..
France: Ten Muslims arrested for death threats and aggravated
harassment of journalists who reported on no-go zone
MAR 21, 2023 3:00 PM
BY ROBERT SPENCER
Jihad Watch
The no-go zones are real, and those making the threats did not, at least from the looks of this report, deny their existence. They just don’t want the general public to know about them.
In Islamic law, it is considered a good thing to conceal the faults of a fellow Muslim, as Muhammad said: “The servant (who conceals) the faults of others in this world, Allah would conceal his faults on the Day of Resurrection” (Sahih Muslim 32.6267). The ordinary understanding of slander in the West is that it involves making false charges that defame another person. But in Islamic law, the definition of slander doesn’t involve falsehood. The Shafi’i manual of Islamic law ‘Umdat al-Salik defines “slander” as “to mention anything concerning a person that he would dislike.” Nothing is said about whether or not what is said is true — only that the person would dislike it. And as the Qur’an warns, “Woe to every slandering backbiter” (104:1).
“Threats after a report on a “No-Go Zone” in Roubaix:
10 people arrested in France,”
Translated from “Menaces après un reportage de “Zone interdite” à Roubaix : 10 personnes interpellées en France,”
FranceInfo, March 15, 2023:
Amine Elbahi, an association activist who has since entered politics with the Les Républicains party, was among those targeted by these threats in 2022. An investigation was opened for “aggravated harassment.”
Ten people were arrested on Wednesday March 14 in France in the investigation that has been opened for “aggravated harassment” after the broadcast of a report from the program No-Go Zone on M6 in January 2022, FranceInfo has learned from concordant sources.
They are suspected of having played a role in the death threats received on social networks by several people after the broadcast of the report, which was devoted to radical Islamism and partly shot in Roubaix (North). The legal consequences for these ten arrested are not known for the time being, the Paris prosecutor’s office told FranceInfo.
Among the recipients of these threats were the presenter of the show, Ophélie Meunier, and Amine Elbahi, who has since entered politics within the Les Républicains party. In the wake of the report, he had received threats on social networks.
In No-Go Zone, this Roubaisien, associative activist and 26-year-old lawyer, suspected the association “Ambitions and initiatives for success” of teaching the Koran by preaching radical Islam, under the guise of support courses in the northern commune.
The investigation was carried out by the gendarmes of the Central Office for the fight against crimes against humanity and hate crimes (OCLCH), and taken over by the national monitor of online hatred of the Paris prosecutor’s office. In addition, the Brigade for the repression of delinquency against the person (BRDP) of the Parisian judicial police is following up on the complaint of the producer of the program, Ophélie Meunier.
Rapist can stay in UK over fears he could face persecution
for his crime in his native Iran
Isaac Crowson
Published: 0:34, 19 Mar 2023 Updated: 0:35, 19 Mar 2023
A RAPIST fighting deportation can stay in the UK — after a judge ruled he could face persecution for his crime in his native Iran.
His appeal was accepted even though he had apparently lied throughout the process about working for MI5.
A rapist fighting deportation can stay in the UK — after a judge ruled he could face persecution in his native Iran.
Credit: Getty
Judge John Keith ruled that the man could stay on human rights grounds. Credit: YouTube
The man — known only as XX — was jailed for seven years in 2001 over the rape in London.
The victim was a female lodger asleep in the same house.
Ministers wanted to automatically deport him after he finished his jail sentence but he appealed.
Bizarrely, throughout the process, the man claimed he had worked with the UK’s security service.
He said he feared the death penalty in Iran because officials there knew of his rape conviction.
Another reason he gave to stay was that he is openly a critic of the Iranian regime.
The immigration appeals tribunal heard the man arrived in the UK in 1992 as a student.
He was arrested in October 2000 and convicted a year later.
A deportation order was made in 2005.
Immigration papers say the man has never given “any indication” of having insight to the impact of his crime or actions.
He has also never taken part in any rehabilitation courses.
The fiend claimed he was approached by MI5 because he mixed in social circles connected with the Iranian Embassy in London.
However, the security services refused to confirm or deny his claim.
Judge John Keith ruled that XX could stay on human rights grounds amid concern about his conviction risking persecution.
He also said there was evidence XX had been an outspoken critic of the Iranian regime on a website and knowledge of this by the authorities in Tehran meant a “real risk of interrogation and extensive detention”.
And, of course, we know what 'interrogation' means in Iran. Women are interrogated for not wearing their hijab properly. Some end up being beaten and raped, some murdered. But those are women! Raping women is no big deal, he can always claim he was introducing her to Islam.
Immigrants guilty of rape or the sexual abuse of a child should have their rights expunged. What they do is wrong in both the UK and their home country. This ruling is an invitation to rapists from all over the world to come to Britain, rape little British girls and suffer few consequences. Laws need to be changed for such evil.
Completely unexpected decision from Sweden's Court of Appeals
Paludan had the right to burn the Koran
– court overturns police decision in Sweden
Published 3/20/2023
samnytt.se
Last year, the police made their own decision to refuse freedom of speech fighter and Islam critic Rasmus Paludan a demonstration permit in Norrköping. The decision was taken considering that there would likely be disturbances from the Muslim side as Paludan intended to burn a copy of the Koran. Now the Court of Appeal rules that the police made a mistake in denying permission.
In 2022, Danish-Swedish opinion leader Rasmus Paludan burned Korans in a series of demonstrations. The idea of the demonstrations was to test Muslim respect for Western democratic freedom of expression and whether Muslims can handle provocations. The result was striking – a wave of brutal immigrant violence that subjected the police, among others, to extreme strain at its worst and in whose wake lawsuits are still ongoing.
The police were therefore not very enthusiastic about granting Paludan permission to hold new demonstrations. In an attempt to stop Paludan, they, therefore, chose to deny him a demonstration permit in Norrköping with reference to the public order law. The argument was that since there would likely be disturbances, the police could prevent the demonstration from being granted permission.
Now, however, the police are being reprimanded by the Court of Appeals, which has tried the case and concluded that the interpretation of the ordinance was incorrect.
The majority in the Court of Appeal does not at all consider that the provisions of the Public Order Act give the police the opportunity to cancel public gatherings as a result of disturbances that have occurred or are feared. Instead, it is the provisions on dissolving gatherings that may become relevant.
The opinion of the Court of Appeal is that the ordinance cannot be used for preventive purposes. On the contrary, it can only be used to break up a demonstration that is already in the making and that the police believe there is reason to shut down. Therefore, the Court of Appeal chooses to annul the police's decision after the fact.
This is, of course, the correct decision for any country that claims free speech. It must frustrate the police, however, as they now have to wait for disturbances to break out before they can move in. This largely untenable position is because of the fact that Muslims are so easily provoked to hysteria. It also reveals the impossibility of peaceful cohabitation between Muslims and Christians.
No comments:
Post a Comment