Shariah Law Makes a Comeback in Ontario

Tarek Fatah

Toronto SUN 

Invisible woman under Shariah (Getty Images)

Two Muslim men — an activist turned Shariah mortgage seller and an Islamic cleric who sold his Islamic seal of approval on such mortgages — were acquitted on Friday of a dozen criminal charges by an Ontario Superior Court judge who validated aspects of Sharia law in reaching her decision. Justice Jane Ferguson described the trial as a “huge learning curve in Islamic finance.”

Shariah in Canada?

But what happened to the declaration by Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, on September 11, 2005, that “there will be no Shariah law in Ontario”?

It wasn’t just Ontario. Earlier that year, on May 26, 2005, the Quebec National Assembly voted unanimously for “a motion against allowing Shariah to be used in the legal system.”

Speaking for the motion, Fatima Houda-Pepin, then a Liberal member of the legislature, said: “The application of sharia in Canada is part of a strategy to isolate the Muslim community.”

And prevent them from melding into Canadian society!

And now comes this 68-page judgement of Justice Ferguson in the case of Omar Kalair and Imam Yusuf Panchbaya who were alleged by the Crown to have unlawfully taken millions of dollars in mortgage money from Kalair’s Shariah-compliant mortgage company. The two accused were charged with theft, fraud and money laundering that involved 15 gold bars that are still missing, silver coins and a $2 million fatwa fee by the Islamic clerics.

The complex plot involves a tiny minority of Muslim homeowners in the GTA who were warned by Islamic scholars that taking a conventional mortgage from a bank was an act of sin as it involved paying interest to the loaner. The overwhelming majority of Muslims, however, know that Shariah mortgages promoted by Mullahs are akin to priests selling indulgences. By simply changing the word ‘interest’ and calling it a ‘fee’ the transaction supposedly becomes Islamic.

Justice Ferguson in her decision stated: “Even if Kalair’s understanding of the application of Shariah law was wrong in law, I find he honestly believed at all times, and had reasonable grounds to believe, that he was acting appropriately under the circumstances.”

Justice Ferguson ruled the Crown had not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Ontario Superior Court judge relied on testimony by an overseas expert named Abdel Qader Thomas who appeared via video to educate the court about Islamic financial products, and who Justice Ferguson credited for educating her about Islamic banking terminology.

In her judgement, Justice Ferguson writes: “I initially believed that an unwillingness to pay conventional interest on a loan appears “bizarre” until I learned that the payment of interest is considered a serious sin in the Islamic faith and violates a central pillar of Shariah law. This understanding was essential in my understanding of Kalair’s operating mind. Thomas’ evidence was also educative regarding industry standards against which Kalair’s conduct must be assessed.”

Justice Ferguson shared facets of Islamic culture that she picked up in what she referred to as her “steep learning curve.”

Commenting on the 15 gold bars paid to Islamic scholars instead of a cheque to the amount of $2 million, she wrote: “There is a cultural attraction to gold in Islamic communities. Gold has an ancient religious connection to Islam as one of the six staple goods mentioned in the Quran.”

However, as Australian Imam Muhammad Tawhidi, currently in Toronto, told me: “Muslim men are prohibited from wearing gold and silk.” He added, “this was a directive from Prophet Muhammad himself, not some latter-day scholar in the Arab Gulf.”

After the judgement, Omar Kalair boasted in a statement: “This [decision by Justice Ferguson] in my view, is a victory not only for myself but for the Islamic finance industry, that actions we take due to our religion [Islam] are accepted in certain courts .”

This can't be allowed to stand!

Erdogan Rejects ‘Moderate Islam’ as a Western Tool to Weaken Muslims

© Faisal Al Nasser / Reuters

The idea of ‘moderate Islam’ was invented by the West and is being used to weaken the ancient religion, Turkey’s President Recep Erdogan has said in reference to Saudi Arabia’s reforms, while also lashing out at the EU’s “discrimination” of Muslims.

Last month, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, vowed to restore “moderate” Islam to the kingdom considered to be "home" of the religion. The Gulf monarchy currently follows a Salafist or Wahhabi version of Islam that is often described as being "ultraconservative" and administered through Islamic Sharia law. 

In what appears to be a direct reference to Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, Erdogan denounced a “moderate” interpretation of Islam in a speech delivered at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Women’s Advisory Council on Friday.

“The term ‘moderate Islam’ is being lathered up again. The patent of moderate Islam belongs to the West. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam; Islam is one. The aim of using such terms is to weaken Islam,” Erdogan said in Ankara.

“Perhaps the person voicing this concept thinks it belongs to him. No, it does not belong to you,” he added, recalling, that he was “asked about ‘moderate Islam’ at meetings in the European Parliament many years ago.”

The thrust of Prince Mohammed bin Salman's Vision 2030, is to socially transform the Wahhabi brand of Sunni Islam, which bans gender mixing, concerts and cinemas. Starting in the summer of next year, women in Saudi Arabia will be permitted to drive. In the new year, women would also be allowed to attend sporting events as the monarchy continues to usher in its liberalization reforms.

Last month the Prince unveiled a plan to construct a $500-billion state of the art city across its borders into Jordan and Egypt. The new mega-city is to be erected with the aim of diversifying the Arab country’s economy and reducing its dependency on oil.

Riyadh’s reforms have been accompanied by a massive anti-corruption drive, which saw a purge of the kingdom’s political and business elite, including 11 princes. The kingdom’s closest ally, the US, has welcomed the campaign, with President Donald Trump saying those arrested had been “milking their country for years”.

“They say we will return to moderate Islam, but they still don’t give women the right to drive. Is there such a thing in Islam? I guess they will give this right when they turn to the moderate one,” Erdogan noted Friday.

The Turkish president also lashed out against the EU for approving a series of so-called “burka bans” introduced in recent years, calling it a “discrimination against Muslim women.”

"Headscarves are gradually being banned in EU states with the public - personal space trick, attempting to bar Muslim women from entering social life. Attempts to incarcerate Muslim women in their homes is spreading like a virus," Erdogan said.

Traditional Islamic head and face coverings have long been controversial in Europe, where they are often seen as incompatible with secular values. France became the first European country to impose a ban on full-face coverings in 2011. Belgium followed suit shortly thereafter. German MPs approved a partial ban on full-face veils this April, saying it’s the country’s duty to present itself “in an ideologically and religiously neutral manner.” Austria’s parliament also endorsed a package of measures that outlaws distribution of the Koran and wearing traditional Islamic full-face veils in public.

"Those who are teaching us lessons on human rights are unfortunately applauding as the most basic human rights are being trampled in their countries," said Erdogan.

Arab ‘Mafia’ Infiltrates German Police, State Services – German Police Union Official

Germany's fear of xenophobia far exceeds its fear of Islamic criminals.

It is possibly that very thing that feeds xenophobia!

FILE PHOTO © Fabrizio Bensch / Reuters

Powerful Arab criminal clans are actively trying to plant their members into Berlin’s police and other state services, a local German Police Union head has claimed. He went on to say the mafia gangs are seeking to control police actions.

Large criminal clans of migrant descent are purposefully seeking to provide some of their members access to the inner working of the state services, Bodo Pfalzgraf, the head of the Berlin branch of the German Police Union, told the German ZDF broadcaster Wednesday. “The truth should be revealed,” he said.

Now what kind of attitude is that? What will Frau Merkel think?

“There are clear indications that big Arab clans have a [infiltration] strategy and try to keep certain family members away from criminal activities so that they could later infiltrate into any state services,” Pfalzgraf explained as he appeared on ZDF’s ‘Morgen Magazin’ program. The migrant mafia has “a vital interest in first-hand knowledge of how the state works, how police operates and when searches [and raids] are conducted,” he said.

These developments require special attention from the German authorities, he said, adding, that allegations against police should be investigated not by the police itself but by a special task force instead. At the same time, he warned against racial or other forms of profiling by saying that no one should be “denied access to the state services just because of their name.”

Pfalzgraf also called for a stricter admission criteria for police enrolments. He said such admission criteria have not been amended for a long period and are currently failing to meet contemporary realities.

Berlin police was, however, quick to dispute the allegations concerning potential infiltration by migrant mafia clans. “These claims are definitely false,” Berlin police chief, Klaus Kandt, said at a special meeting of Berlin’s parliament on Wednesday.

He words were echoed by the Deputy Head of the Berlin Police Department, Margarete Koppers, who said during the same session that any infiltration into police by criminal Arab clans is “ruled out.” She went on to say that no members of such clans are studying in any police educational facilities.

The accusations and counter-statements come amid a high profile scandal involving a law student who undertook an internship at one of the German capital’s police departments.  The student at the Berlin School of Economics and Law, who is from Arab descent, was arrested after she took photos of confidential police documents and sent them to an unknown contact via the WhatsApp messenger service.

According to the local BZ daily, the female student, 22, particularly took pictures of the photos of wanted members of a suspected Arab criminal clan. The student reportedly volunteered to an internship in this particular police department, the daily added. The incident took place in late October but surfaced in the German media only this week.

Berlin’s Interior Minister has meanwhile warned against the rise of xenophobia and prejudice against police officers of migrant descent. “That is something I would not tolerate,” Andreas Geisel said as Germany records a growing number of complaints against immigrant recruits within the police.

It started about a week ago when a lecturer at the Berlin Police Academy was heard complaining in a leaked recording about poor language skills, lack of respect, and disloyalty of ethnic Turks and Arabs who study at the facility.

Is that xenophobia or is it a lack of respect, disloyalty, and poor language skills? Is it xenophobia to state the obvious? Is it necessary to hide the truth or outright lie in order to not be seen as xenophobic? Is it worth it?

Xenophobia, I believe, is fed by government and police ignoring or hiding the dangers and the realities of Islamization. Because they are not doing their jobs of protecting Germans, Germans are likely to rise up to protect themselves. It would be far better for the authorities to do their jobs rather than to pretend everything is great.

The first leak was then followed by a series of new accusations that came in a form of anonymous letters allegedly sent by other members of the German police community. One such letter published by the Tagesspiegel daily said: “The police ranks are open to criminal clans.” Recruits from these big clans are allowed to join the ranks of police despite previous criminal records, the document allegedly written by a long serving member of Berlin’s criminal investigation department, said.

UK's Finsbury Park Mosque Trustee Exposed as Hamas Political Influencer

Not a criminal because he is not military, he's a terrorist!

Mohammed Sawalha. © habibi / YouTube

A leading member of one of Britain’s most prominent mosques is a senior member of Hamas, it has emerged. Mohammed Sawalha, a trustee of Finsbury Park Mosque, is a top figure in the Palestinian group, considered a terrorist organization by the UK and US.

In Britain, only the military wing of Hamas is banned, which means that Sawalha has not committed an offence. He is not thought to be involved with the outlawed Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades.

Hamas grew out of the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The Islamist group was founded to fight Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories and to deliver aid to its own communities in the Gaza Strip, where their Fatah rivals in the Palestinian Authority were seen to be failing.

Sawalha moved to the UK as a refugee in the 1990s and now lives in a council house worth £500,000 ($655,000) in Kingsbury, northwest London, the Sunday Times reports.

In 2008, he was named in court documents as having previously been “in charge of Hamas terrorist operations in the West Bank.”

OK, so help me understand this. He has not committed an offence because he is not part of Hamas' military wing - he is part of their terrorist wing!!??? Is that how it works?

Sawalha’s role in the political bureau of Hamas was exposed after the names of a delegation to Moscow were announced.

He has been a Finsbury Park Mosque trustee since 2010 and is a former director of the Muslim Association of Britain. Sawalha was also a director of the Islam Expo and has been involved in the arrangement of delegations to Gaza.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has refused to rule out including Hamas in peace talks, but last week rounded on the group, calling on its leaders to “stop spewing out anti-Semitic propaganda.”

Good luck with that!

Finsbury Park Mosque says it has no dealings with terrorist organizations, stating that it is a “British charity and has no relationship with Hamas.”

And God knows a Palestinian wouldn't lie!!!

The mosque was at the center of a suspected Islamophobic terrorist attack in June when a van driver ploughed into worshippers as they left Ramadan prayers.

The religious center has spent the last decade trying to undo a bad reputation. Abu Hamza, currently jailed in the US for terrorism offences, was imam at the mosque for many years.

Beware of the Muslim Brotherhood, Expert Warns

 Ian MacLeod, Ottawa Citizen

Authorities should be concerned about the unseen hand of the Muslim Brotherhood gripping sections of Canada’s diverse Muslim community, says a U.S. security expert.

The movement has planted its revivalist interpretation of Islam, political ideology and activism among some Muslims here and sees itself as a minder and broker between them and the rest of society, Lorenzo Vidino, who specializes in Islamism and political violence, told the Senate’s national security committee recently.

“They basically aim to be the gatekeepers to Muslim communities, that whenever politicians, governments or the media try to get the Muslim voice, if there were such a thing, they would go through them, sort of the self‑appointed leaders of Muslim communities,” he said.

Vidino is director of the program on extremism at George Washington University and author of The New Muslim Brotherhood in the West (Columbia University Press, 2010). He sees no direct links to terrorism among the group’s western supporters. In fact, some work to prevent violent radicalization, he said.

“It would be an analytical mistake to lump them, as some do, with al-Qaida or ISIL. These are not organizations that plan attacks in the West, and actually in many cases they do condemn them.”

The problem is more indirect, Vidino said. “Generally speaking, the movement has not abandoned violence as a tool to advance its agenda.” Tactically, it doesn’t pursue violence, “but it’s not heartfelt,” he said.

“They have this narrative where they lump together foreign policy issues with issues like cartoons and so on as part of a big narrative that proves this point that the West hates Muslims and Islam. It’s that mainstreaming of this narrative which is very much the staircase to violent radicalization and the brotherhood does mainstream that. It provides somewhat of a fertile environment.

“That kind of narrative in the mind a 16- or 18-year-old is extremely dangerous, because violence is justified when Muslims are under attack. If it’s OK in Gaza and Afghanistan, why is it not OK in the West, where you’re also telling me that Islam is under attack?”

The brotherhood is a banned terrorist organization in some Middle East and other countries, notably Egypt, where the movement was born. But it has different profile in the West.

To start, there is no group calling itself the “Muslim Brotherhood” in North America. Instead, a few hundred sophisticated, politically savvy and well-funded supporters in Canada have over the past 50 years created vocal and visible organizations that represent a very small part of the Muslim community. They exert a disproportional influence over mosques, schools and spaces where Muslims come together, said Vidino.

While they don’t take orders from any Arab capital, they “are part of an informal network where you have strong links based on personal and financial connections, and at the end of the day what matters the most: ideology. They all embrace a certain world view.”

Groups sometimes go to great lengths to sever or hide such ties, Vidino told the committee. He said they include the Muslim Association of Canada and what used to be called CAIR-CAN, now the National Council of Canadian Muslims.

Another group he identified is The International Relief Fund for the Afflicted and Needy – Canada, IRFAN. Its charitable status was revoked after the government alleged the organization sent almost $15 million to groups affiliated with the Palestinian terror outfit Hamas between 2005 and 2009. IRFAN has since been listed as a banned terrorist organization in Canada.

Ihsaan Gardee, executive director of the NCCM, said Vidino is misinformed.

“The NCCM is an independent, non-partisan and non-profit grassroots Canadian civil liberties and advocacy organization with a public track record spanning 15 years,” said Gardee. “The NCCM is not a religious group and does not and has never had any affiliations, links, ideological or of any other kind, with the Muslim Brotherhood or any other overseas group.”

The Muslim Association of Canada did not respond to a request for comment. But its website traces its roots to the teachings of Egyptian Hassan al-Banna, who founded the brotherhood in 1928 to revive and integrate traditional Islamic teaching and practices, such as sharia law, with modern society.

Vidion’s parting advice to the committee: “Engage with knowledge. Know that they have an agenda.”

What is their agenda? Is it to prepare Muslims for mass radicalization whenever the right issue or the right leader arises? 

France Approves Restrictive Anti-Terrorism Law to Replace 2-Year State of Emergency

The New Normal - France

New laws equal 'State of Emergency light'. This is absolutely necessary and when it is determined that it doesn't really work, it will probably get worse. Even so, there will be many detractors who want the old freedoms and aren't wise enough to know that they cannot exist in a world where Islam is ascendant.

The French parliament has approved a new controversial anti-terrorism law, replacing the soon-to-expire two-year state of emergency. The new legislation has prompted fears it will severely limit civil liberties.

The French senate approved the new anti-terrorism law on its second reading on Wednesday. The new law, set to increase law enforcement powers in the fight against terrorism, was supported by 244 senators, with only 22 voting against it. The bill was overwhelmingly approved by the lower chamber of parliament earlier in October.

The state of emergency was imposed in France to combat terrorism in the wake of the deadly 2015 Paris terrorist attacks, and has been extended six times since. It is set to finally expire on November 1.

Its key points include allowing the authorities to search homes of those suspected of terrorist links, while holding them for up to four hours and seizing data, items and documents. It also allows the authorities to confine suspects to their town or city for up to a year and have them report to police every day. Any movement beyond that requires them to wear a tracking bracelet.

Top regional officials will be allowed to shut down places of worship for up to six months, if they deem preachers have incited attacks or glorified terrorism. This can be done without any hard proof obtained by police, but simply on the basis of "ideas and theories" shared by the preachers’ devotees.

Police are also granted the authority to stop and search people at vulnerable areas such as borders, train stations and airports.

Ahead of the parliamentary vote, French President Emmanuel Macron hosted 500 law enforcement officers including police, gendarmes, prefects, and other officials at the Elysees Palace. Macron defended the new law and mulled a new nationwide anti-radicalization plan.

“The first mission of the state is to protect our fellow citizens and ensure the security of the territory... We have to adapt our organization, our action,” he said.

video 5:13  © Gonzalo Fuentes / Reuters

The plan includes hiring 10,000 more police officers and gendarmes, as well as supplying them with technology suitable for the “smartphone era.” He also promised to implement stricter measures to more efficiently deport migrants with “no legal right” to stay in France.

“We don’t welcome people well, our procedures are too long, we don’t integrate people properly and neither do we send enough people back,” Macron told the law enforcement officers.

The new anti-terrorism law has repeatedly drawn concern over human rights issues. UN human rights experts urged France to comply with "its international human rights obligations," worrying the bill would "incorporate into ordinary law several restrictions on civil liberties currently in place under France’s state of emergency."

'Institutional racism against the Arab-Muslim community'

Even if granting the police sweeping powers helps foil some attacks, it may estrange minorities, in particular, Arab Muslims, making them more susceptible to terrorist propaganda, political analyst Dan Glazebrook told RT.

“If you are going to give police this power, they are going to discriminate communities that are already alienated, putting potentially more recruits into the hands of these death squads,” Glazebrook said, arguing that the French police have “a serious problem with institutional racism and brutality against the Arab-Muslim community” going back to the Paris massacre of 1961, when dozens of Algerians were killed in a police crackdown on the protest against the Algerian War on the River Seine.

The key to reducing the threat posed by international terrorism is to deal with the underlying causes of the Islamist violence and not with its consequences, Glazebrook said.

“If you don’t deal with the root causes, which is the brutal foreign policy on the one hand and the alienation of entire communities due to system institutional discrimination and racism… even the most vicious police state will not be able to stop there being some people who decide to lash out.”

“You can’t be a near-colonial war-mongering power like France and expect to be permanently immune to the blowback and to the consequences of that,” Glazebrook said, referring to France’s involvement in Libya and Syria.

The provision of the law enabling police to shut down suspected terrorist hotbeds without any proof may result in crackdowns on any dissent, thus eroding civil freedoms, former British intelligence officer Annie Machon told RT.

“What is radicalization? At the moment, of course, everyone in France is focused on the concept of Islamic radicalization, but what if that term spreads, what if there is mission creep, so someone who protests against the government is deemed to be radical and therefore be closed down?” she said, noting that French ecological activists used to be targeted by the state under similar pretexts.

Calling the concerns that human rights groups voiced about the law infringing on democracy “absolutely right,” Machon said that bulk data collection and mass surveillance envisioned in the law have proven to be ineffective means in combating terrorism.

She went on to note that while many of the terrorists that mounted attacks in Europe “have already been known to the authorities” it did not help security services to stop them.

“They are drowning in the tsunami of information rather than doing targeted specific investigations into people who might be particularly focused on committing terrorist atrocities… they are falling through the gaps of intelligence agencies.”

Muslim Public Holidays in Germany? Interior Minister’s Proposal Met with Furious Backlash

© Odd Andersen / AFP

German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere prompted a backlash from his own party and political allies by suggesting that Germany introduce Muslim public holidays. He was, however, backed by the leader of the Social Democrats, Martin Schulz.

“I am ready to discuss the issue of whether we should also introduce a Muslim public holiday,” de Maiziere said early this week, adding that the German authorities “could probably easily do that.”

He went on to explain that, in some German states where many Catholics live, there are already some religiously defined Christian public holidays, while in other parts of the country, they are not officially introduced.

“In places where there are many Muslims, why cannot one discuss also [the introduction] of a Muslim public holiday?” the minister said at an election event staged by his party, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), ahead of regional elections in Lower Saxony.

His proposal, however, quickly provoked a wave of indignation within the ranks of his own party as well as among their Bavarian allies, the conservative Christian Social Union (CSU).

“Our Christian legacy is non-negotiable,” Alexander Dobrindt, the head of the CSU faction in the German federal parliament, said, commenting on de Maiziere’s statement.

“Introduction of Muslim public holidays in Germany is out of question,” he added.

His words were echoed by another CSU member, interior policy expert Stephan Mayer, who said that “Germany has for centuries carried the legacy of Christian traditions and was defined by it.”

“As of yet, nothing has changed in this field,” he said, adding that a statement that “Islam belongs to Germany” can be proved neither by the historical experience nor by the present situation.

De Maiziere’s fellow senior CDU member, Wolfgang Bosbach, was, however, more reserved in his criticism. He said that, even though everyone in Germany has every right to celebrate whatever religious holidays they want, the legal protection of non-Christian holidays “is a different issue.”

The politician said he sees no reason to discuss such issues and said that the politicians should instead ask “when Christians will finally have the same religious freedom in all Muslim countries as Muslims [in Germany].”

In the meantime, a CSU deputy head, Manfred Weber, warned that such a move could actually hinder the integration of Muslims into German society, arguing that public holidays cannot be introduced only to serve the needs of a certain community.

His statement was, however, disputed by Aiman Mazyek, the head of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, who said that introduction of Muslim public holidays would foster integration.

Such holidays would show that Muslims are a part of Germany and become a sign of “mutual understanding as well as good and friendly coexistence” of various parts of the German society, Mazyek told Passauer Neue Presse.

The interior minister, however, received support for the proposal not only from the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, but also from Martin Schulz – the leader of the Social Democratic Party and political rival.

“One should think about this proposal,” Schulz told German dpa news agency on Saturday. He also lambasted the CDU and CSU for attacking de Maiziere. In Germany, one has to be able to make a proposal and then discuss it seriously and without anxiety, Schulz said.

In the meantime, the uproar prompted the interior ministry to clarify de Maziere’s statement. The minister “has made it clear that our public holidays come from a Christian tradition and it should stay so, according to his point of view,” the ministry’s spokeswoman told Bild.

“He was, however, ready to discuss certain Muslim holidays in some particular regions,” she said, adding that the minister “basically still holds to an opinion that our holiday culture has Christian roots and no other.”

De Maiziere’s statements came at a time when Germany is still stunned by the historic success of the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party at the latest federal parliamentary election, in which the CDU and their Bavarian allies suffered their worst results in more than half a century.

Since 2015, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced her decision to allow in hundreds of thousands of refugees, around one million mostly Muslim asylum-seekers have arrived in Germany, putting a strain on its social welfare system and sparking a rise in anti-migrant sentiment.

Now, the party of Angela Merkel, whose ‘open door’ policy sparked enormous controversy, is struggling to win back voters from the right-wing AfD. On October 9, the CDU and its Bavarian sister party agreed to cap Germany’s intake of asylum-seekers at 200,000 a year.

Failed Integration: In Next 10-20 Years, France will be New Lebanon – Writer

Muslims pray during Friday prayers in the street in front of the city hall of Clichy, near Paris, France. © Benoit Tessier / Reuters

In just a few years, Islamic suburbs of Paris will obey their own set of rules, they will have their own laws, their own principles, maybe even their own police. It is already the case, Alexandre Mendel, author of the book ‘Partition’ told RT.

Europe has been facing a large number of migrants coming from the war-torn countries in Africa and the Middle East. Today many are concerned about the Islamization of Europe and the failure of Muslims assimilating into their new countries.

RT met with a writer Alexandre Mendel, whose new book “Partition” is devoted to the Muslims' failure to integrate in France, and discussed the current situation in that country.

RT:  Please start by describing for our readers your book.

Alexandre Mendel: My last book, 'Jihadist France,' was only about the French terrorists. ‘Partition’ is mainly about Islamization of France, about what’s going on in France, in schools, hospitals, at work, in sports clubs, etc. I am not talking this time about terrorism itself, but about the way France decided whether the French government - like it or not – collaborated and accepted some kind of arrangements with Islam. This is the main topic of the book.

There are at least two things that are important about the Islamization. The first one is that you cannot be always blind with this problem. For 20-30 years we let down our rules, our principals, our republican ideals; we negotiated with Islamists. We are totally blind to this kind of small signals that some parts of France were becoming Islamized. That can explain the terrorism today in France. If we didn’t accept these little arrangements with radical Islam, we probably wouldn’t have had so many attacks in France. That is why it is so important today not to be blind anymore in France and to tell the truth. 

My book is made of many, many reports in France. It is not a theoretical book – it is a book written by a reporter. We went there, we went to the schools, to the hospitals, to the cities where people and police never set foot to see the reality and just to talk about the reality. A lot of French people, especially a lot of French journalists and French politicians never go there. It is very important today to be a reporter in these areas where nobody sets foot anymore. This is a testimony of our modern time.

RT:  What should be done to integrate people into society? Is it only a Muslim thing, or other groups, as well?

AM: In my book, I say that there is no solution, because it is too late; there won’t be any solution. You can’t send them back to their country - they are French - the French cannot send them back. What France will become in the next 10 or 20 years will be a kind of new Lebanon in some places in France.

For example, take some suburbs in Paris: they will have their own set of rules, they will have their own laws, their own principals, maybe even their own police. It is already the case. The fact that in France right now in many places France has no control in these areas. We accepted it already and we won’t fight back to get these suburbs back to France. It is already done – we already lost the war against them.

So the rich people in France will be in the fancy neighborhoods of Paris, far from the problems, and then the poor people will have to deal with Islamism on a daily base. This is the way we accepted that already.

RT:  Why did integration fail in France, do you think?

AM: Integration has failed in France, but not only France – in many other countries, because we buried our republican principal to actually mimic what exists in Great Britain, in Canada, or in the US; accept that you could be French, get French citizenship without even speaking French, without even going to the Republican French School, get French citizenship, without living like the French. France is not a new country of immigration – it has a very long story of immigration. People in the 1920s came to France from all over Europe – from Poland, from Russia, from Armenia, Italy, and there was no problem to integrate them, no problem at all…

The fact is, Muslims simply cannot integrate and remain Muslims. If they soften Islam to make it possible for them to integrate into western society, the next generation will curse them for it and become twice as radical. There is no saving France or Europe as long as Muslims are being welcomed with open arms.

Clichy, France

Sex Segregation in Islamic-Faith School Ruled Unlawful by UK Court

This will be interesting to watch

FILE PHOTO: © Ben Stansall / AFP

The policy of segregating girls and boys at an Islamic-faith school has been deemed unlawful in a landmark ruling by the Court of Appeal in the UK.

Judges ruled on Friday that the separation of boys from girls constituted sex discrimination. The decision could have huge ramifications across the country.

Al-Hijrah School in Birmingham had challenged a critical report by schools watchdog, Ofsted. However, the High Court upheld the regulator’s findings.

Last year, Justice Robert Jay ruled that the Ofsted inspectors were wrong to penalize the mixed-sex school, which orders complete segregation of pupils from year five.

But three Court of Appeal judges in London have now overturned that decision.

At the school, all breaks, school trips and clubs are held separately for all children aged over nine. The findings from Ofsted said the children were separated to the point that they used separate corridors. Inspectors insisted the practice left them “unprepared for life in modern Britain.”

Books in the library advocated husbands beating their wives and forced sex, the report said.

Ofsted will now be able to give schools that separate children based on their gender a lower rating.

That's it? A lower rating? Wow, that will really teach them. They will wear that like a badge of honour!

Sir Terence Etherton, Lady Justice Gloster and Lord Justice Beatson unanimously found that the actions of the school had contravened the 2010 Equality Act.

“It is common ground that the school is not the only Islamic school which operates such a policy and that a number of Jewish schools with a particular Orthodox ethos and some Christian faith schools have similar practices,” the appeal judges said.

“The relevant central government authorities should not pivot in the way they have gone about this without recognising the real difficulties those affected will face as a consequence.”

Ofsted's Chief Inspector Amanda Spielman said the watchdog’s job is to make sure that all schools “properly prepare children for life in modern Britain.”

“Educational institutions should never treat pupils less favorably because of their sex, or for any other reason,” she said.

“The school is teaching boys and girls entirely separately, making them walk down separate corridors, and keeping them apart at all times.

“This is discrimination and is wrong. It places these boys and girls at a disadvantage for life beyond the classroom and the workplace, and fails to prepare them for life in modern Britain.

“This case involves issues of real public interest, and has significant implications for gender equality, Ofsted, government, and the wider education sector. We will be considering the ruling carefully to understand how this will affect future inspections.”

A number of schools may now have to stop segregating pupils, or split into single sex schools.

‘Shockingly Badly Integrated’ Pakistani Women Live in ‘Entirely Different Society’ in Britain

© justin Tallis / AFP

Pakistani women living in Britain are part of an ‘entirely different’ society and are ‘shockingly badly integrated’ according to a new survey.

The nation’s first disparity audit will reveal entire communities are segregated from their neighbors.

The Cabinet Office study, which will be published on Tuesday, was designed to better understand how people in the UK access healthcare, education, employment and the criminal justice system.

Pakistani women living in the UK, especially those who are not working, and do not speak English, have not integrated into society.

“Other communities have integrated very well, but the audit shows that Pakistani women who don’t speak English or go out to work are living in an entirely different society and are shockingly badly integrated,” a Cabinet Office staffer told the Sunday Times.

While many will be shocked by the report, others may not be surprised.

Teachers in Britain have previously reported some of their pupils have to translate information for their mothers, who cannot communicate with school staff.

Britain must set out rules for immigrants

In December 2016 a major review on community integration by Dame Louise Casey said Britain must set out rules for immigrants.

Casey criticized the government, saying there had been a “saris, samosas and steel drums” policy, rather than real leadership.

She suggested mandatory English lessons and even an oath of allegiance to Britain.

An independent report will be published this week, which will show cuts to benefits and public services are likely to hit Asian families.

Prime Minister Theresa May called for a major audit into societal injustice in the UK.

The Women’s Budget Group and the Runnymede Trust found Asian households will be £11,678 (US$15,390) worse off overall by 2020. At the same time, white families will be £6,199 worse off over 10 years.

“It is only by doing so we can make this country work for everyone, not just a privileged few,” the PM said as she announced the audit.

An “unprecedented” audit on employment showed huge social disparities between white Britons, and black and ethnic minority groups.

A new website, Ethnicity Facts and Figures, will show white Britons are more likely to own their home and have a job than minorities.

They are however, less likely to attend university if they went to a state school.

Currently, the unemployment rate for black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people is 8 percent, yet it is 4.6 percent for white British adults.

I'm a little concerned that the focus may be skewed toward women. Yes they need to learn English and make an effort to fit into British society. They might even learn that it is OK to not be invisible. 

But I am more concerned about teaching Pakistani men that it is not OK to use British children like they are sex toys. That will conflict with their interpretation of the Quran by which they are justified to treat a girl as a sex slave if she merely gets into their car or enters a room with them (in their right-hand - or under their control). Mohammed gives men authority to do 'as they wish' with such girls as long as they are not Muslim.

What You Can’t Say Anymore: ‘Sharia Doesn’t Belong Here’

Now this is more like Europe - someone says something

intelligent and responsible and everyone else starts

running around setting their hair on fire

BY CLARION PROJECT

A local councillor was censured by his party for tweets he made about sharia law and how terrorists are exploiting Europe’s open-door policy.

He will “be dealt with” by the party, said an unnamed spokesman.

Brian Murphy of the ruling Fina Gael (Family of Ireland) party made a series of tweets his higher-ups apparently found offensive.

The tweets included the following sentiments:

Murphy quoted Irish philosopher and author Edmund Burke, lamenting what he believes current politicians are inflicting on his country: “Society is indeed a contract. It is a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those living, those who are dead, and those yet to be born. Future generations of Europeans will inherit countries more divided, more dangerous and packed full of terrorists. They have been betrayed.”

Fine Gael, which describes itself as a centrist party, controls the government. It’s prime minister, or Taoiseach as the office is called in Ireland, Leo Varadkhar, was quoted as saying in response,  “I want to disassociate myself and the party from those messages from Cllr. Brian Murphy. They do not represent the policies views or values of the Fine Gael party. The party at executive council level will take any necessary action that needs to be taken by them and he’ll be informed of that in due course.”

Murphy also tweeted about the support he has received for his sentiments, writing, “I have been humbled and heartened by the hundreds and hundreds of messages of support I have received from people throughout Ireland who love their country and are tired of having their legitimate concerns for their country’s future silenced, censored or outright dismissed.”

Keep speaking out Brian. It won't save your career, but it might eventually save your country from the insanity that now reigns.

Danish Woman Deported to Tunisia for Refusing to Remove Niqab at Belgian Airport

This is a shocking story. Shocking in that it is a completely

uncharacteristically sensible decision by an EU country.

Whoa! Who saw that coming?

A Danish Muslim woman has been deported to Tunisia for refusing to remove her religious veil while going through security at Brussels Airport, Belgium’s State Secretary for Asylum and Migration has said.

The woman landed at Brussels Zaventem Airport on Wednesday on a flight from Tunis, Tunisia.   

In a post on Facebook, immigration minister Theo Francken said that the woman had refused to show her face in Tunis and again refused to do so in Belgium.

“After she refused to make her face visible in Tunis, she refused to do so in Zaventem. Our border police then refused her access to the Schengen area. Without identity checks, no access to our territory,” he said.

The woman was deported to Tunisia on Friday.

Belgium banned the full face veil in 2011. Women wearing the veils can face fines and up to seven days in jail for repeat offences.

The law was challenged at the the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in 2013, but in July of this year, the court upheld the ban, ruling that it doesn’t violate European human rights law.  

Francken is a member of Belgium's largest party, the New Flemish Alliance, a conservative party which campaigns for the peaceful secession of Flanders from Belgium.

The immigration minister made headlines in November last year when he refused to furnish a visa for a family of refugees from Syria after a court ruling which granted them a humanitarian visa.

The European Court of Justice upheld Francken’s decision in March.

Top Muslim Scholar Says Stop Pretending That Orthodox Islam and Violence Aren't Linked

Marco Stahlhut

Indonesia, the world’s biggest Muslim-majority country, has a constitution that recognizes other major religions, and practices a syncretic form of Islam that draws on not just the faith’s tenets but local spiritual and cultural traditions. As a result, the nation has long been a voice of, and for, moderation in the Islamic world.

Yet Indonesia is not without its radical elements. Though most are on the fringe, they can add up to a significant number given Indonesia’s 260-million population. In the early 2000s, the country was terrorized by Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), a homegrown extremist organization allied with al-Qaeda. JI’s deadliest attack was the 2002 Bali bombing that killed 202 people. While JI has been neutralized, ISIS has claimed responsibility for recent, smaller terrorist incidents in the country and has inspired some Indonesians to fight in Syria — Indonesians who could pose a threat when they return home. The country has also seen the rise of hate groups that preach intolerance and violence against local religious and ethnic minorities, which include Shia and Ahmadiya Muslims.

Among Indonesia’s most influential Islamic leaders is Yahya Cholil Staquf, 51, advocates a modern, moderate Islam. He is general secretary of the Nahdlatul Ulama, which, with about 50 million members, is the country’s biggest Muslim organization. Yahya. This interview, notable for Yahya’s candor, was first published on Aug. 19 in German in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Here are excerpts translated from the original Bahasa Indonesia into English.

Many Western politicians and intellectuals say that Islamist terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. What is your view?

Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam.

Radical Islamic movements are nothing new. They’ve appeared again and again throughout our own history in Indonesia. The West must stop ascribing any and all discussion of these issues to “Islamophobia.” Or do people want to accuse me — an Islamic scholar — of being an Islamophobe too?

What basic assumptions within traditional Islam are problematic?

The relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, the relationship of Muslims with the state, and Muslims’ relationship to the prevailing legal system wherever they live … Within the classical tradition, the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is assumed to be one of segregation and enmity.

Perhaps there were reasons for this during the Middle Ages, when the tenets of Islamic orthodoxy were established, but in today’s world such a doctrine is unreasonable. To the extent that Muslims adhere to this view of Islam, it renders them incapable of living harmoniously and peacefully within the multi-cultural, multi-religious societies of the 21st century.

A Western politician would likely be accused of racism for saying what you just said.

I’m not saying that Islam is the only factor causing Muslim minorities in the West to lead a segregated existence, often isolated from society as a whole. There may be other factors on the part of the host nations, such as racism, which exists everywhere in the world. But traditional Islam — which fosters an attitude of segregation and enmity toward non-Muslims — is an important factor.

And Muslims and the state?

Within the Islamic tradition, the state is a single, universal entity that unites all Muslims under the rule of one man who leads them in opposition to, and conflict with, the non-Muslim world.

So the call by radicals to establish a caliphate, including by ISIS, is not un-Islamic?

No, it is not. [ISIS’s] goal of establishing a global caliphate stands squarely within the orthodox Islamic tradition. But we live in a world of nation-states. Any attempt to create a unified Islamic state in the 21st century can only lead to chaos and violence ... Many Muslims assume there is an established and immutable set of Islamic laws, which are often described as shariah. This assumption is in line with Islamic tradition, but it of course leads to serious conflict with the legal system that exists in secular nation-states.

Any [fundamentalist] view of Islam positing the traditional norms of Islamic jurisprudence as absolute [should] be rejected out of hand as false. State laws [should] have precedence.

How can that be accomplished?

Generations ago, we achieved a de facto consensus in Indonesia that Islamic teachings must be contextualized to reflect the ever-changing circumstances of time and place. The majority of Indonesian Muslims were — and I think still are — of the opinion that the various assumptions embedded within Islamic tradition must be viewed within the historical, political and social context of their emergence in the Middle Ages [in the Middle East] and not as absolute injunctions that must dictate Muslims’ behavior in the present … Which ideological opinions are “correct” is not determined solely by reflection and debate. These are struggles [about who and what is recognized as religiously authoritative]. Political elites in Indonesia routinely employ Islam as a weapon to achieve their worldly objectives.

Is it so elsewhere too?

Too many Muslims view civilization, and the peaceful co-existence of people of different faiths, as something they must combat. Many Europeans can sense this attitude among Muslims.

There’s a growing dissatisfaction in the West with respect to Muslim minorities, a growing fear of Islam. In this sense, some Western friends of mine are “Islamophobic.” They’re afraid of Islam. To be honest, I understand their fear … The West cannot force Muslims to adopt a moderate interpretation of Islam. But Western politicians should stop telling us that fundamentalism and violence have nothing to do with traditional Islam. That is simply wrong.

They don’t want to foster division in their societies between Muslims and non-Muslims, nor contribute to intolerance against Muslims.

I share this desire — that’s a primary reason I’m speaking so frankly. But the approach you describe won’t work. If you refuse to acknowledge the existence of a problem, you can’t begin to solve it. One must identify the problem and explicitly state who and what are responsible for it.

Who and what are responsible?

Over the past 50 years, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have spent massively to promote their ultra-conservative version of Islam worldwide. After allowing this to go unchallenged for so many decades, the West must finally exert decisive pressure upon the Saudis to cease this behavior ... I admire Western, especially European, politicians. Their thoughts are so wonderfully humanitarian. But we live in a time when you have to think and act realistically.

The last time I was in Brussels I witnessed some Arab, perhaps North African, youth insult and harass a group of policemen. My Belgian friends remarked that such behavior has become an almost everyday occurrence in their country. Why do you allow such behavior? What kind if impression does that make? Europe, and Germany in particular, are accepting massive numbers of refugees. Don’t misunderstand me: of course you cannot close your eyes to those in need. But the fact remains that you’re taking in millions of refugees about whom you know virtually nothing, except that they come from extremely problematic regions of the world.

I would guess that you and I agree that there is a far right wing in Western societies that would reject even a moderate, contextualized Islam.

And there's an extreme left wing whose adherents reflexively denounce any and all talk about the connections between traditional Islam, fundamentalism and violence as de facto proof of Islamophobia. This must end. A problem that is not acknowledged cannot be solved.

This is what many of us have been saying for years but left-leaning politicians are convinced that ostrich syndrome is a superior way of dealing with problems - close your eyes and hope they go away.

Brainwashed Jihadists? No, They Know Exactly What They're Doing

By Candice Malcolm, Calgary Sun

Canada is a “filthy place” – this, according to a handwritten letter sent by a Canadian al-Qaeda agent to his family back in Canada.

Once a University of Manitoba engineering student, Maiwand Yar left in 2007 and mailed the letter from a terrorist outpost in Pakistan.

The letter recently became public, and is being used as evidence in the American trial of Yar’s friend and former classmate, Muhanad al-Farekh, who is facing terrorism charges after being captured in Pakistan.

In the letter, Yar urges his family to leave Canada and instructs them to stop watching Hollywood movies and North American news stations — “nothing but lies”— and to avoid Western fashion and Canadian public schools.

“Put all the kids in an Islamic school and make the kids wear (a) hijab from an early age,” he commands.

This letter offers a rare glimpse into the mind of a radicalized jihadist. In his own words, he explains exactly what he is doing and why.

The letter goes against everything Justin Trudeau and his friends want us to believe about Islamists, and debunks many of the prevailing myths pushed by those who sympathize and apologize for radical Islamists.

First, the letter provides a calm and clear explanation for why this young man left Canada to join a terrorist army. Yar insists he isn’t crazy or under any illusions when it comes to his hatred for Canada.

Far from the narrative that terrorists suffer from mental illness, Yar emphasizes that he’s made a choice, and he believes it’s the right one.

Second, Yar explicitly says he’s not brainwashed. “It hurts me so much that you believe I left because I was brainwashed and didn’t know what I was doing,” he writes. Yar instead accuses his family and the Muslim community in Canada of going astray and betraying his fundamentalist worldview.

Which, btw, he got from Mohammed's writings and sayings in Muslim scriptures. It is westernized Muslims who have departed from the teachings of Mohammed, and, it is just a matter of time before they return.

Third, this terrorist is incredibly religious, and his letter is filled with references to Islamic scripture and scholars who promote violent jihad against non-Muslims.

It’s clear he’s a devout and fundamentalist Muslim, motivated by his faith. Anyone who still believes that Islamist terrorism has “nothing to do with Islam” should read this letter.

Forth, the letter is surprisingly articulate – revealing Yar as intelligent and well-educated. His beliefs are evil—based on 7th century morality and militant tribalism—but there is no doubt he possesses a thorough and well-researched ideology.

Finally, this letter debunks the prevailing myth that terrorists are driven by a lack of economic opportunity.

Graduating from a top Canadian university with an engineering degree could have landed Yar a high-paying job. He is smart, and could have had a very good life in Canada.

This terrorist didn’t reject Canada because he had no other options. He made a clear choice.

He believed he was fighting in a war of civilizations, and he was willing to die for his cause.

Jihadists repeatedly tell us, in cogent language, that they are fighting a war to destroy our civilization and to impose their Islamist ideology.

We can either choose to take terrorists at their word, and do something to stop the spread of Islamist jihad.

Or we can choose to believe Justin Trudeau – who sees terrorists as victims, deserving of a second chance. Trudeau said the Boston Marathon bombings only happened because someone “feels completely excluded.” He’s rewarded ex-terrorists – with cash and citizenship.

We can choose to be realistic or naive.

That’s our choice. The jihadists have made theirs.