Klevius question to BBC and their muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain: Ever thought about why Klevius blog about sex segregation is called Origin of islam?

Acknowledgement: If you want better editing etc. - just donate and it will be fixed faster than Wikipedia - and certainly less biased! You see, believe it or not but Peter Klevius doesn't get support or funds from neither Saudi Arabia, OIC, EU, US, or UN. On the contrary, these are all busy trying to criminalize his defense of Human Rights (yes, in Saudi Arabia it's already equalized with terrorism) - pretty much in line with the Saudi state's sharia verdict on Raef Badawi.

Islam is a parasitic hate crime - the worst the world has ever encountered. And with 1.5 billion muslims trapped in it it is defended at whatever cost - despite the inevitability of its defeat under the Human Rights equality moral logic.

Islamic hate mongering against the "infidel" is islam's excuse for attacking and taking slaves etc. parasitism. It's also the excuse for sex slavery, marital and exmarital sharia rape, oppression of girls/women etc.

You should be ashamed of having politicians dealing with the disgusting Saud dictator family resting their power on Western oil money and evil Wahhabism (aka Salafism i.e. original islam) which doesn't differ at all from that of the Islamic State (aka ISIS, IS etc).

In Peter Klevius series islam tutorials for the ignorant or bigoted hypocrite (which one do you choose Mishal Husain?)

Islam doesn't have a problem - islam is the problem - more than you ever thought!

The reason being that only orthodox islam (aka "extremism") fits all the violent and parasitic parts of the Koran and historical facts. This is why islam's sudden explosion out of the Arabian illiterate Bedouin desert can't be understood without islam's original formula (taken unabridged and without updatings from Klevius 2002 website www.klevius.info):

Slavery+"infidel" racism+sex segregated rapetivism+anti human rights Sharia/apostasy ban. Why isn't the worst crime ever against humanity criminalized, but instead protected by the very human rights Islam opposes?!
Without these evil racist/sexist/fascist extremist pillars and violent terror threats from so called "unislamic"* and confused morons Islam is dead!

AND ALL OF THEM ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN A DEMOCRACY BASED ON UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS! ISN'T THIS EXTREMISM IF ANYTHING?! FREEDOM OF RELIGION CAN'T MEAN PROMOTING DEATH OF FREEDOM!
.Slavery (forbidden all over the world except in Koran/Islam) - It's well known that Islam allows slavery, although perhaps less well known that Islam emerged out of the very idea of sponging on institutionalized slavery. This is why Saudi islamofascist dictators, imams etc. terrorists and terrorist supporters still don't understand that the Koran is completely wrong, not only because it allows slavery but especially in claiming to be some "god's" unchangeable word hence excluding even the possibility of reformation!
."Infidel" racism (forbidden according to the UN declaration on every humans equal value, but a basic tenet of Koran/Islam) - The moral cornerstone needed for taking slaves and abusing others. Today this alluring but evil racism is utilized in a variety of topics from the people of Darfur to the West in particular or general.
.Rapetivism (globally forbidden because it's not in accordance with the principle that a person's sex shouldn't be used as a regulator of that person's freedom, but a basic tenet in Koran/Islam) - Rigid sex segregation for the purpose of abusing Islam confined girls/women as physical and cultural reproducers of as many new Muslims as possible.
.Sharia (forbidden in a democracy simply because it violates democracy and, like the other Islamic pillars, a bunch of human rights that democracy rests on) - Islam's jurisprudence for sex segregated rapetivism, apostasy ban etc. Ehsan Jami (Dutch ex-muslim): "We have an enormous problem with apostasy in Islam. We see a lot of problems where people want to leave Islam but they can't,"
.Apostasy ban (forbidden because it limits a person's freedom of or from religion, but a basic tenet in Koran/Islam) - Children (commonly from birth) and adults (commonly via marriage/rape) are forced to become and stay Muslims.
.
These cannot be erased by mere "interpretations" but needs deep reformist castration! And in this sense "majority Muslims" are tightly connected to Islamic extremism, i.e. to Islam itself. And if that's just because of plain ignorance abt Islam they better educate themselves, e.g. in a Koran school true to the Koran and Islam! When coming out they then have two choices: Becoming an "extremist" (open or stealthy) or abandoning the message alltogether!

That Islam (Koran) allows and even encourages psychological and physical wife beating is just one of an abundance of "minor" ripples of the main pillars above. The naivity of Muslim feminism may be exemplified by Asghar Ali: "...shari'ah also clearly lays down that if a man hides his impotency from his bride at the time of marriage and she discovers it after marriage, she is fully entitled to divorce on that ground. This itself clearly shows that she is entitled to sexual pleasure along with raising family." Rising what family?! The only reason for this rule is to safeguard that no woman fails to reproduce as many Muslims as possible!

"prophet" Mohammad (a fictive figure* applied long after his "death" to symbolize "Allah's " legitimation of Arab parasitism

* According to historian Hugh Kennedy (who is very uncritical of islam) there is not a single official trace of any Mohammad before many decades after his alleged "death".

Islam is the only religion that combines utter racism (the "infidel" that due to islamic hate speech is fair game to be murdered or enslaved) with utter sexism (women seen as a separate and inferior species) in a way that constitutes optimal parasitism.


, Muhammad:

    I have been ordered to fight with the people [sometimes translated as “all men”] till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah.

And then there is Muhammad’s famous command, uttered as he lay on his deathbed: “Let there not be two religions in Arabia.”  And there is this:

    The Last Hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews.  The Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say:  ‘Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him;’ but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

Asked … whether he would “visit Israel with a Palestinian visa,” [Egypt’s minister of religious endowments] said: “This is premature.  Let’s wait until it happens.  However, we hope that the words of the Prophet Muhammad will be fulfilled:  Judgment Day will not come before the Muslims fight the Jews[.]

"Moderate" (i.e. naive, ignorant, bigoted, hypocritical etc) muslims feed the growth of islamofascism

Hidaayah Islamic Foundation (Sri Lanka): Everywhere in the Muslim world we are witnessing, the raising of the banner of Tawheed and the revival of the Call to the Qur’an and Sunnah.

All around the Muslim world, we see some Muslims, individually and collectively proclaiming the Call to Tawheed and the return to the Qur’an and Sunnah in the face of opposition by the ‘Saint-worshippers’, `Grave-worshippers`, `the Sufis’ and the ‘Tariqat followers’. These deviant groups all purport or make the false claim to be Ahl us Sunnah wal Jam’aah and label the true callers to The Sunnah as `Wahhabis’

Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab ibn Sulaiman ibn Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Rashid al Tamimi was born in the year 1115 A.H.(1703 C.E.) in ‘Ayina to the north of Riyadh, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during the reign of Abdulla ibn Muhammad ibn Hamd ibn Muammar.

He left his native town to perform the Hajj and then proceeded to Madinah. At that time Sheikh Abdullah bin Ibrahim ibn Saif belonging to the progeny of Saif Najdi was chief of the scholars of Madinah. Sheikh Muhammad acquired a good deal of knowledge from him and came to be loved and held in high esteem by his teacher.

However, what really made al Wahhab tick was his scare of European Enlightenment traces of which he experienced during his time in Basra influenced (via Ottoman Turks) by the so called Tulip period (see further down what Klevius wrote 2008 about this).

However, what followed was a repetition of the original islamic formula so that the Wahhab/Saud cooperation resulted in something very similar to what we have seen under the banner of the Islamic State recently.


Compare the following description with what Klevius has written (do note the resemblance with the original islam described by Peter Klevius):

In 1744 Prince Muhammad bin Saud made an agreement with Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab:

    "You (bin Saud) are the settlement's chief and wise man. I (al-Wahhab) want you to grant me an oath that you will perform jihad against the unbelievers. In return you will be leader of the muslim community and I will be leader in religious matters."

 The alliance provided the ideological impetus to Saudi expansion. First conquering Najd, Saud's forces expanded the Salafi influence to most of the present-day territory of Saudi Arabia, eradicating various popular and Shia practices and propagating the doctrines of ʿAbd al-Wahhab

People came in large numbers to the Sheikh, seeking pure knowledge without the adulteration of fables and falsehood. He explained to them the real meaning of “La ilaaha illallah” and its significance. He stressed the importance of the negation of all false deities and the affirmation of Allah and his attributes.

The Sheikh communicated with people of other cities and invited them to accept his call and join his movement in order to eradicate Shirk and all its abominable practices.

Some accepted while others rejected and some even ridiculed him and accused him of sorcery. He continued with his mission undeterred. The opponents exerted their utmost to rally their forces to destroy this nascent movement by any or all means. Sheikh Muhammad and the Prince had no alternative but to resort to the sword to defend this movement. This war went on for many years and village after village fell to the new alliance. Some opponents voluntarily began to accept them when they realized the true nature of the movement.

All the efforts by the misguided group to rally their forces to destroy this nascent movement by any means miserably failed. After the conquest of Riyadh in 1187 A.H. the Sheikh entrusted the governing of the people to Prince Abdul Aziz bin Muhammad bin Saud and devoted his time to worship, learning and teaching. Prince Muhammad and his son Abd al Aziz always consulted him before they undertook anything and he gave his ruling. After an arduous struggle and having reached his goal he passed away in Dhul Qa’dah of 1206.

Muslim hate crimes against Jews (muslim hate crimes against "infidels" are by far the most common hate crimes but we totally lack definite and official figured because these muslim hate crimes are blinked)

Muslim hate crimes against Jews in the world

The most anti-Jewish place is the West Bank and Gaza, where 93 percent of people held anti-Jewish beliefs, followed by Iraq, Yemen, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Morocco. Saudi Arabia we have no reliable figures on but they might even be higher than in the West Bank and Gaza.

Muslim hate crimes against Jews in the US

Although almost two-thirds of religion-based hate crimes in 2012 in the US were committed against Jews and although the majority of these hate attacks stem from islam this is how a Jew who tries to point it out is treated:

In other words, when muslims attack Jews it's not anti- Jewish but anti-muslim!

According to US Ambassador Samantha Power, anti-Semitism is an increasing domestic concern in the US and cited statistics from an FBI report, revealing that almost two-thirds of religion-based crimes in 2012 were committed against Jews.

Muslim hate crimes against Jews in Sweden

Malmö, Sweden's third city with a big muslim population, has for many years been the most dangerous place for Jews. However, Thomas Bull, coordinator at the hate crime section of Malmö police says 'I don't believe Malmö is worse when it comes to hate crimes'. Only after some reporters disguised as Jews showed him the muslim atrocities they encountered he changed his mind: 'It might be harder for Jews to show their attributes here than I previously thought.' However, the question remains: Why is the coordinator of hate crimes in Sweden's most anti-Jewish city not aware of it when almost every other Swede knows it?!

Saudi Arabia - the cradle of muslim evil

Religious freedom "does not exist" in Saudi Arabia. Islam is the official religion of Saudi Arabia, and the tenets of that religion are enforced by law.

Antisemitsm is common within religious circles. Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais, the imam of the Grand mosque in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, has been described as an antisemite for publicly praying to God to 'terminate' the Jews

Saudi Arabian media often attacks Jews in books, news articles, at their Mosques and with what some describe as antisemitic satire. Saudi Arabian government officials and state religious leaders often promote the idea that Jews are conspiring to take over the entire world; as proof of their claims they publish and frequently cite The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as factual.

One Saudi Arabian government newspaper suggested that hatred of all Jews is justifiable. "Why are they (the Jews) hated by all the people which hosted them, such as Iraq and Egypt thousands years ago, and Germany, Spain, France and the UK, up to the days they gained of power over the capital and the press, in order to rewrite the history?"

Saudi textbooks vilify Jews (and Christians and non-Wahabi Muslims): according to The Washington Post, Saudi textbooks claimed by them to have been sanitized of antisemitism still call Jews apes (and Christians swine); demand that students avoid and not befriend Jews; claim that Jews worship the devil; and encourage Muslims to engage in Jihad to vanquish Jews.

Even during the height of the Saudi crackdown on extremism in 2004, a Saudi IQRA TV "man on the street" segment on feelings toward Jews, was entirely antagonistic. Interviewees described Jews as "our eternal enemies", "murderous", "the enemies of Allah and His Prophet," "murderers of prophets," "the filthiest people on the face of this earth", etc.

What Klevius has said about Abd al-Wahhab the father of Saudi islamofascism (2008) plus what yo won't find on Wikipedia:

The root man of Saudi islamofascism was Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab who, during his studies in Basra in the 18th C, got seriously dazzled by glimpses of the European Enlightenment twinkling through the temporary crack to the West called the "Tulip period". He then retreated back into his medieval islamic darkness and as a result, came to position himself as the very opposite to the British "Glorious revolution" which fought against Catholic papacy, and which ended up in Lancashire's coal fueled textile industries as the beginning of the modern industrialized* world based on technology and rationality rather than on religious superstition and fundamentalism (also compare Shinto vs islam). A major outcome of industrialization was universal suffrage and the idea about negative human rights.

* isn't it an irony then that Britain, who started the series of modern revolutions as well as industrialization, came to deeply embed itself with the most intolerant, hateful, racist and sexist constitution, i.e. the Saudi islamofascist state which was incapable of producing anything by itself except hatred and more fanatic muslims!

Together with the criminal "house of Saud" Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab then confined the Arabs in islamic backwardness and, in addition, the Arab women in an islamic burka of extreme Sharia sex segregation/apartheid.

After having robbed Mecca and Medina, the Sauds/Wahhabis run the stolen country by the help of what they fleeced from visiting pilgrims. This was the main source of income until Westerners found/drilled oil and made the lazy islamist looters even wealthier.

(analysis taken from Homo Filius Nullius by Peter Klevius).

Klevius comment: And today this evilness threatens the free world through spineless politicians and UN! The banner of Enlightenment is now upheld by heroic women, e.g. African Ayaan Hirsi Ali who has suffered as a victim of islam(ofascism) and escaped to the West, only to find that she was abandoned by those she thought would protect her! In fact, Western politicians and media are busy implementing that very Arab-islamic oppression so many muslims have escaped!

Saying islam is "a great religion" is a grave insult to secularism* and secularized religions

* No religious or other superstitious and spiritual basis for legislation etc. The only guidance for legislation is the most basic of Human Rights, i.e. the universal equality principle that makes sexism and racism (and due hate) redundant (Klevius 1992). Add to this the so called negative rights, i.e. freedom from impositions. Read Klevius important definition of Negative Human Rights. It's been on the web since 2002 but somehow you might have missed this most educational page you can find re. Human Rights! And if you understand it you either give up your Human Rights violating racism/sexism - or admit that you really are a hateful racist.

Barely are the victims of islam's latest atrocities buried before the Pope, BBC and politicians (not to mention muslim organizations) again campaign for muslims' right to offend us non-muslims.
 

BBC got one more muslim presenter, Mishal Husain, yet uses non muslim presenters to talk about the most important muslim news! Why? Is it to protect her fantasy "Euro-muslim" virginity"?!

When the islamofascist Saudi dictator and "guardian of islam" died Mishal Husain was silent about it and rather talked about prince Andrew's alleged sex with a minor prostitute.

While pious orthodox muslims chase Jews, BBC's main muslim presenter drinks alcohol during ramadan and argues, in an extremely bigoted and hypocritical way, that as a muslim she thinks that ‘the emphasis on what you wear on your head or how many times you pray, on the outward things rather than what’s in your heart and the way you treat people, is misguided’. Well Mishal please, what you have in your individual head has nothing to do with collective islam where you count as one of the more than a Billion muslims who via their muslimhood sanction OIC's Human Rights violating islamofascism!

However. either she is a muslim and thereby has to support Human Rights violating sharia - or she is a lying apostate. There is no such a thing as an individual muslim! Although Mishal Husain as an individual is free to believe whatever she likes, if she calls herself a muslim she automatically connects to sharia islam - e.g. as stated by all the world's muslims' Saudi based and UN sanctioned sharia organization OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) and its islamofascist Saudi Fuhrer Iyad Madani.

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo. Mishal Husain is BBC's top muslim presenter and BBC is the world's leading media. The only thing she needs to say is that she opposes Human Rights violating sharia - and thereby also opposes islam because islam without some form of Human Rights violating sharia is not islam anymore - it's just a private belief and won't bother Klevius a bit.

A consequence of this is that a sharia supporting muslim's vote is undemocratic. OIC's 57 member state voting bloc in UN who supported Human Rights violating sharia as a guidance for muslim legislation was therefore also undemocratic.

Why do you let your politicians keep licking the most evil dictator family on Earth?!

Saudi Arabia and islam - the Human Rights violating sharia curse (incl. street jihad in the West) of the world

Not since the German National socialists has the world seen such an apparent pure evil as what the Saudis (+accomplices) have produced by the help of oil money and the most hateful of ideologies. The Saudis have been behind most major terrorist attacks incl 9/11, Iraq (most atrocities since Bush's speedy victory over Saddam), Libya, Egypt, Syria, Russia, UK etc around the world; OIC, the islamofascist organization against Human Rights is based in Saudi Arabia and its Fuhrer is a Saudi named Iyad Madani; Saudi Arabia is the center of muslim racism and intolerance; the Saudis have deliberately covered with concrete and various constructions all sites that could reveal the total lack of archaeological evidence about the islamic myths. And on and on!

Saudi based OIC - and its islamofascist Saudi sharia Fuhrer Iyad Madani - constitutes islam today, and it's against the most basic of Human Rights!

Islam has always been used for evil. Why? Because it's originally made as a tool for evil!

 There was never a good Nationalsocialim (aka "Nazism") in Germany. So why should there be a good islam - especially considering that islam has committed way more crimes against humanity throughout 1400 years?! Moreover, islam is the only "monotheist" religion that started by slaughtering its Jewish parents.

Nazi German, Saudi Arabiay and islamist Turkey - no freedom of speech!

Excerpts from OIC's sharia declaration sanctioned by UN

ARTICLE 24:

All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.


ARTICLE 25:
The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

Klevius: This declaration is the real muslim problem because it constitutes islam of today. This is also the reason why BBC and its muslim sharia presenter try hard to keep ordinart Brits and others unaware of this disgusting hate declaration

Why doesn't BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain comment on her Saudi muslim sharia caliph's death?!

Saying islam is "a great religion" is a grave insult to secularism* and secularized religions

* No religious or other superstitious and spiritual basis for legislation etc. The only guidance for legislation is the most basic of Human Rights, i.e. the universal equality principle that makes sexism and racism (and due hate) redundant (Klevius 1992). Add to this the so called negative rights, i.e. freedom from impositions. Read Klevius important definition of Negative Human Rights. It's been on the web since 2002 but somehow you might have missed this most educational page you can find re. Human Rights! And if you understand it you either give up your Human Rights violating racism/sexism - or admit that you really are a hateful racist.

Barely are the victims of islam's latest atrocities buried before the Pope, BBC and politicians again campaign for muslims' right to offend us non-muslims.
 

BBC got one more muslim presenter, Mishal Husain, yet uses non muslim presenters to talk about the most important muslim news! Why?

When the islamofascist Saudi dictator and "guardian of islam" died Mishal Husain was silent about it and rather talked about prince Andrew's alleged sex with a minor prostitute.

While islamofascism chases Jews, BBC's main muslim presenter drinks alcohol during ramadan and argues, in an extremely bigoted and hypocritical way, that as a muslim she thinks that ‘the emphasis on what you wear on your head or how many times you pray, on the outward things rather than what’s in your heart and the way you treat people, is misguided’.

However. either she is a muslim and thereby has to support Human Rights violating sharia - or she is a lying apostate. There is no such a thing as an individual muslim! Although Mishal Husain as an individual is free to believe whatever she likes, if she calls herself a muslim she automatically connects to sharia islam - e.g. as stated by all the world's muslims' Saudi based and UN sanctioned sharia organization OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) and its islamofascist Saudi Fuhrer Iyad Madani.

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo. Mishal Husain is BBC's top muslim presenter and BBC is the world's leading media. The only thing she needs to say is that she opposes Human Rights violating sharia - and thereby also opposes islam because islam without some form of Human Rights violating sharia is not islam anymore - it's just a private belief and won't bother Klevius a bit.

A consequence of this is that a sharia supporting muslim's vote is undemocratic. OIC's 57 member state voting bloc in UN who supported Human Rights violating sharia as a guidance for muslim legislation was therefore also undemocratic.
 
Yet BBC manages today to:


1  Call the world's most intolerant dictator - who even on his death bed asked for more Human Rights violating sharia - a 'cautious reformer'!



2 When interviewing terrorist experts trying to belittle the Saudi connection to the Islamic State (which has a huge support among Saudis) while instead trying to emphasize the Shia threat which has a much less support within Saudi Arabia.


3  Not with a word touching the subject of worldwide Saudi sponsored jihadist hate crimes around the world. "king" Abdullah was the main culprit behind this hate mongering.


4  The fact that his follower is, at least equally keen to violate Human Rights with islamofascist sharia.



5  The fact that the Saudi family steers all muslims world Umma via its Jeddah based OIC organization.



Is it just Klevius who thinks these would have been topics of interest for British license fee paying listeners?

Every true* muslim is a Human Rights violator

* I.e. follower/supporter of OIC's Human Rights violating sharia.

Saudi based OIC - and its islamofascist Saudi sharia Fuhrer Iyad Madani  - constitutes islam today, and it's against the most basic of Human Rights!


There was never a good Nationalsocialim (aka "Nazism") in Germany. So why should there be a good islam - especially considering that islam has committed way more crimes against humanity throughout 1400 years?! Moreover, islam is the only "monotheist" religion that started by slaughtering its Jewish parents.

Nazi German, Saudi Arabiay and islamist Turkey - no freedom of speech!

Excerpts from OIC's sharia declaration sanctioned by UN

ARTICLE 24:

All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.


ARTICLE 25:
The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

Klevius: This declaration is the real muslim problem because it constitutes islam of today. This is also the reason why BBC and its muslim sharia presenter try hard to keep ordinart Brits and others unaware of this disgusting hate declaration.

Klevius question to BBC's muslim sharia* presenter Mishal Husain: Why don't you report more about muslim hate attacks on Jews?!

 .

Islamofascists take down main Jewish news website 

 

Barely are the victims of islam's latest atrocities buried before the Pope, BBC and politicians again campaign for muslims' right to offend us non-muslims.

While islamofascism chases Jews, BBC's main muslim presenter drinks alcohol during ramadan and argues, in an extremely bigoted and hypocritical way, that ‘the emphasis on what you wear on your head or how many times you pray, on the outward things rather than what’s in your heart and the way you treat people, I find misguided’.

* However. either she is a muslim and thereby has to support Human Rights violating sharia - or she is a lying apostate. There is no such a thing as an individual muslim! Although Mishal Husain as an individual is free to believe whatever she likes, if she calls herself a muslim she automatically connects to sharia islam - e.g. as stated by all the world's muslims' Saudi based and UN sanctioned sharia organization OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) and its islamofascist Saudi Fuhrer Iyad Madani.

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo. Mishal Husain is BBC's top muslim presenter and BBC is the world's leading media. The only thing she needs to say is that she opposes Human Rights violating sharia - and thereby also opposes islam because islam without some form of Human Rights violating sharia is not islam anymore - it's just a private belief and won't bother Klevius a bit.

 A consequence of this is that a sharia supporting muslim's vote is undemocratic. OIC's 57 member state voting bloc in UN who supported Human Rights violating sharia as a guidance for muslim legislation was therefore also undemocratic.
 

Every true muslim is a Human Rights violator

Saudi based OIC - and its islamofascist Saudi sharia Fuhrer Iyad Madani  - constitutes islam today, and it's against the most basic of Human Rights!


There was never a good Nationalsocialim (aka "Nazism") in Germany. So why should there be a good islam - especially considering that islam has committed way more crimes against humanity throughout 1400 years?! Moreover, islam is the only "monotheist" religion that started by slaughtering its Jewish parents.

FREE SPEECH FOES SHUT DOWN PAMELA GELLER'S ANTI-JIHAD WEBSITE

01-20-2015 12:51 am - Pamela Geller
Anti-free speech thugs are at it again. My website, Atlas Shrugs (PamelaGeller.com), was taken down by a massive DDoS attack last Thursday, and as of this writing on Sunday afternoon, the attack is still metastasizing. This attack is unprecedented in its size and scope. Jihadis and their leftist errand boys are so desperate to silence me and my message that they have devoted tremendous resources to taking down my site, which is devoted to honest news reporting about jihad activity.

Leftists and Islamic supremacists do this on all fronts. On Saturday, I organized a rally against an anti-free speech Islamic conference, and the leftists were in lockstep, goosestep, with the Islamic supremacists – as the media coverage from leftist outlets demonstrated.

My site host, Media Temple, said they couldn’t cope with the attack against my site. They had never in their history seen anything like it. The DDoS attack didn’t just take down my site. It also took down Media Temple and threatened all of their clients, and even attacked the servers that Media Temple uses at Net Data Center, a service provider that promises “uninterrupted operations.” Net Data Center could not handle the massive traffic that the attackers were sending to my site to take it down, and finally had to pull the plug on Atlas Shrugs.

The timing was noteworthy. Our ads calling attention to Islamic Jew-hatred in San Francisco have gotten an immense amount of national and international press. And above all, our free speech rally last Saturday to counter the “Stand with the Prophet” anti-free speech conference in Garland, Texas, got the foes of freedom riled.

Leaders of the Muslim community in America held their “Stand with the Prophet” conference in Garland, in support of Muhammad and the restriction of “Islamophobic” speech – working for the same goal as that which was held by those who killed 12 people at the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris last week: the punishment of criticism of Islam and Muhammad, including even examinations of the motives and goals of terrorists.

The event featured:

John Esposito, head of the Saudi-funded Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown; and

Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and close friend of the mastermind of that bombing, the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman.

Saturday’s “Stand with the Prophet” event sought to combat “Islamophobes in America” – including me. This is in line with Islamic supremacist groups’ longstanding objective of defaming, smearing and marginalizing anyone who opposes the jihad agenda. They said they wanted to defend Muhammad – which means to silence those who notice that defenders of Muhammad just murdered 16 people in Paris and tens of thousands worldwide since 9/11.

Nevertheless, the superintendent of schools allowed this anti-American group to hold this conference agitating for an abridgment of the First Amendment – despite the mass slaughter of the Charlie Hebdo staff for violating the draconian Shariah blasphemy laws, mandating death for criticism of Islam. The Islamic law restricting free speech has no place in the American public sphere. It is anathema to the principles upon which this great nation was established.

But we were unbowed. Saturday in Garland, Texas, thousands of freedom-loving Americans took a stand for the freedom of speech. Block after block, row after row, Texan after Texan, American after American, said no to the restrictions against free speech as mandated under Islamic law (Shariah).

The rally was an enormous success. Thousands of Americans joined us in Garland, Texas, to oppose the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the earth, Islamic law (Shariah). They demonstrated their indomitable commitment to freedom. We will never give in, and never submit, and never be subjugated.

The media coverage of our rally was vicious, ugly and dishonest. It’s extraordinary in the wake of the Paris jihad attack, where journalists were mercilessly slaughtered in cold blood, that journalists are covering and advancing the most extreme and brutal ideology on the face of the earth. The jihadists screamed in the streets (while making a Nazi salute, by the way), “We have avenged the prophet.”

This conference was the same kind of initiative: It was called “Stand with the Prophet.” And what did the media call it? A “peace conference.” One headline blared, “Muslims group gathers for peace, faces threats, protest.” And the news story features only smiling young women wearing hijabs.

This coverage, the “Stand with the Prophet” conference and the attack on my site are all part of the same anti-free speech initiative. The Islamic supremacists are out for blood, determined to criminalize criticism of Islam (and opposition to jihad terror) under the guise of fighting against “Islamophobia” and “hate speech.” The media cover for them. And on the eve of their “Stand with the Prophet” event, their fellow foes of free speech took my site down.

My website reaches close to 100,000 readers a day. No wonder they want so very much to take it down and keep it down. Our rally, like my website, stood for the freedom of speech against all attempts, violent and stealthy, to impose Islamic blasphemy laws on Americans and stifle criticism of Muhammad and Islam. As Muhammad’s followers kill more and more people, we need critics of him more than ever – and free people need to stand up against these underhanded attempts to stifle all criticism of Islam, including honest investigations of how jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify Jew-hatred, violence, supremacism and oppression.

The foes of free speech never give up. And neither should its defenders. As of this writing, the DDoS attack against my website continues, and there is no end in sight. I am working furiously to move the site and get back online. The costs associated with the move, the server, and the IT expertise are staggering. You can rest assured that I’ll be back online – with a righteous vengeance.

We need to get the message out and cover the news the media won’t cover – especially now when the jihad is raging. I need your help. If you believe that Atlas Shrugs must survive

Saudi based OIC (all muslims Ummah organization via UN) and its islamofascist* Fuhrer Iyad Madani: Violent? Me? Just trying to sharia punish Charlie Hebdo!

* The original UN Human Rights declaration from 1948 was meant to be a final bulwark against fascism. However, by calling Human Rights violating sharia "islamic human rights" and by the help of a bunch of Human Rights violating muslim member states, the Saudis managed to bypass this bulwark and can now in an extremely bigoted and hypocritical way argue that they follow "human rights" when they in fact do the very opposite!

Dear reader, it's Charlie Hebdo, Raif Badawi and (to a lesser extent) Peter Klevius with the Human Rights sword against Saudi oil Billionaires and their sharia scimitar. Whose side are YOU on?! Should Charlie Hebdo be prosecuted in accordance with islamofascist sharia?

Charles Martel was the guy who 732 saved France from muslim jihadist "crusades". 

Is OIC now shooting itself in the foot? Or will it again be aided by Western PC politicians?

Saudi Secretary General of Saudi based OIC, Iyad Madani (member of the dictator "house" of Saud): The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) intends to take legal measures against the French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, for publishing "blasphemous" (according to sharia) cartoons. OIC is studying Europe and French laws and "other available procedures" (UN?) to be able to take legal action against Charlie Hebdo. If French laws allow us to take legal procedures against Charlie Hebdo, OIC will not hesitate to prosecute the French magazine. This publication by Charlie Hebdo requires necessary legal measures (to comply with Human Rights violating muslim sharia). These cartoons have hurt the sentiments of muslims across the world. This is hate speech (according to Human Rights violating sharia) and must not offend others.

Klevius question to BBC's muslim sharia presenter: What do you make of it? Are your "sentiments" hurt, and dou you also think Charlie Hebdo people need more suffering? BBC and you seem to be totally unaware (see screendumps below) of this Saudi islamofascist  threat. Luckily you have Klevius to help you in your heavy task of informing about really essential news.

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo



Charlie Hebdo's editor-in-chief Gérard Biard: "We do not attack religion, but we do when it gets involved in politics. If God becomes entangled in politics, then democracy is in danger. Some of Charlie Hebdo's staff members are religious, but choose not to be offended. To be a believer is a personal choice that concerns no one else. We respect that, in the same way that we respect a person's private life as long as the individual does not bring his or her private life into the public sphere.

Klevius: So what does UK's OIC loving muslim sharia Minister of faith islamofascism, Sayeeda Warsi make of it? Declaring the British parliament "islamophobic"?!





Here some screen dumps of 20 Jan 2015. As you can see, BBC seems quite uniterested in the OIC/Madani issue:

No surprise here.

Saying islam is "a great religion" is a grave insult to secularism* and secularized religions

* No religious or other superstitious and spiritual basis for legislation etc. The only guidance for legislation is the most basic of Human Rights, i.e. the universal equality principle that makes sexism and racism (and due hate) redundant (Klevius 1992).

Who is a muslim - and who isn't?

Where does "extremist/radical" islam end and "moderate" islam start?

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo

Mishal Husain pretends to be a "Brit" yet shares values that are as far you can get from Britishness and basic Human Rights. Or is she just pretending to be a muslim - i.e. an apostate? In the latter case she has committed the worst crime islam knows about.

It was considered "racist abuse" when BBC's Mishal Husain was told by a shopper in supermarket (about her children fooling around) that 'Your tribe need to behave like proper English children'.

So what about Communities Secretary Eric Pickles who has been challenged by British muslims (see below) for writing to mosques in England urging them to do more to fit a "British identity" and that there was “more work to do”? Racist?

Muslim born (apostate?!)* Mr X** "president"*** Hussain**** Obama Soetoro (or whatever)***** who wants to criminalize criticism of islamic hate speech (sharia), and who has made himself sharia compliant and therefore against Human Rights: 'Our biggest advantage is that our muslim populations, they feel themselves to be Americans. However, there are parts of Europe in which that is not the case and that's probably the greatest danger that Europe faces.'

* Born to a muslim father who hadn't committed apostasy (the worst crime in islam) made him a muslim. Moreover, he was also raised as a muslim because his adoptive father Soetoro was a muslim.
** All his records are labeled secret.
*** His mother was too young as the only US parent for to fulfill the constitutional criterion. He listened for some 20 years to one of the worst black supremacist racists' preachings. He used the race card in the election and he has violated the spirit of the US Constitution ever since.
**** more in line with his muslim heritage
***** sarcasm:

Klevius: Shouldn't muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X "president" and the news channels which broadcasted his nonsense, now for it as did Steve Emerson and Fox News who actually didn't say anything wrong in principle?! After all, Saudi based and Saudi led OIC is openly pushing for a worldwide sharia Ummah.


Why talk about islamic violence when the real subject should be islamic sharia causing not only violence but also all sorts of other Human Rights violations?

A new guide written by students at Michigan State University aims to educate the public about muslim Americans. Kate Kerbrat said that all the muslims she interviewed for the guide "denounced terrorism and wanted to ... convey that islam is not a violent religion, that the extremists misinterpret a few verses in the Quran."

Klevius: Like the Saudi based and Saudi steered 57 member state OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) which has abandoned the most basic of Human Rights all together and replaced them with sharia via UN?!

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam,Aug. 5, 1990

Recognizing the importance of issuing a Document on Human Rights in Islam that will serve as a guide for Member states in all aspects of life;

Having examined the stages through which the preparation of this draft Document has so far, passed and the relevant report of the Secretary General;

Having examined the Report of the Meeting of the Committee of Legal Experts held in Tehran from 26 to 28 December, 1989;

Agrees to issue the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam that will serve as a general guidance for Member States in the Field of human rights.

Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made as the best community and which gave humanity a universal and well-balanced civilization, in which harmony is established between hereunder and the hereafter, knowledge is combined with faith, and to fulfill the expectations from this community to guide all humanity which is confused because of different and conflicting beliefs and ideologies and to provide solutions for all chronic problems of this materialistic civilization.

In contribution to the efforts of mankind to assert human rights, to protect man from exploitation and persecution, and to affirm his freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah.

Convinced that mankind which has reached an advanced stage in materialistic science is still, and shall remain, in dire need of faith to support its civilization as well as a self motivating force to guard its rights;

Believing that fundamental rights and freedoms according to Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one shall have the right as a matter of principle to abolish them either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commands, which are contained in the Revealed Books of Allah and which were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages and that safeguarding those fundamental rights and freedoms is an act of worship whereas the neglect or violation thereof is an abominable sin, and that the safeguarding of those fundamental rights and freedom is an individual responsibility of every person and a collective responsibility of the entire Ummah;

Do hereby and on the basis of the above-mentioned principles declare as follows:

ARTICLE 24:

All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.


ARTICLE 25:
The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

Klevius: This declaration is the real muslim problem because it constitutes islam of today. This is also the reason why BBC and its muslim sharia presenter try hard to keep ordinart Brits and others unaware of this disgusting hate declaration.

Iyad Madani, Saudi Fuhrer of the Saudi initiated and Saudi based OIC, all the world's muslims Umma and Sharia organization, which via UN demands the world to criminalize criticism of islam (the worst crime ever) and to make it a crime following Human Rights (as it is already in e.g. Saudi Arabia - compare the case of Raif Badawi and others).

British muslims oppose British values

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has been challenged by Muslims for writing to mosques in England urging them to do more to root out extremists and prevent young people being radicalised.

In a letter sent to more than 1,000 Islamic leaders, Mr Pickles stressed that he was “proud” of the way Muslims in Britain had responded to the Paris terror attacks but added that there was “more work to do”.

The Muslim Council of Britain said it wanted Mr Pickles to clarify his request - and asked if, like “members of the far right”, he was suggesting that Islam is inherently apart from British society.

Deputy secretary-general Harun Khan said: “We will be writing to Mr Eric Pickles to ask that he clarifies his request to Muslims to ‘explain and demonstrate how faith in Islam can be part of British identity’.

“Is Mr Pickles seriously suggesting, as do members of the far right, that Muslims and Islam are inherently apart from British society?”

In the letter, also signed by Communities Minister Lord Ahmad (the muslim who threatened to let loose ten thousand jihadists if the Brits didn't obey to muslim demands - same muslim was later sentenced for killing a person with his car), Mr Pickles wrote: “You, as faith leaders, are in a unique position in our society. You have a precious opportunity, and an important responsibility, in explaining and demonstrating how faith in Islam can be part of British identity.

“We believe together we have an opportunity to demonstrate the true nature of British islam today. There is a need to lay out more clearly than ever before what being a British muslim means today: proud of your faith and proud of your country. We know that acts of extremism are not representative (sic) of islam, but we need to show what is.”

A "colored" voice on islamic schizophrenia

Aki Muthali (born and raised in Sri Lanka): We know Reza Aslan is a stickler for misrepresenting the truth. I have discussed him once before here. His obsession with omitting key details of Islamist violence has made him a proper unicorn since his takeover of Western media. He also found comfort in the hearts of [pseudo] liberals obsessed with their own western colonial and imperial guilt who also have no problem limiting human rights for people [in the east and west] just so it doesn’t “offend” religious fanatics.

On January 8, 2015, he was on CNN (yet again) with Don Lemon, discussing the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

ASLAN:"They make fun of Muslims for a very specific reason to sort of show, or maybe demonstrate, that look if you maybe want to be in this country, if you want to be in France, then you have to deal with the French values, you have to rid yourself of your own values, ideals, norms and you have to take on French values."

In the case of Charlie Hebdo—the massacre took place because the “French value” was to uphold free speech [over religious appeasement]. But that isn’t a “Muslim value”—am I hearing this right? I’ll let my head fall on the table for a minute here…

With all the different races and cultures that create France’s multicultural landscape, only those practicing Islam are being specially targeted by the French society? So the Kouachi brothers simply reacted by killing cartoonists and police officers?

being religious means people can never truly integrate into secular societies—that religion will be at a constant war with the provision of human rights above the law of religion itself

he is admitting that being religious means people can never truly integrate into secular societies—that religion will be at a constant war with the provision of human rights above the law of religion itself.

Jihadists had heavily indoctrinated the Kouachi brothers with Islamic tribalism [on recruitment at a young age] which resulted in mental lacerations that kept them further apart from civil society and convinced them to contribute to the tyranny of those wanting an Islamic totalitarianism. And that’s what Islamists do—they take advantage of young children and preach anti-western and anti-secular sentiments to the point where they feel victimized whenever their Islamic values aren’t placed above human rights—then Aslan proceeds to reiterate these clearly erroneous placement of blame on the west as well. Somehow, the west is “accountable” when they refuse to sacrifice fundamental human rights for the bigotry of religious fanaticism.

ASLAN:“And there have been a number of laws passed not only in France, with regard to prohibitions on Islamic dress, but throughout Europe about whether you can build mosques, about whether you can build minarets, etcetera. And this tension, this polarization I'm afraid has led to a lot of acts of violence. Not just the tragedy yesterday...”

Surely, Aslan’s eyeballs will bulge momentarily after hearing one of the gunmen literally admitting to being influenced by the scriptures to die as a martyr for Islam [back in a 2005 documentary on Muslim extremism] but he would probably brush that off as well and make another mental note to deflect and deter criticism of Islam and shorten it to an “identity crisis” and “clash of civilizations” to place a collective blame [on those being abused by Islam]. Where did he get his Ph.D. from—Fox News?

Infidels must have been asking for it with their enticing secular nonsense—so of course it makes sense to shout “Allahu Akbar” while slaughtering them. But it still has nothing to do with Islam!

One of the brothers told a female worker at Charlie Hebdo that she is being left alive because she is a woman, but she must convert to Islam and wear a hijab. See—women are not compelled to wear the hijab at all!

ASLAN:“And particularly in France, an aggressively secularizing country that has never really tolerated multiculturalism or the kind of cultural religious diversity that is the hallmark of the United States, you can see how that would create the kinds of tensions that would bubble up occasionally into acts of violence on both sides. We have seen a lot of anti-Muslim violence in Europe as well as Muslim violence against Europeans.”

He claims a multi-racial “Muslim” group is having hostility with a multi-racial “European” group and yet he only blames one group for the atrocities.This is what I call ‘mind-numbing idiocy’—and as if that weren’t enough, his hyperbole narrative implies severe racism against the “Muslims”.

Why is the controversial caricature being referred to as “racist”? It sounds rather unsophisticated to me. Who exactly is Charlie Hebdo being racist towards—blacks—whites—browns—olives? I think my hair just turned white.

Islam is represented by Asians, Africans, Americans, Australians and Europeans—so who exactly is being racially discriminated by the satire…? I’m genuinely curious.

I’m sure Aslan has heard of Anjem Choudary. If we are to scan through his social media pages—he incites hatred and violence against non-Muslims and calls for an Islamic colonialism in the west [in accordance with the Quran and Sharia Law].

The way free speech works is Choudary can spout as much hate speech against non-Muslims as he wants and still he hasn’t been violently victimized by ‘anti-Muslim bigots’ in the west,whereas anybody else who satirizes or criticizes Islam under the same banner of free speech—they get shot and killed or threatened by Islamists who are protecting the “honour” of Islam exactly as any citizens living in countries governed by the law of Sharia are terrorized for blasphemy.

Aslan’s narrative is so dangerous that it suggests Islamists violence and threats are part of multiculturalism and should be respected. He is defaming multiculturalism itself with his nonsensical rationale—which creates more room for the rednecks that chant “Go back home!” not just to immigrants but also to people of colour who were born and raised in the west.

Masking every wrong on European colonization and [western] foreign and national policy continues to keep even our fellow women, children and men in the east shackled in mass terror day and night under the grip of their countrymen’s law concentrated with religious insanity.

Do the people of the east not deserve a better standard of human rights from their own government and citizens? How is the “west” preventing the east from granting human rights to its own people? Is Dick Cheney responsible for their jurisprudence—is he the one enforcing the draconian blasphemy laws? Just don’t blame“religion” if you want to be Aslan’s friend though—because this lion only roars in the west.

Conforming to secularism did not happen overnight in the west—it took centuries of bloodshed to even accept the idea—and it’s still not perfect, but it has a lot more human rights to offer than the east. While slavery is abolished in the west—it’s still alive and well in much of the Middle East where it’s openly practiced. Aside from ISIS’s brutality, ask why the people from India, Philippines, China, Sri Lanka,much of Africa, etc. who arrive to the Middle East on a worker visa, hoping for employment,are unable to return home to their loved ones.

While Islamists indoctrinate and force children to gear up in suicide vests and blow themselves up—we have Aslan [and others like him] claiming these unprecedented scale of terror around the world committed by Muslim extremists is a mere response to racial and cultural oppression by the west and doesn’t involve Islam in any way.

Recently, Amnesty International reported Boko Haram had killed approximately 2,000 people—mainly children, women and the elderly. What was the “west’s” involvement in this Islamist frenzy to create an “Islamic State” in West Africa;who erased the accountability of these eastern tyrants? Just ignore the meaning of “Boko Haram” if you’re feeling too cute for critical thinking.You can click here to view details and satellite image of Boko Haram’s attack on Baga, Nigeria.

I will discuss Raif Badawi repeatedly until reality sinks in. Why is he rotting in a Saudi prison? He was charged with “insulting Islam” after promoting free speech. He will receive 50 lashes every week—his spine will bleed and fester for 19 more weeks if he does survive the remaining 950 lashes. He also faces 10 years and approximately a quarter of a million dollars in fine. His initial sentencing was death for apostasy before it was “reduced”. Alas, hypocrisy enables people to condemn Saudi Arabia while making apologies for the Kouachi brothers.

Liberal/non-Muslims are already on a trial in a kangaroo court created in the delusional minds of Islamists who also processed the voir dire on the values of Sharia but apologists claim Islamists are the victims. So let me ask these apologists a few questions…

1) Why do you not march for minorities [Kurds, Yazidis, Balochs, non-Muslims, etc.] facing apartheid in Islamic nations?

2) Why do you silence discussion on the double standards, hypocrisy and contradiction Muslims often display in both east and west?

3) Why are you so eager to discredit and neglect the plight of those victimized by Islamists—victims who are as diverse in race and nationality as the Islamists themselves?

4) What can a verdict be[in a trial built on fallacies] when the doctrine of Islam is incompatible with liberalism?

Just take a proper look at Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Qatar,Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Palestine, Algeria, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Egypt, Libya, Somalia, Morocco, Sudan, Brunei, Malaysia, Oman, etc. and if these countries aren’t evident of human rights strife directly resulting from the consequences of embracing Islamic values—just please stop pretending to be indignant about injustice because you’re satirizing yourselves without the help of Charlie Hebdo.

Islamists stormed the magazine’s office due to their material which was enabled by freedom of speech but Aslan frills it up as a result of France “forcing” Muslim people to renounce their “norms”. His accusatory tone aimed at western people is the only thing generalizing all Muslims into one insidious category—so I denounce him for implicating the Muslim “norm” as being disconnected with liberal values.

The Kouachi brothers are not martyrs of multicultural and racial struggle—they are anti-liberal and anti-human-rights Islamists who assassinated 12 innocent people to honour their Islamic pride as commanded by the Sharia Law.

I’d like to welcome Aslan and his cheerleaders to the 21st century where multi-generational bigotry meets common sense and their redundant, preposterous apologia gets dismissed as quickly as religion dismisses human rights—and that is precisely why Islamists fear liberalism—because it is slowly ending the epoch of rule based on delusions and its momentum is creeping into the Islamic nations perilously governed by such madness.

Growing up must be so hard for some people—especially when they are told they can’t hijack the world for their own foolish sentiments.






Radical Islamists are using Sharia Law to silence fellow Muslims who critique the religion. (Photo: Emad Nassar/Flash90)

Last Wednesday’s terrorist attack against the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris shocked the world. A satirical magazine known for printing images of Muhammad, which is against Sharia law, the magazine has been threatened over the years by various terror and Islamist groups to stop or suffer the consequences.

The attack on the magazine, which left 12 people dead, is an attack by radical Islamists on the West’s ideals of freedom of speech. The terrorists who carried out the Charlie Hebdo attack were in line with a method of thinking that is becoming all the more popular among Muslims around the world.

Proscribed by numerous Islamic states and various Islamist groups, the terrorists believed that Sharia law should be implemented under any circumstances where the honor of the prophet Mohammed is seen to be ‘insulted’.

Over the last few years, numerous regimes and religious entities in Muslim countries have given out the death penalty for any person believed to have publicly critiqued Islam, Mohammed or even the government. Claiming that all such behavior is anti-Islam, these Islamist regimes have started a war on the basic human privilege known as freedom of expression.

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Soheil-Arabi.jpg
Soheil Arabi (Photo: MEMRI/ Hra-news.org)Soheil Arabi (Photo: MEMRI/ Hra-news.org)

In Arab and Muslim countries, defaming Islam and the Prophet Muhammad is still defined as an offense against Sharia Law and entails heavy punishment. Recent examples of the enforcement of such laws have included the arrest of Saudi intellectual Dr. Turki Al-Hamad and Saudi blogger Hamza Kashgari; the arrest of another Saudi liberal, Raef Badawi, who was sentenced to public flogging; and both Mauritanian blogger Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir and Iranian blogger Soheil Arabi, who were sentenced to death.

Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir was sentenced to death for writing an article on January 14, 2014, in which he criticized some decisions that the Prophet and his Companions took during their military conquests. He applied and used these examples to implicitly criticize Mauritania for allowing a discriminatory caste system. The result was that on December 24, 2014, a court in Mauritania convicted him of apostasy and sentenced him to being shot to death, even though he publicly disavowed insulting Muhammad.

As for Iranian Soheil Arabi, he was arrested in January 2014 by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps for insulting the Prophet on his Facebook page. He has been incarcerated in Evin prison for about a year. An Iranian court sentenced him to death, but in December 2014 the sentence was suspended, possibly due to pressure by Iranian human rights activists abroad. However, according to various activists, his sentence may be carried out after all. According to those same sources, Arabi has been threatened not to disclose any information about his legal status.

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/useful_banner_manager_banners/81-TheThirdJihad-600WIDE.jpg

More recently, Saudi authorities began to carry out the punishment for Raef Badawi. As of January 9, the government began dishing out lashes incurred by Badawi, who is a co-founder of the Saudi Liberal Network online forum. His sentence, 1,000 lashes, is to be meted out in weekly installments of 50 lashes every Friday after prayers in front of a Jeddah mosque. In addition, Badawi is to serve 10 years in jail and a fine of 1,000,000 riyals (about $267,000). His crime? “Harming Islam” and committing Internet crimes. Human rights organizations have criticized the sentence. US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki called Badawi’s sentence “brutal” and urged Saudi authorities to overturn it.

According to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), the various punishments inflicted on these men for speaking their minds is straight out of the Koran. In a recently published report, MEMRI explains:

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/rafi-badawi.jpg
Rafi Badawi with his children. Raef Badawi with his children.

“According to the Sharia, defaming the Prophet is an act of blasphemy, the punishment for which is death even if the blasphemer repents. This law is Koranic, for Koran 9:61 says: “Those who hurt Allah’s Messenger will have a painful punishment.” The same Surah also states: “…Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allah will bring to light all that you fear. If you ask them (about this), they declare: ‘We were only talking idly and joking.’ Say: ‘Was it at Allah and His verses and His Messenger that you were mocking? Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed. [Koran 9:64-66].’”

The question that remains is how long will it take for Western countries to realize that they are not dealing with simply a bunch of radicals, but with a culture that not only condones such actions as were seen in France last week, but promotes and encourages them – even commands it.

While it is rare to see such acts of terror in Western countries that are not mandated by Sharia Law, it is sadly commonplace among Muslim countries. What are clearly acts of terror in the West are in reality run of the mill legal battles in Islamic countries. The sickening part of it all is what happens when Islam succeeds at silencing all of its critics, both internal and external.

Even ‘moderate’ countries such as Egypt, whose President came out and decried the status of radical Islam on the international level, have their less liberal and more mainstream religious elements calling for a cessation of all depictions of the prophet, even by western media.

Should the attacks in France then come as a shock? Perhaps. Or maybe it is a wake up call to the West to get them to realize that these Muslim radicals are simply trying to enforce their version of the Sharia Law in Western countries.

BBC wastes 7 min on an islam critic's mistake abt UK no-go-areas - a topic BBC otherwise almost never spend time on!

BBC focusing on smearing an individual islam critic (Steve Emerson) while defending Human Rights violating islam

Steve Emerson is an islam "expert" playing in a lower division were mistakes may occur. However, fact slips like the one that the whole of the big UK city named Birmingham would be totally muslim and as a whole a muslim no-go-area shouldn't be used to cover up the troublesome fact that a steadily growing part of UK is turning into racist sharia areas. But this is of low importance for BBC which rather used a huge chunk of its news program for poorly veiled personal attacks on Steve Emerson instead of discussing the real problem - hate fueling racist/sexist islam. Birmingham is heavily infested by islamofascism, not only in schools (see e.g. the Trojan horse scandal in Birmingham UK).

Actually, the whole of UK is a no-go-area when it comes to criticism of islam or muslims. No other group is equally "sensitive" and protected.

Klevius message to BBC: If you try to call Klevius and other peaceful Human Rights defenders who criticize islam's Human Rights violations "extremist" - then you also prescribe to Saudi Arabia's islamofascist criminalization of Human Rights! Is that what you are there to do really? You can't juxtaposition the most basic of Human Rights with sharia violations of Human Rights as to create a presumably "non-extremist"/"moderate" islam in between. Driving on the correct side of the road isn't "extremism" nor is driving in the middle of the road "moderate". And if you want an "islam" that bypasses OIC's sharia declaration in UN - then there is no longer any islam that worries Klevius. A "personal islam" isn't islam - other than among dreamers and deliberately lying imams, media people and politicians!

Is BBC/Eddie Mair steered by this islamofascist, Iyad Madani and his muslim world Ummah, the Human Rights violating Saudi based OIC?

Here are two of the very few BBC reports on no-go-area racism throughout 13 years. Keep in mind that they are full of BBC bias and that the reality is far worse. Also note how BBC tries to paint a picture that this should somehow have something to do with white racism. For more than a decade white racism has been the one and sole target for anti-racism. As a consequence (and assuming that racism isn't biologically inherited in white skin) under normal circumstance there should therefore be less white racism than colored racism. Add on top of this islam which is to a high degree a fascism of color, and you'll see even more of the disgusting bias wrapped in BBC's reporting.


BBC 3, Oct 2014
Asian Vigilantes
by Barnie Choudhury

An investigation for Today has found disturbing evidence that Asian youths in parts of Oldham are trying to create no go areas for white people.

Last year the police investigated record levels of racist attacks in Oldham.Of the 572 cases, 60% turned out to be white victims.

Pakistanis make up the majority on the Glodwick estate just west of the town centre. Some youths speak the language of racial hatred. It's not clear whether this is bravado but their message is blunt... white people keep out.

Many openly admit to carrying out what they see as revenge attacks on white people as part of a tit-for-tat campaign.

One told us: "There are signs all around saying whites enter at your risk. It's a matter of revenge. It's about giving as good as you can take."

Another had a six-inch scar running across his head. He said he had been attacked by a white gang.

"I got slashed by some whites so that I'm totally racist. I don't like whites. It's like this now, we go to a white area and we get done over. It's like them coming here they get done over...it's for your own good."

This hardening in attitude is repeated across the town and has passed down to children as young as 10. Unlike their parents they will not tolerate being victims of racism.

Local white people are scared and many want to leave the estates but cannot.

"I was just walking with my dog around 10 at night and a group of Asian youths in their car, music blaring,threatening me like saying they'd kick me head in calling me white bastard, white scum. You're frightened," one person told me.

Many Asian youths say they take the law into their own hands because they have no confidence in the police.

The perception is that the police do not take racist attacks on Asian people as seriously as assualts on white residents.

Akbor Khan had his three front teeth smashed in a brutal attack by a white gang:

"I used to have a take away in Manchester. We used to get lots of people who used to order food but not pay for it. It used to take the police an hour to get there. We'd ring the police and they'd say we haven't got the manpower. But if it happened to white people they would be there in 10 minutes," he said.

Many Asian community leaders say the trouble is caused by a minority stoking up problems for the majority, who are law abiding residents.

They say they would happily support greater police action to clamp down on the trouble makers.

Greater Manchester Police deny the accusations levelled at them.

A special multi-agency task force has been set up in Oldham to tackle the growing number of racist attacks



Compare to an other BBC report from


BBC 19 April, 2001
Police deny 'no-go zones' for whites
racist graffiti
Racist graffiti in Oldham is stirring up tensions
Police have denied that Asian youths are turning parts of Oldham into "no-go zones" for whites.

Latest police figures show a record level of race attacks in the Greater Manchester town, with 60% of reported victims being white.

Suggestions that no-go areas exist in Oldham followed the violence which flared at the weekend between white and Asian youths in Bradford.

Chief Superintendent Eric Hewitt, of the Oldham division of Greater Manchester police, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he did not believe there were any such areas in Oldham.

But he warned that unless the public gave their full support to police initiatives there was a "very real danger" that no-go zones could become reality.


It's a matter of getting revenge, a matter of giving as good as you can take

Asian youth

In a report on the Today programme, one young Asian on the Glodwick estate in the west of Oldham said there were signs all around the area saying "Whites enter at your own risk".

"It wasn't done to say 'We don't want you in our area', it was just to show that 'What you've done to us, we can do to you'," he said.

"It's a matter of getting revenge, a matter of giving as good as you can take.

"No one comes in here and causes trouble any more."


There has certainly been an increase of violence on white people

Councillor, Abdul Jabbar
But local councillor Abdul Jabbar said most people in the town lived in harmony, and only a small minority were responsible for the racist attacks.

He said: "There has certainly been an increase of violence on white people.

"This worries me and has to be resolved.

"But also there are attacks on Asian people, some very serious ones."

Racial crime unit

Akbor Khan, who lost three teeth in an attack by a gang of white youths in a subway, told the programme he would not report the crime because he had no confidence in the police.

But Mr Hewitt refuted the allegation that police were slow to respond to complaints from the Asian community.

"To try to combat that under-reporting, over a year ago I set up a special racial crime unit in the town to demonstrate that we were taking it seriously and that we would identify and arrest people responsible for these offences by employing specialist officers.

"That small unit alone arrested 75 people for racist crime last year.

"We are taking it seriously and we are producing the results.

Mr Hewitt urged community leaders to help the police identify anyone responsible for race attacks.





Compare this with some old stuff by Soeren Kern:

European ‘No-Go’ Zones for Non-Muslims Proliferating
“Occupation Without Tanks or Soldiers”

by Soeren Kern
August 22, 2011 at 5:00 am

Islamic extremists are stepping up the creation of “no-go” areas in European cities that are off-limits to non-Muslims.

Many of the “no-go” zones function as microstates governed by Islamic Sharia law. Host-country authorities effectively have lost control in these areas and in many instances are unable to provide even basic public aid such as police, fire fighting and ambulance services.

The “no-go” areas are the by-product of decades of multicultural policies that have encouraged Muslim immigrants to create parallel societies and remain segregated rather than become integrated into their European host nations.

In Britain, for example, a Muslim group called Muslims Against the Crusades has launched a campaign to turn twelve British cities – including what it calls “Londonistan” – into independent Islamic states. The so-called Islamic Emirates would function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Islamic Sharia law and operate entirely outside British jurisprudence.

The Islamic Emirates Project names the British cities of Birmingham, Bradford, Derby, Dewsbury, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Luton, Manchester, Sheffield, as well as Waltham Forest in northeast London and Tower Hamlets in East London as territories to be targeted for blanket Sharia rule.

In the Tower Hamlets area of East London (also known as the Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets), for example, extremist Muslim preachers, called the Tower Hamlets Taliban, regularly issue 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 is regularly vandalized or blacked out with spray paint.

In the Bury Park area of Luton, Muslims have been accused of “ethnic cleansing” by harassing non-Muslims to the point that many of them move out of Muslim neighborhoods. In the West Midlands, two Christian preachers have been accused of “hate crimes” for handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham. In Leytonstone in east London, the Muslim extremist Abu Izzadeen heckled the former Home Secretary John Reid by saying: “How dare you come to a Muslim area.”

In France, large swaths of Muslim neighborhoods are now considered “no-go” zones by French police. At last count, there are 751 Sensitive Urban Zones (Zones Urbaines Sensibles, ZUS), as they are euphemistically called. A complete list of the ZUS can be found on a French government website, complete with satellite maps and precise street demarcations. An estimated 5 million Muslims live in the ZUS, parts of France over which the French state has lost control.

Muslim immigrants are taking control of other parts of France too. In Paris and other French cities with high Muslim populations, such as Lyons, Marseilles and Toulouse, thousands of Muslims are closing off streets and sidewalks (and by extension, are closing down local businesses and trapping non-Muslim residents in their homes and offices) to accommodate overflowing crowds for Friday prayers. Some mosques have also begun broadcasting sermons and chants of “Allahu Akbar” via loudspeakers into the streets.

The weekly spectacles, which have been documented by dozens of videos posted on Youtube.com (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here), and which have been denounced as an “occupation without tanks or soldiers,” have provoked anger and disbelief. But despite many public complaints, local authorities have declined to intervene because they are afraid of sparking riots.

In the Belgian capital of Brussels (which is 20% Muslim), several immigrant neighborhoods have become “no-go” zones for police officers, who frequently are pelted with rocks by Muslim youth. In the Kuregem district of Brussels, which often resembles an urban war zone, police are forced to patrol the area with two police cars: one car to carry out the patrols and another car to prevent the first car from being attacked. In the Molenbeek district of Brussels, police have been ordered not to drink coffee or eat a sandwich in public during the Islamic month of Ramadan.

In Germany, Chief Police Commissioner Bernhard Witthaut, in an August 1 interview with the newspaper Der Westen, revealed that Muslim immigrants are imposing “no-go” zones in cities across Germany at an alarming rate.

The interviewer asked Witthaut: “Are there urban areas – for example in the Ruhr – districts and housing blocks that are “no-go areas,” meaning that they can no longer be secured by the police?” Witthaut replied: “Every police commissioner and interior minister will deny it. But of course we know where we can go with the police car and where, even initially, only with the personnel carrier. The reason is that our colleagues can no longer feel safe there in twos, and have to fear becoming the victim of a crime themselves. We know that these areas exist. Even worse: in these areas crimes no longer result in charges. They are left ‘to themselves.’ Only in the worst cases do we in the police learn anything about it. The power of the state is completely out of the picture.”

In Italy, Muslims have been commandeering the Piazza Venezia in Rome for public prayers. In Bologna, Muslims repeatedly have threatened to bomb the San Petronio cathedral because it contains a 600-year-old fresco inspired by Dante’s Inferno which depicts Mohammed being tormented in hell.

In the Netherlands, a Dutch court ordered the government to release to the public a politically incorrect list of 40 “no-go” zones in Holland. The top five Muslim problem neighborhoods are in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht. The Kolenkit area in Amsterdam is the number one Muslim “problem district” in the country. The next three districts are in Rotterdam – Pendrecht, het Oude Noorden and Bloemhof. The Ondiep district in Utrecht is in the fifth position, followed by Rivierenwijk (Deventer), Spangen (Rotterdam), Oude Westen (Rotterdam), Heechterp/ Schieringen (Leeuwarden) and Noord-Oost (Maastricht).

In Sweden, which has some of the most liberal immigration laws in Europe, large swaths of the southern city of Malmö – which is more than 25% Muslim – are “no-go” zones for non-Muslims. Fire and emergency workers, for example, refuse to enter Malmö’s mostly Muslim Rosengaard district without police escorts. The male unemployment rate in Rosengaard is estimated to be above 80%. When fire fighters attempted to put out a fire at Malmö’s main mosque, they were attacked by stone throwers.

In the Swedish city of Gothenburg, Muslim youth have been hurling petrol bombs at police cars. In the city’s Angered district, where more than 15 police cars have been destroyed, teenagers have also been pointing green lasers at the eyes of police officers, some of whom have been temporarily blinded.

In Gothenburg’s Backa district, youth have been throwing stones at patrolling officers. Gothenburg police have also been struggling to deal with the problem of Muslim teenagers burning cars and attacking emergency services in several areas of the city.

According to the Malmö-based Imam Adly Abu Hajar: “Sweden is the best Islamic state.”

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2487/french-suburbs-islamic-societies

French Suburbs Becoming ‘Separate Islamic Societies’

by Soeren Kern
October 10, 2011 at 4:45 am

France’s decrepit city suburbs are becoming ‘separate Islamic societies’ cut off from the state, according to a major new study that examines the spread of Islam in France.

Muslim immigrants are increasingly rejecting French values and identity and instead are immersing themselves in Islam, according to the report, which also warns that Islamic Sharia law is rapidly displacing French civil law in many parts of suburban Paris.

The 2,200-page report, “Banlieue de la République” (Suburbs of the Republic), is the result of a one-year research effort into the four “i’s” that comprise the heart of the debate over French national identity: Islam, immigration, identity and insecurity.

The report was commissioned by the influential French think tank L’Institut Montaigne, and directed by Gilles Kepel, a well-known political scientist and specialist in the Muslim world, together with five other French researchers.

The authors of the report show that France, which has between five and six million Muslims (France has the largest Muslim population in European Union), is on the brink of a major social explosion because of the failure of Muslims to integrate into French society.

The report also shows how the problem is being exacerbated by radical Muslim leaders who are promoting the social marginalization of Muslim immigrants in order to create a parallel Muslim society in France that is ruled by Sharia law.

The research was primarily carried out in Clichy-sous-Bois and Montfermeil, two suburbs in north-eastern Paris that were ground zero for Muslim riots in 2005. Clichy and Montfermeil form part of the district of Seine-Saint-Denis, which has one of the highest concentrations of Muslims in France.

Seine-Saint-Denis, which the report describes as a “wasteland of de-industrialization,” is home to more than 600,000 Muslims (primarily from North and West Africa) out of a total population of 1.4 million.

“In some areas, a third of the population of the town does not hold French nationality, and many residents are drawn to an Islamic identity,” the report says.

The study says that Muslim religious institutions and practices are increasingly displacing those of the state and the French Republic, which has a strong secular tradition.

For example, French schools, which are rigorously non-religious, have traditionally been seen as having the role of training and socializing young citizens in the secular values of the French Republic. However, many Muslim pupils refuse to integrate and often boycott school dinners if the food is not halal [religiously permitted in Islam], the report says.

The survey also points to differing social attitudes when it comes to marriage, for example. The report says that although most people in France do not object to mixed marriages, “in the suburbs we were surprised to find a very large proportion of Muslim respondents who said they were opposed to marriages with non-Muslims.”

The researchers also looked into the reasons behind the 2005 riots, which they said had called into question modern France’s founding myth, namely “the implicit shared belief that the nation was always able to integrate people.”

Islamic values are replacing those of a French Republic which has failed to deliver on its promise of “equality,” the report says, and the residents of the suburbs increasingly do not see themselves as French.

But the report adds that the French state is not primarily to blame for this and that many Muslim immigrants simply do not want to integrate into French society.

Although resentment in the poor suburbs has social roots (primarily a lack of jobs), the report says the rioters expressed frustration in a vocabulary that is “borrowed from Islam’s semantic register.”

The report points out that the suburbs of Clichy and Montfermeil have been at the center of one of France’s biggest urban renewal projects. Many physical barriers to integration have been removed, and efforts have been made to plug the area into public transport networks and improve public safety.

Nevertheless, low educational achievement is endemic among the Muslim population. This, in turn, is turning France into a “divided nation.” Most Muslim youth are “not employable.” More than 20% of the residents of Clichy and Montfermeil leave school without a diploma (about 150,000 people per year), according to the report. The unemployment rate for Muslim youth in the suburbs of Paris is around 43%.

These drop-outs enter a cycle of social exclusion negatively shapes their lives and those of their children. Many Muslim youth turn to “deviant behaviors across the range of incivilities in a parallel economy in which drug trafficking is the most prominent.”

“One is struck by the high birth rates among newly arrived families from the African Sahel. The mothers work long hours and their young children are under-supervised by the education system, thus threatening their social integration,” the report says.

Islam is filling the void. The authors of the study are taken aback at the explosion of the halal market in France in recent years and also point out that the term halal has been greatly expanded in its definition. The survey question “do you respect the halal?” highlights the “complexity of different meanings of the word, which in its most restrictive sense means only the dimension of the forbidden food, but may also include a code of conduct, standards and an expression of dominant values, separating the ‘halal’ from ‘haram,’ the lawful or unlawful in many aspects of society.”

The report also describes a proliferation of mosques and prayer rooms in the suburbs. The religious orientations of the mosques are heavily influenced by the national origin of the founder or president of a given mosque.

Islam in Clichy-Montfermeil is structured around two major poles: one pole involves the Tabligh (“spreading of Islam”) movement which is focused on “re-socializing” Muslims on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder.

The Tabligh movement arrived in Clichy-Montfermeil in the 1980s in the midst of mass unemployment and drugs. Tabligh preachers built their social legitimacy by providing a moral regeneration of young people in distress around a rigorous practice of the precepts of Islam.

The other pole revolves around the figure of the Tunisian imam Dhaou Meskine, who was involved in the launch of Union of Islamic Organizations in France (UIOF). The UOIF, which represents the majority of the 2,100 registered mosques in France, is closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, which aims to extend Islamic law throughout France.

Meskine also participated in the formation of the Union of Muslim Associations (UAM93), a Muslim lobby group that aims to mobilize Muslims to elect candidates in local elections around Islamic issues. UAM93 has been pushing for the construction of a mega-mosque in Seine-Saint-Denis, although that project has run into difficulties due to a power struggle between Algerian, Moroccan and Turkish immigrants.

The report describes a “new sociology of Muslim believers” that is composed mainly of undereducated low-income immigrants who depend on financial support from Morocco or Turkey, countries that are pursuing their own objectives in France.

The authors of the study also point to a contradiction among Muslims who live in the suburbs: they do not want the French state to interfere in matters relating to Islam, but they also expect the state to improve their lot in life.

The report closes with a warning: “France’s future depends on its ability to re-integrate the suburbs into the national project.”

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2941/muslim-gangs-denmark

Muslim Gangs Terrorize Denmark

by Soeren Kern
March 14, 2012 at 5:00 am

“With Islam comes fear, and with fear comes power.”

More than 140 Muslim gang members were arrested in Denmark after they tried to raid a courthouse where two fellow Muslims are being tried for attempted murder.

The Muslims — all members of criminal street gangs that have taken over large parts of Danish towns and cities — were wearing masks and bullet-proof vests and throwing rocks and bottles as they tried to force their way into the district courthouse in Glostrup, a heavily Islamized suburb of Copenhagen, on March 6.

Police used batons and pepper spray to fend off the gang members, who were armed with an arsenal of 20 different types of weapons, including crowbars, darts, hammers, knives, screwdrivers and wooden clubs.

The trial in Glostrup involves two Pakistani immigrants accused of shooting and attempting to murder two fellow Muslims who belong to a rival gang. Police say the accused used a nine millimeter handgun to carry out the crime in Ballerup, a Muslim suburb northwest of Copenhagen. The trial began on February 28 and is scheduled to run through March 28.

The shooting was related to an escalating turf war between rival Muslim gangs from the Værebroparken housing estate in Bagsværd, a suburb of Copenhagen, and Nivå and Kokkedal in northern Zealand. Immigrant gangs are believed to be responsible for at least 50 shootings in and around Copenhagen during the past several months.

The recent violence is reminiscent of an earlier conflict between immigrant gangs and Danish gangs like the Hells Angels or the AK81 that left many people dead or wounded in Copenhagen and other Danish cities.

The immigrant gangs are involved in countless criminal activities, including drug trafficking, illegal weapons smuggling, extortion, human trafficking, robbery, prostitution, automobile theft, racketeering and murder.

Many of the gang members are ethnic Arabs, Bosnians, Turks and Somalians. They also include Iraqis, Moroccans, Palestinians and Pakistanis.

Over the past several years, the immigrant gangs have proliferated geographically across all of Denmark. The gangs have spread south from Copenhagen to the rest of Zealand, from inner Nørrebro, to the suburbs Ishøj, Greve, Greve, and on to Køge. The gangs are also active in Albertslund, Herlev, Hillerød, Høje Gladsaxe, Hundige, Roskilde and Skovlunde, among many Danish localities.

One of the largest criminal gangs in Denmark is a Muslim gang called Black Cobra. The organization was founded by Palestinian immigrants in Roskilde near Copenhagen in 2000 and now operates in all Danish cities.

Black Cobra has also established itself in Sweden, where it operates with impunity in the Islamized Tensta and Rinkeby suburbs of Stockholm and in the Muslim ghetto of Rosengård in Malmö.

The Black Cobra gang — whose members wear black and white shirts with an emblem of a cobra in attack position — also controls a youth gang called the Black Scorpions.

Danish authorities estimate that each year more than 700 immigrants between the ages of 18 and 25 are choosing crime as a permanent career by joining gangs such as Black Cobra, the Black Scorpions, the Bandidos, the Bloodz, the International Club, or any other of the more than 100 gangs that are now operating in Denmark.

On February 28, the Danish national police (Rigspolitiet) together with the Justice Ministry presented parliament with a plan to push back against the gangs. Police say they hope they can arrest 300 high-ranking gang members — 200 from Zealand and 100 from Jutland — by the end of 2012. The government has also committed 50 million Danish kroner ($9 million) in 2012 to a special project aimed at intercepting and preventing gang recruitment in marginalized areas.

But analysts are skeptical the Danish government can do very much to crack down on the gangs. Although Danish police say they arrested more than 350 gang members in 2011, many of those detentions involved lower-ranking “errand boys” who were released after being questioned.

Some critics say a big problem is a lack of will and that Danish efforts to crack down on the immigrant gangs have been half-hearted at best. In Denmark — as in other European countries where the state-enforced dogma of multiculturalism trumps traditional notions of equal justice for all — immigrants involved in crime are portrayed as victims of circumstance and relatively few are ever sent to prison.

In those cases where immigrants are detained, many are released after just a few hours. Critics say this encourages them to avenge their arrests. A case in point: Of the more than 140 Muslims who were arrested for trying to storm the courthouse in Glostrup on March 6, all but five were immediately released. That same night many of those who were released went on a rampage in Værebroparken, setting fire to trash bins and launching missiles at hapless police.

But a larger part of the problem involves fear.

Immigrant gangs often operate or seek refuge in so-called no-go zones that are effectively off limits to Danish authorities. These “no-go zones” involve suburbs of Copenhagen and other Danish cities that function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Muslim immigrants, areas where Danish police fear to tread.

Muslim gangs in Denmark have been highly adept at leveraging the fear that Danish authorities have of Islam and of Muslim immigrants. They replicated the model that Muslim gangs in Britain have successfully used to wrest control over the criminal underworld in that country.

In an interview with a British newspaper, an Asian Muslim gang member named Amir put it this way: “The reality is that Asian gangs don’t give much of toss about religion, but with Islam comes fear, and with fear comes power. Religion is important to us only as a way of defining who we can trust and who we can work with. Young Muslim gangs aren’t worried about what Allah makes of their criminal ways — they don’t believe in it to that extent.”

Amir added: “Through religion we speak the same language, live in the same areas, go to the same schools and can even use mosques as a safe place away from the police or other gangs. If you f*** with a Muslim gang you’d better be able to run fast or hide well, because they will come back at you in numbers.”