Londonistan

[American_Jihad]

Britain Is No Place for Jews​

January 30, 2013
By Caroline Glick

Since I came home from London, subsequent events have borne out my dim assessment of England, and done so at break-neck pace. As one of Britain’s great righteous gentiles Douglas Murray wrote in an essay published yesterday by the Gatestone Institute, England is no longer even trying to hide its anti-Semitism. At this point, to live well in the kingdom, Jews are required to accept or at least express minimal objection to the dominant narrative that Israel is the current Nazi Germany.

Back in 2005, I felt it was a mistake for Israel to push for the UN to establish an international Holocaust remembrance day. What did we need it for?

The UN emerged at the 2001 Durban conference as the epicenter of global anti-Semitism. Why should we give it an out for its hostility towards live Jews by letting it pretend it isn’t an anti-Semitic institution because it mourns dead Jews?

...

Britain Is No Place for Jews

Wow.....you seem completely unaware of what Amis was speaking about in 2010.

Not a surprise.

Caroline Glick has an email on the url, tell her what you think...

 

[American_Jihad]

This website gives parents, teachers and school leaders practical advice on protecting children from extremism and radicalisation.

Educate Against Hate

 

[American_Jihad]

UK Can't Deport Terrorists, Can Deport 92-Year-Old South African Grandma
February 19, 2016
Daniel Greenfield

Here's whom the UK can't deport.

Baghdad Meziane ran an al-Qaeda fundraising and support network from his home in Leicester, where he had lived since about 1999. He had come to the UK after fleeing his native Algeria, marrying at least twice and fathering two children. He was arrested in 2001 in connection with supplying false passports and credit cards to jihadists who travelled to al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. Meziane was jailed for 11 years in 2003 and his deportation ordered in 2009 following his release. Meziane has successfully avoided deportation using the Human Rights Act over his right to a family life and fear of mistreatment in Algeria. He is connected to the terror cell that murdered 17 people last month in France through a close Algerian friend who mentored the Paris cell.

Siraj Yassin Abdullah Ali was brought up by the same foster parents in London as Yassin Omar, one of the co-conspirators behind the failed bomb plot in London on July 21 2005. He lived in a flat directly above Omar and sheltered his friend and other plotters when fumes from Omar’s flat, where they were making the bombs, overwhelmed them, forcing them to flee. Government officials were prevented from deporting Ali due to the Human Rights Act because of the threat of him facing 'inhumane treatment or punishment’ in his native Eritrea.

Ismail Abdurahman sheltered Hussain Osman, one of the 21/7 London bomb plotters, for three days after the foiled bomb attack was uncovered. Osman was able to flee the UK, despite a huge manhunt, and was later arrested in Italy, having escaped the country on a Eurostar train to Paris. Abdurahman, who worked for a firm of solicitors as an assistant, was convicted of assisting an offender and jailed for eight years. He served three years of his sentence and was released to a bail hostel. In 2011, he won an appeal to prevent his deportation to his native Somalia on human rights grounds after judges ruled there were fears for his safety.

But here's whom the UK can deport.

A 92-year-old widow who lives in Britain with her only child has been ordered to leave the country and return to her native South Africa after losing her battle to stop her deportation.

Myrtle Cothill, whose father fought for Britain in the First and Second World Wars, suffers from heart problems and relies on the care of her 66-year-old daughter, Mary Wills, who is a British citizen.


...

UK Can't Deport Terrorists, Can Deport 92-Year-Old South African Grandma

 

[American_Jihad]

How Long Until Arabs and Muslims Rule, Britannia?
Those in England who deplore its Islamization are afraid to express their thoughts out loud.
March 13, 2016
Phyllis Chesler

Reprinted from IsraelNationalNews.com.

England: Shakespeare's heroic fairy realm; the world of Blake, Milton, Keats, Byron, Wordsworth, Coleridge, Austen, the Brontes, George Eliot, Charles Dickens, and Virginia Woolf.

England: The country of William Wilberforce, who successfully fought to abolish the slave trade; the land of the bravest suffrage movement anywhere; Churchill's own country--that fair and glorious Kingdom is still there but it is also fraying, fading away.

I've just returned from a visit to this storied Isle. I saw the most sublime production of "The Tempest" at The Sam Wanamaker/Globe Theater; a wondrous production of "As You LIke It" at the National Theater; and a riveting performance of Bellini's opera about the Druid priestess, "Norma," at the Coliseum. Every seat was filled by Brits of all ages. High Culture still lives on there--and yet, London is no longer as I first encountered it in 1961 or again, in 1969, or even in 1989.

Now, all London only dares whisper about the Arab and Muslim takeover of their city. Nearly every single luxury hotel is owned by the Sultan of Brunei, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia as is the historic department store Harrods. (Dodi Al-Fayed's father, an Egyptian, bought it long ago when he envisioned his son marrying Princess Diana, the mother of the future King of England).

The best townhouses on Park Lane, in Hyde Park, Belgravia, Mayfair, and Knightsbridge now belong to Arab Embassies, oil-rich sheiks, and the occasional Russian oligarch.

Nearly every single luxury hotel is owned by the Sultan of Brunei, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia as is the historic department store Harrods...

Londoners who still "take tea" in the lobbies of the grand hotels, tell me in soft, resigned voices that "this is how it is and there is nothing that can be done about it. Speak out and you will fall into immediate disfavor."

I know several exceptionally gallant, truth-telling thinkers and writers in London who are now blacklisted, censored, their powers curtailed. They dared tell the truth about how biased against America and Israel the British media and professoriate are--and how irrationally they favor both Islam and Islamism.

However, as one life-long Londoner pointed out to me: "Harrods, which is also owned by Arabs, (al-Fayed sold it to Qatar), loses business nine months of the year and only survives because Arabs come on shopping expeditions in the summer to escape the desert heat." London's Fortum and Mason's, the most luxurious store in the world, now has its first stand-alone satellite store in Dubai.

A limousine driver tells me that he routinely picks up exceedingly short fur coats that cost $65,000.00 for Arab women and that "once, a Saudi Prince left 3 million pounds in the boot (trunk) of my car. He completely forgot about it."

...

How Long Until Arabs and Muslims Rule, Britannia?

 

[American_Jihad]

Poor suckers...
Muslim Elected Mayor of London
A triumph of multiculturalism or Islamic supremacist deception – or both?
May 9, 2016
Robert Spencer

Labour Party candidate Sadiq Khan, a Muslim, has been elected mayor of London, and the international Left is thrilled. “Son of a Pakistani bus driver, champion of workers’ rights and human rights, and now Mayor of London. Congrats, @SadiqKhan. –H,” tweeted Hillary Clinton. Likewise happy are Islamic supremacists worldwide: members of the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), the party of Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and the majority party in the nation’s National Assembly, held up a sign emblazoned: “Heartiest Congratulation [sic] to Sadiq Khan 1st Muslim Mayor of London who defeated millionaire Jew Zec [sic] Goldsmith.”

Those two messages summed up the dichotomy that characterizes the response to Sadiq Khan, and his own associations and intentions. Khan himself has written about the necessity to “ensure that the perception of Islam is not tainted by those with extremist views.” But his concern about this “taint” is relatively newly-minted: back in 2004, Khan spoke at a gender-segregated event entitled “Palestine — the suffering still goes on.” Also on the bill was Daud Abdullah of the Muslim Council of Britain; who once led a boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day; Ibrahim Hewitt, the chairman of Interpal, which the U.S. Treasury Department has designated a “global terrorist” organization for funneling money to Hamas; Muslim leader Azzam Tamimi, who has called for the destruction of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic state; Muslim cleric Suliman Gani, who has echoed the Qur’an (4:34) in saying that women should be “subservient” to men; Ismail Adam Patel of Friends of Al-Aqsa, who has claimed that “Hamas is no terrorist organization”; and Church of England cleric Stephen Sizer, who has blamed Israel for the 9/11 jihad terror attacks.

Khan and his supporters have cried foul at Khan’s being held responsible for the views of these men. Their hypocrisy is evident, however, since the Left’s various dossiers against foes of jihad terror rely heavily on guilt by association, and then, even more tendentiously, on guilt by association built upon its earlier smears of others. Nonetheless, Khan’s appearance at that long-ago event should really only cause concern if Khan holds such views.

Does he? In a 2009 interview with Iran’s state-controlled Press TV, Khan criticized the British government for working with moderate Muslim organizations, saying: “I wish we only spoke to people who agree with us. I can tell you that I’ve spent the last months in this job speaking to all sorts of people. Not just leaders, not just organizations but ordinary rank and file citizens of Muslim faith and that’s what good government is about, it’s about engaging with all stakeholders. You can talk about articles in the newspapers about what an organization might get but the point is you can’t just pick and choose who you speak to, you can’t just speak to Uncle Toms.” The “Uncle Toms” in question were the Quilliam Foundation, which is a declared foe of Islamic “extremism.”

The ConservativeHome website lists other problematic aspects of Khan’s record, summarized by Raheem Kassam at Breitbart:

...

And so this Reuters story is all about how the wicked Conservatives are “unapologetic” for raising Khan’s ties to “extremists.” Reuters publishes no articles about the possible implications of Khan’s ties to “extremists.” The only concern is how “racist” the Conservative Party is.

In this environment, London marches happily into its brave new multicultural future, led by its Muslim mayor. Let’s hope it doesn’t blow up on them. But it probably will.

Muslim Elected Mayor of London

 

[Roudy]

Poor suckers...
Muslim Elected Mayor of London
A triumph of multiculturalism or Islamic supremacist deception – or both?
May 9, 2016
Robert Spencer

Labour Party candidate Sadiq Khan, a Muslim, has been elected mayor of London, and the international Left is thrilled. “Son of a Pakistani bus driver, champion of workers’ rights and human rights, and now Mayor of London. Congrats, @SadiqKhan. –H,” tweeted Hillary Clinton. Likewise happy are Islamic supremacists worldwide: members of the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), the party of Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and the majority party in the nation’s National Assembly, held up a sign emblazoned: “Heartiest Congratulation [sic] to Sadiq Khan 1st Muslim Mayor of London who defeated millionaire Jew Zec [sic] Goldsmith.”

Those two messages summed up the dichotomy that characterizes the response to Sadiq Khan, and his own associations and intentions. Khan himself has written about the necessity to “ensure that the perception of Islam is not tainted by those with extremist views.” But his concern about this “taint” is relatively newly-minted: back in 2004, Khan spoke at a gender-segregated event entitled “Palestine — the suffering still goes on.” Also on the bill was Daud Abdullah of the Muslim Council of Britain; who once led a boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day; Ibrahim Hewitt, the chairman of Interpal, which the U.S. Treasury Department has designated a “global terrorist” organization for funneling money to Hamas; Muslim leader Azzam Tamimi, who has called for the destruction of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic state; Muslim cleric Suliman Gani, who has echoed the Qur’an (4:34) in saying that women should be “subservient” to men; Ismail Adam Patel of Friends of Al-Aqsa, who has claimed that “Hamas is no terrorist organization”; and Church of England cleric Stephen Sizer, who has blamed Israel for the 9/11 jihad terror attacks.

Khan and his supporters have cried foul at Khan’s being held responsible for the views of these men. Their hypocrisy is evident, however, since the Left’s various dossiers against foes of jihad terror rely heavily on guilt by association, and then, even more tendentiously, on guilt by association built upon its earlier smears of others. Nonetheless, Khan’s appearance at that long-ago event should really only cause concern if Khan holds such views.

Does he? In a 2009 interview with Iran’s state-controlled Press TV, Khan criticized the British government for working with moderate Muslim organizations, saying: “I wish we only spoke to people who agree with us. I can tell you that I’ve spent the last months in this job speaking to all sorts of people. Not just leaders, not just organizations but ordinary rank and file citizens of Muslim faith and that’s what good government is about, it’s about engaging with all stakeholders. You can talk about articles in the newspapers about what an organization might get but the point is you can’t just pick and choose who you speak to, you can’t just speak to Uncle Toms.” The “Uncle Toms” in question were the Quilliam Foundation, which is a declared foe of Islamic “extremism.”

The ConservativeHome website lists other problematic aspects of Khan’s record, summarized by Raheem Kassam at Breitbart:

...

And so this Reuters story is all about how the wicked Conservatives are “unapologetic” for raising Khan’s ties to “extremists.” Reuters publishes no articles about the possible implications of Khan’s ties to “extremists.” The only concern is how “racist” the Conservative Party is.

In this environment, London marches happily into its brave new multicultural future, led by its Muslim mayor. Let’s hope it doesn’t blow up on them. But it probably will.

Muslim Elected Mayor of London

Must be something in the water in London.

 

[paulitician]

There is no England now. The Left has systematically dismantled Immigration Systems all across Western Europe. Those nations will never be the same again. They could be lost for good.

Americans really should taka a close look at Western Europe. If the American Left is allowed to continue dismantling the U.S. Immigration System, they'll lose their nation for good as well.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

There are some thick fuckers posting on this thread.

 

[American_Jihad]

There is no England now. The Left has systematically dismantled Immigration Systems all across Western Europe. Those nations will never be the same again. They could be lost for good.

Americans really should taka a close look at Western Europe. If the American Left is allowed to continue dismantling the U.S. Immigration System, they'll lose their nation for good as well.

The half/breed is doing the same here before he leaves, if he leaves...

 

[American_Jihad]

There are some thick fuckers posting on this thread.

Said the thick moron who just posted...

 

[American_Jihad]

The Facebook Wrath of Khan
Trying to discuss Sadiq Khan's victory within 1984 conversational guidelines.
May 12, 2016
Danusha V. Goska

On May 5, 2016, London elected Sadiq Khan its new mayor. Khan is a Muslim and the son of Pakistani immigrants. The anthropologist in me sought a thorough understanding of how this seismic shift was being received by England's Muslims and non-Muslims alike. I wanted to know what demographics supported Khan, who opposed him, and who took his victory as a serious blow. I wanted to know what significant statements Khan had made about his own history-making place in society.

I turned to NPR. In lieu of news, I heard a blast from a confetti cannon. NPR journalists are nothing if not expert at using every feature of their voice to instruct the listener in the correct response. Pauses, high pitch, sighs, monosyllables snippily clipped, all conduct the listener's progress as deftly and firmly as your tour guide at a super-max prison. This day the NPR announcer was giddy. Surely Khan's election was as worthy of unalloyed celebration as the rescue of a kitten from a well. It was as if Mayor Khan had saved Britain from a long, dark night in which only – ew, yuck – Christians had held office. Khan's election lifted some medieval curse.

I mentioned my frustration on Facebook: "Cairo, Egypt surprised the world today by electing a Christian Englishman as mayor. Next on NPR, we explore how this will impact the world's most populous Arab nation."

In that imaginary scenario, journalists would do the real work of exploring how millions of Muslim Arabs felt about being governed by a Christian Englishman. These Muslims would not be pressured to smile and announce their multiculturalism. They would not be shamed if they expressed anxiety. Reporters would merely take it down if their Muslim informants invoked the Crusades, colonialism, white supremacy, or Islamic sanctions against Muslims being ruled by Christians.

Demographers would astutely analyze population shifts, culture shifts, and the social anxiety that inevitably follow – as documented by Harvard's Robert Putnam and other social scientists. The information would be treated as a neutral commodity. There would be no badge of virtue in celebrating this English, Christian Cairo mayor, and no stigma or exclusion in questioning what his election means.

I'd like to hear a reporter calmly ask Khan, "How do you, a devout Muslim, understand qisas and diyya? This system attributes a sliding scale of value to human beings, with Muslim males on the top and Pagan females at the bottom. How do you understand the Koran's command that Muslims not take Jews or Christians as friends? How, as mayor, will you navigate Islam's prohibitions surrounding men talking to women?"

I'm Polish, American, and Catholic. I get asked tougher questions regularly. Wake me up in the middle of the night, shine a light in my face, and ask me to give my position on the priest sex abuse crisis, the Inquisition, or Vietnam. I respect people's concerns about these issues and I've done research to respond responsibly – that's what the Bible tells me to do in 1 Peter 3:15; it's what Thomas Jefferson said Americans must do in the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence. I wasn't asking any more of Khan than others have asked of me.

I posted my frustration that Khan's election was being treated as a litmus test for righteousness. "Marek," a Facebook friend who lives in England, chided me. "Religion plays far less of a role in British political life than in America," Marek tut-tutted. He argued that Khan's religion was not worthy of discussion, and that Khan is a model multiculturalist. Marek posted a photo of Khan standing next to a Christian cleric, and he reported that Khan voted for "marriage equality." Marek closed with, "I will forebear from commenting in depth on the irony of an American pontificating on racial tensions."

Khan-boosting like Marek's can be found all over the web. Again, like Marek, there is the competitive factor: Khan's election is an ornament showing that the English, unlike Americans, are not mired in racial strife. The single most disturbing factoid used to quash any serious discussion of Khan's historic win: Khan attended the UK's Holocaust memorial ceremony; therefore, he must be a really good guy.

Let's get serious. Ken Livingstone is the former mayor of London. He is a leader of the Labour Party. Last month Livingstone said that Hitler was a Zionist. He said this after Naz Shah, another Labour pol, was revealed to have posted on Facebook in 2014 that Jews should be expelled from the Middle East. The Labour Party, Khan's party, faces charges of being anti-Semitic.

What freshly-elected public official, especially under these circumstances, wouldn't attend the UK's official Holocaust memorial ceremony? Khan did something that is as necessary, normal, and tactically beneficial for a politician as kissing babies and eating rubber chicken. In any case, Khan's visit "unleashed an anti-Semitic twitter barrage," according to Haaretz. (The Forward mostly likes Khan.)

Marek's comments praising Khan and pooh-poohing my desire for a deeper discussion of his election felt, to me, like the heavy hand of thought control. The official narrative: there is no tension between Muslims and non-Muslims in England. Anyone who even asks how Khan's religion affects the worldview of various demographic groups in the UK is race-baiting. There is nothing to see here. Move along.

I disagreed with Marek. I stated my disagreement in a series of photos. I posted a photo of Anjem Choudary. I posted a photo of Lee Rigby, in his scarlet uniform, holding his son, Jack. I posted a meme of mug shots of four of the Rotherham rapists. I posted a link to an article about an increase in attacks on Jews in London.

On April 11, 2016, ICM released the survey "What Muslims Really Think." One subsequent headline: "Jail Gays, Introduce Shariah."

...

The Facebook Wrath of Khan

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The Facebook Wrath of Khan
Trying to discuss Sadiq Khan's victory within 1984 conversational guidelines.
May 12, 2016
Danusha V. Goska

On May 5, 2016, London elected Sadiq Khan its new mayor. Khan is a Muslim and the son of Pakistani immigrants. The anthropologist in me sought a thorough understanding of how this seismic shift was being received by England's Muslims and non-Muslims alike. I wanted to know what demographics supported Khan, who opposed him, and who took his victory as a serious blow. I wanted to know what significant statements Khan had made about his own history-making place in society.

I turned to NPR. In lieu of news, I heard a blast from a confetti cannon. NPR journalists are nothing if not expert at using every feature of their voice to instruct the listener in the correct response. Pauses, high pitch, sighs, monosyllables snippily clipped, all conduct the listener's progress as deftly and firmly as your tour guide at a super-max prison. This day the NPR announcer was giddy. Surely Khan's election was as worthy of unalloyed celebration as the rescue of a kitten from a well. It was as if Mayor Khan had saved Britain from a long, dark night in which only – ew, yuck – Christians had held office. Khan's election lifted some medieval curse.

I mentioned my frustration on Facebook: "Cairo, Egypt surprised the world today by electing a Christian Englishman as mayor. Next on NPR, we explore how this will impact the world's most populous Arab nation."

In that imaginary scenario, journalists would do the real work of exploring how millions of Muslim Arabs felt about being governed by a Christian Englishman. These Muslims would not be pressured to smile and announce their multiculturalism. They would not be shamed if they expressed anxiety. Reporters would merely take it down if their Muslim informants invoked the Crusades, colonialism, white supremacy, or Islamic sanctions against Muslims being ruled by Christians.

Demographers would astutely analyze population shifts, culture shifts, and the social anxiety that inevitably follow – as documented by Harvard's Robert Putnam and other social scientists. The information would be treated as a neutral commodity. There would be no badge of virtue in celebrating this English, Christian Cairo mayor, and no stigma or exclusion in questioning what his election means.

I'd like to hear a reporter calmly ask Khan, "How do you, a devout Muslim, understand qisas and diyya? This system attributes a sliding scale of value to human beings, with Muslim males on the top and Pagan females at the bottom. How do you understand the Koran's command that Muslims not take Jews or Christians as friends? How, as mayor, will you navigate Islam's prohibitions surrounding men talking to women?"

I'm Polish, American, and Catholic. I get asked tougher questions regularly. Wake me up in the middle of the night, shine a light in my face, and ask me to give my position on the priest sex abuse crisis, the Inquisition, or Vietnam. I respect people's concerns about these issues and I've done research to respond responsibly – that's what the Bible tells me to do in 1 Peter 3:15; it's what Thomas Jefferson said Americans must do in the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence. I wasn't asking any more of Khan than others have asked of me.

I posted my frustration that Khan's election was being treated as a litmus test for righteousness. "Marek," a Facebook friend who lives in England, chided me. "Religion plays far less of a role in British political life than in America," Marek tut-tutted. He argued that Khan's religion was not worthy of discussion, and that Khan is a model multiculturalist. Marek posted a photo of Khan standing next to a Christian cleric, and he reported that Khan voted for "marriage equality." Marek closed with, "I will forebear from commenting in depth on the irony of an American pontificating on racial tensions."

Khan-boosting like Marek's can be found all over the web. Again, like Marek, there is the competitive factor: Khan's election is an ornament showing that the English, unlike Americans, are not mired in racial strife. The single most disturbing factoid used to quash any serious discussion of Khan's historic win: Khan attended the UK's Holocaust memorial ceremony; therefore, he must be a really good guy.

Let's get serious. Ken Livingstone is the former mayor of London. He is a leader of the Labour Party. Last month Livingstone said that Hitler was a Zionist. He said this after Naz Shah, another Labour pol, was revealed to have posted on Facebook in 2014 that Jews should be expelled from the Middle East. The Labour Party, Khan's party, faces charges of being anti-Semitic.

What freshly-elected public official, especially under these circumstances, wouldn't attend the UK's official Holocaust memorial ceremony? Khan did something that is as necessary, normal, and tactically beneficial for a politician as kissing babies and eating rubber chicken. In any case, Khan's visit "unleashed an anti-Semitic twitter barrage," according to Haaretz. (The Forward mostly likes Khan.)

Marek's comments praising Khan and pooh-poohing my desire for a deeper discussion of his election felt, to me, like the heavy hand of thought control. The official narrative: there is no tension between Muslims and non-Muslims in England. Anyone who even asks how Khan's religion affects the worldview of various demographic groups in the UK is race-baiting. There is nothing to see here. Move along.

I disagreed with Marek. I stated my disagreement in a series of photos. I posted a photo of Anjem Choudary. I posted a photo of Lee Rigby, in his scarlet uniform, holding his son, Jack. I posted a meme of mug shots of four of the Rotherham rapists. I posted a link to an article about an increase in attacks on Jews in London.

On April 11, 2016, ICM released the survey "What Muslims Really Think." One subsequent headline: "Jail Gays, Introduce Shariah."

...

The Facebook Wrath of Khan

You post these articles without comment. Are we meant to laugh or cry ?

 

[American_Jihad]

Dear Mr. Ahmed Aboutaleb
An open letter to the Muslim mayor of Rotterdam.
May 16, 2016
Frontpagemag.com

Editor's Note: The following is the translated text of an open letter to the Muslim mayor of Rotterdam in the Netherlands, which originally appeared on the Dutch Language website of journalist Joost Niemoller. The letter was translated by SimonXML, who provides a brief introductory note.

[From Translator]

The Dutch do not have many journalists who speak out against Islam. Joost Niemoller is one. May 5th is Dutch Liberation Day. There is a big ceremony at the Dam in Amsterdam during which the King and all the various notables lay a wreath at the national monument. It’s kind of similar to the Cenotaph in London. This year, the 4/5 May Committee, who organize it all, invited Ahmed Aboutaleb – the Muslim mayor of Rotterdam to give the main speech. It was a dreadful piece of left-wing multicultural tripe, but this open letter published on Niemoller’s website says it far better than I ever could. I could not resist sharing it, so I have done a quick translation into English.

————————————

Dear Mr Ahmed Aboutaleb,

I will introduce myself. My name is Jurrien Boiten and I am the grandson of J. H. Boiten, a resistance fighter from Assen who didn’t come home after World War II. Murdered by the Nazis in the Dora concentration camp. So I am one of the relatives of the survivors you briefly mentioned in your speech during the commemoration this year.

...

Unfortunately my misgivings came true.

Why was I so upset when your name was called? That has everything to do with your faith and everything you stand for. You are above all a practicing Muslim. Additionally, you are a representative of the multicultural society desired and acclaimed by the left. But above all because of your Muslim background, letting you give a speech during the commemoration for all the Jews murdered in our country during the war is trying to unite the irreconcilable. It’s like a convention of vegetarians where the president of the Association of Butchers as a speaker gives an impassioned speech against eating meat.

You want to live by the rules of the Koran. The Koran is, as you know, a book that oozes hatred of Jews and is full of prejudice about unbelievers. Even homosexuality is strictly forbidden in the Koran. The Koran in that sense is as bad as Mein Kampf. The Koran inspires the faithful to fight against any “infidel”. The barbarians of IS are the ultimate example of this. I am such an “infidel.” Your holy book calls for my destruction. And to this day you have never distanced yourself from that book. Indeed, it inspires you in your daily life.

...

You end with, “That’s why we remember.” Indeed WE commemorate. We, the white, native Dutch. Except for a few, immigrants were not present at the Dam to commemorate. And even though many have held a Dutch passport for generations, their absence proved once again that they do not identify with the history of our country and therefore not with the country itself. They consume our country and nothing more.

And that’s why I now wonder whether the ultimate sacrifice made by my grandfather and all those other, often nameless, resistance fighters for this country and its inhabitants was worth it. The legacy he and his comrades left us has been squandered and sold off by generations of politicians over the last thirty-five years. With, as sad highlight, the fact that you as a practicing Muslim may speak at our National Remembrance Day, at which upright Dutch people are dismissed as the new Nazis.

With best regards.

JHB

Dear Mr. Ahmed Aboutaleb

 

[American_Jihad]

Muslim Bomb Plot Terrorist Looking for a Job
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield

Obama Inc. insists that Islamic terrorists suffer from "joblessness". Maybe they can help out Salahuddin al Britani, aka Richard Dart, a Muslim terrorist in the UK, currently in prison but looking for work if his parole kicks in.

Dart and fellow jihadists were seized plotting attacks on Royal Wootton Bassett — the Wiltshire town famed for its solemn homage when coffins of troops were flown home from Iraq and Afghanistan. The would-be killers also planned to target the London Stock Exchange and to murder MI5 and MI6 chiefs.

Cronies on the outside are so confident they are already lobbying prospective employers via social media. Their messages tell anyone interested in offering him a job: “CV available on request.”

That should be a great CV covering his transition from BBC guard to Jihadist to jailed terrorist. Not to mention advocate for conquering and Islamizing the UK.

...

Someone give this man a job. Maybe Al Qaeda can help. Or Obama.

Muslim Bomb Plot Terrorist Looking for a Job

 

[Tommy Tainant]

New Mayor of London Sadiq Khan flies rainbow flag from City Hall
Enlightened Mayor sends out a message of tolerance.
New Mayor of London Sadiq Khan flies rainbow flag from City Hall

 

[HenryBHough]

There are some thick fuckers posting on this thread.

Thinking of yourself in the plural like that can be helped but probably only by going private. National Health not likely to be of much assistance.

 

[American_Jihad]

New Mayor of London Sadiq Khan flies rainbow flag from City Hall
Enlightened Mayor sends out a message of tolerance.
New Mayor of London Sadiq Khan flies rainbow flag from City Hall

Maybe he want's to be like the obongo who gayenized/pussified America...

 

[American_Jihad]

FROM BENGHAZI TO MANCHESTER
The UK’s dirty Libyan secret.
May 30, 2017

Daniel Greenfield

...

The Didsbury Mosque based out of the former Albert Park Methodist Chapel is led by Imam Mustafa Graf who was accused of fighting in the Libyan Civil War. Graf had signed on to a petition to free “our brother Shaker Aamer”. Aamer is an Al Qaeda terrorist who had been held in Gitmo and had served under Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi of the LIFG. In Manchester, Islamic terror begins and ends with the LIFG.

And not only in Manchester. Abdelhakim Belhadj, the Emir of the LIFG, was living in London. That’s also where the LIFG’s Al-Wasat propaganda newspaper was being published.

...

The Manchester Arena bombing is yet another lesson about the cost of collaborating with Islamic terrorists. It should end our support for LIFG Islamists, Libya Dawn and its puppet regime. LIFG and Libyan Muslim Brotherhood members operating in the US and the UK should be investigated and expelled.

Our death toll from the Libyan Islamist intervention stands at 27 dead and over a hundred injured. We must ensure that the girls who died in Manchester will be the last of our casualties in that Islamist war.

From Benghazi to Manchester

 

[American_Jihad]

If your going to survive you have to crush the left and do a lot of deportations...

RUN, HIDE AND DENY IN LONDON
Islamic terrorism has no religion even when it’s shouting, “This is for Islam.”
June 5, 2017

Daniel Greenfield

As Muslim terrorists rampaged around London, Met police debuted the new “Run, Hide and Tell” program. But instead some Londoners chose to stand and fight. They fought with pint glasses and barstools as the Muslim killers shouting, “This is for Allah” stabbed women in trendy eateries.

Some drivers tried to ram the killers. An unarmed police officer attacked the terrorists with a baton. An off-duty police officer tackled one of the Muslim terrorists. Both men were severely wounded.

Other unarmed police officers ran away.

Met counter-terrorism chief Mark Rowley sympathetically noted that, "If someone acts on instinct and perhaps decides to fight because they have no choice, we would never criticise them for that.”

It was kind of him not to criticize those Londoners who reacted with their base instincts and tried to fight the Muslim killers instead of running, hiding and telling, then reemerging for a vigil or a concert.

...

Run, Hide and Deny in London

 

[American_Jihad]

THERESA MAY’S NEW APPROACH: MORE OF THE SAME
“Enough is enough,” she says after the London attacks, but clearly she wants more.
June 5, 2017

Robert Spencer

The United Kingdom has just suffered its second major jihad massacre in as many weeks, and Prime Minister Theresa May, facing an unexpectedly tough electoral challenge, is talking tough. “It is time,” she proclaimed, “to say enough is enough….Our society should continue to function in accordance with our values but when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism things need to change.”

Indeed they do. Nothing is clearer at this point than the catastrophic failure of the approach to jihad terrorism that May and her predecessors David Cameron, Gordon Brown, and Tony Blair have pursued since 9/11. For years, the British government has hounded, stigmatized, and demonized foes of jihad terror, falsely claiming that they represent a “far-right” equivalent to jihad terrorists, and has appeased and accommodated Muslim groups in Britain, many of which were by no stretch of the imagination “moderate,” and allowing numerous jihad preachers to operate without hindrance.

What has been the result? The jihad massacre at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester in May, and Saturday night’s jihad attacks in London. And there is much, much more to come. The British government’s approach has failed so dismally that “when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism things need to change” may be wisest thing Theresa May has ever said, or ever will say, during her tenure as Prime Minister.

...

Theresa May’s New Approach: More of the Same