, Neff said.

Neff said Ruales would cut checks from the company to the informant as payment for drug purchases.

"The cash brought in by the confidential source was being laundered through Yassine Enterprises," Neff said.

When arrested, she said that "all she did was take orders from Mike Yassine," Neff said, although investigators reportedly have video evidence that shows Ruales knew what was going on. She hasn't reported any income from Yassine Enterprises in at least a decade, according to the IRS.

Neff said that when the company's "do-everything guy," Rommel Gomez, faced domestic violence charges, Ruales, on behalf of Mike Yassine, offered Gomez's wife as much as $250,000 to drop the charges — an act that investigators called witness tampering.

Gomez is in custody in Williamson County on unrelated charges, officials said.

Recordings show that the informant, Hakiki and Steve Yassine were involved in purchasing large amounts of narcotics, Gillette said. Steve Yassine introduced the informant to Hakiki because the informant said he wanted to buy a gun to protect himself. He told the informant that Hakiki previously sold him some hashish and would also sell guns, Gillette said.

The informant purchased a .22-caliber pistol and later a 9 mm Taurus handgun from Hakiki, and transactions were made at Steve Yassine's office and home, Gillette said.

Gillette testified that the informant met Melendrez, who goes by "Alex" or "Cueta," at a Yassine nightclub. The informant purchased cocaine from Melendrez there, and during the transaction, Melendrez put some of the drug on his finger, shoved it in the informant's mouth and said, "If you snitch on me, I'll kill you and your family," Gillette said.

Gillette said Melendrez "has history" with the Texas Syndicate prison gang. During the hearing, Melendrez stood up and told the judge he was not a member of the gang, which has been linked to murders and drug trafficking.

Is the Bible more Bloodthirsty than the Qur'an?

In a word, no.  This is the answer even before we take the respective theologies behind understanding the two books into consideration.

Amount of Violence

From Steve Wells, the guy behind the the Skeptic's Annotated Quran & Bible:

Number of Cruel or Violent Passages

Bible 1214

Quran 527

So the Bible has more than twice as many cruel or violent passages as does the Quran. But the Bible is a much bigger book. How do they compare when size is taken into account?

 Violence and Cruelty Total verses Percent

Bible      1214              31173         3.89

Quran    527                6236           8.45

When expressed as a percentage of cruel or violent verses (at least as marked in the SAB/Q), the Quran has more than twice that of the Bible. (8.45 vs. 3.89%)

Nature of Violence

To summarize; the violence in the Bible is descriptive, i.e. it is applied to a certain group at a certain time, against groups which no longer exist (e.g. Canaanites). Whilst the violence in the Qur'an is prescriptive, i.e. it contains open ended commands to slay pagans, Christians, Jews and other unbelievers (e.g. Qur'an 9:5 ). This is not apologetics, it's common sense. Open up a Bible and Qur'an and read the passages for yourself.

Muslims will respond, "But every ayah has a context!" Of course, this is true. But this context can rarely be gleaned from the Qur'an itself, which is an extremely vague text. In addition to this, when one does the legwork and reads the supplementary hadith and tafsir literature, you will find they tend to support the assertions of critics.

Raymond Ibrahim deals with this in more detail:

When the Qur'an's violent verses are juxtaposed with their Old Testament counterparts, they are especially distinct for using language that transcends time and space, inciting believers to attack and slay nonbelievers today no less than yesterday. God commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites—all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At no time did God give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by extension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill gentiles. On the other hand, though Islam's original enemies were, like Judaism's, historical (e.g., Christian Byzantines and Zoroastrian Persians), the Qur'an rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book—"until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled" and to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them."

The two Arabic conjunctions "until" (hata) and "wherever" (haythu) demonstrate the perpetual and ubiquitous nature of these commandments: There are still "people of the book" who have yet to be "utterly humbled" (especially in the Americas, Europe, and Israel) and "idolaters" to be slain "wherever" one looks (especially Asia and sub-Saharan Africa). In fact, the salient feature of almost all of the violent commandments in Islamic scriptures is their open-ended and generic nature: "Fight them [non-Muslims] until there is no persecution and the religion is God's entirely. [Emphasis added.]" Also, in a well-attested tradition that appears in the hadith collections, Muhammad proclaims:

I have been commanded to wage war against mankind until they testify that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God; and that they establish prostration prayer, and pay the alms-tax [i.e., convert to Islam]. If they do so, their blood and property are protected. [Emphasis added.]

This linguistic aspect is crucial to understanding scriptural exegeses regarding violence. Again, it bears repeating that neither Jewish nor Christian scriptures—the Old and New Testaments, respectively—employ such perpetual, open-ended commandments.

Chronological Shift in Violence

This is one of the most important factors to take into consideration. If you are going to criticize a holy book for what you believe it advocates to its followers, then you must read the text like a believer would. If a book contains a large amount of violence in it but finishes by telling its readers in the second half of the book to be pacifists and behave like cute little bunny rabbits, does it advocate violence or pacifism? Of course, the answer is that it advocates pacifism. Likewise if a book begins by describing pacifism but finishes by telling its readers to "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them", that book logically advocates violence.

All of the "positive" violence committed in the Bible is found in the Old Testament. The New Testament contains absolutely no exhortations to violence. Quite the opposite, Jesus advocates extreme pacifism. Christians believe they are a part of the "New Covenant" described in the New Testament , not the Old Covenant described in the Old Testament. 

Muslims do not have an "old" or "new" covenant to filter their text through. However, what they do have is something very similar, it is the doctrine of Abrogation, where later Qur'anic verse naturally supersede earlier ones. This would be fine if like the Bible all the violence was confined to the beginning, but this is not the case. Don't take my word for it. Read the Qur'an in chronological order and the shift from pacifism to violence is unmissable. This results in rendering almost all of the peaceful verses abrogated and useless.

Violence in Other Holy Text

Unlike the Bible for Christianity, the Qur'an is not Islam's sole religious holy text. In fact it only constitutes a very small percentage of it. Mainstream Islam (Sunni Islam, followed by up to 90 percent of all Muslims), also adheres to the Sira and Hadith which collectively form Muhammad's Sunnah.

Apologists like to downplay their importance, but, if you haven't guessed it already, they're even named after it. If the Five Pillars of Islam could never be hand-waved away as irrelevant in a discussion on Islam, then nor can the Sira and Hadith. This is because the Five Pillars are not simply "Muslim" doctrines, they are in fact a set of Sunni doctrines. And these important doctrines are not found in the Qur'an, they are found in Muhammad's Sunnah. If a Muslim or apologist wants to discount the Sunnah (which is also followed by the Shi'ites), they'd also have to discount the Five Pillars. In essence you'd be discussing a form of Islam that does not exist, or is followed by such few numbers that it is insignificant.

When the additional texts are taken into consideration, there is ten times as much violent material contained within Islamic scriptures than there is in Christian ones.

From Bill Warner:

The Koran is the smallest of the three books, also called the Trilogy. It is only 16% of the Trilogy text. This means that the Sunna is 84% of the word content of Islam's sacred texts. This statistic alone has large implications. Most of the Islamic doctrine is about Mohammed, not Allah. The Koran says 91 different times that Mohammed's is the perfect pattern of life. It is much more important to know Mohammed than the Koran. This is very good news. It is easy to understand a biography about a man. To know Islam, know Mohammed.

It turns out that jihad occurs in large proportion in all three texts. Here is a chart about the results:

It is very significant that the Sira devotes 67% of its text to jihad. Mohammed averaged an event of violence every six weeks for the last nine years of his life. Jihad was what made Mohammed successful. Here is a chart of the growth of Islam.

Basically, when Mohammed was a preacher of religion, Islam grew at the rate of ten new Muslims per year. But when he turned to jihad, Islam grew at an average rate of ten thousand per year. All the details of how to wage jihad are recorded in great detail. The Koran gives the great vision of jihad -- world conquest by the political process. The Sira is a strategic manual, and the Hadith is a tactical manual, of jihad.

Now let's go to the Hebrew Bible. When we count all the political violence, we find that 5.6% of the text is devoted to it. There is no admonition towards political violence in the New Testament.

When we count the magnitude of words devoted to political violence, we have 327,547 words in the Trilogy and 34,039 words in the Hebrew Bible. The Trilogy has 9.6 times as much wordage devoted to political violence as the Hebrew Bible. 

Further Reading

My response is only a very brief one, so, in addition to the inline links provided, I would like to direct you to other articles that deal with the same issue and more. 

Christianity and Islam: A Side by Side Comparison, from the excellent resource, TheReligionOfPeace.com: 

Each year, thousands of Christian homes and churches are torched or bombed by Muslim mobs, and hundreds of Christians, including dozens of priests, pastors, nuns and other church workers are murdered at the hands of Islamic extremists. The so-called justification varies, from charges of apostasy or evangelism, to purported "blasphemy" or "insulting" Islam. Innocent people have even been hacked to death by devout Muslims over cartoons.

Yet, there is little if any violent retaliation from religious Christians to the discrimination, kidnapping, rape, torture, mutilation and murder that is routinely reported from nations with Muslim majorities. Neither is there is any significant deadly terrorism in the name of Jesus, as there is in the stated cause of Allah each and every day. Muslim clerics in the West do not fear for their safety as do their Christian counterparts.

The "Christian world" and the Islamic world contrast sharply in other ways as well, from the disparate condition of human rights and civil liberties to economic status. An astonishing 70% of the world's refugees are Muslims - usually seeking to live in Christian-based countries.

While Western societies take seriously "scandals" such as Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo (where no one has actually been killed), Muslims routinely turn a blind eye to their own horrible atrocities, even those committed explicitly in the name of Allah. The Muslim world has yet to offer a single apology for the tens of millions of lives consumed by centuries of relentless Jihad and slavery.

These sharp differences are almost certainly rooted in the underlying religions, which begin with the disparate teachings of Jesus and Muhammad... 

Keep reading....  

Flying Hijacked Planes into Glass Houses, again from TheReligionOfPeace.com:

In an article entitled, “Throwing Stones at the Quran from a Glass House”, The American Muslim claims that the verses of violence and war in the Bible can be misread in “exactly the same way as some verses in the Qur’an” (emphasis ours). In other words, the on-line magazine alleges that, like the Quran, there are Biblical verses with open-ended commands to violence that are not bound by historical context within the passage itself.

Our first clue that this probably isn’t true is the scarcity of Christian terrorist groups. Not too many people are losing their heads to fanatics screaming praises to Jesus (or Moses, Buddha or the many Hindu gods either) as they are to shouts of “Allah Akbar!” That there are so many Islamic terrorist groups composed of fundamentalists (or purists) of the Muslim faith is enough to impress any reasonable person that there is something far more dangerous about Islam.

Nevertheless, to support their claim, The American Muslim quotes sixteen of the worst passages that the Bible has to offer in the way of violence. Others are alluded to as well, but delving into these particular verses should be a large enough sample to expose whatever sophistry might be at play.

Keep reading....  

Homeless Charity Criticised Over BNP Link

The couple in charge of this charity, which claims it helps homeless veterans, are threatening to close it down if criticism of its links to the racist BNP continue. I say, "good riddance". Many Islamic charities provide financial support to terrorists, something which is explicitly endorsed by mainstream Islam, but no rational person would support them because they may also feed and clothe a few Muslims.

From The Observer:

The founder of a charity established by former members of the British National Party to help homeless soldiers has said he will close it down if it continues to be dogged by criticism from ex-servicemen and experts who question its credentials.

Soldiers off the Streets (SotS), a charity and limited company set up by Hugh William "Bill" Murray, the BNP's former secretary for Wales, who was once a close associate of the party's leader, Nick Griffin, was given charitable status in August 2010. Its latest accounts declare that it received about £6,000 in donations and lists its main activity as "social work without accommodation".

Three other former senior BNP members helped establish the charity. Daniel McDonald, who ran for the BNP in Horsham, resigned as a director in 2010, as did Christopher Robinson, an ex-serviceman who ran for the party in south Wales before his death two years ago. Griffin declared in 2009 that we are "involved in other veteran organisations such as ... Soldiers off the Streets. It definitely doesn't hurt the party to be connected to these groups."

Paul Jones, another BNP member, also helped establish the group but was "dismissed" according to SotS accounts. A spokesman for the organisation confirmed that another senior member had been expelled for making excessive expenses claims.

The charity says it provides "clothing, food and rehabilitation, including advice on post-traumatic stress disorder, alcoholism, drug abuse, housing and employment". But some have questioned its ability to deal with complex problems affecting veterans. Maurice Cousins of Nothing British, which campaigns against the BNP, wrote to the Charities Commission questioning SotS activities. "I raised issues surrounding the transparency of this organisation, their links to extremism and their qualifications for helping homeless veterans," Cousins confirmed.

Two ex-servicemen contacted by the Observer said they had become concerned about the group's activities. One alleged he was approached and offered accommodation in return for helping raise funds for the organisation, claims strenuously denied by the charity.

The ex-serviceman said SotS offered him an unfurnished flat for £400 a month – far more than he could afford – but said it would help him complete his benefit form to claim the cash. He said Murray had given him £30 to buy food and essentials after picking him up from the streets and taking him to a flat in the Midlands where he was met by a group of skinheads with no affiliation to the armed forces. "I didn't feel safe, so I just left," said the ex-serviceman, who asked to remain anonymous. Another serving soldier who worked with SotS described how he had been subjected to an online hate campaign for raising concerns about its activities.

SotS, which operates across the UK, has raised thousands of pounds in donations recorded on its Facebook page. It also sells merchandise such as badges, bumper stickers and wristbands. Its supporters claim it is doing vital work. Murray declared last year that "there could be as many as 10,000 [ex-soldiers] who will be homeless over Christmas and the problem is getting worse". However, homeless experts question the increasing emphasis in the charitable sector on the plight of veterans sleeping rough.

Government figures indicate there are around 1,800 "rough sleepers'" in England, of whom around 4% claim a military connection. A briefing from the respected charity Veterans Aid claims "many, on further investigation, prove not to be telling the truth. This is not surprising given that there are around 3,000 ex-service support bodies operating in the UK, offering help that is not available to those who are not veterans."

Murray and his partner, Marie, are sole officers of SotS, which claims to have helped 80 soldiers find accommodation. Murray said he had severed all links with the BNP and denied ex-soldiers helped by SotS were asked to raise funds for it.

"We've got a couple of lads that work with us, but they volunteered," he said. "We didn't ask them to join up. We've got a company that raises funds for us and we do events," he said, adding that the charity worked with landlords who had empty properties, helping SotS to find homes for ex-soldiers, and warned further accusations would make him reconsider his organisation's future.

"I will just say 'fuck it' and close it down. And then all the lads on the street can suffer and I'll name everybody that made us close it down. Anybody that stops it will be attacked for it and it won't be nothing to do with us."

Islamophobia Alert: Bigot Accuses Muslim Cleric of Abusing her 2 Young Boys, Innocent Muslim Jailed

No, not really. A Muslim women reports the sexual abuse of her children by a cleric in the UK and is branded a sinful traitor, who is then persecuted by her religious community. Whilst both are abhorrent, this is one of the many differences between clerical abuse in Catholicism and clerical abuse in Islam. I will most likely expound upon why the often-made comparison of the two is fallacious and inaccurate in a later post.

From the Nottingham Post:

AN IMAM who sexually assaulted two boys has been jailed for three years.

Yazeid Osama Aqqad, 24, of Alfreton Road, Radford, touched one boy when he was sitting on his lap on two occasions and abused another boy after inviting him to sit on his lap.

The mother of the two boys has been "vilified" by the Muslim community for reporting the assaults, Nottingham Crown Court heard.

She has been subjected to "a number of unpleasant incidents" including an episode at her home and damage to her car, Sarah Knight, prosecuting, said.

The mother told the court she felt the acts were aimed at encouraging her to withdraw the allegations because in the eyes of the Muslim community, she had committed a sin.

Aqqad denied the offences during his trial, but was found guilty unanimously of three allegations of sexual assault on a male child under the age of 13 years.

Judge Andrew Hamilton disqualified him from working with children and ordered him to sign the sex offenders' register for life.

Muslim leaders in Nottingham who were contacted by the Post condemned Aqqad's actions and said the mother was absolutely right to report him.

Councillor Mohammed Ibrahim, who represents Berridge ward on the city council said: "There are people in every community who break laws and if someone is found to have broken the law, they should be punished."

Eric Allen Bell: Loonwatch.com and Radical Islam

First some background on the article(s) and the author, Eric Allen Bell:

"In January of 2012 I wrote 3 consecutive articles for the Daily Kos. The first was entitled "Loowatch.com and Radical Islam". Here I pointed out the how Loonwatch only deflects criticism of radical Islam. I was also critical of Islamic theology while noting over and over that most Muslims were peaceful. The comments section of Daily Kos made me feel like I was attending my own funeral. It was like a public stoning. There wasn't much in the way of responding to any of the points laid out in my article but hundreds of comments accusing me of being "right wing" a "bigot" and an "lslamophobe". This was disappointing." (source)

Loonwatch.com and Radical Islam

Let me just come right out by saying that the vast majority of the estimated 1.67 billion Muslims around the world are clearly not terrorists. The newly coined term “Islamophobia” describes an irrational fear of Islam. But for LoonWatch.com any criticism of the Koran or of violent Jihad - even those criticisms that might have some legitimacy to them - even of radical Islam, are branded as Islamophobia and anyone who dares to raise questions about the nearly constant acts of Jihad going on increasingly around the world today is labeled a “Loon” - thus the title of their blog, LoonWatch.com.

It seems that Loonwatch is pretty much exclusively concerned with exposing the perceived enemies of Islam, including a compulsive and obsessive tit for tat over anything that Robert Spencer, of JihadWatch.com had to say. Unlike Pamela Geller or that nut in Florida who was preoccupied with burning the Koran, Spencer, whom I don't see eye to eye with either (I feel he might also be religiously motivated), presents himself in a rather rational, sober and scholarly fashion and I might add that neither he nor the other "Loons" have bombs strapped to them - only words. Something we cannot say for so many, many defenders of Islam.

Anyone can take a short stroll through YouTube and find numerous videos translated into English of Islamic clerics from many parts of the world calling for the death of all Jews, the Islamic takeover of the world, applauding the actions of Islamic terrorists and defending the practice of beating women, forcing young girls to marry grown men and promoting the most radical forms of Sharia (Islamic) Law. Surely Loonwatch.com has noticed this, but they have nothing to say on the subject - only criticism and attacks on anyone who dare suggest that within the Islamic world there might be room for improvement.

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

In time I became very disappointed by the deafening silence on the part of Loonwatch.com when it came to speaking out against the seemingly constant acts of Islamic terrorism, women in Islamic countries being stoned to death as a punishment for being raped, female genital mutilation, the rise of forced Islamic law in Libya, Tunisia and the rise of Islamism in Egypt, the many abuses that are so rampant in so much of the Islamic world today. Loonwatch.com, in my opinion, has an obligation to do more than stand by silently as if to give their consent while only focusing on defending "the religion of peace".

After over a year of communication with Loonwatch.com in the making of "Not Welcome" I have come to the realization that this organization is fundamentally a radical Islamic front, covering up for terrorism, spreading distorted information about the reality of rapidly spreading Islamic fundamentalism - through lies of omission.  To tell a half truth is to tell a lie and the lie that Loonwatch.com tells everyday is to cover up the atrocities within Islam and only focus on attacking its critics.

Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]...

I trust that everyone who reads this can think for yourself, but my sense is that if you are affiliated with this site: Loonwatch.com you are perhaps unknowingly supporting a group with terrorist / Islamist sympathies. Think of those Germans who did not stand up against or speak out against Hitler. And note the distinction between being a German, which is of course perfectly fine, and through silence giving ones consent for the atrocities of the Nazi regime, which is quite another thing entirely. We see here a similar scenario more and more with highly vocal Muslim representatives who have much to say about being percecuted wrongly but nothing much to say about Jihad and the violence associated with fundamentalist Islam.

Please note that there is a difference between the belief system called Islam and a person calling themselves a Muslim. I have tolerance for Muslims as I would for any other human being. But Islam as a belief system is another matter.

Obviously I feel strongly that Muslims have the same rights as everyone else to practice their religion in peace. But when an organization goes beyond that, I will speak up. My sense is that my movie "Not Welcome" makes it abundantly clear that I do support religious freedom for all and loath Islamophobia (the irrational fear of Islam). But I will call out anyone I am in contact with if they also have "Islamist" or terrorist sympathies.

In summary, it is clear that Loonwatch.com is in fact something of a terrorist spin control network, lacking basic empathy for human beings who are being victimized daily by the human rights abuses of fundamentalist Islam.

To give some perspective, what if any one of us created a news source whose only purpose was to attack and expose those people who had criticized American foreign policy, for instance, but we were totally unwilling to talk about what violence the American government had done and was doing that is wrong and in our name? Kind of sounds like Fox "News" actually. That is essentially what you have with Loonwatch.com and its relationship to radical Islam. So why would they only defend Allah while never holding the many radical Muslims accountable? Because the Koran commands them to do so - and when you follow the Koran literally like that - even when to do so defies basic empathy for other human beings... well, isn't that what fundamentalism is?

Read more..... 


How & Why Loonwatch.com is a Terrorist Spin Control Network

[...] Loonwatch unconditionally attacks criticism of Islam but they refuse to criticize the many, many Islamic clerics and terrorists who are hurting people in the name of Islam. Should a person have something to say publicly questioning the funneling of monies from Islamic charities to Islamic terrorist networks, Loonwatch is there to call them a “Loon” for even raising the question. That’s quite a clever system – a form of radical Islamic McCarthyism it seems – with the first line of defense being a blogoshere of misinformed infidels who will blurt out the word “Islamophobe” at the slightest mention that within Islam there might be a problem brewing. What a clever design. [...]

First let me make it clear that there is a difference between a Muslim and Islam. One is a human being and the other is a religious doctrine.  No matter how many times I repeat this, there will always be a fair share of people who refuse to comprehend it and will go on the attack mode saying that I am insulting Muslims. Such was the case when I wrote an article entitled “Loonwatch.com and Radical Islam” 

The next day when I received the usual Loonwatch email containing the next round of articles on who they had singled out to be a “Loon” I saw a photograph of my own face blown up with the words “Loon At Large” over it. The article itself ended with a demand that I be silenced and a link to Daily Kos asking people to write in and demand that I be censored.  

My assertion in the article was and is that Loonwatch is protecting Jihadists and terrorists through lies of omission.  Criticism ranged from emails I received saying that “it was about time someone stood up to Loonwatch”, to people who simply disagreed and felt Loonwatch to be a legitimate Islamophobia watchdog site and that my point was a bit of a stretch, to those who immediately took to the blogosphere, parroting all of the talking points of the Loonwatch smear piece, saying that I was “right wing” and a follower of Robert Spencer and a bigot and so on.

So how can it be that I could make a documentary defending the rights of an Islamic community to build a 53,000 square foot mega mosque and then only months later publish an article with so many criticisms of Islam while accusing a major Islamic blog of being a “terrorist spin control network”? Am I as they say, just somebody with a split personality, or a “Loon” or some kind of an attention-seeking bigot? What happened?

What happened is that my investigation into the theology of Islam continued. And I started to notice more and more of a correlation between some of the violent passages in the Koran and the Hadiths and many of the acts of brutality being carried out by radical Muslims in the world – mostly overseas.

Then when I posted some of these news articles, from Al Jazeera and other international news sources on my Facebook wall, lively discussions and sometimes even debates took place concerning the fact that although the Koran very clearly commands violence in a few passages, most Muslims do not take those passages literally. And thank God, or Allah or Zeus or whoever one imagines to be ruling over the world that most Muslims do not follow all of the commandments in the Koran to the letter or take those dark passages literally.

During those debates I was threatened twice. The first time was from a Muslim computer programmer out of Saudi Arabia who told me he was going to destroy me after I said that I thought Mohammed was too violent, had killed too many people to be considered a holy man (Mohammed personally beheaded hundreds of people and is considered the ideal man in Islam).  I did not take this threat too seriously but soon after my website was hit with a denial of service attack. The second threat came from a Muslim man in New York who told me “I will cut off your dick and stuff it down your throat”. This time I not only contacted Facebook but also contacted the FBI.

While all of this was happening I continued to receive newsletter emails from Loonwatch.com every few days. Their content was mostly obsessed with Robert Spencer and his blog called JihadWatch.com so I put myself on that mailing list as well. It was more than just strange to be receiving these two newsletters every week, each with their own bias. Spencer was meticulously pointing out nearly every act of Islamic inspired violence around the world while Loonwatch responded, tit for tat, by calling him a “Loon” over and over. I’m not sure what Spencer’s preoccupation with Jihad is really all about. He seems a little too cozy with the radical Evangelicals to me. That said, when I click on the links in his articles – for instance this one: “I was doing my duty as a Muslim,' says father who handed out leaflets saying gay people should be hanged”  sure enough, Spencer wasn’t making this stuff up. In fact the Daily Mail in the UK did report on several Muslim men handing out fliers demanding that homosexuals be executed by way of hanging for disobeying Islam – in England.

Spencer’s take on this is naturally seen through the lens of his own sense of reality – a reality strongly motivated by his own reasons - which are not entirely clear to me. Loonwatch would have us believe that Spencer hates all Muslims, but that is not the impression I come away with. That Loonwatch hates Robert Spencer will become immediately self evident to anyone who browses their site. And how does Loonwatch report on the many, many Islamic inspired hate crimes in the world today? By waiting for someone to say anything critical about them and then branding that person a “Loon”.

The Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic charity in the United States. Headquartered in Richardson, Texas, it was originally known as Occupied Land Fund. In 2007, federal prosecutors brought charges against the organization for funding Hamas and other "Islamic terrorist organizations". Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement) was founded in 1987 (The charter exhibits the influence of anti-Jew conspiracy theories throughout, as evidenced by the explicit mention of the "The Protocols of the Elder of Zion,") as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (an organization often credited as being the mother ship for Al Queda, those followers of “the religion of peace” who brought us 9/11). In the 1920s, an Egyptian school teacher, Hassan al-Banna, gathered discontent Muslims to found the Muslim Brotherhood.

According to a former prosecutor with the US Justice Department, John Loftus, “Al-Banna formed this nationalist group called the Muslim Brotherhood. Al-Banna was a devout admirer of Adolf Hitler and wrote to him frequently.” Loftus adds that Al-Banna was so persistent in his “admiration of the new Nazi Party that in the 1930s Al-Banna and the Muslim Brotherhood became a secret arm of Nazi Intelligence. With the goal of the Third Reich to develop the Muslim Brotherhood as an army inside Egypt.

For what it’s worth, here is what WikiPedia says about the connection between Hamas and the Council on American Islamic Relations (C.A.I.R.):

“Critics of CAIR, including six members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, have alleged ties between the CAIR founders and Hamas. The founders, Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad, had earlier been officers of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), described by a former FBI analyst and US Treasury Department intelligence official as "intimately tied to the most senior Hamas leadership." Both Ahmad and Awad participated in a meeting held in Philadelphia on October 3, 1993, that involved senior leaders of Hamas, the Holy Land Foundation (which was designated in 1995 by Executive Order, and later convicted in court, as an organization that had raised millions of dollars for Hamas) , and the IAP. Based on electronic surveillance of the meeting, the FBI reported that "the participants went to great length and spent much effort hiding their association with the Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas]." Participants at the meeting discussed forming a "political organization and public relations" body, "whose Islamic hue is not very conspicuous."

CAIR raised suspicions by raising its annual budget of around $3 million (as of 2007) in part through large donations from people and foundations identified with Arab governments.

How does this relate to Loonwatch? Loonwatch works with CAIR by broadcasting CAIR's point of view. They are very consistent on this. Loonwatch is never in disagreement with CAIR. CAIR thanks Loonwatch in their "Hate Report".

Connecting all of these dots is deeply, deeply concerning. Here is the math: Out of the Muslim Brotherhood come a number of terrorist organizations including Al Queda and Hamas. Out of Hamas comes C.A.I.R. and Loonwatch becomes a mirror for anything that C.A.I.R. wants to convey to Americans about how harmless Islam is. Perhaps I am reading this wrong, but it sure does not look right.

Read more..... 

Muslims (a.k.a. "Asians") and their Persecution of Non-Muslim Asians in the UK

Race hate fear over attacks on Sikhs

POLICE and community leaders say they are struggling to contain racial tensions in Derby after a young Sikh was badly hurt when ambushed by a gang of Muslims carrying hammers and crowbars.

Harjit Singh Sandhu, 22, was in hospital with a broken leg, ankle and nose and cuts to his face and head after being attacked for 20 minutes in the Normanton area on Monday.

About 50 Sikh youths went on to the streets to protest at the rising number of assaults by Muslim youths, but were dispersed by police. [...]  Harninder Singh, a close friend of Mr Sandhu, said: "It was a totally unprovoked attack and the worst thing was he ran into a few Muslim shops for help and received none. When they had finished he was absolutely covered in blood. I was with him last Wednesday when Muslim lads mounted the pavement and tried to run him over." 

Battered Stepney man in recovery

Monzur Rahman was left with a broken arm, damaged eye and lying unconscious in the street after the violent attack earlier this month.

The 39-year-old atheist claims he was brutally set upon by a pack of youths for failing to observe Ramadan. [...] He claims he was then approached by a group of around ten young men who asked him why he wasn’t observing Ramadan. When he replied that he was an atheist they are believed to have chased him to nearby Walburgh Street, attacking him outside his home.

Monzur was reportedly battered until unconscious and later taken to the Royal London Hospital. His left arm was broken and metal bolts later put in.

Minister beaten after clashing with Muslims on his TV show

A [Pakistan-born] Christian minister who has had heated arguments with Muslims on his TV Gospel show has been brutally attacked by three men who ripped off his cross and warned: ‘If you go back to the studio, we’ll break your legs.' [...] Mr Samuel, based at Heston United Reformed Church, West London, said: ‘He put his hand into my window, which was half open, and grabbed my hair and opened the door.

He started slapping my face and punching my neck. He was trying to smash my head on the steering wheel. Then he grabbed my cross and pulled it off and it fell on the floor. He was swearing. The other two men came from the car and took my laptop and Bible.’ [...]  He said that he, his wife Louisa, 48, and his son Naveed, 19, now fear for their safety, and police have given them panic alarms. ‘I am frightened and depressed,’ he said. ‘My show is not confrontational.’

Hindu girl tells of school hall hammer attack

A TEENAGE Hindu girl who suffered a fractured skull when a gang of Muslim youths rampaged through her school with hammers and axes told of her ordeal yesterday.

Radhika Shukla, 15, was walking to the dinner hall at Derby Moor Community School when up to 10 youths burst in, smashing more than 40 windows and assaulting staff and pupils.

Radhika was chased, pushed to the floor and hit on the head with a hammer. She said: "I was crying and trying to roll up in a ball as he was hitting me. He was telling me he was going to kill me. I just closed my eyes and hoped he would stop."

She suffered a fractured skull, internal bleeding in her ear, a black eye and bruising on her back and shoulders. [...] Muslim youths had sprayed graffiti supporting Osama bin Laden on a school building, and even Muslim children from Derby Moor had joined in the attack. Two members of staff and four other pupils were injured.

Sikh man 'was beaten up by gang in street'

A Sikh man told a jury he was beaten up by a group of Muslim-looking men who knocked off his turban and pulled off his necklace and religious pendant.

The 25-year-old alleged victim suffered a cut head and other injuries after being hit to the ground and struck with a weapon, possibly a spanner, it was claimed. [...] He looked out to see five or six Asian males, of Muslim appearance and dress, whom he did not know. [...] The court heard the necklace and religious pendant were later found and returned to the complainant.

Mark Achurch, prosecuting, said one of the witnesses claimed he heard members of the group shouting "Allah, Allah" during the alleged attack.

Five in court on shopkeeper murder

Five men have appeared in court accused of murdering a shopkeeper who was beaten to death during a robbery at his store.

Umare Aslam, 20, Muawaz Khalid, 20, Shoaib Khan, 18, Nabeel Shafi, 18, and Rehman Afzal, 18, are charged with the murder and robbery of Huddersfield shopkeeper Gurmail Singh.

Mr Singh, 63, died from head injuries after he was struck at least nine times with a weapon, believed to be a hammer, in the shop in the Cowcliffe area of Huddersfield on February 20.

Police protect girls forced to convert to Islam

Extremist Muslims who force vulnerable teenage girls to convert to Islam are being targeted by police, Met chief Sir Ian Blair has revealed.

 Police are working with universities to clamp down on "aggressive conversions" during which girls are beaten up and forced to abandon university courses.

The Hindu Forum of Britain claims hundreds of mostly Sikh and Hindu girls have been intimidated by Muslim men who take them out on dates before terrorising them until they convert.

Sir Ian spoke about the problem at a conference organised by the forum.

Wear headscarf or face death, woman told in Britain

A non-Muslim woman in Britain, who wears Western clothes, was told to wear a hijab or face death, a media report said Monday.

The non-Muslim Asian pharmacist in Whitechapel said she was told to cover up with a hijab headscarf or face boycott, the media report said.

She said that later a second man said: 'If you keep doing these things, we will kill you.'

UK’s Hindu And Sikh Organizations Also Accused Muslim Groups Of Sexually Targeting Their Communities

A day after UKs’ former home secretary Jack Straw blamed some Pakistani Muslim men for targeting “vulnerable” White girls sexually, UK’s Hindu and Sikh organizations also publicly accused Muslim groups of the same offence. [...] Sikhs and Hindus are annoyed that Straw had shown concern for White girls and not the Hindu and the Sikh teenage girls who have been coaxed by some Pakistani men for sex and religious conversion.

“Straw does other communities a disservice by suggesting that only white girls were targets of this predatory behaviour. We raised the issue of our girls with the previous government and the police on several occasions over the last decade. This phenomenon has been there because a minority of Islamic extremists view all ‘non believers’ as legitimate targets,” said director NSO Inderjit Singh.

Minister to take legal action after radio show cancelled

A minister is taking legal action against a radio station which allegedly cancelled his show because his defence of Christianity was offensive to Muslims. [...] The dispute arose during a show where Mr Masih and his co-presenter Asif Mall debated with prominent Muslim speaker Zakir Naik, who the pair said had patronised Christianity during a previous speaking appearance. [...] Mr Mall then accused the guest of having a "superficial knowledge" of holy texts, including the Bible and the Koran, and his comment is said to have offended followers of Islam. 

Mr Masih made an on-air apology, he said, reading from a statement prepared by station manager Javed Sattar, but refused to apologise in person at Glasgow's Central Mosque because he did not feel he had anything to apologise for, and feared for his safety should he appear in person.

Muslim students preventing Hindus from using QMU's Multi-faith centre

A row has broken out at Queen Mary University, London about the use of its multi-faith centre. The National Hindu Students Forum (UK) claims that members of the Queen Mary’s Islamic Society have been physically preventing students of the university’s Hindu society from offering prayers at the multi-faith centre on the premises by standing 15 students at the door. The last Hindu prayer in the evenings is normally at 6pm, but the Muslim group who have a prayer session before the Hindus say that there is "no demand for the use of the multifaith centre by other faith communities" and they cannot therefore allow Hindus to use the premises even though they have a valid booking for its use. 

The Islamic Society refuses to move out of the room even though we have a booking to use it for this week (13 March 2009). They did not even allow security to enter the premises and we were left standing outside the room unable to offer our prayers,” explained Kajal Valani, Chair of the National Hindu Students Forum. “The men who stood barricading the door issued verbal threats to us. We are going there again this evening, and we await to see if good sense will prevail.” 

Minority Report: Freshers week 'seduction website' angers Sikhs

Sikhs have angrily condemned a website (left) which appears to be run by young male Muslims and boasts about seducing Sikh women during freshers week at university.

 The website contains pictures of at least 25 Sikh women which the site's administrators claim to have seduced alongside highly provocative remarks about the women and the Sikh religion.

 Timed to coincide with the start of the university year - described in the site as a time when "[Muslim] soldiers go hunting for Sikh slappers" - the website's creators encourage friends and readers to send in pictures of Sikh women they have seduced during freshers week.

Machine-gun thug killed 'blameless' pair in a row over parking 

After his car was blocked in by a van, Ayub Khan went to fetch a MAC-10 pistol capable of firing 1,000 rounds a minute.

Khan, then only 20, gunned down hotelier Amarjit Singh Tiwana and his nephew Rajinder Singh Tiwana at point-blank range.

He then turned the weapon on Amarjit’s daughter Harjinder but did not fire – possibly because the gun had jammed.

Khan fled the country after the attack but was extradited from Bangladesh in 2010. [...]

Harjinder Tiwana watched in horror as the gunman aimed the gun at her, before the gang fled with hoods pulled over their faces. In February 2004 she identified Khan as the gunman. She told the court: ‘I will never forget the face of the man who murdered my father.’

Mobile phone evidence revealed that after leaving the scene Khan repeatedly phoned another man, Abu Bakr Mansha Khan – who was later jailed for six years in 2006 for plotting to kill a decorated British soldier, Corporal Mark Byles.

Cassetteboy vs Nick Griffin vs Question Time

This is an absolutely hilarious video of the hilarious Miss Nick Griffin.

British National Party and Ethnic Minorities

I remember when I first heard the claim that the British National Party (BNP) had some limited support from a few Hindus and Sikhs, and was absolutely dumbfounded.  There is no doubt that the persecution of non-Muslim Asians (primarily Hindu and Sikh, but also atheist and Christian) in the UK by Muslim Asians was a contributing factor behind this.  Also through the years, the BNP have tried to soften their image and were even forced by law to allow membership to ethnic minorities. However, this doesn't change the fact that it's a racist organization, formed as a splinter group from the National Front, that only exists for the furtherance of its racist ideals.

To anyone among the ethnic minorities who may be thinking of supporting organizations like the BNP due to their hard stance on Islam, please reconsider.  Yes, they pale in comparison to the extremism found within mainstream Islam, a belief system which (when followed) would execute Hindus and Sikhs (i.e. idolators/pagans) if they refused to convert, but fighting hate with more hate is never the answer. The BNP is following a familiar pattern that can be found among some, but certainly not all, "Islam critical" sites/blogs/forumers which are simply using Islam as a platform to push their racist views. An example of this would be in how some discussions related to Muslim population growth quickly turn to criticism of Mexican and African immigrants or multiculturalism.

Information on BNP members and violence from Wikipedia:

John Hagan claims that the BNP has conducted right-wing extremist violence in order to gain "institutionalized power". Critics of the BNP, such as Human Rights Watch in a 1997 report, have asserted that the party recruits from skinhead groups and that it promotes racist violence.

In the past, Nick Griffin has defended the threat of violence to further the party's aims. In 1986, when Griffin was Deputy Chair of the NF, he advised his audience at an anti-IRA rally to use the "traditional British methods of the brick, the boot and the fist." After the BNP won its first council seat in 1993, he wrote that the BNP should not be a "postmodernist rightist party" but "a strong, disciplined organisation with the ability to back up its slogan 'Defend Rights for Whites' with well-directed boots and fists. When the crunch comes, power is the product of force and will, not of rational debate". In 1997 he said: "It is more important to control the streets of a city than its council chambers."

A BBC Panorama programme reported on a number of BNP members who have had criminal convictions, some racially motivated. The BBC's list is extensive. Some of the more notable convictions include:

John Tyndall had convictions for assault and organising paramilitary neo-Nazi activities. In 1986 he was jailed for conspiracy to publish material likely to incite racial hatred.

In 1998, Nick Griffin was convicted of violating section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986, relating to incitement to racial hatred. He received a nine-month prison sentence, suspended for two years, and was fined £2,300.

Kevin Scott, who in 2001 was the BNP's North East regional organiser, has two convictions for assault and using threatening words and behaviour.

Joe Owens, now expelled but previously a BNP candidate in Merseyside and former bodyguard to Nick Griffin, served eight months in prison for sending razor blades in the post to Jewish people and another term for carrying CS gas and knuckledusters.

Tony Wentworth, former BNP student organiser, was convicted alongside Owens for assaulting demonstrators at an anti-BNP event in 2003.

Colin Smith, who in 2004 was the BNP's South East London organiser, has 17 convictions for burglary, theft, possession of drugs and assaulting a police officer.

Richard Edmonds, at the time BNP National Organiser, was sentenced to three months in prison in 1994 for his part in a racist attack. Edmonds threw a glass at the victim as he was walking past an East London pub where a group of BNP supporters was drinking. Others then 'glassed' the man in the face and punched and kicked him as he lay on the ground, including BNP supporter Stephen O'Shea, who was jailed for 12 months. Another BNP supporter, Simon Biggs, was jailed for four and a half years for his part in the attack.

Tony Lecomber cases

Tony Lecomber was imprisoned for three years for possessing explosives, after a nail bomb exploded while he was carrying it to the offices of the Workers' Revolutionary Party in 1985. He was imprisoned for three years in 1991, whilst the BNP's Director of Propaganda, for assaulting a Jewish teacher.

Robert Cottage case

In 2007, Robert Cottage, a former BNP council candidate, was sentenced to two and a half years for possession of explosives but a conspiracy charge against him was withdrawn after two juries had been unable to reach a verdict. The prosecution claimed that Cottage had plans to assassinate Tony Blair and Liberal Democrat peer Lord Greaves.

The chemicals recovered by police are believed to be the largest explosives haul ever found at a house in Britain.

MuslimWiki, NarSakSasLee and Jagged 85: The Insanity behind Pro-Islamic Propaganda

Have you ever heard complaints about Wikipedia's pro-Islam bias? If you're reading this, then the chances are you have. Many people have commented on this problem at Wikipedia (e.g. here, here, here, here and here).

Now try imagining how ridiculous a Muslim user's edits would have to be before Wikipedia finally decided to take action against them by deleting all of their contributions to the site. Too hard to imagine? Well, fear not, MuslimWiki, that bastion of neutrality, with the help of its genocidal and racist editors, is about to remind us.

Jagged 85

The now infamous Wikipedia user Jagged 85 was a Muslim editor who contributed to 8,115 separate Wikipedia articles with over 67,000 edits until being caught in 2010. Focusing efforts on improving the image of Islam and downplaying the achievements of the Western world (particularly in regards to the history of science, technology, and the so-called Islamic "Golden Age"), for 5 years he/she was left largely unhindered, misrepresenting sources in all kinds of ways, misrepresentations which were then reproduced all over the net by other sites which use Wikipedia as a source.

He was the main contributor to the many inaccurate Islam/Science/Golden Age articles which are still being copied and pasted all over the Internet by Muslims, and more than 20% of Wikipedia's "Timeline of historic inventions" was provided by him. Some of the problems identified by Wikipedia users included:

• Misrepresenting a source by quoting material utterly out of context 
• Reporting that a source supports a claim that it simply does not and sometimes explicitly does not
• Claiming that a certain figure invented something or was the first to do something, when the cited source simply says that they made or did that thing, without any suggestion that they were the first to do so
• Taking a passing comment about some connection to a modern theory and claiming that the Islamic thinker being discussed invented that theory or is an important forefather of that theory
• Reporting only one point from a source, even if a minor one, and ignoring the contrary position it reports, even if that is the majority position
• Rather than withdraw a claim, if it is pointed out that the cited source does not support the claim, finding a source of any quality to use instead, even when that may be of much lower quality than the original source, which made the opposite claim
• Inventing claims and citing sources connected with the issue but which simply do not support those claims
• Using questionable, inappropriate and unreliable sources
• Using exceptionally poor sources for exceptional claims

NarSakSasLee

Long time "Japanese" Wikipedia user NarSakSasLee a.k.a. IslamicWarrior has recently created a new user account for himself. More accurately, he's created several, but we shall be focusing on just the one, i.e. ChainedButFree. It is obviously him; if you look at his user sandbox, you will notice him working on the "Islam in Japan" article which was eventually imported to MuslimWiki under his IslamicWarrior user account.

He has recently got in contact with his apparent role-model Jagged 85 in order to recruit him for work at MuslimWiki. Jagged 85 gracefully declined but, after accusing Wikipedia of "racism", kindly offered him access to all of his deleted edits. ChainedButFree graciously accepted, assuring Jagged 85 that his "work wasn't in vain".

If you read some of ChainedButFree's comments, you'll be shocked at the hypocrisy, overt racism, hope for genocide against "whites" and paranoia they display:

Obviously I can't go up against systematic racists and racism (I have a hunch that that committee, at least one of the members belonged to that WikiIslam website that just paints Muslims so horribly and badly otherwise it wouldn't even be there). I can't stand racism Whites really need to sort out this ugly trait they have between themselves. I mean with parts of the Muslim world rising economically and former enslaved colonies getting much stronger (China, India, Malaysia and Indonesia) it won't be long before Whites are made the scapegoats. And who will care? No one that's for sure. They're just Whites. And its just racism at the end of the day. I mean they do have a long history of it. And yeah, join the project. That's what I'm going to be doing soon. I'll see you there. Until then take care.

Belonging to an ethnic minority myself, I'm acutely aware of how wide-spread racism still is among whites. But I'm not filled with the irrationality and hate displayed by NarSakSasLee, which would enable me to ignore the fact that racism is not unique to people who are "white". Try being part of an ethnic household living in a multicultural society. You will soon realize that racism is more prevalent among us than it is with the whites.

Ironically, Islam is the worst offender when it comes to religiously motivated racism and slavery,  and, what is the historical Muslim Conquests and modern-day jihad in order to implement Shari'ah, if not Islamic Imperialism?

Update

Jagged 85 is now officially a member of the MuslimWiki team of fiction writers. Already he is hard at work importing his deleted Wikipedia stories, for example, his fictional account of the "Islamic Golden Age", "Islamic Contributions to Physics", and how he wished "Islamic Law" contributed to Western Law. IslamicWarrior has also imported a lot of Jagged 85's fictional work that was rejected by Wikipedia, including "Islamic Contributions to Science",  "Islamic Contributions to Medicine",  "Islamic Contributions to Surgery", and   "Islamic Contributions to Pharmacy".