‘Baroness Warsi gave official roles to people with links to extremist groups’



Baroness Warsi, the first Muslim woman to sit in United Kingdom’s Cabinet, handed official posts to people linked to militant and radical groups, including a man involved in an “unpleasant and bullying” campaign to win planning permission for the controversial London ‘megamosque’ proposed by a fundamentalist Islamic sect,  the Telegraph reported.

Fiyaz Mughal — a former member of the cross-Government working group on anti-Muslim hatred” set up by Lady Warsi and Nick Clegg, UK Deputy Prime Minister – told The Telegraph that he had resigned in protest at the group’s activities.

“I was deeply concerned about the kinds of groups some of the members had connections with, and some of the groups they were recommending be brought into government,” said Mughal, who is head of Tell Mama, the British national organisation for monitoring anti-Muslim attacks.

“The working group was Sayeeda [Warsi]’s personal project and she was responsible for the appointments. There was very little transparency about who was put on,” said another member of the working group.

The Telegraph reported that some members of the group are using their seats at the table to urge that Whitehall work with extremist-linked bodies, including one described by the Prime Minister as a “political front for the Muslim Brotherhood”. Some are also pressing to lift bans on foreign hate preachers from entering Britain, including Zakir Naik, who has stated that “every Muslim should be a terrorist”.

The working group, set up in 2012, has continued after Lady Warsi’s resignation last summer in protest at the Government’s “morally indefensible” policy on the Gaza crisis.

One of its most prominent non-government members is Muddassar Ahmed, a former senior activist in the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC), an extremist and anti-Semitic militant body which is banned from many universities as a hate group.

During Ahmed’s time, MPAC campaigned heavily against “Zionist” MPs, in particular Jack Straw, the former foreign secretary, and Lorna Fitzsimons, the former Labour MP for Rochdale, the Telegraph reported. She lost her seat after MPAC sent thousands of leaflets to local Muslim voters saying they should sack her because she was “Jewish”. She is not Jewish. MPAC has stated that Muslims are “at war” and that “every Muslim who does not participate in that war is committing a major sin”.

Ahmed said that his “regrettable” MPAC activities were “many years in the past” and he was now a “very different person from what I was then”. He had not been involved in the racist campaign against Fitzsimons, he said, but had concentrated on Straw. The UK government also insisted that Ahmed had “dissociated himself” from MPAC and its “approach” to politics.

More recently, Ahmed and his PR company, Unitas Communications, have played a role in a body called the Newham People’s Alliance (NPA), which was created to demonstrate “community support” for plans to create Britain’s biggest mosque near the Olympic Park in the east London borough of Newham.

Also on the working group is Iqbal Bhana, who has repeatedly praised the work of a body called the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC). The group has defended Abu Hamza, saying he has been “demonised” and claiming his recent terrorism conviction in America was an example of the “double standards of the British justice system in relation to Muslims”.

Other members include Iftikhar Awan, a former trustee of Islamic Relief, a charity with links to the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, and Sarah Joseph, a former spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), with which the current and previous governments have broken ties over its links to extremists.

However, some former member of the working group, such as Chris Allen, an academic, claims that not all members of the working group are extremist or radical sympathisers and there is no suggestion that any member is a supporter of violent extremism.

Another member, Matthew Goodwin, the associate professor of politics at Nottingham University and an expert in hard-Right political movements, said he was not aware of any attempt by the group to push an extremist agenda. He said that he and others had been frustrated at the group’s lack of progress.

The Muslim Takeover of West Bengal

Riots, restrictions on speech and religion, and the takeover of politics and law enforcement are just a few of the unwelcome changes that can be expected in non-Muslim societies as Muslim immigrants increase in number, according to Dr. Peter Hammond.  A Christian missionary based in South Africa and author of 40 books, Hammond delineates how Muslims change societies in his book, Slavery, Terrorism and Islam.  Citing examples of countries worldwide, Hammond outlines typical activities that occur as the Muslim percentage of the total population increases.  It is a warning bell about the gradual, step-by-step changes that can be expected in other countries still undergoing significant Muslim immigration.

These societal changes occur because devout Muslims are bound by a 1,400-year-old doctrine of immigration originating in Islamic scriptures and based on Mohammed’s migration from Mecca to Medina. Under the religious edict or Hijra, Islamic expansionism and submission of all non-Muslims to shariah or Islamic doctrine must occur.  Islamic expansionism and its counterpart, jihad, are first expressed as Muslim demands for special status and privileges within the host country.  A higher percentage of Muslims in the host country can soon translate into Muslim control of political processes, law enforcement, media, and the economy, as well as restrictions on freedom of movement, speech and religious practices. The appropriation of goods and property, as well as violence with impunity, can also occur.

The situation in at West Bengal in Hindu-majority India, bordering Muslim-majority Bangladesh, illustrates the inherent problems to non-Muslim societies of a growing Muslim population.

West Bengal

Bengal, an ethno-cultural region, was politically divided in 1947 during the partitioning of British India into independent India and Pakistan.  Under this arrangement, the Bengal province was carved in two: the predominately-Hindu West Bengal, a state of India, and the predominately-Muslim East Bengal, which became a province of Pakistan and, in 1971, the Muslim-majority country of Bangladesh.

At partitioning, the Muslim population of West Bengal stood at 12% and the Hindu population of East Bengal 30%.  Today, with massive Muslim immigration, Hindu persecution and forced conversions, West Bengal’s Muslim population has increased to 27% (up to 63% in some districts), as per the 2011 census and Bangladesh’s Hindu population has decreased to 8%.  While the situation for Hindus in Bangladesh is certainly dire, life has become increasingly difficult for Hindus in West Bengal, home to a Muslim-appeasing government and a breeding ground and safe haven for terrorists. For several years, West Bengal has suffered under apparent Muslim-planned riots designed to implement shariah, extract government concessions and grab more territory.

Kolkata Riots

In 2007, a violent protest broke out in Kolkata (formerly known as Calcutta) against Bangladeshi feminist author, physician and human rights activist, Taslima Nasreen. The demonstrations against Nasreen were a thinly veiled attempt to institute Islamic blasphemy laws and curtail freedom of speech.

Nasreen, who was born a Bangladeshi Muslim but chose atheism, had witnessed the horrific treatment of Islamic women in her medical practice, and advocated for freedom of expression, women’s rights, non-Muslim rights and abolition of shariah law.  In 1993, she published a novel, Lajja (Shame) about a Hindu family persecuted by Muslims.  The novel ignited a furor in the Muslim community, which called for a ban on the book and offered a bounty for her death.  The novel was subsequently banned by Indian authorities.  Nasreen was physically attacked, went into hiding and escaped from Bangladesh to Europe.  After 10 years’ exile, she returned to the east and settled in Kolkata.  Her Bangladeshi passport had been revoked and she waited several years for a visa to be able to visit India.  While in Kolkata, she continued to write articles critical of Islam despite renewed threats and calls for her beheading.

In November 2007, a protest organized by militant Muslims against Nasreen led to riots as Muslims blocked traffic, pelted police and journalists, torched cars and damaged buses.  Similar to the justification for the Charlie Hebdo murders in Paris, West Bengali Muslims protested the violation of shariah blasphemy law, which mandates death for anyone who dares to criticize Islam.  The army was forced to intervene, Nasreen was placed under house arrest and later forced to leave the area.  The banned Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) were believed to have fostered the mayhem.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/the_muslim_takeover_of_west_bengal.html#ixzz3SnMImrL6

Should You Let Feminists Tell You How to Raise Your Children?





Laura Bates is a childless 28-year-old feminist who bemoans the “gender-based assumptions about girls” in society:

We must protect young girls
from sexism in primary school

. . . How often do we heedlessly shower little girls with platitudes about prettiness and looks, or comment on how “big and strong” their brothers are growing? We hear comments about the sweetness and politeness of daughters, while sons are proudly described as boisterous, instead.



It is always interesting to me when feminists demand that we must emulate their failure. Nobody wants to marry Laura Bates and she has no children of her own, yet she considers herself qualified to tell the rest of us how to raise our children. Like all feminists, she assumes that normal gender roles are incompatible with women’s success or happiness. In order for women to be “equal,” feminists tell us, our society and culture must promote androgyny, so we are condemned for encouraging “sexism” if we praise girls for being pretty or describe boys as boisterous.

“Feminists have declared war on human nature,” and wish to destroy the marriage-based family, which is the basis of human civilization. Therefore, normal parents must be condemned as “sexist” if they try to raise normal children who will be successful in attracting a spouse, maintaining a marriage and raising a family. Normal parents are “sexist” for understanding that normal sex traits — the femininity of women and the masculinity of men — are attractive to normal people. Insofar as we wish our children to be normal and happy, we do encourage them in these “gender-based assumptions,” which are both natural and necessary to success in normal life.

We have met Laura Bates before, when she claimed “Women are being assaulted, abused and murdered in a sea of misogyny.” She is a failed actress, who graduated from elite Cambridge University in 2007 and launched her site Everyday Sexism in 2012. Unhappy women embrace feminism because it tells them that their unhappiness is not their own fault. Instead, feminists believe they are victims of male supremacy — externalizing responsibility by scapegoating men — and they wage war on human nature in order to destroy the system of “patriarchy” that these unhappy women blame for their own misfortunes.


“If you would be loved, love, and be lovable.”
Benjamin Franklin

This is the problem that feminism can never solve, because feminists refuse to accept responsibility for their own unhappiness. Bitterness and envy are not attractive qualities. Feminists are not loved because they are not lovable. They make their own selfishness the basis of a political movement and, when this produces a negative reaction, they claim that this confirms that their analysis is correct: “Men hate me because I’m a feminist, and therefore more feminism is necessary!”

The circularity of this solipsistic theory never seems apparent to them. Nor do they ever seem to notice that other women succeed and achieve happiness within the “gender-based assumptions” that feminists blame for their own failure and unhappiness. These failed women presume their superiority qualifies them to tell the rest of us how to raise our children, and they want to teach this in schools:

Dreams of Feminist Education
Tadashi Dozono, Ileana Jiménez, Cheyenne Tobias

Two teachers of color, both feminist and queer, will share their dreams for feminist education in schools. Moving from theory to action, Ileana and Tadashi work alongside their students using various feminisms such as women of color feminism, global feminism, trans-feminism and queer theory. Their pedagogical practices incorporate restorative and social justice, inspiring innovative curricula that are intersectional and interdisciplinary. In collaboration with Cheyenne Tobias, feminist artist and Ileana’s former student, Tadashi and Ileana will bring us on a visual journey through two different school contexts via the successes they’ve had and the challenges they face in bringing a feminist vision to their respective classrooms. Calling us to action through their own personal storytelling, Ileana and Tadashi will urge us to consider the role of feminism in schools and the role that schools play in feminism.

Lesbians earn 20% more than heterosexual women in the U.S., which proves women are oppressed by heteronormative patriarchy!

Of course, if you’re a feminist, everything proves that women are oppressed by heteronormative patriarchy.