Friday, December 09, 2016

Germany: “100s of young Muslim men treated women as objects to hunt down….they’re considered fair game and can be raped”

Bassam Tibi is all over the map: he has written accurately about Islam’s jihad doctrine, but has denied that there is any specifically Islamic antisemitism, despite the fact that the Qur’an depicts the Jews as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181), denying Allah’s power (5:64); loving to listen to lies (5:41); disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13); disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); and more. It says they are the worst enemies of the Muslims (5:82) and that Allah transformed Sabbath-breaking Jews into apes and pigs (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166).
Here, however, he is correct in saying that “hundreds of young Muslim men treated women as objects to hunt down. They know what they do is prohibited by law. But they also think German women are sluts. And in addition they know their actions have no consequences. The German police do not fear the refugees, they fear to be branded as racist when dealing with them.” Indeed. The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.
But Tibi is right: German authorities are afraid to acknowledge any of this or to move decisively against Muslim migrant crime, for fear of being called “racist.”
“Syrian-born political scientist says migrants see German women as ‘fair game’ to be raped,” by Katie Mansfield, Express, December 8, 2016
GERMAN women are seen as “prostitutes” and “fair game” by migrants, a top political scientist has warned.
The 72-year-old warned women will be raped by migrants with tensions set to escalate between Germans and immigrants as integration remains a huge problem.
A record 890,000 migrants arrived in Germany last year with alleged sex attacks by migrants soaring in 2016.
Professor Tibi, who moved to Germany from Syria when he was 18, says the current trend is likely to continue.
He said: “German women sleep with men without being married to them. In the eyes of the migrants their behaviour is like that of a prostitute.
“That is why they are considered fair game and can be raped.”
Migrants committed 1,576 sex crimes in Germany in 2015, compared to 1683 in the first six months of this year.
Professor Tibi said: ”Hundreds of young Muslim men treated women as objects to hunt down. They know what they do is prohibited by law.
“But they also think German women are sluts. And in addition they know their actions have no consequences. The German police do not fear the refugees, they fear to be branded as racist when dealing with them.”…

Fake Newser Whines About Fake News

By Ethel C. Fenig 

The liberal/left hilariously continues its meltdown, unable to comprehend that they are not the natural default position in American society but merely a deviant negative (remember those?), mirror image of American society, the true alt movement.  The latest example is the phenomenon of the discovery of "fake news" i.e., everything that doesn't reflect the liberal position of the up-to-now dominant media; everything that comes from the new, electronic and increasingly influential media.  Sure, there is a lot of false stuff coming from the latter but it has become increasingly clear that for years the so-called mainstream media was also truly biased and slanted.
The latest example is former NBC News' star anchor Brian Williams complaining that "fake news" swayed the election towards Donald Trump (R).  You remember Brian Williams don't you?  If not, here are a few reminders of his false reports where he inflated his bravery, his courage under fire, his influence his....oh why bother? as it was all "fake news.
So naturally he was moved to NBC's fake news outlet, MSNBC, where he proclaimed
"Another former general in the Trump circle is receiving new attention," Williams began. "His National Security Adviser-designate, Mike Flynn. Flynn's son was fired by the Trump transition today for passing on fake news story via Twitter. But his dad, the retired Army three-star general has passed on some gems himself."
"Here are a few: 'Clinton is involved in child sex trafficking and has secretly waged war on the Catholic Church.' As well as charges that the president is a 'jihadi' who 'laundered' money for terrorists," the anchor added. "As we talked about here last night, fake news played a role in the election and continues to find a wide audience. A BuzzFeed news study of Donald Trump's own tweets where they followed back news stories to their root source found more of them came from Breitbart originally than any other single source."
Uh, Brian, it was Flynn's adult son who said this, not Flynn. Why don't you go to work for a real fake news outlet such as National Enquirer who actually believed that a wholesome, married to a sick wife, Democratic presidential candidate was having an affair and produced a child?  Oh wait!
So yeah, MSNBC is one of the few fake news outfits, masquerading as real news that would hire you.

NIGHTMARE FOR MERKEL: More than HALF of Germans see refugees as country’s biggest problem

MORE than half of Germans see refugees and integration as Germany's biggest problem, a survey released today revealed.The shock findings come despite the number of newcomers into the country falling significantly on the year after the open-door approach of 2016. A record 890,000 mainly Muslim migrants from the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere arrived in Europe's largest economy in 2015, prompting concerns about security and integration. Arrivals have slowed this year, with the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) saying on Friday around 305,000 new asylum seekers were registered during the first 11 months of 2016.The BAMF received 26,438 asylum applications in November - a fall of around 54 per cent on the year. However, a survey by pollster Forschungsgruppe Wahlen for broadcaster ZDF found 58 per cent of Germans see refugees and integration as the most important problems Germany is facing. Chancellor Angela Merkel's popularity has waned since migrants started arriving in large numbers last summer and she expects next year's federal election, in which she plans to run for a fourth term, to be "tough like no other".Mrs Merkel, whose conservatives have lost support to the anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, hardened her stance on migrants' integration in Germany at a congress this week and her Christian Democrats (CDU) passed a resolution on cracking down on dual citizenship. Fifty per cent of Germans think she is doing a good job on refugee policy while 45 per cent think her work in this area is "rather bad", the survey of 1,234 people conducted in December. Almost two-thirds (60 per cent) worry that spending on refugees means money is being saved elsewhere and 52 per cent fear that migration will push up crime rates. Just under a third (30 per cent) fear that Germany's cultural and social values are under threat due to the refugees. Newspaper Die Welt said on its website that migrants from North Africa were seldom deported from Germany. It cited an answer from the government to a question from the opposition far-left Linke party as saying that a combined total of 281 Moroccans, Tunisians and Algerians had been deported from Germany in the first three quarters of 2016 after more than 13,000 North Africans arrived here last year. Around three-quarters (14,463) of all migrants deported (19,914) from Germany in the first three quarters were from the West Balkans, it said.

Reaction of Geert Wilders to His Conviction

Dear friends, I still cannot believe it, but I have just been convicted. Because I asked a question about Moroccans. While the day before yesterday, scores of Moroccan asylum-seekers terrorized buses in Emmen and did not even had to pay a fine, a politician who asks a question about fewer Moroccans is sentenced.
The Netherlands have become a sick country. And I have a message for the judges who convicted me: You have restricted the freedom of speech of millions of Dutch and hence convicted everyone. No one trusts you anymore. But fortunately, truth and liberty are stronger than you. And so am I.
I will never be silent. You will not be able to stop me. And you are wrong, too. Moroccans are not a race, and people who criticize Moroccans are not racists. I am not a racist and neither are my voters. This sentence proves that you judges are completely out of touch.
And I have also a message for Prime Minister Rutte and the rest of the multicultural elite: You will not succeed in silencing me and defeating the PVV. Support for the Party for Freedom is stronger than ever, and keeps growing every day. The Dutch want their country back and cherish their freedom. It will not be possible to put the genie of positive change back in the bottle.
And to people at home I say: Freedom of speech is our pride. And this will remain so. For centuries, we Dutch have been speaking the unvarnished truth. Free speech is our most important possession. We will never let them take away our freedom of speech. Because the flame of freedom burns within us and cannot be extinguished.
Millions of Dutch are sick and tired of political correctness. Sick and tired of the elite which only cares about itself and ignores the ordinary Dutchman. And sells out our country. People no longer feel represented by all these disconnected politicians, judges and journalists, who have been harming our people for so long, and make our country weaker instead of stronger.
But I will keep fighting for you, and I tell all of you: thank you so much. Thank you so much for all your support. It is really overwhelming; I am immensely grateful to you. Thanks to your massive and heartfelt support, I know that I am not alone. That you back me, and are with me, and unwaveringly stand for freedom of expression.
Today, I was convicted in a political trial, which, shortly before the elections, attempts to neutralize the leader of the largest and most popular opposition party. But they will not succeed. Not even with this verdict. Because I speak on behalf of millions of Dutch. And the Netherlands are entitled to politicians who speak the truth, and honestly address the problems with Moroccans. Politicians who will not let themselves be silenced. Not even by the judges. And you can count on it: I will never be silent.
And this conviction only makes me stronger. This is a shameful sentence, which, of course, I will appeal. But I can tell you, I am now more vigorous than ever. And I know: together, we aim for victory.
Standing shoulder-to-shoulder, we are strong enough to change the Netherlands.
To allow our children to grow up in a country they can be proud of.
In a Netherlands where we are allowed to say again what we think.
Where everybody can safely walk the streets again.
Where we are in charge of our own country again.
And that is what we stand for. For freedom and for our beautiful Netherlands.

Amnesty International Attacks Democracies, Forgives Islamist Tyrannies

According to Amnesty International, the centers that host migrants arriving in Italy, known as "hotspots," are like concentration camps. This is what you learn from Amnesty International's new report, which accuses Italy of nothing less than "torturing" migrants. The report features a sequence of testimonies, never proven, that describe methods worthy of a South American military junta.
The report validates Salman Rushdie's accusation against Amnesty International: "Morally bankrupt." The Wall Street Journal added two more charges against the famous Western non-governmental organization (NGO): "Anti-American fervor and intellectual confusion".
In the new Amnesty International report, a "witness," under the name of only "Adam," speaks of "a kind of clamp with three ends" by which Italian policemen allegedly grabbed his testicles. Evidence? Medical reports attesting to this violence? The version of the Italian police? Not in the wonderful world of Amnesty International, where a Western democracy can be safely accused of "torture" with flimsy, sub-standard, unverifiable "evidence" -- the same as Amnesty's many spurious charges against Israel. The Italian police and Interior Ministry denied all the charges, calling them ridiculous.
Already in February 2016, Antonio Marchesi, president of the Italian section of Amnesty, said: "Those in Italy who have committed acts of torture can sleep soundly." A month ago, Amnesty issued a similar report on the immigration centers in Australia, another democracy denounced as a "torturer" by this now badly-degraded NGO that won the now badly-degraded Nobel Peace Prize in 1977.
The world owes a debt of gratitude to Amnesty -- it fought hard to free political prisoners held by Communist regimes during the Cold War, and those held by South Africa's Apartheid regime. But those days are gone. Now Amnesty keeps betraying its symbol: the light of its small candle trapped in barbed wire.
In 2005, Irene Khan, then secretary general of Amnesty, described the American detention center in Guantanamo Bay as "the Gulag of our time." She compared the Soviet forced-labor camps, where three million people died of hunger, cold and executions, to a US military base where no prisoner has died, and which has prevented countless innocent civilians from being blown up.
It seems that Amnesty International abandoned the battle of human rights in favor of a grotesque anti-Western bias. This shift is why the British weekly, The Economist, accused Amnesty International of "reserving more pages to human rights abuses in Britain and the United States than in Belarus and Saudi Arabia." This is the same muddled moral equivalence that probably led Amnesty International to use the same language for Italian "hotspots" as for the Saydnaya prison in Syria, run by the regime of Bashar al Assad.
If Guantanamo is the new Gulag, why not demand the arrest of its commander-in-chief? This is precisely what Amnesty did two years ago, when it asked Canada to arrest George W. Bush. "Canada is obliged to arrest and prosecute Bush for his responsibility for crimes under international law including torture", said Susan Lee, Amnesty International's Americas programme director. Amnesty's also charged Obama of "war crimes". The Western "war on terror"? According to Amnesty, "it is sowing fear". US drone strikes? A "war crime."
The NGO has also accused Israel of "war crimes". Alan Dershowitz summarizes Amnesty International's definition of Israel's "war crimes": "Whatever Israel does to defend its citizens". A report by NGO Monitor detailed "Amnesty's repeated examples of "lawfare"; systematic flaws in the reporting of human rights abuses; limited understanding of armed conflict leading to erroneous claims and incorrect analysis; and violation of the universality of human rights, including a consistent institutionalized bias against Israel through double-standards". There are even Amnesty's officials who called the Jewish State "a scum state."
In the name of "protecting human rights," Amnesty International has even excused Islamic extremism. The secretary general of Amnesty, Claudio Cordone, said that the "defensive jihad" is not "antithetical" to the struggle for human rights. He said this in response to a petition on Amnesty's relationship with CAGE (formerly CagePrisoners), the NGO founded by Islamic extremist Moazzam Begg which campaigns for the release of acclaimed jihadists.
One prominent leader of Amnesty, Karima Bennoune, author of the book Your Fatwa Does Not Apply Here, wrote: "During my years at Amnesty I shared the concerns about torture in Algeria, but I could not understand the organization's paltry response to the violence of fundamentalist groups". She is not the first Amnesty's official who has flung criticism at her own organization. Amnesty suspended one of its senior officers, Gita Sahgal, for having expressed some concerns. "To be appearing on platforms with Britain's most famous supporter of the Taliban, whom we treat as a human rights defender", she wrote, "is a gross error of judgment".
There was a time when Amnesty International defended victims of ideological repression such as the wife of Soviet writer Boris Pasternak, Olga Ivinskaya, who spent years under arrest and persecuted for her husband's refusal to bow down to the Kremlin. Now, the Times of London documented has links between Amnesty International's officials and Islamism.
Today, Amnesty evidently considers freedom of expression something to use with "responsibility," as Amnesty claimed during the Mohammed cartoons' crisis. Is free speech the right to say whatever you like about whatever you like whenever you want? Not according to Amnesty International, the watchdog group which today would apparently have lectured the great Soviet dissidents to write with "responsibility".
Amnesty International sponsored a rally in Brussels, where Islamist speakers celebrated 9/11, denied the Holocaust and demonized gays and Jews. Before that, Amnesty refused to punish an official, Kristyan Benedict, Amnesty's campaigns manager in the UK, who tweeted: "Israeli regimes [sic] response to our Gaza report: Amnesty is 'a propaganda tool for Hamas & other terror groups' (#JSIL?)." The hashtag "#JSIL" is used on Twitter to compare Israel with terrorist organization Islamic State by replacing "Islamic" with "Jewish" in the group's common alias, ISIL. Amnesty also sponsored a tour of Bassem Tamimi, a Palestinian militant who promotes anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.
Given Amnesty International's embarrassing record, it is at least doubtful that the police and the Italian authorities are "torturing" migrants whom they have so generously been rescuing at sea for more than two years.
Some in the Western humanitarian establishment have crossed the red line that separates the defense of human rights, even for terrorists, from complicity and collusion with repressive totalitarian ideas.

Police to Monitor Social Media To Prevent Migrant Sex Mobs

German police have announced that they will be monitoring the social media accounts of migrants in order to predict whether or not they will try and group up and attack women again on New Year’s Eve.

German police in Cologne have one thing on their minds leading up until New Year’s Eve and that is to avoid a repeat of last year’s massive wave of sex attacks that took place outside the Cologne cathedral. One way they hope to achieve this is to actively read and research posts made on social media by  migrants to see if they are organizing to gather and commit more attacks FOCUS Online reports.
According to the Cologne police, many of the sex mobs were organized via Facebook and Twitter and that if the police had known this beforehand they would have been able to properly react to the situation. As the situation unfolded last year the police were severely understaffed in the area around the cathedral and were not prepared for the scale of the attacks, having to let attackers go almost immediately after arresting them because there was no free police cells in the city, or vans to take them in.
The police are now employing translators  to scour the Facebook and Twitter feeds of migrants across the North Rhine-Westphalia region sand hope that they will add to already existing plans to beef up the security in and around areas like train stations and public squares.
After the more than 1,000 men and women who were assaulted, sexually attacked, and robbed by migrant gangs the police are looking to radical and innovative methods to prevent a repeat of last year. Ideas already proposed include the use of helicopters, “safe retreats” for women and even the registering of all asylum seekers who enter the areas.
The attacks at the start of this year shocked the German public and were the first cracks in the “welcome culture” attitude that led people to gather at train stations to greet migrants and cheer them on last year. The idea of a “welcome culture” barely holds on in the minds of many Germans who have turned against the policies of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the recent murder of student Maria L. has only increased the sentiment.
Despite the fact that there were over 1,000 complaints the government has found little success in finding and prosecuting those responsible. Only 24 migrants have been successfully taken to court  and convicted of crimes.
The prosecutor’s office in Cologne still maintains some 820 investigations against unknown perpetrators, 372 of which are sexual assaults. The majority of these investigations have been put on hold down to insufficient evidence.

While the Cologne attacks were the largest known instance of migrant sex assaults on New Year’s Eve, similar attacks took place in other German cities and in Austria.

Pro-Migrant Group Helping Illegals Avoid Deportations


German politicians are furious with a pro-migrant group who are using social  media to inform migrants when to lay low to avoid their scheduled deportations.

German politicians have expressed anger with a pro-migrant club based out of the town of Radebeul called “Colourful Radebeul” who have taken it upon themselves to warn migrants of possible deportations. The club has used its Facebook page to tell migrants from Albania, Serbia, and Kosovo that the authorities were planning to deport them on the 7th and 8th of December allowing the migrants to flee elsewhere to avoid the deportations Tag 24 reports.
Geert Mackenroth, a regional politician who heads up the commission on foreigners, is angry with the club for interfering in the deportation process, saying that they should behave as a neutral party. He said that the asylum law is clear and is legitimate because it comes from a democratically elected government and that the clubs actions only further  help those living in the country illegally.
Christian Democrat Union politician Sebastian Fischer said that the club was hindering the ability of the government to carry out the law and noted that while the club does not receive money from the state that it should still not act in such a manner.
The Interior Ministry in Saxony also commented on the matter saying, “such posts naturally complicate the work of our colleagues,” and noted that the deportations only happen after the migrants have been told repeatedly that they will have to leave and are given the option to do so voluntarily.
The club, which describes itself as a nonprofit working to help migrants, has declined all press questions on the post telling one journalist that the board had to vote on whether or not to talk about the matter.  The paper Saechsische Zeitung had asked whether or not the club published the information to directly aid illegal migrants who wished to evade being deported.
Pro-migrant charities and organisations have been a thorn in the sides of many governments over the course of the migrant crisis and have been linked to violence, rioting, and even deaths. In Calais, before the destruction of the infamous Jungle migrant camp, pro-migrant “No Borders” activists stirred up rumours and led rampaging migrantsthrough the city of Calais in an attempt to storm ferries to cross into Britain.

In Greece at the squalid Idomeni camp, which has also been cleared, pro-migrant activists helped migrants storm the border with Macedonia and handing out fake maps which ultimately resulted in the deaths of several migrants who downed trying to cross a nearby river.

Merkel DISMISSES migrant rape & murder of EU official’s daughter as an 'ISOLATED INCIDENT'

GERMAN Chancellor Angela Merkel has shockingly dismissed the murder of Maria Ladenburger, daughter of European Commission adviser Clemens Ladenburger, as an "isolated incident" despite a recent surge in violent crime.Speaking at the annual CDU party conference in Essen, Merkel called for “tougher sentencing” for people convicted of major crimes following several high-profile cases in recent weeks. But she has come under intense criticism after Maria Ladenburger was ambushed, raped and drowned as she cycled home from a party in October.Two Chinese students were attacked in separate incidents in the city of Bochum, prompting Merkel to defend Germany’s policy on allowing increasing numbers of migrants into the country. She described the cases as “terrible isolated incidents”, Merkel argued there was no reason to suspect all refugees and claimed “the response of Germany’s rule of law” is enough to maintain order. In an impassioned speech ahead of her plan to run for a fourth term as German Chancellor, Merkel said: “We have looked closely at the crime rate among refugees and the picture is varied.“That is also the right answer: that you have to differentiate. She added: “The fact that some people want to exploit that is something we have to withstand and defend ourselves against.”Her speech comes after it was revealed migrants committed 1,576 sex crimes in Germany in 2015 alone. While this figure may appear shocking, in the first half of 2016 alone the figure already stands at 1,683 and Merkel is under increasing pressure to take action.On Monday she made a sensational U-turn and vowed to ban the burka “wherever that is legally possible” after right-wing populist party, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), saw a surge in support in recent polls.Migrant numbers in Germany have been rapidly increasing and more than one million asylum seekers were allowed the enter the country last year. Germany could be set to see yet another migrant surge after rumours that the EU’s deal with Turkey to stem the flow of migrants is on the brink of collapse.

Merkel Backtracks Amidst Refugee Crisis: A too little, too late response to the consequences of a reckless open door immigration policy.


German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other like-minded Western European leaders have allowed an unprecedented number of “refugees” into their countries from the most terrorist-prone countries in the world, such as Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. To save their own necks, these reckless leaders are finally beginning to listen, at least half-heartedly, to their own citizens, who are recoiling from the disastrous consequences of the prevalent European Union open door “refugee” policy. The leaders have only themselves to blame for the crisis they have created for their people.
Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, in that order, are at the top of the list of origins of people applying for asylum in the European Union. All three of these countries are also among the top 5 on the 2015 Global Terrorism Index prepared by the Institute of Economics and Peace.  It should not have been a surprise that, over the last two years, as the number of asylum-seekers originally from terrorist-prone Muslim-majority countries has risen dramatically, acts of terrorism committed by jihadists in Western Europe have risen dramatically as well. Yet Chancellor Merkel and her European Union pals either could not connect the dots or willfully turned a blind eye.
Crimes against females have also risen in Western Europe as carriers of Islamic cultural norms denigrating women and girls have entered Western Europe in large numbers. Afghanistan is at the top of the list of the most dangerous countries to be a woman.
Germany has been the most welcoming of Western European countries to asylum-seekers from Afghanistan and other terrorist-prone, Muslim-majority countries. Afghanistan, which was second on both the refugee origin and terrorist country lists, was the country of origin of an Afghan teenage “refugee” last July who carried out an attack in Germany that resulted in several serious injuries. The Islamic State claimed responsibility. Afghanistan was also the origin country of the so-called "unaccompanied underage refugee” who allegedly raped and murdered the daughter of a high level European Union official in October. The victim was a 19 year old medical student, whom had also worked as a volunteer in one of the local refugee shelters. The 17 year old alleged murderer, who entered Germany illegally in 2015, had applied for asylum as an unaccompanied minor and was living with a German family.
Many Germans have reached their boiling point after having had to deal with several acts of terrorism this year, following hundreds of sexual assaults committed against women last New Year’s Eve by young men, described as refugees of "Arab or North African appearance." German citizens are fed up with their government’s excuses and its downplaying of the incidents as isolated cases that should not be blamed on the government’s liberal refugee policy.  Everyday citizens are understandably incensed at the latest news of the brutal murder of the young female medical student, as exemplified by this tweet featuring a photo of the slain girl: “Angela Merkel, look here! Blood of this person is on your hands!”
Indeed, Chancellor Merkel is largely to blame for the mass influx of asylum-seekers from the most terrorist-prone countries, including the alleged murderer from Afghanistan. Last year, she encouraged asylum-seekers from Syria and other Islamic terrorist havens to migrate to Europe and resettle there. Germany alone received approximately 900,000 so-called “refugees.”  However, Chancellor Merkel apparently gave little thought to how so many would be assimilated– especially, the  Muslims brought up to believe in and act upon cultural and religious values that stand in stark contrast to the values of open, egalitarian Western societies. In fact, some of the Muslim asylum-seekers living in German refugee camps have carried out acts of persecution against Christians in those camps, the same as if they had not left their own countries where persecution of Christians is the norm. According to a report by the non-governmental organization, Open Doors, Christian refugees in Germany have been “discriminated against, beaten up by and receive death threats from Muslim refugees and partly by the Muslim staff (securities, interpreters, volunteers) on grounds of their religion.”  Between May and September of 2016 alone, according to the Open Doors report, there were 512 documented cases of Christian refugees who have reported religiously motivated attacks. The report concluded that the number of reported cases should be “considered most likely as the tip of the iceberg in regard to the number of religiously motivated attacks on Christian refugees and other religious minorities.”
Until fairly recently, European government leaders, particularly Chancellor Merkel, have been in denial as to the dimension of the threats to their own citizens’ security and well-being they have allowed into their countries. They have turned a blind eye to the spike in murders, sexual assaults and acts of terrorism that have dramatically risen with the rapid growth in the number of asylum-seekers from terrorist prone countries.
However, even Chancellor Merkel, as she prepares to run for a fourth term, is being forced to come to grips with her constituents’ real concerns. She can read the polls, which have not been good for her. Thus, in response, like some other open door European countries such as Sweden, Germany is now trying to stem the tide of would-be asylum-seekers, or even reverse it through deportation. Germany is also belatedly following in the footsteps of France and other countries that have tried to institute measures intended to break down the cultural separation of those Muslim refugees who remain. Chancellor Merkel, in a bid to act tough, said recently that Germany would not tolerate a “parallel society.” To prove her point, she has just proposed a ban on the burqa – the full-face veil that some Muslim women wear as an expression of their faith. “Our law takes precedence before tribal rules, codes of honor and sharia,” she declared. If only the chancellor had thought about that before opening up the floodgates in just one year to nearly a million people who do believe firmly that sharia law takes precedence over the laws of a self-governing society.

Thursday, December 08, 2016

Police Deny Political Correctness After Report Finds Schoolgirl Raped by Muslim Gang Was Let Down


Police have denied “cultural niceties or political correctness were a barrier” after a damning report found dozens of opportunities were missed to protect a schoolgirl repeatedly gang raped by a Muslim gang.

When she was just 13 and 14, between 2011 and 2012, the victim was “raped in car parks, parks and churchyards” in the small town of Keighley, near Bradford in the North of England, a court has previously heard.
The gang of 12 were jailed last year for more than 140 years between them, but the leader, described as an “evil mastermind”, Arif Choudhury, escaped and is thought to have fled to Bangladesh.
Despite the seeming similarities, the Keighley review claimed “no evidence has come to light of a culture of denial” similar to that found in Rotherham.
Priti Patel, chairman of the board which conducted the Serious Case Review, said they explored the concern that the gang had been overlooked because of their Muslim background, but “it just so happened these perpetrators were from a particular community”.
However, like in Rotherham, the review found multiple opportunities were missed to protect the girl from the horrific crimes, with the police placing some blame on her.
According to the Telegraph & Argus, the report says there was “confusion and disagreement” between the various agencies and a “consistent failure” to assess her circumstances properly.
It says: “When she was raped by her main groomer in May 2011, she made three separate disclosures to agencies about this incident… [but] tended to withdraw allegations once she had made them.”
This led to the authorities forming a view of the victim as unreliable, which “saw her withdraw further into silence and made her more vulnerable to the power of her abusers”.
David Niven, who chairs the district’s independent safeguarding children board, also argued that the failing had nothing to do with political correctness.
He said there was “no denying” the men were “Asian”, but said that sexual abuse cases from Jimmy Savile to allegations of abuse in sport showed perpetrators could be from any background.
Detective Superintendent Nick Wallen, of West Yorkshire Police, agreed. He said: “I don’t think cultural niceties or political correctness were a barrier here, in this particular case.
“I think we missed opportunities because of our failings as an organisation to understand the problem but I do think in the future we need to watch very carefully that fear of offending, fear of causing offence, or upsetting minority ethnic groups does not stand in the way of robust policing.”
Det. Supt. Wallen added: “It’s very clear that West Yorkshire Police failed this girl on a number of levels. It’s certainly clear there were opportunities to safeguard her that were missed.
“There were investigative opportunities to get to grips fairly quickly with the individuals that were perpetrating this sexual abuse upon her that were missed and there were opportunities particularly when she went missing to have made the connection between her going missing and the exploitation she was clearly suffering at that time.

“Knowing that, the most important thing for West Yorkshire Police to do is to acknowledge that and apologise to Autumn, which West Yorkshire Police clearly do. As a senior officer at West Yorkshire Police, I personally apologise to her as well.”

A fascinating peek into the mentality of the liberal bubble

By Thomas Lifson

The academic left is in much worse shape than I even realized. We can see how bad it has gotten in the read of the day: a fearless academic immersed in the world of New York City higher education calling out the shallow groupthink that characterizes political discussions in the ivory tower. 
Frederick deBoer is newly-minted PhD in English working at Brooklyn College in support roles (“Academic Assessment Manager”; “WAC Coordinator”) lacking the crucial word “professor” in his title.  His blog post titled, “condescending, certain, and incoherent” is drawing a lot of attention, including a link on heavyweight Instapundit.
The picture deBoer paints is of people who seem to be in a collective trance. Their assumptions are mistaken for facts, and are never enumerated, much less discussed. They remain hazy, varying from person to person, because those assumptions are never challenged:
…the internal contradictions and lack of clear theoretical footing were packaged with the aggressive presumption that the conclusions were obvious.
This is a constant condition for me: interacting with liberals and leftists who affect a stance of bored impatience, who insist that the answers to moral and political questions are so obvious that every reasonable person already agrees, who then lack the ability to explain the thinking underlying their answers to those questions in a remotely compelling way. Everything is obvious; all the hard work is done; only an idiot couldn’t see what the right thing to do is. And then you poke a little bit at the foundation and it just collapses. I suppose the condescension and the fragility are related conditions, the bluster a product of the insecurity at the heart of it all. You act like everything is obvious precisely because you can’t articulate your position.
If you read the whole thing, you will see that while deBoer enjoys challenging assumptions, he is no conservative.  His conclusion lays out the hazards the academic Left is inflicting upon itself with the trance (my word, not his) they remain stuck in:
Few things are more deadly to a broad political tendency than a (sic) eye-rolling assumption that there is no work to be done. You combine that with the way challenging questions have come to be seen as themselves offensive, particularly in academia, and you have a left-of-center that cannot do the work of figuring out what it is and what it stands for at precisely the time its mission is most important. Our opposition’s taken control of everything, so how do we respond? Race OR class or race AND class? Neoliberalism or socialism? Identity or economics or both? Wonk autocrats or the grassroots? I know what I prefer. But I don’t know what broad movement will emerge when everyone is so busy being certain about the answers that they cannot articulate or justify. 
The stark contrast between the scholarly duty to consider all possible explanations before reaching a conclusion and the inability of so many academics to think through their own assumptions, much less defend them, demonstrates fundamental corruption. The very legitimacy of higher education is in peril, particularly the humanities and social sciences.  When there is no possibility of a bridge falling down, and when similarly leftist colleagues are the sole judges of academic merit, a cultural spiral toward the extreme probably is inevitable.  It’s how you get attention from a like-minded crowd.
Unless people like deBoer can yank the leftists out of their political trance, they will be digging their own political graves. At least 70% of the country laughs at the extremes of campus leftists. Political strategies based on a shared fantasy have a poor chance of success.

German Chancellor Merkel’s Party Passes Anti-BDS Law; Compares BDS To Nazi Boycotts

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party on Wednesday passed a resolution opposing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, labeling anti-Israel activism anti-Semitic and comparing BDS to Nazi boycotts.

“Who today under the flag of the BDS movement calls to boycott Israeli goods and services speaks the same language in which people were called to not buy from Jews. That is nothing other than coarse anti-Semitism,” the Jerusalem Post cited the CDU as saying.
Noting the comparison between BDS and the National Socialists’ boycott of Jews in the 1930s, the CDU said BDS dresses up anti-Semitism in the “new clothes of the 21st century,” i.e., anti-Zionism.
“The German CDU declares with this motion its disapproval and rejection of every form of BDS activity and condemns these activities as anti-Semitic. The CDU will decisively oppose every hostile action that Israel faces.
“The CDU professes its deep friendship toward Israel and continues to work toward a peaceful solution to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians,” the resolution read.
Merkel was nominated again to run as the party’s candidate in next year’s federal election.
Last month, Breitbart Jerusalem reported that organizers of a Holocaust remembrance ceremony in the town of Oldenburg in lower Saxony attempted to “remove with physical violence” a Jewish man for marching with the Israeli flag while allowing anti-Israel activists, and those sporting the Palestinian scarf, or keffiyeh, to participate.
Rabid anti-Israel activist and teacher Christoph Glanz, who accused Israel of genocide and said the Israeli government was “a racist freak show,” also took part in the march.
Glanz accused Israel of “crimes against humanity” and “ethnic cleansing.” He also said Israel is engaged in genocidal activities.
In September, Glanz published a call in the teachers’ union magazine for a blanket boycott of Israel in the first incident of its kind since the Holocaust, plunging Oldenburg into the center of an anti-Semitism firestorm.
Israel’s ambassador to Germany slammed the town’s BDS activities last week, the Jerusalem Post said, citing the Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung daily.

“In Oldenburg a teacher agitates against Israel in an official way; in a magazine of the GEW labor union [the Education and Science Workers Union]. This teacher publicly spreads the proposal to relocate Israel to Baden-Württemberg” in southeastern Germany, Yakov Hadas-Handelsman said according to the report.

Revealed: Tens of Millions Lavished on Hidden Costs of Immigration Industry

Immigration Industry

A freedom of information (FoI) request made by the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in the eastern state of Saxony has thrown light on the enormous amount of money being spent on migrants beyond the billions already set aside for accommodation and food.

The 27-page list of expenses paid out to charities and companies providing services for migrants in Saxony covered just one year from 2015 to 2016, but ran to nearly €30 million. The German government already plans to spend over €93 billion on migrants by the end of 2020, according to reports.
In the FoI document, hundreds of awards are listed with amounts paid out to migrant assistant groups from a few tens of thousands to over a million euros.
The vague descriptions of the multicultural projects funding by German taxpayers include dozens of rooms outfitted as so-called “focal points” or meeting rooms for the use of migrants. The cost of outfitting these rooms ranged between €50,000 and €100,000 each.
Also paid for among the hundreds of entries in the document are integration programmes including dance classes for children (€11,988), training migrants for “apprenticeships in media” (€140,077), and psychological counselling for “adults with migrant backgrounds” (€1,092,513).
Among the more obscure awards were €645,500 towards a “music festival for cultural integration” and €47,110 towards an equality garden, where migrants and native Germans can grow fruit and vegetables.
In all, the total paid out towards what the state of Saxony identified as “household costs” ran to €29,175,494.52.
The figures are just the latest revelation of the staggering cost of the migrant crisis, which has seen the German government take over exhibition halls, hotels, and even city parks to house hundreds of thousands of new arrivals.
The migrant crisis has touched almost all areas of German society, with costs spiralling in healthcare where a growing black hole caused by uninsured migrants threatening to hit one billion euros.
The extra costs in health care incurred by migrants will be passed on to taxpayers, according to reports. Dental care for migrants, who have been described as arriving in Europe with “catastrophic” teeth will also run to billions.
Education for young migrants is set to cost nearly a billion more a year, while the German army is facing a half-billion euro bill for their role in welcoming migrants to the country.
The Alternative for Germany party, whose freedom of information request brought to light more of these extraordinary costs is presently surging in German polls, and may be recognised as responsible for a lurch to the right of Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Speaking to a congress of her party this week, Mrs. Merkel called for a burka ban in Germany and swore that the migrant crisis would not be repeated. The new stances are a significant departure from Merkel’s position a year ago which saw a dogged defence of multicultural values and welcome culture.

A recent poll had Merkel’s Christian Democrats at a low of 33 per cent, and the AfD at a high of 12 per cent.

Migrant Sex Attacks Increased 133 Per Cent This Year


The number of sex attacks by migrants has rapidly risen in Austria over the last year with statistics showing an increase of 133 per cent, an inquiry has revealed.

The anti-mass migration Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) brought the statistics of migrant sex attacks to light in the Austrian parliament after making an inquiry to the Interior Ministry. According to the Interior Ministry report, “from January 1 to September 30, 2016, 91 asylum seekers were investigated as suspects” in rape cases – a 133 per cent increase from 2015, Kronen Zeitung reports.
The total number of rape allegations in Austria has gone down since 2015 from 688 suspects to 594 suspects. The number of incidents has also decreased in general from 826 to 674. But despite asylum seekers being a small fraction of the population in Austria, the statistics show that more than one in ten instances of rape, closer to one-fifth, are carried out by migrants.
The report also states that the vast majority of the migrants who are suspected of rape are of an Afghani origin with the number of Afghan suspects rising from 16 to 47. The number of Syrian rape suspects has also risen from three to 11.
Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) Interior Minister Wolfgang Sobotka noted that the figures were too raw to make any real policy conclusions and said that they did not stand up to a scientific review because they were only quarterly or semi-annual statistics.
FPÖ deputy David Lasar, who made the initial inquiry, asked the interior minister what steps were being done to secure the safety of Austrians “due to the multitude of sexual assaults on women”. Sobotka replied to the FPÖ politician saying that police had been increased in certain urban hotspots as well as the deployment of plain clothes officers.
The number of migrants who have applied for asylum in Austria, by the Interior Ministry official statistics, has dropped to 34,657 from the nearly 89,000 who applied in 2015.
Some, like the FPÖ, have disputed the claim that less than the 37,000 migrant limit have come into the country. Earlier this year the party revealed that over 120,000 migrants had entered Austria’s borders, though many may have only passed through on their way to Germany and elsewhere.
Several of the rapes alleged to have been committed by migrants have made headlines in Austria over the last year. One of the most high-profile cases was the rape of a young boyat a swimming facility. The migrant responsible had his conviction for the crimeoverturned after a court said he likely didn’t know the boy was saying “no” at the time. He is set to be retried in the new year for the crime.

In another prominent case, a gang of nine migrants raped a German woman in the Austrian capital of Vienna. The men, aged 21 to 47, are said to have taken advantage of the girl on New Year’s Eve as she was severely intoxicated at the time.

Shari'a Law Meets the Internet

The UK has for several years faced problems with its growing number of shari'a councils (often misleadingly called courts). These councils operate outside British law, yet frequently give rulings on matters such as divorce, child custody, inheritance and more, which are based on Islamic law and in contradiction of the rights of individuals (usually women) under UK legislation. Many Muslim communities in cities such as Bradford, Birmingham, Luton, or boroughs such as Tower Hamlets in London are both sizeable and close-knit; individuals in them are made to live lives in accordance with Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Islamic traditional norms. This means that contact with British life at large is often restricted, with a lack of assimilation that traps many women and girls into lives very close to the lives of their sisters in Muslim countries.
Much of the concern about the "courts" has been expressed by Baroness Caroline Cox, whose bill to limit their impact on Muslim women has passed more than once through the House of Lords and, recently, into the House of Commons. Her personal determination and clear-sightedness have meant that the matter has remained for several years a focus for debate in politics and the media. Her arguments have received widespread support from women's rights organizations, especially several concerned with the rights of Muslim women.
This year, in addition, two important academic studies of the issue have appeared. First was Machteld Zee's "Choosing Sharia?: Multiculturalism, Islamic Fundamentalism & Sharia Councils," which appeared in January. Zee is a Dutch political and legal scholar who carried out research in the UK, where she was given limited access to two shari'a councils, one in Birmingham and one in London. Her book devotes much time to the problems of what she calls "Essentialist Multiculturalism," specifically the way multiculturalist theorists condemn individuals to be treated according to the culture and religion to which they belong, rather than as people who may wish to reject one or both of these.
An equally pertinent and academically sound treatise appeared in May: Elham Manea's "Women and Shari'a Law: The Impact of Legal Pluralism in the UK." Manea is of Yemeni origin; an Associate Professor in the Political Science Institute at the University of Zurich, a Fulbright Scholar, and a consultant for Swiss government agencies and international human rights organizations. Her book also focuses on the way in which multiculturalism undermines individual rights, especially in a chapter entitled, "A Critical Review of the Essentialist Paradigm."
"Essentialists" demand that individuals conform to the cultural and legal norms of whatever community they are born into, and apparently prefer a multiculturalist vision of competing cultures and faith groups that maintain social distinctions. rather than mixed but well-integrated societies. The result is that restrictions are placed on the freedom of individuals to take their own path in life. In the instance of close-knit Muslim communities, the heaviest impact is on women. This involves forced and early marriage, first-cousin marriage, restriction of education for girls, rejection of appeals for divorce, denial of a woman's right to child custody, and enforcement of the rule that women are only entitled to much lower inheritance payments than their brothers. It also means that women are limited in their freedom to work. In fundamentalist communities, their loss of that freedom means that they are forced to stay in the home to cook and look after children. This loss of freedom effectively destroys their opportunity to work (or be educated) alongside men. Women are often forbidden to adopt Western clothing norms even while living in open, Western societies. Shari'a "courts" have a deeply regressive influence on matters such as these.
Baroness Cox does not call for the abolition of the shari'a councils, given that Muslims have a right to turn to their own advisors for advice. But shari'a councils should not have the right effectively to deny women rights they hold as British citizens under British law. Many Muslim women are married purely under Islamic law and their marriages are not registered by civil registrars: this means that they can be denied their right to ask for a divorce or child custody from British courts. In the end, the biggest problem is that there is no system of external regulation for the councils. There is no legal requirement for them to keep full records of the cases they adjudicate on, no requirement to report to a civil authority with the right to prevent abuses, and not even a requirement for any council to register with a government agency -- leading to the problem of how many councils exist in the country.
If political reluctance to upset Muslims is not allowed to prevent Caroline Cox's bill from becoming law, then there is hope that proper regulation will succeed the present chaos and irregularity that surround the councils as they are now operated. But even this may not be enough. Because of this absence of proper supervision, shari'a rulings impact British Muslims from three directions: through the shari'a councils, from the larger bodies to the informal "courts" that are reputed to operate from small terraced houses in Bradford, Birmingham and elsewhere; through the many online fatwa "banks" (websites) to which individuals refer themselves; and through the fatwas issued by the European Council for Fatwa and Research, based in Dublin.
These last two sources of shari'a rulings are usually ignored in studies of Islamic law in Britain, but they do, in fact, account for an undetermined number of responses to questions from individual Muslims in this country, and more formal diktats seen as binding across Europe, including the UK.
What I term "fatwa banks" are websites run either by individual muftis[1] or larger collective sites on an international scale. The sites I used in "Sharia Law or One Law for All" were Sunnipath, Ask Imam (answers from South Africa, but accessed through the Jamia Madina Mosque in Hyde), Madrasa In'aamiyyah, Darul Iftaa Leicester[2],[3], Ask the Scholar, Ask an Alim, Leicester, and the Islamic Shariah Council (Leyton in London).
Others operate out of other countries and in different languages, but can be accessed from the UK without difficulty. The most popular is IslamQ&A, which provides rulings in English and fifteen other languages. It is run from Saudi Arabia by the Salafi mufti Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid, and is not only one of the most popular Salafi websites, but also, according to, the world's most popular website on the topic of Islam generally. The impact of its fatwas worldwide cannot be exaggerated. It includes some rulings on jihad.[4] There is no space here to reproduce these in full, but here are a few in brief that show the extent to which shari'a rulings diverge from British laws and values.
  1. Waging jihad against Americans (and other enemies of Islam) is to be encouraged.
  2. Shari'a law takes priority over secular law.
  3. A husband may prohibit his wife from leaving the house.
  4. Shari'a law can override British courts.
  5. A Muslim lawyer should not always act in accordance with UK law where it contradicts shari'a.
  6. Polygamy is acceptable even if against the law.
  7. A man may divorce his wife but keep that a secret from her.
  8. Execution or severe beating for homosexuals is correct.
  9. A wife has no property rights in case of divorce.
  10. There is no requirement to register a marriage according to the law of the country one lives in.
  11. A Muslim woman may not marry a non-Muslim man.
  12. Insurance is forbidden even if required by law.
  13. Child marriage is justified.
  14. A husband is not obliged to support a childless wife.
  15. A husband has conjugal rights over his wife. "Both partners have the right to have their physical demands met." The only difference is that the husband may demand this, while the wife cannot.
  16. Divorce does not require a witness.
  17. Taking out insurance is forbidden.
  18. Medical insurance schemes are forbidden.
  19. If being a police officer in West contradicts shari'a, it is forbidden.
  20. Beating one's wife is permissible (unless it harshly done).
  21. The mere intention to divorce is sufficient to make it valid, regardless of what is said.
Many of the above rulings are shocking, and by no means all websites or British shari'a councils will endorse many of them. But there they are, freely available to Muslims everywhere. If a believer tends towards strict interpretations of the sacred texts or the laws, he or she may well gravitate to fatwa banks such as these, and may well act on their basis rather than on the judgements of the nearest shari'a council. After all, what real authority do the muftis on the councils have beyond that of the other, online muftis? Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, for example, outranks pretty well all other contemporary Muslim authorities, with his TV show "Shari'a and Life" reaching an estimated 60 million viewers, and his learned essays promoting his personal views within the overall context of the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the most fundamentalist of today's Islamic organizations.
Let us leave the British councils for a moment. There is another external source of fatwas. In many Muslim states, shari'a laws may be, and often are, imposed, often to the extent of punishing crimes from theft to murder. This means that matters that would not be crimes in Western states, such as adultery, blasphemy, or apostasy receive corporal punishments or the death penalty.
Knowing that there is no freedom in the West to criminalize these latter faults or to apply shari'a punishments for them, it became essential to come up with fatwas that would give authoritative guidance to Muslims in Western countries on how to conduct themselves in the "Land of War" ("Dar al Harb", the opposite of the "Land of Islam") while remaining shari'a-observant. The overall aim is to bring shari'a into Western societies by the back door. Even if Western governments like that of the UK were to find ways to register and control shari'a courts, or even abolish them, religious authorities could subvert this by presenting fatwas that would recommend certain behaviours for individuals and small communities.
The deliberations of the jurisprudents resulted in the need to adapt shari'a rulings to the situation of large-scale Muslim communities living outside enforceable Islamic jurisdictions. This endeavour has been termed Fiqh al-'Aqalliyyat ("Jurisprudence of the minorities"). The purpose of this system -- in which the classical system of Muslims ruling non-Muslims has been reversed -- is to find a way to use shari'a without incurring the wrath of the indigenous legal system in secular parliamentary democracies. This has some resemblance to Muslim efforts during the colonial era to use shari'a in personal affairs in British and French colonies such as India or Algeria.
In its current form, the jurisprudence of the minorities dates back to the 1990s. It was developed by two individuals, the formerly mentioned Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the late Shaykh Dr. Taha Jabir al-Alwani of Virginia. Al-Qaradawi is, among other things, president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, a body founded in 2004 with its headquarters in the vastly wealthy Wahhabi state of Qatar. Its close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have led to its designation by the United Arab Emirates as a terrorist organization. It boasts a membership of at least 90,000 Islamically-qualified scholars from around the world, representing several different sectarian positions.
Al-Alwani (d. 2016) was the founder and former chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA), whose 18 members issue religious rulings, resolve disputes, and answer questions relating to Islamic practice. Their declared purpose:
"To consider, from a Shari'ah perspective, and offer advice on specific undertakings, transactions, contracts, projects, or proposals, guaranteeing thereby that the dealings of North American Muslims fall within the parameters of what is permitted by the Shari'ah."
The FCNA too has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, which may, under a bill launched by Senator Ted Cruz, soon be designated by the US as a terrorist organization in its own right. The Muslim Brotherhood in the US itself listed the FCNA as one of several organizations who shared their goals, including the destruction of Western civilization and the conversion of the US into a Muslim nation.
The "minorities" jurisprudents generally favour a non-violent approach to the encounter of Islam and the West, while retaining a critical stance towards the latter and a conviction that Islam must, in the end, replace it. But on occasion, as in the Middle East, violence is sanctioned. When asked in an interview about Palestinian suicide bombings, al-Alwani responded, "We think that the Palestinian people have the right to defend themselves in the way they view as suitable and we will back it and support it."[5]
That view was, until recently, shared by al-Qaradawi, who has supported terrorism, including suicide bombings.

[1] A mufti (a religious scholar who issues fatwas) is a learned man specializing in Islamic law; he issues judgements on cases, determining what is compliant with his law school, but the sentencing is carried out by a judge (a qadi). Sometimes, the same person performs both functions.
[2] The Darul Iftaa in Leicester was founded and run by Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari, a graduate of the Deobandi Darul Uloom in Bury.
[3] This important site features a "Live Fatwa" session, where answers are given by Muhammad al-Mukhtar al-Shinqiti, director of the Islamic Center of South Plains in Lubbock, Texas. Al-Shinqiti is a prominent figure in Fiqh al-'Aqalliyyat.
[4] Examples of fatwas from the above sites (apart from Islam Q&A, which I did not consult at that time) may be found in "Sharia Law or One Law for All," pages 74 to 127. Unwittingly, they provide insights into the topics to which British Muslims who speak English have access: not just the archives of fatwas that they maintain, but in order to ask questions themselves on matters from oral sex to male doctors seeing female patients.
[5] Cited Fishman p. 11 from the London Arabic newspaper, Al-Sharq al-Awsat.