Islam is the Most Violent Religion in the World, But Let’s Keep Calling it ‘Peaceful’ Anyway - This is a must read...


Selene

Recommended Posts

Step one is securing the borders.

If that means building a modern Hadrian's Wall, or, the a modern Great Wall of China, so be it. As long as we do not emulate the French and build a Maginot Line wherein the entrenched cannons supposedly could only rotate 90 degrees.

It shall cover both land borders of the United States continental area,

The water borders will have to be separately addressed.

Once that is done, then we can discuss a simple immigration policy which will be sunsetted three (3) years from its passage.

It would have to be re-authorized for three (3) more years, or, terminate. Kinda like a consultanting contract.

Then we could address the illegal individuals who exist within the secured borders of the United State.

A...

If you count the little nooks and crannies the U.S. has 75,000 miles of coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Step one is securing the borders.

If that means building a modern Hadrian's Wall, or, the a modern Great Wall of China, so be it. As long as we do not emulate the French and build a Maginot Line wherein the entrenched cannons supposedly could only rotate 90 degrees.

It shall cover both land borders of the United States continental area,

The water borders will have to be separately addressed.

Once that is done, then we can discuss a simple immigration policy which will be sunsetted three (3) years from its passage.

It would have to be re-authorized for three (3) more years, or, terminate. Kinda like a consultanting contract.

Then we could address the illegal individuals who exist within the secured borders of the United State.

A...

If you count the little nooks and crannies the U.S. has 75,000 miles of coast.

Well that is more than a Thomas' English Muffin...

Original "Nooks and Crannies" - is a registered trademark of Bimbo Bakeries USA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a pure opinion piece. Only three references. No unseemly nagging.

In Canada and America the best informants on jihadi groups and dangerous and violence-prone individuals are fairly regular people: family, friends, mosque attendees, coworkers and clergy, people of the community who are eyes and ears on radicals. Each new jihadi militant horror tends to make the Muslim communities more vigilant and cooperative with law enforcement. I'd say it's a trend and maybe a feature -- human intelligence is best. I think we owe our Muslim citizens the basic courtesy of not assuming they are terrorist fanatics or sympathizers. When we approach each other only with suspicion or prejudice we gain no intelligence.

We supplement that with other citizen-led actions and warnings -- folks like fellow Canucki CaliphateCop, those with a public face who have outed and/or testified about terror plans, or radical cells, and who continue to be vigilant, aware and informed. I never forget how many ordinary Muslims were perfect Canadians in word and deed, outraged at the assault on Parliament -- with perhaps extra resentment and outrage at being placed in a role of scapegoat for what they revile. They are alert far more than I am to the proto-radicals in their midst, I figure, and we should not let a phantom Muslim Menace prevent us from seeing these normal citizens or making use of their humint in Da Wa On Terrr.

Few want a repeat of the Ottawa and Quebec events. I'd wager that the debates we have had in Canada since then about the process and purlieus of radicalizing jihadis have underlined the shared red lines across religious boundaries and educated everybody to some degree. The events kicked in a rebound pride and purpose in being all Canadian, all revolted, resentful and disgusted with extremism of the murderous jihadi kind. And being Canadian, revolted at the notion of collective guilt or suspicion. Remember what this video prank depicted?

We can credit our various North American intelligence agencies for thwarting several plots, a couple in Canada. I think we can accept that there will be more arrests. In Canada legislation will soon be tabled that extends some surveillance powers and mandates inter-agency data-sharing. The rough shape of the new laws seem semi-OK.

The ability to penetrate or unveil developing networks involves details of spying that might need new law, some will argue. Britain is tabling legislation that will compel companies like Twitter and Facebook and others to give up identities to law enforcement.

I think of the UK as a haven, a place of asylum, where former imperial subjects who were being oppressed in home countries could make a break for safety and surety. It's thus had waves of migrants and exiles and emigres and immigrants through its history and has found means to integrate them relatively successfully (compared say to France). Racial, ethnic and communal animosities in Britain are much exaggerated, but where folks edge into incitement and promotion of violence or terrorist acts, they are charged, convicted and punished, and in some cases forced to observe bond conditions that prevent free association. "Hate preachers" are convicted on hate crimes, and thought they continue to peddle Islamist nonsense, they are forced to observe the limits of free speech and free association. I am not sure if Canada's home-grown haters and self-styled imams are half as wacked as the British (eg, Anjem Choudary).

Beyond that, the UK seem to be slightly more sophisticated in using all means to upset terror plans within the kingdom. The media does a thorough job on all issues, inflaming passions on one hand, exposing abuses and social facts on the other, blowing hard and cold on every sensational story. So, in addition to informants, spies, analysts, border control, RCMP, CSIS, and integrated squads on heightened alert, I think Canada will probably do a middling job of containing and exposing to justice jihadi elements intent on terror, not as good as the UK but without too much 'emergency' law being promulgated.

I also hope our abilities to infiltrate and observe and degrade recruiting networks becomes sharpened. Networks that are built to enable terror recruiting (for especially ISIS) or enable home-grown 'lone wolf' or 'cell' attacks in America and Canada will be more heavily watched over. We will figure out who are the Edmonton gangs, so to speak, and the same for the other major cities. We will subvert violence successfully in the majority of cases, failing only where a madmen erupts.

I expect the various US agencies will take advantage of the crisis with ISIS to do their jobs as thoroughly as possible. It's hard to imagine the might of the USA in all its glory. Your abilities to infiltrate and observe real-time jihadi recruitment, financing, transport, all that will be key. If you have the backing of the Muslim communities (as we seem to have in Canada) to do their part on the home front, I just don't see any spectacular jihadi horror in America that isn't as horrible as regular school massacre atrocities. As long as the USA drops bombs on ISIS in Syria, some jihadi nitwit fanboy may decide to go all suicide in a blazing attack on the homeland. Knowing or accurately estimating which folks are more likely to turn violent fantasies into reality is the intelligence needed. Seeing a dark forest of would-be attackers when one wants to pick out diseased individual trees ... is not optimal.

-- it seems to me that rather than being a stark staring Menace, Muslim Americans are the first and best informants on the bad seedlings in their gardens, where they are observable. One shouldn't doubt the power of the American Muslim en masse or individually, nor sheer him or her away from the shared project of safely and freedom. We should estimate 'The Menace' rationally and understand its particulars. Vive le Freedom. Vive la Justice. Vive le Reality

As for Adam's notion of heavy-duty fencing as a Great Wall as a first start to protect America from I don't quite know which Jihadi Menace exactly, here's one that is in process elsewhere (I wonder how such a fence around America could help unveil The Enemy Within):

430-1421230259686332861.png

Click image for source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two statements:

Islam is the world's most violent religion. False. Religions don't do anything.

Some adherents of Islam in the name of Islam are the most violent religious adherents in the world generally speaking. True.

The first statement is true if accepted as a shorthand way of saying the second. The problem is many don't do that and think the way to deal with Muslim terrorists is to attack the religion either as such or all Muslims consequently. The purpose of terrorism--my opinion--however, is to cause a response against the religion which generates more status and power and fighters for terrorist activity from other Muslims. It's to radicalize as many Muslims as possible. For this the victims of terrorism are needed to attack the religion reactively to terrorism, not only the terrorists; terrorists--in the know--want more cartoons, not fewer--more publicity, not less. The fight's the thing. Dying for Allah, rewarded in paradise, is a backstop.

--Brant

Islam is a religion of peace: never mind true or false--see above for that--this is liberal swill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam teaches violence.

Islam's Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad's Own Words

Islam is a caustic blend of regurgitated paganism and twisted Bible stories. Muhammad, its lone prophet, conceived his religion solely to satiate his lust for power, sex, and money. He was a terrorist. And if you think these conclusions are shocking, wait until you see the evidence.

Critics of Prophet of Doom claim it is offensive, hatemongering, and unnecessarily violent. We agree - but we didn't write those parts. They came directly from Islam's scriptures. Over the course of these pages, we quote from almost every surah in the Qur'an - many are presented in their entirety. But more than that, we put each verse in the context of Muhammad's life, quoting vociferously from Islam's most trusted sources.

https://archive.org/details/prophetofdoom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paris has to get rid of non-entry zones.

I am really pissed--at myself and at Fox and the rightwing power-players. OK, so the right just won big in the midterm elections. And what to those clowns do?

The Big Fucking Lie.

Right out of the gate.

They didn't even give any time to let things settle.

I picked up the idea of "non-entry zones" up from the mainstream media, mostly Fox News (but others). They repeated "no go zones" so much I didn't think to look into it.

Thank goodness we have people like WSS on board who will hold no truck with The Big Lie. Here's a post where he simply destroyed the attempt at a false meme with a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Cenk Ungar irritates the crap out of me, especially when he redefines smug and snark in his actions, pushing them to ever greater thresholds of rhetorical crap.

But here's a video of him crowing about Fox's mendacious manipulation that I will not criticize.

I don't agree with Ungar on much, especially because he constantly commits the same errors of bias and hypocrisy he criticizes (except he goes anti-right instead of anti-left). But he's totally entitled to crow this time. I'm even going to swallow his spin without comment for this one.

Let 'er rip, Cenk.

Those idiots earned it.

If anyone thinks this error by Fox was an excess of zeal instead of blatant manipulation, let them look at the festival of citations in Ungar's video. There's no way to ignore all that or call it random. The Fox people did it on purpose.

This kind of shit runs the risk of costing the right the presidential race in 2016.

A pox on untruth, right and left.

Fuck 'em both.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that means building a modern Hadrian's Wall, or, the a modern Great Wall of China, so be it. As long as we do not emulate the French and build a Maginot Line wherein the entrenched cannons supposedly could only rotate 90 degrees.

It was my understanding that the main problem with the Maginot line was where it ended --- at the Belgian border. As a result, Hitler's army was able to avoid it completely by going through Belgium on the the way to France. By using modern (in 1940) tanks, Hitler was able to drive through Belgium in about four days --- can't find exact references --- and plunge south into France from the north.

I guess the fact that the Maginot guns couldn't completely pivot made it easy to attack the line from the rear, but it is unlikely to have significantly changed the battle once the German army was safely behind the Maginot line. They could have simply taken their time laying siege to the line once the rest of France had surrendered.

Darrell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that means building a modern Hadrian's Wall, or, the a modern Great Wall of China, so be it. As long as we do not emulate the French and build a Maginot Line wherein the entrenched cannons supposedly could only rotate 90 degrees.

It was my understanding that the main problem with the Maginot line was where it ended --- at the Belgian border. As a result, Hitler's army was able to avoid it completely by going through Belgium on the the way to France. By using modern (in 1940) tanks, Hitler was able to drive through Belgium in about four days --- can't find exact references --- and plunge south into France from the north.

I guess the fact that the Maginot guns couldn't completely pivot made it easy to attack the line from the rear, but it is unlikely to have significantly changed the battle once the German army was safely behind the Maginot line. They could have simply taken their time laying siege to the line once the rest of France had surrendered.

Darrell

Apparently, that "reference" might have been because they had "retractable" cannons...I assumed that these turreted pillboxes and towers worked on a left right 90 degree movement.

Retractable turrets

The line included the following retractable turrets.

21 turrets of 75 mm (3.0 in) model 1933

12 turrets of 75 mm (3.0 in) model 1932

1 turret of 75 mm (3.0 in) model 1905

17 turrets of 135 mm (5.3 in)

21 turrets of 81 mm (3.2 in)

12 turrets for mixed weapons (AM)

7 turrets for mixed weapons + mortar of 50 mm (2.0 in)

61 turrets of machine-guns

75 mm (3.0 in) Turret model 1932

135 mm (5.3 in) Turret

81 mm (3.2 in) Turret

Machine-gun Turret

AM (Mixed-Weapons) Turret 120px-Cloche_jm.jpg <<<obviously this could only fire with a very small arc...

120px-Cloche_vp.jpg not sure about this one, I assumed they would be 360 degrees however I could be totally wrong...

However, I did find the plans for Greg's house in California:

hgb4GwO.jpg

nnz4eoB.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting article:

Long after the war many writers continued to include drawings and descriptions, some based on pre-war
propaganda, of multi-level underground forts with large caliber weapons and underground railroads. Some of the
these fantastic descriptions even include items like under ground hangars! Most of these writers agree that the
most serious weakness of these fortifications was their inability to fire to the rear and claim that this was the
primary reason for their failure.
Some historians also insist that France’s defeat in 1940 was caused by
excessive investment in these fortifications, when the creation of modern mechanized forces should have
taken priority. In virtually all cases there is one element that stands out: the information presented demonstrates an
almost total ignorance of what the Maginot Line actually was. It is important to correct this historical record through

this brief primer, explain its form and function, and present a short operational history of the Maginot Line.

Well sourced 55 page primer with sketches and photos.

J.E. KAUFMANN is a retired public school teacher who lives in San Antonio, Texas. A widely acknowledged
expert on fortifications, he is the author of a number of books and articles on the topic, many in conjunction with
H.W. Kaufmann, including the highly successful Medieval Fortress (2004), as well as Maginot Imitations: Major
Fortifications of Germany and Neighboring Countries (with Gunther Reiss); Fortress America: The Forts that
Defended America, 1600 to the Present (2004); Sleeping Giant: American Armed Forces between the Wars
(1996); Fortifications of Western Europe: 1940 (1984); Hitler’s Blitzkrieg Campaigns (2002); Fortress Third Reich
(2003); and Fortress Europe (2002).

http://www.fsgfort.com/uploads/pdfs/Public/Kaufmann%20F33%20Pb.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The French knew they had a problem with Germany, so instead of taking Hitler down in 1936 they built this stupid thing. Come the invasion they had no reserves.

--Brant

The Maginot Line was an expression of cowardice, weakness and appeasement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

President O'bama is vowing, well we all know what his word is worth and it > 0, to veto a bill increasing the sanctions against Iran.

Making sense of Obama’s counter-intuitive approach to negotiations with Iran

Last week, President Obama and British Prime Minister Cameron pleaded with Congress not to pass new sanctions legislation against Iran. Such legislation, which has strong bipartisan support, could undermine ongoing negotiations, they argued. “Just hold your fire” until we complete negotiations, Obama urged.

Reminds me of that great scene in Braveheart:

(Battlefield at Stirling. A horseman approaches full-speed as Mornay, Lochlan, and Craig wait with their armies.)

Mornay: (to the horseman) Well, what news?

Horseman: We're outnumbered, at least 3 to 1.

Mornay: How many horse, then?

Horseman: 300, maybe more.

Mornay: 300 heavy horse?

Lochlan: We must try to negotiate.

Mornay: Who's in command? Did he have a scarlet chevron?

Horseman: Aye, he did.

Craig: We can still negotiate.

(As the nobles are talking, two Scottish soldiers are waiting and listening in the front line.)

Young soldier: (to the veteran beside him) What are they talking about?

Veteran: I can't hear, but it doesn't look good. The nobles will negotiate. If they do a deal, then we go home. And if not, we charge.

Mornay: 300 heavy horse; we have no chance.

(The English infantry, archers and cavalry appear over the hill.)

Young soldier: (to no one in particular) So many! (swallows hard, then turns to the veteran) I didn't come here to fight so they can own more lands; then I have to work for them.

Veteran: Nor me. (shouting to all) Alright lads. I'm not dying for these bastards! Lets go home.

(The two Scots start to leave the field and others join them.)

Lochlan: (seeing the departing men, rides over the them, shouting in desperation) Stop men. Do not flee. Wait until we've negotiated.

The President's lack of any knowledge of untainted history...is appalling, dangerous and immature.

Boy, it must be tough living up to that undeserved Nobel Peace Prize.

At we finally have global peace under his brilliant leadership ...

However, back in REALITY, which the President only visits as a tourist, ...

Iran is playing hardball, though. It has manufactured two bargaining chips. First, it recently announced that is has begun the construction of two new nuclear reactors.

Second, Iran has referred the case of Jason Rezaian, a Washington Post reporter held prisoner in Tehran, for processing by the “Revolutionary Court.” Rezaian has been denied basic humanitarian treatment by his captors — for example, his weight is down by 40 pounds, according to his mother — and has neither been informed of the charges against him nor allowed to consult with his lawyer, according to the Post.

Put simply, Rezaian is a hostage to the nuclear negotiations. And why not? The Castro brothers got what they wanted from Obama using the same approach.

The author concludes ...

As with Cuba, Iran is actually using a belt and suspenders approach. Obama has always wanted to lift sanctions on Cuba and he clearly wants a nuclear deal, any deal, with Iran. With Cuba, he was able to obtain the photo ops accompanying a prisoner release to make his concessions easier for Americans to swallow. The Rezaian captivity means that Obama may be able to do the same with a nuclear deal with Iran.

But Obama doesn’t want just any nuclear deal. Obama wants a deal Iran will feel good about so that he can make more deals with the ruling clerics. He sees Iran as the key to a grand bargain in the Middle East, one that will thwart ISIS and bring stability — on Iran’s terms — to the region. Israel, of course, excepted.

This, I believe, is why Obama opposes congressional action that would strengthen his bargaining position. Obama is fine with bargaining from weakness with Iran, and wants to earn credit with the mullahs for standing up on their behalf to Congress, including members of his own party.

A final note. The Post’s editors should be commended for the strong position they advance in today’s editorial. A few days age, I suggested that the Post was experiencing something resembling Stockholm syndrome in its reporting on Iran. If so, the syndrome has not spilled over to its editorial page.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/01/making-sense-of-obamas-counter-intuitive-approach-to-negotiations-with-iran.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29

Interesting theory.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--Brant

The Maginot Line was an expression of cowardice, weakness and appeasement

It was a denial of advances in armored warfare. If the French had been paying more attention to German armor perhaps some sane people would have emerged and made a difference. But the politicians had their way.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--Brant

The Maginot Line was an expression of cowardice, weakness and appeasement

It was a denial of advances in armored warfare. If the French had been paying more attention to German armor perhaps some sane people would have emerged and made a difference. But the politicians had their way.

Ba'al Chatzaf

As well as paratroopers and air power [mechanized and glider].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As well as paratroopers and air power [mechanized and glider].

The French were flat-thinkers. We live in a 3 d world and the French expected to be fighting in 2 d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paris has to get rid of non-entry zones.

I am really pissed--at myself and at Fox and the rightwing power-players.

. . .

I picked up the idea of "non-entry zones" up from the mainstream media, mostly Fox News (but others). They repeated "no go zones" so much I didn't think to look into it.

At least this apology is something:

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone thinks this error by Fox was an excess of zeal instead of blatant manipulation, let them look at the festival of citations in Ungar's video. There's no way to ignore all that or call it random. The Fox people did it on purpose.

This kind of shit runs the risk of costing the right the presidential race in 2016.

A pox on untruth, right and left.

Fuck 'em both.

Michael

Justified reaction.

However, since my understanding is that, de facto, there are growing enclaves of Muslim communities that have been growing in European cities for two ot three decades.

To define them, or, call them "no-go zones" should be a semantic red flag.

In essence, it implies that they are de jure, zones also, where "police are not allowed to go" which was the spin.

Kinda like "separate, but equal" schools prior to Brown v. Board of Education,347 U.S. 483 (1954) http://www.nationalcenter.org/brown.htmlthat found that:

After reviewing psychological studies showing black girls in segregated schools had low racial self-esteem, the Court concluded that separating children on the basis of race creates dangerous inferiority complexes that may adversely affect black children's ability to learn. The Court concluded that, even if the tangible facilities were equal between the black and white schools, racial segregation in schools is "inherently unequal" and is thus always unconstitutional. At least in the context of public schools, Plessy v. Ferguson was overruled. In the Brown II case a decided year later, the Court ordered the states to integrate their schools "with all deliberate speed."

The Court drew a substantial difference between the de jure "separate, but equal" and the de facto results of the law.

In the "no-go zones," Fox intentionally implies that these zones are in some way shape or form "legal" and that was the unsubtle lie.

Here is a detailed piece that is worth considering.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5177/no-go-zones-britain

Essentially, the author recognizes the "Fox lie" in the opening two (2) paragraphs.

This is the second article in a multi-part series documenting so-called no-go zones in Europe. The first article in this series documents no-go zones in France. This second segment focuses on the United Kingdom. It provides a brief compilation of references to British no-go zones by academic, police, media and government sources.

An erroneous claim on American television that Birmingham, England, is "totally Muslim" and off-limits to non-Muslims has ignited a politically charged debate about the existence of no-go zones in Britain and other European countries.

The author then fleshes out what the "no-go zones" actually look like, explaining through Andrew McCarthy, ex DOJ attorney, who is given expert status, states that:

Islam expert Andrew C. McCarthy has offered a lucid clarification of what no-go zones are and of what they are not:

"[N]o sensible person is saying that state authorities are prohibited from entering no-go zones as a matter of law. The point is that they are severely discouraged from entering as a matter of fact — and the degree of discouragement varies directly with the density of the Muslim population and its radical component. Ditto for non-Muslim lay people: It is not that they are not permitted to enter these enclaves; it is that they avoid entering because doing so is dangerous if they are flaunting Western modes of dress and conduct.

As you have pointed out, this "no-go zones" spinning semantic is designed to due the basic job of propaganda which is to instill fear in an individual.

Then capitalize on the fear.

In the United Kingdom, much of the debate over no-go zones — in Britain they are sometimes referred to as "Muslim areas" or "Muslim enclaves" — has focused on "white flight," the large-scale migration of native white Britons out of a given neighborhood as more and more Muslim and other immigrants move in.

Citing a study by:

... Oxford Professor David Coleman showed that if current immigration levels continue, white Britons will be a minority in little more than 50 years — within the lifespan of most young adults alive today. Coleman warned that this will be accompanied by a total change in national identity—cultural, political, economic and religious. He wrote: "The ethnic transformation implicit in current trends would be a major, unlooked-for, and irreversible change in British society, unprecedented for at least a millennium."

Transitioning to "Muslim enclaves" is de facto correct...

Birmingham: Bordesley Green (includes Small Heath) (73.9%); Hodge Hill (includes areas of Saltley and Ward End) (41.5%); Ladywood (35.2%); Lozells and East Handsworth (48.9%); Nechells (43.5%); Sparkbrook (includes Sparkhill) (70.2%); Washwood Heath (includes Alum Rock) (77.3%).

Blackburn with Darwen: Audley (68.7%); Bastwell (85.3%); Corporation Park (62.6%); Little Harwood (51.9%); Queen's Park (51.5%); Shear Brow (77.7%); Wensley Fold (39.8%)

Bolton (Greater Manchester): Crompton (32.7 %); Great Lever (36.6%); Halliwell (27.9%); Rumworth (51.8%)

Bradford (West Yorkshire): Bowling and Barkerend (45.8%); Bradford Moor (72.8%); City (57.3%); Great Horton (42.8%); Heaton (55.9%); Keighley Central (51.2%); Little Horton (58.0%); Manningham (75.0%); Toller (76.1%)

Brent: Barnhill (23.3%); Dollis Hill (31.3%); Dudden Hill (23.5%); Harlesden (21.8%); Stonebridge (28.2%)

Dewsbury (West Yorkshire): Dewsbury South (including Savile Town) (43.8%); Dewsbury West (46.7%)

Leeds: Gipton and Harehills (33.2%)

Leicester: Charnwood (38.7%); Coleman (39.7%); Spinney Hills (69.6%); Stoneygate (50.2%)

London Borough of Enfield: Edmonton Green (29.1%); Haselbury (25.7%); Jubilee (24.1%); Lower Edmonton (24.1%); Ponders End (29.0%); Upper Edmonton (26.4%)

London Borough of Tower Hamlets: Bethnal Green South (45.7%); Bromley-by-Bow (48.7%); East India and Lansbury (42.9%); Limehouse (35.5%); Mile End and Globe Town (34.3%); Mile End East (45.9%); Shadwell (46.7%); Spitalfields and Banglatown (38.6%); St Dunstan's and Stepney Green (48.7%); Weavers (30.3%); and Whitechapel (42.4%).

London Borough of Newham: Boleyn (40.5%); East Ham Central (39.6%); East Ham North (50.1%); Green Street East (49.1%); Green Street West (50.4%); Little Ilford (44.8%); Manor Park (45.4%); Wall End (33.9%)

London Borough of Redbridge: Clementswood (42.7%); Cranbrook (36.6%); Goodmayes (33.5%); Loxford (46.0%); Mayfield (34.6%); Newbury (29.4%); Seven Kings (31.3%); Valentines (40.0%)

London Borough of Waltham Forest: Forest (31.9%); Lea Bridge (32.3%); Leyton (30.2%); Markhouse (32.4%)

Luton: Biscot (64.6%); Dallow (includes parts of Bury Park) (61.6%); Saints (51.1%)

Manchester: Cheetham (43.3%); Longsight (53.8%); Rusholme (37.9%); Whalley Range (32.7%)

Oldham: Coldhurst (64.2%); Medlock Vale (32.3%); St Mary's (58.7%); Werneth (68.2%)

Pendle: Bradley (45.7%); Brierfield (38.8%); Walverden (47.1%); Whitefield (69.8%)

Rochdale: Central Rochdale (52.4%); Milkstone and Deeplish (67.1%)

Slough: Baylis and Stoke (44.7%); Central (40.6%); Chalvey (37.2%);

Westminster: Church Street (42.0%); Harrow Road (24.1%); Hyde Park (25.1%); Queen's Park (26.3%); Westbourne (33.1%)

Wycombe: Bowerdean (35.6%); Oakridge and Castlefield (45.7%)

There is lots more in this piece.

Extremist Muslim preachers — sometimes referred to as the Tower Hamlets Taliban — have issued death threats to women who refuse to wear Islamic veils. Neighborhood streets have been plastered with posters declaring: "You are entering a Sharia controlled zone. Islamic rules enforced." And street advertising deemed offensive to Muslims has been vandalized or blacked out with spray paint.

Left, an example of the posters that have been put up in Muslim enclaves in Britain. Right, British jihadists in Syria encourage British Muslims to take up arms for the Islamic State, in a recruitment video entitled "There is No Life Without Jihad".

The Sunday Telegraph uncovered more than a dozen other instances in Tower Hamlets where both Muslims and non-Muslims have been threatened or beaten for behavior considered to be a breach of fundamentalist "Islamic norms." Victims said that police ignored or downplayed outbreaks of hate crime, and suppressed evidence implicating Muslims in them, because they feared being accused of racism or "Islamophobia."

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

Well researched articles which paint a worse picture of England and France than most could imagine (myself too). It is galling that Fox News reported that dumb statement, which even on the surface looked ridiculous. But as the writer remarks, if they had only reported of parts of Birmingham as being de facto "no-go" areas, it would have had merit. Then, almost as bad, to make the embarrassed apology which followed might tend to bury the real and depressing problem from public attention and discourse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another day, another Islamic atrocity. And another blizzard of traitorous statements from appeasers and enablers of raw evil -- from apologists for, and defenders of, Islam. These treasonous vermin say that the perpetrators of this horror are not Muslims, but rather Islamic "radicals" or "extremists" -- or even "perverters" or "hijackers" of Islam. Thus, for the umteenth time, the Islamic activists who committed this monstrosity supposedly are not Muslims.

Anyone who publicly claims such a thing is a "useful idiot", and secret ally of Islam, who has an ocean of blood on his hands.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/…/isis-burns-jordanian-pilot-a…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now