A Tory MPhas been investigated by police for alleged racial hatred after criticising the burka during a Commons debate.
Philip Hollobone described the garment as 'the religious equivalent of going around with a paper bag over your head with two holes for the eyes'.
Northamptonshire Race Equality Council, which is funded by taxpayers, complained to police.
Mr Hollobone, pictured, said the group wanted to see him prosecuted for inciting religious hatred but the Crown Prosecution Service has decided not to take action.
Debates in Westminster are protected by parliamentary privilege.
He insisted he would continue to speak out on a 'perfectly legitimate topic for debate'.
'What we cannot have in this country are MPs being threatened when they speak out on contentious issues,' he said.
House of Commons: Debates in Westminster are protected by parliamentary privilege but Mr Hollobone said the complaint could have related to his comments inside or outside the House
'The judgment of Northamptonshire Race Equality Council is quite wrong in speaking to police as they haven't tried to engage in any debate. I have no criticism
of the police - they have behaved impeccably.'
In a debate over immigration on February 2, the Kettering MP said: 'How ridiculous would the House of Commons be if we were all to wear burkas? How would Mr Speaker be able to identify which member to call next?
'In my view, it is offensive to want to cut yourself off from face-to-face contact with, or recognition by, other members of the human race.'
Last month, the council sent the MP a letter criticising his stance. Mr Hollobone said: 'It's complete hypocrisy. They talk on one hand about freedom of speech and expression and then without even making contact try to get me prosecuted.'
A police spokesman said: 'It was brought to our attention and we looked into it but the CPS decided there was no case to answer.'
Anjona Roy, of the race equality council, said: 'Even though the CPS said there were not enough grounds to proceed, cautionary words were issued. In our view that is a positive outcome.'
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
95,000 Muhammad 'Descendents' to Sue over Cartoons...
NEARLY 95,000 descendants of Mohammed are going to sue 10 newspapers for publishing "blasphemous" cartoons of the prophet.
Faisal Yamani, a Saudi lawyer acting for the descendants, claims that the cartoons - which first appeared in 2005 and caused violent protests by Muslims around the world - are defamatory.
One of the 12 cartoons depicts Mohammed wearing a bomb-shaped turban.
One of the 12 cartoons depicts Mohammed wearing a bomb-shaped turban.
The Sunday Times said that although the cartoons were published by Danish newspapers, Mr Yamani plans to pursue legal action in England, where libel laws are weighted towards the plaintiff.
English lawyers expect that he will argue that the cartoons were published in Britain via the internet and are a direct slur on his clients, who live in the Middle East, north Africa and even Australia.
Mark Stephens, a British lawyer who saw Mr Yamani's missive to the newspapers, told The Sunday Times: “Direct descendants of the prophet have a particular place within Muslim society ... By effectively criticising and making fun of the prophet you are, by implication, holding them up to scandal, contempt and public ridicule.
“The question is, is that defamatory in English law?"
He said that although many judges would dismiss such a case, "it is obviously a very highly charged issue and if they do throw it out, it becomes political”.
Mr Yamani has already won an apology from the Danish newspaper Politiken for printing the cartoons.
The cartoons first appeared in Jyllands-Posten as part of its campaign to promote freedom of expression.
However, the paper's offices have been evacuated several times after security threats and the artist behind the bomb cartoon, Kurt Westergaard, was forced to go into hiding.
In January this year a man was shot trying to get into his home.
Man charged with honour killing of woman found in suitcase in Handsworth
A MAN has appeared in court charged with the “honour” killing of a woman whose decomposed body was found in a suitcase.
Banaz Mahmod, 20, disappeared from her home in Mitcham, London, in January 2006 and her body was discovered in Handsworth, Birmingham, three months later.
Omar Hussain, 30, of Messenger Road, Smethwick, appeared at Greenwich Magistrates’ Court yesterday, charged with her murder.
He is also charged with the attempted kidnap of Rahmat Suleimani – Miss Mahmod’s boyfriend – and with attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Hussain was remanded in custody to appear at the Old Bailey on March 23.
Miss Mahmod began a relationship with Mr Suleimani after leaving an unhappy arranged marriage.
Her father, Mahmod Mahmod, uncle Ari Mahmod and a third man, Mohamad Hama, were jailed for life in 2007 for the so-called “honour” killing.
Banaz Mahmod, 20, disappeared from her home in Mitcham, London, in January 2006 and her body was discovered in Handsworth, Birmingham, three months later.
Omar Hussain, 30, of Messenger Road, Smethwick, appeared at Greenwich Magistrates’ Court yesterday, charged with her murder.
He is also charged with the attempted kidnap of Rahmat Suleimani – Miss Mahmod’s boyfriend – and with attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Hussain was remanded in custody to appear at the Old Bailey on March 23.
Miss Mahmod began a relationship with Mr Suleimani after leaving an unhappy arranged marriage.
Her father, Mahmod Mahmod, uncle Ari Mahmod and a third man, Mohamad Hama, were jailed for life in 2007 for the so-called “honour” killing.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Cab Driver Rapes Disabled Teen...
A student with learning difficulties has told a court how a taxi driver locked her in his cab and sexually assaulted her.
The 19-year-old, from Portsmouth, had been out with friends in Guildhall Walk when she got a taxi home alone.The woman said Muhammed Hasan had asked her to move from the back of the cab to the front seat.
She told Portsmouth Crown Court: 'I just kept thinking "don't go in the front because he might have a knife on him".
I didn't know what he would do if I didn't.'He just kept chatting to me like all the time like normal chat, like "did you have a good time".'
I was crying. I wanted to go home, he just kept driving.
I was scared.'She said that after he sexually assaulted her Hasan drove to a shop in Albert Road, Southsea, to buy condoms.'He said he was just going in to get some condoms,' she said.'He got out of the car and he locked the car.
'I don't think he locked it properly because I managed to open the door.
I opened it and I ran.
I was running and I think my heel broke.
'I reached for the handle and it wouldn't open at first but then it did, it just opened.
I think I was shaking, that's probably why it didn't open.
'She said she called her mum and hid between two parked cars while she waited for her to arrive.
Prosecutor Gary Venturi told the court the woman had been to Babylon nightclub before calling Aqua Cars for a lift home.
Hasan was sent to pick her up just after 2am on March 28 last year.
Mr Venturi said: 'He either told her or asked her to get into the front seat.
'She did, not sure what was going on, not sure what else to do.
'Having got into the front seat Mr Hasan suggested that perhaps they could go somewhere in Southsea together.
'She said "no I want to go home".'CCTV from the shop shows Hasan buying the contraceptives along with cans of Red Bull and an alcopop.
'He returned to the car to see she had gone,' Mr Venturi said. 'She had made good her escape.'She got some distance before she was able to phone her mother for help.
'Her mother describes an hysterical phone call from her daughter.
'Hasan was arrested shortly after the police were called and told officers he had done nothing wrong.
The 35-year-old, of Toronto Road, Portsmouth, denies one charge of false imprisonment and one of sexual assault.
The 19-year-old, from Portsmouth, had been out with friends in Guildhall Walk when she got a taxi home alone.The woman said Muhammed Hasan had asked her to move from the back of the cab to the front seat.
She told Portsmouth Crown Court: 'I just kept thinking "don't go in the front because he might have a knife on him".
I didn't know what he would do if I didn't.'He just kept chatting to me like all the time like normal chat, like "did you have a good time".'
I was crying. I wanted to go home, he just kept driving.
I was scared.'She said that after he sexually assaulted her Hasan drove to a shop in Albert Road, Southsea, to buy condoms.'He said he was just going in to get some condoms,' she said.'He got out of the car and he locked the car.
'I don't think he locked it properly because I managed to open the door.
I opened it and I ran.
I was running and I think my heel broke.
'I reached for the handle and it wouldn't open at first but then it did, it just opened.
I think I was shaking, that's probably why it didn't open.
'She said she called her mum and hid between two parked cars while she waited for her to arrive.
Prosecutor Gary Venturi told the court the woman had been to Babylon nightclub before calling Aqua Cars for a lift home.
Hasan was sent to pick her up just after 2am on March 28 last year.
Mr Venturi said: 'He either told her or asked her to get into the front seat.
'She did, not sure what was going on, not sure what else to do.
'Having got into the front seat Mr Hasan suggested that perhaps they could go somewhere in Southsea together.
'She said "no I want to go home".'CCTV from the shop shows Hasan buying the contraceptives along with cans of Red Bull and an alcopop.
'He returned to the car to see she had gone,' Mr Venturi said. 'She had made good her escape.'She got some distance before she was able to phone her mother for help.
'Her mother describes an hysterical phone call from her daughter.
'Hasan was arrested shortly after the police were called and told officers he had done nothing wrong.
The 35-year-old, of Toronto Road, Portsmouth, denies one charge of false imprisonment and one of sexual assault.
Artificial Penis to Cost British Taxpayers 60,000 pounds...
A TURKISH transsexual woman granted UK asylum is having at least £60,000-worth of NHS surgery to become a man called Dennis.
The 33-year-old fled to Britain in 2002 claiming she was being persecuted in her Muslim homeland.
She has now won the right to become a UK resident - and taxpayers' cash will fund her gender-reassignment programme.
Identified only as G.O, she was born female but will get a prosthetic penis.
Her breasts have been removed and she told friends she wants the name Dennis.
The £60,000 spent already covers the first phase of the complex surgery. She is also having male hormone treatment and shaves her face.
She told a friend: "Once I have an artificial penis I will have the body I always felt I belonged in. Life was terrible in Turkey for someone like me but I'm happy here."
G.O. grew up in a devout Muslim area and claimed she had no option but to flee to a less strict society.
She said she would be lynched if she returned to Turkey as a man.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We have an obligation to offer safety to any individual genuinely at risk of persecution and this sort of case would be acceptable."
The Department of Health said: "NHS treatment is free for UK residents and determined through clinical need."
The 33-year-old fled to Britain in 2002 claiming she was being persecuted in her Muslim homeland.
She has now won the right to become a UK resident - and taxpayers' cash will fund her gender-reassignment programme.
Identified only as G.O, she was born female but will get a prosthetic penis.
Her breasts have been removed and she told friends she wants the name Dennis.
The £60,000 spent already covers the first phase of the complex surgery. She is also having male hormone treatment and shaves her face.
She told a friend: "Once I have an artificial penis I will have the body I always felt I belonged in. Life was terrible in Turkey for someone like me but I'm happy here."
G.O. grew up in a devout Muslim area and claimed she had no option but to flee to a less strict society.
She said she would be lynched if she returned to Turkey as a man.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We have an obligation to offer safety to any individual genuinely at risk of persecution and this sort of case would be acceptable."
The Department of Health said: "NHS treatment is free for UK residents and determined through clinical need."
19-Year-Old 'Lured' and Abducted by Shamed Family...
A teenager, who had broken away from her family, was bundled into a car from a Bradford street and kept at a house by relatives, a Court heard.
Tanzeela Hanif, then 19, was lured to the city centre before being taken to Blackburn, Lancashire, where she was made to take a pregnancy test.
Bradford Crown Court was told the family, led by eldest brother Sajid Hanif, had acted out of concern for their sister’s well-being, but had gone too far.
Five members of her family and a close friend were sentenced yesterday.
Judge Peter Benson said relatives had genuine concerns for Tanzeela and reported her missing.
He told brothers Sajid and Wajid Hanif: “It was clear to you she had taken a conscious decision to stay clear of the family influence.
Whether that was wise on her part was immaterial because at the age of 19 she has a right to choose her way of life.
“It is not for you, for whatever motives, to plan to lure her into a meeting by false pretences.”
Sajid Hanif, 35, and his 29-year-old wife Sheena, both of Darwen, Lancashire, and Wajid Hanif, 33, and Lee Gilligan, 23, of Blackburn, pleaded guilty to affray at a previous hearing. Lubna Hanif, 29, a solicitor, and Asim Hanif, 24, also of Blackburn, admitted threatening behaviour.
All six had originally been charged with kidnap and at an earlier hearing Judge Benson had expressed concerns about the pleas accepted.
Prosecutor Jonathan Sharp said Tanzeela, the youngest child, had been living at a women’s refuge in Bradford at the time of the incident last July.
He said the family devised a plan to bring her back home, which involved someone ringing her and impersonating a police officer and persuading her to meet in Bank Street, Bradford. The family drove to Bradford in two cars.
Mr Sharp said Sheena told the 19-year-old: “This is what I have to do, Tanzeela. You have to go home.” Sajid was behind her waving his fist.
Gilligan, Lubna and Asim were also present, and the teenager was bundled into one of the cars and driven to Blackburn where she was taken to an empty house owned by Lubna. Witnesses alerted police.
Mr Sharp said Tanzeela was subjected to further violence, primarily by Sajid. She suffered bleeding when the car door closed on her fingers. Inside the house he punched her in the face.
Gilligan and Asim bought a pregnancy test kit and the victim was required to use it in the presence of Sheena. Wajid joined in the abuse, picking up a hammer and threatening to kill her.
Tanzeela described herself as being numb with fear and said Sajid was shouting about shame and family honour. Mr Sharp said Sheena took a stand and took Tanzeela to her home.
John Hargan, for Sajid, said it was not an honour-based case. He was deeply ashamed and had gone about protecting his sister in the wrong way.
Philip Andrews, for Wajid, said there was hope they would be reconciled with Tanzeela.
Jailing Sajid for 21 months, Judge Benson said he had treated his sister with deliberate cruelty and used gratuitous violence.
He said Wajid’s conduct was disgraceful and cowardly and jailed him for 12 months.
Gilligan was given a six-month sentence suspended for two years, with 12 months’ supervision and 100 hours’ unpaid work;
Sheena was given a four-month sentence suspended for two years and 12 months’ supervision; Lubna was given a 12-month Community Order with 120 hours’ unpaid work and Asim a similar order with 80 hours’ unpaid work.
Tanzeela Hanif, then 19, was lured to the city centre before being taken to Blackburn, Lancashire, where she was made to take a pregnancy test.
Bradford Crown Court was told the family, led by eldest brother Sajid Hanif, had acted out of concern for their sister’s well-being, but had gone too far.
Five members of her family and a close friend were sentenced yesterday.
Judge Peter Benson said relatives had genuine concerns for Tanzeela and reported her missing.
He told brothers Sajid and Wajid Hanif: “It was clear to you she had taken a conscious decision to stay clear of the family influence.
Whether that was wise on her part was immaterial because at the age of 19 she has a right to choose her way of life.
“It is not for you, for whatever motives, to plan to lure her into a meeting by false pretences.”
Sajid Hanif, 35, and his 29-year-old wife Sheena, both of Darwen, Lancashire, and Wajid Hanif, 33, and Lee Gilligan, 23, of Blackburn, pleaded guilty to affray at a previous hearing. Lubna Hanif, 29, a solicitor, and Asim Hanif, 24, also of Blackburn, admitted threatening behaviour.
All six had originally been charged with kidnap and at an earlier hearing Judge Benson had expressed concerns about the pleas accepted.
Prosecutor Jonathan Sharp said Tanzeela, the youngest child, had been living at a women’s refuge in Bradford at the time of the incident last July.
He said the family devised a plan to bring her back home, which involved someone ringing her and impersonating a police officer and persuading her to meet in Bank Street, Bradford. The family drove to Bradford in two cars.
Mr Sharp said Sheena told the 19-year-old: “This is what I have to do, Tanzeela. You have to go home.” Sajid was behind her waving his fist.
Gilligan, Lubna and Asim were also present, and the teenager was bundled into one of the cars and driven to Blackburn where she was taken to an empty house owned by Lubna. Witnesses alerted police.
Mr Sharp said Tanzeela was subjected to further violence, primarily by Sajid. She suffered bleeding when the car door closed on her fingers. Inside the house he punched her in the face.
Gilligan and Asim bought a pregnancy test kit and the victim was required to use it in the presence of Sheena. Wajid joined in the abuse, picking up a hammer and threatening to kill her.
Tanzeela described herself as being numb with fear and said Sajid was shouting about shame and family honour. Mr Sharp said Sheena took a stand and took Tanzeela to her home.
John Hargan, for Sajid, said it was not an honour-based case. He was deeply ashamed and had gone about protecting his sister in the wrong way.
Philip Andrews, for Wajid, said there was hope they would be reconciled with Tanzeela.
Jailing Sajid for 21 months, Judge Benson said he had treated his sister with deliberate cruelty and used gratuitous violence.
He said Wajid’s conduct was disgraceful and cowardly and jailed him for 12 months.
Gilligan was given a six-month sentence suspended for two years, with 12 months’ supervision and 100 hours’ unpaid work;
Sheena was given a four-month sentence suspended for two years and 12 months’ supervision; Lubna was given a 12-month Community Order with 120 hours’ unpaid work and Asim a similar order with 80 hours’ unpaid work.
'Blackburn Resistance' brothers convicted of terrorist offences
Two brothers who filmed Al Qaeda-style propaganda in a park and dubbed themselves 'The Blackburn Resistance' were yesterday convicted of terrorist offences.
Abbas Iqbal, 24, gathered a stockpile of weapons at the family home in Blackburn, while his brother, Ilyas, 23, studied and compiled information on guerrilla warfare.
A jury at Manchester Crown Court found Abbas Iqbal guilty of dissemination of terrorist publications and preparing for acts of terrorism.
Ilyas was found guilty of possession of a document likely to be useful to a terrorist.
A third man, Muhammad Ahmad, 26, was cleared of preparing for an act of terrorism.
Abbas Iqbal was sentenced to two years' jail for dissemination of terrorist material and one year for preparation for acts of terrorism, to run concurrently. He has already served two and a half years on remand and will be released shortly.
Ilyas was sentenced to 18 months for possession of a document likely to be useful to a terrorist but was released immediately as he too had spent two and a half years on remand.
Passing sentence, Judge Andrew Gilbert QC said: 'You fancied yourself as a fighter for the cause, but the truth is you were a very low-grade one.
'It would be wrong to pass a long sentence on someone who is obviously more taken with the vanity than the reality.
During the four-week trial, the jury was shown mobile phone footage off all three men dressed in camouflage and crawling across a town centre park in broad daylight.
One of them appeared to carry a rifle as he rustled through Corporation Park in Blackburn.
The video was among material found on a mobile phone memory card contained in the suitcase of Abbas Iqbal when he was arrested as he attempted to board a flight from Manchester Airport to northern Europe in August 2008.
An alleged extremist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was in the company of Abbas Iqbal at the airport.
Prosecutor Edward Brown QC said the 'promotional collage' was intended to radicalise others abroad.
The park video is introduced by a voice stating: 'They are fighting against oppression, they are The Blackburn Resistance.'
It is accompanied by a background chant which recites: 'I am the armour for those who believe in the unity of Allah. I am the fire against the aggressor.
The Iqbal family home in Percival Street, Blackburn, was searched and officers uncovered an armoury stockpile in a cabinet and a desktop computer containing extremist material.
The cabinet contained numerous air rifles, knives, machetes, a sword, a crossbow, various ammunition, books on weaponry and hand-written notes on 'Attack planning' and 'Urban combat'.
In his defence, Abbas Iqbal claimed the park video was a homage to his action hero Arnold Schwarzenegger, and was based on the film Predator, which he said he had seen 600 times.
He said he wanted to fly abroad in August 2008 because he was offered a job as a teacher at a newly-opened mosque.
Ilyas Iqbal said his notes on 'Urban combat' were largely based on the Hollywood movie Black Hawk Down and he could not see how his ideas would have been useful to anyone but himself.
Outside court Omer Shaukat, a friend of Ahmad, read a statement on his behalf.
'I have no doubt the only reason I have been prosecuted and spent more than a year in custody was because I am a Muslim.
'We have been labelled wrongly as terrorists by the media and police. I was arrested, charged and imprisoned for 19 months waiting for the trail, thankfully I was acquitted.
'The action of the police will do nothing to assist good relations between Muslims and the police.'
Detective Chief Superintendent Tony Porter, of the North West Counter Terrorism Unit, said: 'Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public in the North West.
'Terrorism affects us all and protecting the safety of the public is of paramount importance. Security for our communities is our highest priority and sometimes we have to make arrests.
'We will continue to do our utmost to help people recognise signs of suspicious behaviour so that they in turn can help defeat terrorism.
'I would ask that our communities continue to be vigilant and work with us by reporting any suspicious behaviour to their local police officers or by calling the confidential anti-terrorist hotline on 0800 789321 or by logging on to www.police.uk.
Abbas Iqbal, 24, gathered a stockpile of weapons at the family home in Blackburn, while his brother, Ilyas, 23, studied and compiled information on guerrilla warfare.
A jury at Manchester Crown Court found Abbas Iqbal guilty of dissemination of terrorist publications and preparing for acts of terrorism.
Ilyas was found guilty of possession of a document likely to be useful to a terrorist.
A third man, Muhammad Ahmad, 26, was cleared of preparing for an act of terrorism.
Abbas Iqbal was sentenced to two years' jail for dissemination of terrorist material and one year for preparation for acts of terrorism, to run concurrently. He has already served two and a half years on remand and will be released shortly.
Ilyas was sentenced to 18 months for possession of a document likely to be useful to a terrorist but was released immediately as he too had spent two and a half years on remand.
Passing sentence, Judge Andrew Gilbert QC said: 'You fancied yourself as a fighter for the cause, but the truth is you were a very low-grade one.
'It would be wrong to pass a long sentence on someone who is obviously more taken with the vanity than the reality.
During the four-week trial, the jury was shown mobile phone footage off all three men dressed in camouflage and crawling across a town centre park in broad daylight.
One of them appeared to carry a rifle as he rustled through Corporation Park in Blackburn.
The video was among material found on a mobile phone memory card contained in the suitcase of Abbas Iqbal when he was arrested as he attempted to board a flight from Manchester Airport to northern Europe in August 2008.
An alleged extremist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was in the company of Abbas Iqbal at the airport.
Prosecutor Edward Brown QC said the 'promotional collage' was intended to radicalise others abroad.
The park video is introduced by a voice stating: 'They are fighting against oppression, they are The Blackburn Resistance.'
It is accompanied by a background chant which recites: 'I am the armour for those who believe in the unity of Allah. I am the fire against the aggressor.
The Iqbal family home in Percival Street, Blackburn, was searched and officers uncovered an armoury stockpile in a cabinet and a desktop computer containing extremist material.
The cabinet contained numerous air rifles, knives, machetes, a sword, a crossbow, various ammunition, books on weaponry and hand-written notes on 'Attack planning' and 'Urban combat'.
In his defence, Abbas Iqbal claimed the park video was a homage to his action hero Arnold Schwarzenegger, and was based on the film Predator, which he said he had seen 600 times.
He said he wanted to fly abroad in August 2008 because he was offered a job as a teacher at a newly-opened mosque.
Ilyas Iqbal said his notes on 'Urban combat' were largely based on the Hollywood movie Black Hawk Down and he could not see how his ideas would have been useful to anyone but himself.
Outside court Omer Shaukat, a friend of Ahmad, read a statement on his behalf.
'I have no doubt the only reason I have been prosecuted and spent more than a year in custody was because I am a Muslim.
'We have been labelled wrongly as terrorists by the media and police. I was arrested, charged and imprisoned for 19 months waiting for the trail, thankfully I was acquitted.
'The action of the police will do nothing to assist good relations between Muslims and the police.'
Detective Chief Superintendent Tony Porter, of the North West Counter Terrorism Unit, said: 'Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public in the North West.
'Terrorism affects us all and protecting the safety of the public is of paramount importance. Security for our communities is our highest priority and sometimes we have to make arrests.
'We will continue to do our utmost to help people recognise signs of suspicious behaviour so that they in turn can help defeat terrorism.
'I would ask that our communities continue to be vigilant and work with us by reporting any suspicious behaviour to their local police officers or by calling the confidential anti-terrorist hotline on 0800 789321 or by logging on to www.police.uk.
Brits reluctant to "target or upset Muslims over cousin-marriage issues"
A rise in the number of marriages between cousins in Britain has prompted calls for a crackdown on the practice amid warnings it is putting children's health at risk.
Crossbench peer Baroness Deech has called for a 'vigorous' public campaign to deter marriages between family members, which is common in Muslim and immigrant communities.
Her comments come as figures show up to 75 per cent of British Pakistanis in some areas are married to first cousins.
In a speech to be made next week, obtained by The Times, the leading family lawyer will warn that such marriages can be a barrier to the integration of minority communities and increases the risk of birth defects in children.
She is also expected to call for testing for genetic defects when marriages between family members are arranged and for a register of people carrying genetic diseases to be set up in order for two carriers not to be introduced.
She said such a scheme could be possible in Bradford, which has the UK's highest population of Pakistanis.
Up to three-quarters of Pakistanis in Bradford are married to their first cousins.
The trend is also evident in Birmingham, where figures show that one in ten of all children born to first cousins died in childhood or suffered from a serious genetic disorder.
British Pakistanis, half of whom marry a first cousin, are 13 times more likely to produce children with genetic disorders than the general population, according to Government-sponsored research.
Although British Pakistanis account for three per cent of the births in this country, they are responsible for 33 per cent of the 15 to 20,000 children born each year with genetic defects.
Baroness Deech will also suggest that married first cousins use in-vitro fertilisation so that embryos can be tested for recessive diseases.
'Human right and religious and cultural practices are respected not by banning cousin marriage,' she will argue.
'But those involved must be made aware of the consequences.'
In next week's speech, she will say that marriages between cousins is on the rise and the practice is 'at odds with freedom of choice, romantic love and integration.'
But she said the practice was continuing because of financial reasons - either to settle debts or provide financial support for relatives abroad; helping relatives to migrate to Britain or wanting to provide a 'ready-made' family for an immigrant spouse.
Lady Deech will also call for an education campaign to warn of the health risks of such marriages, but will stop short of urging a ban.
'There is no reason, one could argue, why there should not be a campaign to highlight the risks and preventative measures, every bit as vigorous as those centring on smoking, obesity and Aids.'
'Where marriages are arranged, it is possible to test for carrier status and record with results, without stigmatising individuals.'
Her speech is set to reignite a debate from five years ago when Ann Cryer, the Labour MP for Keighley in Yorkshire, said cousin marriages were medieval and called for them to be stopped.
Ms Cryer encouraged discussion the issue this week.
'We have been told to be careful, as discussing it could cause deep offence. Blow that, it does not matter. If people wish to be offended, they will be offended.'
Two years ago Minister Phil Woolas provoked a furore by warning of the health risks of cousin marriages among British Pakistanis.
He claimed the practice was sending the number of birth defects among children in these communities soaring.
His comments prompted Gordon Brown's spokesman to state that the issue was not one for ministers to comment on.
Instead, he said, it should be addressed by members of the local community and scientific experts.
Mr Woolas insisted that he had a duty to raise the subject of cousin marriage - which is legal in the UK - based on cultural and not religious grounds.
Muslim Council of Britain spokesman Inyat Bunglawala welcomed Lady Deech's comments.
He said cousin marriage was popular even though Islamic teaching encouraged wedlock outside the immediate family.
'Certainly education has an important role to play in this area. There are clear dangers to marrying a close relative, which need to be better understood.'
Lady Deech's speech is the latest in a series of family law lectures she has given under the auspices of Gresham College.
In a speech last week she said English law no longer had a clear concept of marriage.
She said the traditional Christian image of a lifelong union of man and woman is no longer accurate because of the changing nature of relationships and the introduction of legal rights for same-sex couples.
Lady Deech said she believes that human rights law may soon rule that it is discriminatory to ban homosexuals from marrying in the same way that heterosexual couples do.
But she added that some differences between civil partnerships and marriages should be preserved, and criticised recent Labour laws that allow same-sex couples to be named on birth certificates with no mention of a father.
Crossbench peer Baroness Deech has called for a 'vigorous' public campaign to deter marriages between family members, which is common in Muslim and immigrant communities.
Her comments come as figures show up to 75 per cent of British Pakistanis in some areas are married to first cousins.
In a speech to be made next week, obtained by The Times, the leading family lawyer will warn that such marriages can be a barrier to the integration of minority communities and increases the risk of birth defects in children.
She is also expected to call for testing for genetic defects when marriages between family members are arranged and for a register of people carrying genetic diseases to be set up in order for two carriers not to be introduced.
She said such a scheme could be possible in Bradford, which has the UK's highest population of Pakistanis.
Up to three-quarters of Pakistanis in Bradford are married to their first cousins.
The trend is also evident in Birmingham, where figures show that one in ten of all children born to first cousins died in childhood or suffered from a serious genetic disorder.
British Pakistanis, half of whom marry a first cousin, are 13 times more likely to produce children with genetic disorders than the general population, according to Government-sponsored research.
Although British Pakistanis account for three per cent of the births in this country, they are responsible for 33 per cent of the 15 to 20,000 children born each year with genetic defects.
Baroness Deech will also suggest that married first cousins use in-vitro fertilisation so that embryos can be tested for recessive diseases.
'Human right and religious and cultural practices are respected not by banning cousin marriage,' she will argue.
'But those involved must be made aware of the consequences.'
In next week's speech, she will say that marriages between cousins is on the rise and the practice is 'at odds with freedom of choice, romantic love and integration.'
But she said the practice was continuing because of financial reasons - either to settle debts or provide financial support for relatives abroad; helping relatives to migrate to Britain or wanting to provide a 'ready-made' family for an immigrant spouse.
Lady Deech will also call for an education campaign to warn of the health risks of such marriages, but will stop short of urging a ban.
'There is no reason, one could argue, why there should not be a campaign to highlight the risks and preventative measures, every bit as vigorous as those centring on smoking, obesity and Aids.'
'Where marriages are arranged, it is possible to test for carrier status and record with results, without stigmatising individuals.'
Her speech is set to reignite a debate from five years ago when Ann Cryer, the Labour MP for Keighley in Yorkshire, said cousin marriages were medieval and called for them to be stopped.
Ms Cryer encouraged discussion the issue this week.
'We have been told to be careful, as discussing it could cause deep offence. Blow that, it does not matter. If people wish to be offended, they will be offended.'
Two years ago Minister Phil Woolas provoked a furore by warning of the health risks of cousin marriages among British Pakistanis.
He claimed the practice was sending the number of birth defects among children in these communities soaring.
His comments prompted Gordon Brown's spokesman to state that the issue was not one for ministers to comment on.
Instead, he said, it should be addressed by members of the local community and scientific experts.
Mr Woolas insisted that he had a duty to raise the subject of cousin marriage - which is legal in the UK - based on cultural and not religious grounds.
Muslim Council of Britain spokesman Inyat Bunglawala welcomed Lady Deech's comments.
He said cousin marriage was popular even though Islamic teaching encouraged wedlock outside the immediate family.
'Certainly education has an important role to play in this area. There are clear dangers to marrying a close relative, which need to be better understood.'
Lady Deech's speech is the latest in a series of family law lectures she has given under the auspices of Gresham College.
In a speech last week she said English law no longer had a clear concept of marriage.
She said the traditional Christian image of a lifelong union of man and woman is no longer accurate because of the changing nature of relationships and the introduction of legal rights for same-sex couples.
Lady Deech said she believes that human rights law may soon rule that it is discriminatory to ban homosexuals from marrying in the same way that heterosexual couples do.
But she added that some differences between civil partnerships and marriages should be preserved, and criticised recent Labour laws that allow same-sex couples to be named on birth certificates with no mention of a father.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Police banned from asking for someone's 'Christian' name because it might offend those of other faiths
Officers taking down a suspect's particulars must now refer to their 'personal' or 'family name' as the word 'Christian' could offend Muslims, Sikhs and other faiths, according to new diversity guidelines.
They state bobbies on the beat should refrain from using phrases such as 'my dear' or 'love', when addressing women for fear it may cause embarrassment or offence.
Well-meaning gestures like handshakes or putting a comforting arm around a victim or grieving family member are also prohibited as it could be deemed 'unprofessional'.
Police officers in Kent have been given strict guidelines on how to address members of the public, including a ban on saying 'my dear' or 'Evening all'
The handbook produced by Kent Police, which aims to 'promote clearer communication' and 'break down barriers' with diverse communities, advises officers to avoid language like 'Christian' name or surname.
They are also warned not to use terms like afternoon or evening as it could confuse people of 'different cultural backgrounds' about the time of day.
The 62-page 'Faith and Culture Resource' booklet produced by the force's diversity support group sets out customs and practices in a number of religions and beliefs including paganism and rastafarianism.
In it, officers are told to offer to remove their shoes on entering people's homes as some religions frown upon shoes being worn inside the home.
Other handy tips for police include wiping their feet to get rid of mud when entering a gypsy's trailer and not to put a cup of proffered tea on the floor as this could offend their standards of cleanliness.
The booklet also contains a section on appropriate terms to describe ethnic origin, suggesting 'mixed parentage' or 'mixed cultural heritage' should be used instead of 'mixed race'.
Staff are warned that when speaking to someone from Africa or Asia, they should refer to their specific country rather than the continent as a whole.
The rulebook has been described by Kent Police Federation secretary Peter Harman as a 'useful and educational reference guide to dealing with different communities'.
But it has angered some rank and file officers who say it is politically correct nonsense.
One officer said: 'Most of us are fully aware of how to treat people from different cultural backgrounds, but being told we can't even ask what their Christian name is just plain ridiculous.
'That is what we are brought up with - Christian name and surname - and to be honest if you had an officer ask for your personal name and family name it's just going to confuse people.
'It's just the latest in a long line of annoying PC-related nonsense that we keep getting shoved down our throats.'
It follows a raft of PC directives from other forces.
Last year officers in Warwickshire were told not to say 'Evenin' all' - a phrase made famous by classic police drama Dixon of Dock Green - because times of day could meant different things to various cultures.
Scotland Yard recently instructed officers not to use the phrase 'gang rape', because the term was considered too emotive.
Instead they were told to refer to the crime as 'multi-perpetrator rapes'.
A Freedom of Information request to police forces and fire services has also revealed that a number of organisations, including Essex Police and Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service, instruct staff to avoid the words 'child, youth or youngster'.
Addressing someone as a 'girl' or a 'boy' could have 'connotations of inexperience, impetuosity and unreliability, or even dishonesty', according to official guidance.
The same guide also warns against the phrases 'manning the phones', 'layman's terms' and 'the tax man', for 'making women invisible'.
Today, Marie Clair, of the Plain English Campaign, said: 'It's so sad that rather than using common sense, we are taking away all sense of respect from the way police deal with the public.
'If people can't be asked for their Christian name as a matter of common courtesy- something we all identify with- then where are we?
'This sort of politically correct nonsense helps no one.'
Assistant Chief Constable Gary Beautridge said: 'It is important that Kent Police recognises and values fundamental human rights and provides services that meet the changing and diverse needs of Kent's communities, visitors and our workforce.
'One of our core values is that we will treat everyone with fairness, respect and dignity.
'As such we need to ensure officers and staff have an understanding and awareness of some of the faiths and ethnicities found in Kent so that they can engage more sensitively with, and have more confidence in, the various cultural and faith backgrounds.
'In doing so it will help provide the most appropriate and professional services to those people.'
sniffer dogs to wear bootie
Curiously, the new regulations also make officers' behavior more closely aligned with Sharia norms of gender interaction and interpersonal contact.
They state bobbies on the beat should refrain from using phrases such as 'my dear' or 'love', when addressing women for fear it may cause embarrassment or offence.
Well-meaning gestures like handshakes or putting a comforting arm around a victim or grieving family member are also prohibited as it could be deemed 'unprofessional'.
Police officers in Kent have been given strict guidelines on how to address members of the public, including a ban on saying 'my dear' or 'Evening all'
The handbook produced by Kent Police, which aims to 'promote clearer communication' and 'break down barriers' with diverse communities, advises officers to avoid language like 'Christian' name or surname.
They are also warned not to use terms like afternoon or evening as it could confuse people of 'different cultural backgrounds' about the time of day.
The 62-page 'Faith and Culture Resource' booklet produced by the force's diversity support group sets out customs and practices in a number of religions and beliefs including paganism and rastafarianism.
In it, officers are told to offer to remove their shoes on entering people's homes as some religions frown upon shoes being worn inside the home.
Other handy tips for police include wiping their feet to get rid of mud when entering a gypsy's trailer and not to put a cup of proffered tea on the floor as this could offend their standards of cleanliness.
The booklet also contains a section on appropriate terms to describe ethnic origin, suggesting 'mixed parentage' or 'mixed cultural heritage' should be used instead of 'mixed race'.
Staff are warned that when speaking to someone from Africa or Asia, they should refer to their specific country rather than the continent as a whole.
The rulebook has been described by Kent Police Federation secretary Peter Harman as a 'useful and educational reference guide to dealing with different communities'.
But it has angered some rank and file officers who say it is politically correct nonsense.
One officer said: 'Most of us are fully aware of how to treat people from different cultural backgrounds, but being told we can't even ask what their Christian name is just plain ridiculous.
'That is what we are brought up with - Christian name and surname - and to be honest if you had an officer ask for your personal name and family name it's just going to confuse people.
'It's just the latest in a long line of annoying PC-related nonsense that we keep getting shoved down our throats.'
It follows a raft of PC directives from other forces.
Last year officers in Warwickshire were told not to say 'Evenin' all' - a phrase made famous by classic police drama Dixon of Dock Green - because times of day could meant different things to various cultures.
Scotland Yard recently instructed officers not to use the phrase 'gang rape', because the term was considered too emotive.
Instead they were told to refer to the crime as 'multi-perpetrator rapes'.
A Freedom of Information request to police forces and fire services has also revealed that a number of organisations, including Essex Police and Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service, instruct staff to avoid the words 'child, youth or youngster'.
Addressing someone as a 'girl' or a 'boy' could have 'connotations of inexperience, impetuosity and unreliability, or even dishonesty', according to official guidance.
The same guide also warns against the phrases 'manning the phones', 'layman's terms' and 'the tax man', for 'making women invisible'.
Today, Marie Clair, of the Plain English Campaign, said: 'It's so sad that rather than using common sense, we are taking away all sense of respect from the way police deal with the public.
'If people can't be asked for their Christian name as a matter of common courtesy- something we all identify with- then where are we?
'This sort of politically correct nonsense helps no one.'
Assistant Chief Constable Gary Beautridge said: 'It is important that Kent Police recognises and values fundamental human rights and provides services that meet the changing and diverse needs of Kent's communities, visitors and our workforce.
'One of our core values is that we will treat everyone with fairness, respect and dignity.
'As such we need to ensure officers and staff have an understanding and awareness of some of the faiths and ethnicities found in Kent so that they can engage more sensitively with, and have more confidence in, the various cultural and faith backgrounds.
'In doing so it will help provide the most appropriate and professional services to those people.'
sniffer dogs to wear bootie
Curiously, the new regulations also make officers' behavior more closely aligned with Sharia norms of gender interaction and interpersonal contact.
Court backs £400,000 payout for head teacher who was forced to quit
update of this story
A headmistress forced from her job after a campaign by two Muslim governors to give Islam a greater presence in a state school is entitled to £400,000 damages, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Erica Connor, 57, left the New Monument primary school in Woking, Surrey, because of stress after she was accused of Islamophobia.
A deputy High Court judge ruled in March last year that Surrey County Council had failed in its duty to protect her and to intervene when the actions of the governors created problems. He awarded her £407,700 damages.
The council had appealed against the ruling, claiming it was not liable in law and had not acted negligently in dealing with the problem.
Lord Justice Laws, giving a ruling on Thursday, said that Mrs Connor, who was promoted to head of the school in 1998, had suffered psychiatric damage and had to stop work in 2005 and retired a year later on ill-health grounds.
The school had a 80-85 per cent Muslim intake and problems began in 2003 when Paul Martin, a Muslim convert, was elected a parent governor and Mumtaz Saleem was appointed as a local education authority governor.
Mr Martin started making allegations about anti-Muslim comments by members of staff, which led to an investigation by Mrs Connor. She found that all the staff denied the allegations, which she said had demoralised them. An official review also found no evidence of deliberate racism or religious bias but said the governing body had become dysfunctional.
The High Court had been told Mr Martin tried to stir up disaffection in the community against the school and Mr Saleem was verbally abusive in school meetings.
Although during the first five years that Mrs Connor was in charge of the school there had been good relations with the local Muslim community and improved results, the situation changed when the two men were elected as governors.
Judge John Leighton Williams ruled in the High Court that the men had an agenda to increase the role of the Muslim religion in the school and that this, combined with the authority’s failure to protect Mrs Connor, had led her to suffer serious depression.
When Mr Martin was removed from the board of governors in June 2005, he wrote a letter of complaint saying it was because he had been raising complaints of institutional racism within the school.
A few days later a petition was circulated calling for Mrs Connor’s removal from the school and containing “defamatory and offensive remarks”, the appeal judges were told.
Lord Justice Laws said the High Court judge was right to find there had been negligence on the part of the council.
He said it was an unusual case — “partly because of the council’s lamentable capitulation to aggression”.
Lord Justice Sedley said: “Surrey County Council found itself faced with the unenviable task of responding in an equitable fashion to an inequitable campaign designed to capture a secular state school for a particular faith which happened to be that of a majority of the families whose children attended the school.”
He said the council had gone wrong by trying to compromise rather than protecting the head, the staff and the school.
“The picture that emerges from the careful and thorough [High Court] judgment is of a local education authority which had allowed itself to be intimidated by an aggressively conducted campaign to subvert the school’s legal status, a campaign which was plainly destabilising the school and placing the headteacher under intolerable pressure.”
A headmistress forced from her job after a campaign by two Muslim governors to give Islam a greater presence in a state school is entitled to £400,000 damages, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Erica Connor, 57, left the New Monument primary school in Woking, Surrey, because of stress after she was accused of Islamophobia.
A deputy High Court judge ruled in March last year that Surrey County Council had failed in its duty to protect her and to intervene when the actions of the governors created problems. He awarded her £407,700 damages.
The council had appealed against the ruling, claiming it was not liable in law and had not acted negligently in dealing with the problem.
Lord Justice Laws, giving a ruling on Thursday, said that Mrs Connor, who was promoted to head of the school in 1998, had suffered psychiatric damage and had to stop work in 2005 and retired a year later on ill-health grounds.
The school had a 80-85 per cent Muslim intake and problems began in 2003 when Paul Martin, a Muslim convert, was elected a parent governor and Mumtaz Saleem was appointed as a local education authority governor.
Mr Martin started making allegations about anti-Muslim comments by members of staff, which led to an investigation by Mrs Connor. She found that all the staff denied the allegations, which she said had demoralised them. An official review also found no evidence of deliberate racism or religious bias but said the governing body had become dysfunctional.
The High Court had been told Mr Martin tried to stir up disaffection in the community against the school and Mr Saleem was verbally abusive in school meetings.
Although during the first five years that Mrs Connor was in charge of the school there had been good relations with the local Muslim community and improved results, the situation changed when the two men were elected as governors.
Judge John Leighton Williams ruled in the High Court that the men had an agenda to increase the role of the Muslim religion in the school and that this, combined with the authority’s failure to protect Mrs Connor, had led her to suffer serious depression.
When Mr Martin was removed from the board of governors in June 2005, he wrote a letter of complaint saying it was because he had been raising complaints of institutional racism within the school.
A few days later a petition was circulated calling for Mrs Connor’s removal from the school and containing “defamatory and offensive remarks”, the appeal judges were told.
Lord Justice Laws said the High Court judge was right to find there had been negligence on the part of the council.
He said it was an unusual case — “partly because of the council’s lamentable capitulation to aggression”.
Lord Justice Sedley said: “Surrey County Council found itself faced with the unenviable task of responding in an equitable fashion to an inequitable campaign designed to capture a secular state school for a particular faith which happened to be that of a majority of the families whose children attended the school.”
He said the council had gone wrong by trying to compromise rather than protecting the head, the staff and the school.
“The picture that emerges from the careful and thorough [High Court] judgment is of a local education authority which had allowed itself to be intimidated by an aggressively conducted campaign to subvert the school’s legal status, a campaign which was plainly destabilising the school and placing the headteacher under intolerable pressure.”
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Muslim gang jailed for hot iron torture of teenager
Four Leeds men who used a hot iron and boiling water to torture a boy over a "drug debt" have been jailed.
The gang demanded a £20,000 ransom after abducting the 16-year-old on 30 April 2009, Leeds Crown Court heard.
Shaheed Rahman, 24, was sentenced to 12 years and nine months and Syed Ahmed, 24, got 12 years, after both admitted conspiracy to kidnap and blackmail.
Shuel Hussain, 28, got 10 years and Abdul Rajaque, 29, five years and three months after admitting blackmail.
A fifth man, 25-year-old Hassan Ahmed, will be sentenced at a later date after also pleading guilty to blackmail.
“ A 16-year-old young man was needlessly tortured with a hot steam iron and by having red hot water poured onto his skin ” Det Supt Bill Shackleton, West Yorkshire Police
Det Supt Bill Shackleton, from West Yorkshire Police's homicide and major inquiry team, said:
"This was a deeply traumatic experience for the young man who was taken hostage, and also for those members of his family who were obliged to deal with the demands made by the kidnappers.
"The fact that a 16-year-old young man was needlessly tortured with a hot steam iron and by having red hot water poured onto his skin made this offence all the more despicable."
The court heard the victim was bundled into a Transit van by a group of men as he walked home from a takeaway restaurant in the Harehills area of Leeds.
He was then taken to an address, in the Belle Isle area of the city, where he was handcuffed and had a pillowcase and a carrier bag placed over his head.
He was then burned on his legs with an iron and scalded with boiling water over a five-hour period.
During this time his brother was repeatedly contacted by the kidnappers who demanded a £20,000 ransom as payment of the "drugs debt".
The men threatened to cut off the victim's fingers unless it was paid.
The court heard police went to the house in Belle Isle after a neighbour reported hearing "shouts and screams".
The victim was treated at Leeds General Infirmary for his injuries and a statement written by his doctor reported that he has suffered depression and anxiety since the incident.
The gang demanded a £20,000 ransom after abducting the 16-year-old on 30 April 2009, Leeds Crown Court heard.
Shaheed Rahman, 24, was sentenced to 12 years and nine months and Syed Ahmed, 24, got 12 years, after both admitted conspiracy to kidnap and blackmail.
Shuel Hussain, 28, got 10 years and Abdul Rajaque, 29, five years and three months after admitting blackmail.
A fifth man, 25-year-old Hassan Ahmed, will be sentenced at a later date after also pleading guilty to blackmail.
“ A 16-year-old young man was needlessly tortured with a hot steam iron and by having red hot water poured onto his skin ” Det Supt Bill Shackleton, West Yorkshire Police
Det Supt Bill Shackleton, from West Yorkshire Police's homicide and major inquiry team, said:
"This was a deeply traumatic experience for the young man who was taken hostage, and also for those members of his family who were obliged to deal with the demands made by the kidnappers.
"The fact that a 16-year-old young man was needlessly tortured with a hot steam iron and by having red hot water poured onto his skin made this offence all the more despicable."
The court heard the victim was bundled into a Transit van by a group of men as he walked home from a takeaway restaurant in the Harehills area of Leeds.
He was then taken to an address, in the Belle Isle area of the city, where he was handcuffed and had a pillowcase and a carrier bag placed over his head.
He was then burned on his legs with an iron and scalded with boiling water over a five-hour period.
During this time his brother was repeatedly contacted by the kidnappers who demanded a £20,000 ransom as payment of the "drugs debt".
The men threatened to cut off the victim's fingers unless it was paid.
The court heard police went to the house in Belle Isle after a neighbour reported hearing "shouts and screams".
The victim was treated at Leeds General Infirmary for his injuries and a statement written by his doctor reported that he has suffered depression and anxiety since the incident.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Muslim community leader invited suspected jihad terrorist to teach at his new mosque
THE leader of a Muslim community has told how he invited a suspected terrorist from Blackburn to his country to teach at his new mosque.
Businessman Altaf Rajah told Manchester Crown Court that he asked Abbas Iqbal, 24, of Percival Street, Blackburn, to join his 200-strong organisation in Northern Europe.
Iqbal was arrested at Manchester Airport last summer when he and another alleged extremist were found carrying 'terrorism-related material'.
Mr Rajah, who owns a petrol station and restaurant and imports oil from England, said he needed the duo to help at his Islamic centre.
He told the court through an interpreter that he was looking for somebody who spoke Urdu and Punjabi....\
Yeah, sure, and there was absolutely no other Muslim around who could do that.
He said he was introduced to Iqbal through the other suspected terrorist, who cannot be named for legal reasons.
He said he spoke to Iqbal two or three times on the phone and sent the pair their plane tickets.
He said: “We needed them first of all because we were doing a ceremony of opening our mosque and secondly because the month of Ramadan was coming up and we needed help to perform the prayers.”
Iqbal and two other Blackburn men deny preparing for acts of terrorism.
Businessman Altaf Rajah told Manchester Crown Court that he asked Abbas Iqbal, 24, of Percival Street, Blackburn, to join his 200-strong organisation in Northern Europe.
Iqbal was arrested at Manchester Airport last summer when he and another alleged extremist were found carrying 'terrorism-related material'.
Mr Rajah, who owns a petrol station and restaurant and imports oil from England, said he needed the duo to help at his Islamic centre.
He told the court through an interpreter that he was looking for somebody who spoke Urdu and Punjabi....\
Yeah, sure, and there was absolutely no other Muslim around who could do that.
He said he was introduced to Iqbal through the other suspected terrorist, who cannot be named for legal reasons.
He said he spoke to Iqbal two or three times on the phone and sent the pair their plane tickets.
He said: “We needed them first of all because we were doing a ceremony of opening our mosque and secondly because the month of Ramadan was coming up and we needed help to perform the prayers.”
Iqbal and two other Blackburn men deny preparing for acts of terrorism.
Scottish Law Firm Branches into 'Sharia Advice'...
A Scottish law firm has become the first in the country to offer clients “conventional” legal representation alongside advice on sharia law.
Hamilton Burns, based in Glasgow’s south side, has teamed up with an eminent Muslim scholar who will counsel clients on the Islamic aspect of civil law cases, while solicitors give advice under Scots law.
Clients will be able to see a Muslim lawyer who is fully trained in Scots law at the same time as they consult a sharia scholar who is an expert in Islamic law. It will be the first time such a service has been offered in Scotland.
Despite public fears over what is deemed “creeping” sharia law, the firm stressed that the sharia advice was not legally binding and would mainly focus on giving Islamic guidelines on divorce or child custody based on rigorous readings of the Koran.
Shaykh Amer Jamil, the Islamic scholar who will provide sharia advice, wants to make sure that Muslims have access to the correct religious ruling on matters such as divorce.
Some Muslims want to know what sharia law says and find that although they can get civil advice, they find it difficult to get sharia advice Shaykh Amer Jamil
However, critics and opponents accuse sharia of being a discriminatory and sexist legal system and an “extension” of the fundamentalist laws that allow hand amputations and stonings in countries such as Saudi Arabia.
Niall Mickel, a solicitor advocate specialising in civil law and the managing partner at Hamilton Burns said: “We hope that by incorporating sharia family jurisprudence against a background of domestic Scottish legislation, we can provide our clients with as much relevant information as possible to assist them in making the right choices.”
He insisted the service offered is “uncontroversial” and compared it to informal religious advice sought from a priest or minister by a divorcing Christian.
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh is also partner at the firm. She said: “It is difficult for Muslim women to seek divorce from their husbands.
“If the position under Islamic law is made clear, then even though the husband might not want to take the Scots law step, women may then be able to do so.”
The firm’s services would also help recent immigrants to Scotland, who are unsure of their rights under Scots law.
Employees at the law firm admit that their groundbreaking decision has been controversial.
One employee hinted that it was the fact that female solicitors were involved in the new initiative that was causing concern within some sections of the Muslim community.
Shaykh Amer Jamil trained in sharia law in the Middle East and holds a Bachelor in Law qualification from Strathclyde University.
He is noted for his campaigns against issues such as domestic violence.
He said: “Some Muslims want to know what sharia law says and find that although they can get civil advice, they find it difficult to get sharia advice, as imams in different mosques say different things.
“We will offer information so they can make an informed decision. It will cut out some of the stress of divorce.”
Maryam Namazie, an ex-Muslim and spokesperson for One Law for All warned that Islamic law was not as innocuous as the firm claimed. She will speak at a London seminar on tomorrow to mark International Women’s Day.
She said: “Sharia law is discriminatory. It is antithetical to laws that have been fought for and hard won by progressive social movements, particularly in areas of family matters.
“Laws related to family matters are the result of wrestling control from the church – now it is being handed back to sharia law to violate rights.
“The civil matters sharia law decides on here is an extension of the criminal matters it decides on in Islamic states, such as stoning, amputations and so on,” Namazie added.
Hamilton Burns, based in Glasgow’s south side, has teamed up with an eminent Muslim scholar who will counsel clients on the Islamic aspect of civil law cases, while solicitors give advice under Scots law.
Clients will be able to see a Muslim lawyer who is fully trained in Scots law at the same time as they consult a sharia scholar who is an expert in Islamic law. It will be the first time such a service has been offered in Scotland.
Despite public fears over what is deemed “creeping” sharia law, the firm stressed that the sharia advice was not legally binding and would mainly focus on giving Islamic guidelines on divorce or child custody based on rigorous readings of the Koran.
Shaykh Amer Jamil, the Islamic scholar who will provide sharia advice, wants to make sure that Muslims have access to the correct religious ruling on matters such as divorce.
Some Muslims want to know what sharia law says and find that although they can get civil advice, they find it difficult to get sharia advice Shaykh Amer Jamil
However, critics and opponents accuse sharia of being a discriminatory and sexist legal system and an “extension” of the fundamentalist laws that allow hand amputations and stonings in countries such as Saudi Arabia.
Niall Mickel, a solicitor advocate specialising in civil law and the managing partner at Hamilton Burns said: “We hope that by incorporating sharia family jurisprudence against a background of domestic Scottish legislation, we can provide our clients with as much relevant information as possible to assist them in making the right choices.”
He insisted the service offered is “uncontroversial” and compared it to informal religious advice sought from a priest or minister by a divorcing Christian.
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh is also partner at the firm. She said: “It is difficult for Muslim women to seek divorce from their husbands.
“If the position under Islamic law is made clear, then even though the husband might not want to take the Scots law step, women may then be able to do so.”
The firm’s services would also help recent immigrants to Scotland, who are unsure of their rights under Scots law.
Employees at the law firm admit that their groundbreaking decision has been controversial.
One employee hinted that it was the fact that female solicitors were involved in the new initiative that was causing concern within some sections of the Muslim community.
Shaykh Amer Jamil trained in sharia law in the Middle East and holds a Bachelor in Law qualification from Strathclyde University.
He is noted for his campaigns against issues such as domestic violence.
He said: “Some Muslims want to know what sharia law says and find that although they can get civil advice, they find it difficult to get sharia advice, as imams in different mosques say different things.
“We will offer information so they can make an informed decision. It will cut out some of the stress of divorce.”
Maryam Namazie, an ex-Muslim and spokesperson for One Law for All warned that Islamic law was not as innocuous as the firm claimed. She will speak at a London seminar on tomorrow to mark International Women’s Day.
She said: “Sharia law is discriminatory. It is antithetical to laws that have been fought for and hard won by progressive social movements, particularly in areas of family matters.
“Laws related to family matters are the result of wrestling control from the church – now it is being handed back to sharia law to violate rights.
“The civil matters sharia law decides on here is an extension of the criminal matters it decides on in Islamic states, such as stoning, amputations and so on,” Namazie added.
Irish 'plot to kill cartoonist'
Seven people have been arrested in the Irish Republic over an alleged plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist for depicting the Prophet Muhammad, police say.
The four men and three women are all Muslim, according to media reports, though a police statement did not confirm this.
Cartoonist Lars Vilks had depicted the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog in the Nerikes Allehanda newspaper.
Islamic militants then put a $100,000 (£67,000) bounty on his head.
Irish police said the seven suspects were arrested after an investigation that also involved police in the US and other European countries.
The suspects ranged in age from their mid-20s to late-40s.
Ireland's RTE news network reported that five were detained in Waterford and two others in Cork.
The four men and three women are all Muslim, according to media reports, though a police statement did not confirm this.
Cartoonist Lars Vilks had depicted the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog in the Nerikes Allehanda newspaper.
Islamic militants then put a $100,000 (£67,000) bounty on his head.
Irish police said the seven suspects were arrested after an investigation that also involved police in the US and other European countries.
The suspects ranged in age from their mid-20s to late-40s.
Ireland's RTE news network reported that five were detained in Waterford and two others in Cork.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Female Muslim councillor forced "to dress more conservatively" after threats from other Muslims
A progressive Brit-Muslim woman councillor was forced to dress more conservatively after receiving death threats and sexually harassing phone calls.
Shiria Khatun, 38, told the police that callers threatened to kill her and her four young children.
In one call, they warned they would dig up parents' graves and bury her there instead.
The Labour councillor in the controversial borough of Tower Hamlets is considered one of the area's most progressive politicians.
She was elected in 2006, worked for Ken Livingstone as a transport adviser at London's City Hall and frequently campaigns for more Muslim women to enter politics.
However, over the past year she has been the victim of a "sick" harassment campaign.
At first she was "too embarrassed" to call the police, but when the threats, mostly made in the Bangladeshi dialect Sylheti, targeted her family she decided to act.
"As a councillor I'm meant to be a strong woman and I didn't want to show that I was bothered, but it's gone too far," the Daily Express quoted her, as saying.
"They're really disgusting. They would talk about my Western clothes, my tight jeans and my body parts," she added.
Shiria Khatun, 38, told the police that callers threatened to kill her and her four young children.
In one call, they warned they would dig up parents' graves and bury her there instead.
The Labour councillor in the controversial borough of Tower Hamlets is considered one of the area's most progressive politicians.
She was elected in 2006, worked for Ken Livingstone as a transport adviser at London's City Hall and frequently campaigns for more Muslim women to enter politics.
However, over the past year she has been the victim of a "sick" harassment campaign.
At first she was "too embarrassed" to call the police, but when the threats, mostly made in the Bangladeshi dialect Sylheti, targeted her family she decided to act.
"As a councillor I'm meant to be a strong woman and I didn't want to show that I was bothered, but it's gone too far," the Daily Express quoted her, as saying.
"They're really disgusting. They would talk about my Western clothes, my tight jeans and my body parts," she added.
Refusal likely for Islam centre plan
PARKING problems looklikely to defeat plans for an Islamic community centre on Austin Fields Industrialestate in Lynn.
The West Norfolk Islamic Association wants permission to transformtwo business units into a new social, educational and religious facility for some 80 Islamic families in the area.Planning officers have recommended councillors refuse the project because of a lack of parking spaces, but the College of West Anglia saw its plans for an education centre next door approved earlier this year.
A report supporting the application said the centre, to be open sevendays a week, would offer religious services and instruction, educationfor all sections of the community and would help to integrate Muslimsinto the wider community.Maximum occupancy would be about 70 people – twice a year for Eidprayers and some four times a year for social events, the report said.
Functions, talks and meetings would mostly take place in the evening, although the proposed centre, next to Auto-glass, would also be used by around 50 people on Friday lunch times for Friday prayers.
The traditional call to prayer would be made by one person, inside the building, without a sound system.
"Most importantly, the proposal will provide a focal point for the Islamic community, rather than being spread around a number of locationswhich are proving inadequate for the growing need," the report concluded.
Only four to six parking spaces are available at the site, but the association said those visiting could easily walk or pay to park at Austin Fields.
But the Highways Authority objected because of the limited numberof spaces and doubted whether people would walk to the centre.
It said footways to the site were "poor to non-existent" and that thewalking route was "not inviting and conflict with commercial vehicles islikely to occur".The highways' response concluded: "Users of the centre will aim topark their cars within the industrial estate, rather than utilise the public pay car parks and the attempt the undesirable walk to the site.
"It is expected that an approval of the application would exacerbatethe existing ad-hoc parking arrangements to create excessive on-streetparking.
"The college's plans convert a former Polar Systems industrial unitinto a workshop for trainee plumbers, electricians and engineeringstudents were given temporary permission in January, when parkingissues were also raised.
A strict policy was introduced requiring students to park at the maincampus and walk to the workshop. Officers said the similarities betweenthe two applications were "not material" and the Islamic centrewould attract people from a larger catchment area.Managers could encourage walking to the site, but it could not becontrolled in the same manner as the college's policy, the report said.West Norfolk Council's development control board is due to discussthe application at a meeting today (Monday).
The West Norfolk Islamic Association wants permission to transformtwo business units into a new social, educational and religious facility for some 80 Islamic families in the area.Planning officers have recommended councillors refuse the project because of a lack of parking spaces, but the College of West Anglia saw its plans for an education centre next door approved earlier this year.
A report supporting the application said the centre, to be open sevendays a week, would offer religious services and instruction, educationfor all sections of the community and would help to integrate Muslimsinto the wider community.Maximum occupancy would be about 70 people – twice a year for Eidprayers and some four times a year for social events, the report said.
Functions, talks and meetings would mostly take place in the evening, although the proposed centre, next to Auto-glass, would also be used by around 50 people on Friday lunch times for Friday prayers.
The traditional call to prayer would be made by one person, inside the building, without a sound system.
"Most importantly, the proposal will provide a focal point for the Islamic community, rather than being spread around a number of locationswhich are proving inadequate for the growing need," the report concluded.
Only four to six parking spaces are available at the site, but the association said those visiting could easily walk or pay to park at Austin Fields.
But the Highways Authority objected because of the limited numberof spaces and doubted whether people would walk to the centre.
It said footways to the site were "poor to non-existent" and that thewalking route was "not inviting and conflict with commercial vehicles islikely to occur".The highways' response concluded: "Users of the centre will aim topark their cars within the industrial estate, rather than utilise the public pay car parks and the attempt the undesirable walk to the site.
"It is expected that an approval of the application would exacerbatethe existing ad-hoc parking arrangements to create excessive on-streetparking.
"The college's plans convert a former Polar Systems industrial unitinto a workshop for trainee plumbers, electricians and engineeringstudents were given temporary permission in January, when parkingissues were also raised.
A strict policy was introduced requiring students to park at the maincampus and walk to the workshop. Officers said the similarities betweenthe two applications were "not material" and the Islamic centrewould attract people from a larger catchment area.Managers could encourage walking to the site, but it could not becontrolled in the same manner as the college's policy, the report said.West Norfolk Council's development control board is due to discussthe application at a meeting today (Monday).
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Photographer captures the women who wear the hijab
By SANDY ILLIAN BOSCH sbosch@pioneerlocal.com
Sadaf Syed of Willowbrook grew up in Los Angeles with dreams of becoming a teacher. She found a way to fulfill that dream, not with a teaching degree, but with a camera."I believe we're all here to educate one another," said Syed. Through her photo documentary, "iCover, A Day in the Life of an American Muslim COVERed Girl," she wants to show the world that a woman who chooses to wrap her head in a scarf is just like every other woman in America.
Walks of life
Like Syed, all of the women in her book have chosen to wear the traditional head covering of the Muslim faith. Syed's book of photos, which has seen its first run, but is still being tweaked, shows Muslim women in all ways of life -- from mother to dentist to motorcycle enthusiast. "It's something that I do for God," said Syed, who began wearing the scarf, or hijab, in early 2001.
She said the hijab is part of a commitment to live a humble, modest life. It also allows people to focus on a woman's inner beauty rather than her outward appearance.
But the public, especially in post-Sept. 11 America, has misconceptions.
Heavy weight
"If there's one thing I know for sure now, it's that this light strip of cloth sure does carry a lot of weight," Syed wrote in her book's introduction. She said some people see the scarf as a symbol of piety -- a sign that the wearer considers herself more holy than the rest of the world. Others believe it's a sign of a woman's submissiveness to her husband.
But the women in "iCover" are anything but subservient. They are boxers, surfers, U.S. soldiers and artists who choose to honor God by covering their heads.
Covering one's head in honor of God is not unique to the Muslim faith, Syed said. She notes that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is always pictured with her head covered. Most nuns still cover their heads, as do Orthodox Jews.
Syed said a Muslim woman's decision to wear or not to wear the hijab is an individual one made between her and God. For Syed, the scarf serves as a constant reminder of her relationship with God and of her commitment to try to be the best person she can be.
Access granted
She said she's grateful to the women who allowed her to include them in her book, which when complete will be about 125 pages long. "It takes a lot for people to invite you into their private lives," she said.
Syed found these women through modern day word-of-mouth. As friends e-mailed friends, they began suggesting women they believed would help Syed deliver her message. To photograph them, she flew all over the country, to the East and West coasts, to a dance studio in Texas and a courthouse in Baltimore.
Syed sees her book as a way to celebrate women -- like the Pakistani woman who drives a big rig and the Chicago teacher who challenged herself to complete her first triathlon -- and as a way to show the world that these women really aren't that different after all.
"It's just a piece of cloth," she said.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
BA man arrested in ‘terror plot’
A would-be suicide bomber worked for British Airways and volunteered to work during the cabin crew strike, a court heard today.
Bangladesh-born Rajib Karim, 30, faced three charges under counter terrorism legislation when he appeared in court today.
He is accused of two counts of planning suicide bombings and his own martyrdom.
One charge involves the UK and the other alleges that he plotted with contacts in his home country, Pakistan and Yemen.
It is alleged that Karim, of Newcastle upon Tyne, deliberately stayed in Britain, obtaining a passport and getting a job at the airline to further the conspiracy.
Prosecutor Colin Gibbs told City of Westminster Magistrates' Court the charge sheet alleges Karim shared information about his work, including security measures, and offered to take advantage of planned strikes by BA staff to join the airline's cabin crew.
The computer expert also faced a third charge alleging he collected money and transferred it through trusted associates and wire services to terrorist associates overseas.
All three offences are said to have taken place between April 2006 and February this year.
Karim was arrested by officers from Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorism Command, working with colleagues in the north-east of England, on February 25.
They swooped on the office complex where he worked in Newcastle as a computer software developer and searched his home in the city.
Police swoop: The office complex in Newcastle where Karim worked as a computer software developer
Forensic specialists are continuing to sift through hundreds of files held on computers seized from his workplace and home.
Urgent inquiries are also understood to be under way in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Yemen to trace the others allegedly involved.
Karim, a well-built man with a thin beard and close-cropped hair, spoke only to confirm his name and date of birth during the 15-minute hearing. He wore a black fleece.
His solicitor James Nicolls said he did not want his client's address made public over fears of reprisal attacks against his young family. He did not apply for bail.
The address was not made available by court staff, who said they did not have it. No formal order was put in place banning its publication.
District Judge Timothy Workman remanded Karim in custody and adjourned the case until March 26 at the Old Bailey.
Scotland Yard also arrested three men in Slough, Berkshire, during the inquiry. They were released without charge on Tuesday.
The case continues.
Bangladesh-born Rajib Karim, 30, faced three charges under counter terrorism legislation when he appeared in court today.
He is accused of two counts of planning suicide bombings and his own martyrdom.
One charge involves the UK and the other alleges that he plotted with contacts in his home country, Pakistan and Yemen.
It is alleged that Karim, of Newcastle upon Tyne, deliberately stayed in Britain, obtaining a passport and getting a job at the airline to further the conspiracy.
Prosecutor Colin Gibbs told City of Westminster Magistrates' Court the charge sheet alleges Karim shared information about his work, including security measures, and offered to take advantage of planned strikes by BA staff to join the airline's cabin crew.
The computer expert also faced a third charge alleging he collected money and transferred it through trusted associates and wire services to terrorist associates overseas.
All three offences are said to have taken place between April 2006 and February this year.
Karim was arrested by officers from Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorism Command, working with colleagues in the north-east of England, on February 25.
They swooped on the office complex where he worked in Newcastle as a computer software developer and searched his home in the city.
Police swoop: The office complex in Newcastle where Karim worked as a computer software developer
Forensic specialists are continuing to sift through hundreds of files held on computers seized from his workplace and home.
Urgent inquiries are also understood to be under way in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Yemen to trace the others allegedly involved.
Karim, a well-built man with a thin beard and close-cropped hair, spoke only to confirm his name and date of birth during the 15-minute hearing. He wore a black fleece.
His solicitor James Nicolls said he did not want his client's address made public over fears of reprisal attacks against his young family. He did not apply for bail.
The address was not made available by court staff, who said they did not have it. No formal order was put in place banning its publication.
District Judge Timothy Workman remanded Karim in custody and adjourned the case until March 26 at the Old Bailey.
Scotland Yard also arrested three men in Slough, Berkshire, during the inquiry. They were released without charge on Tuesday.
The case continues.
lick our boots
RAILWAY police are hunting a gang of thugs who told three teenagers: “Lick our boots” during a 30-minute terror journey into Birmingham.
Officers said the boys – two 16-year-olds and another aged 17 – were also threatened with violence and suffered a “humiliating and degrading” ordeal at the hands of the gang.
British Transport Police today released CCTV images of eight people, including a girl, they want to trace in connection with the incident.
It happened when the louts boarded the New Street-bound train at Blake Street Station, near Sutton Coldfield.
Det Con Tim Friend, from British Transport Police, described the ordeal as “degrading bullying” and appealed for help to find the culprits.
“A group of between eight and ten Asian males and females bullied the lads for the whole of the 30-minute journey,” he said.
“They were told ‘kiss our feet’ and anyone who said no was threatened with violence. It was pretty unpleasant.”
A British Transport Police spokesman said: “We are seeking to identify the individuals pictured who we would like to speak to in connection with a robbery on a train service between Blake Street and New Street stations.
“Three young males were subjected to a protracted ordeal of bullying before having property stolen under threat of further violence.”
The victims were heading into the city for a concert on board a train that left Lichfield City station at 5.50pm on November 9 last year.
Police said the ordeal lasted until the train arrived at New Street.
The frightened lads were eventually robbed of their mobile phones, cash, train tickets and one had a concert ticket stolen.
Their assailants were seen giggling and joking with each other as they left the train.
The victims raised the alarm shortly after the train arrived in Birmingham, telling police the torment left them feeling “humiliated and degraded”.
Police checked CCTV footage from the station and Pallasades shopping centre to catch the culprits.
Detectives are now appealing to Birmingham Mail readers to help identify a group of people they want to speak to in connection with the incident after their own investigations drew a blank.
* Anyone who recognises those in the images or who has any information about the incident should contact Det Con Tim Friend on 0121 654 2244 or 0800 405040.
Officers said the boys – two 16-year-olds and another aged 17 – were also threatened with violence and suffered a “humiliating and degrading” ordeal at the hands of the gang.
British Transport Police today released CCTV images of eight people, including a girl, they want to trace in connection with the incident.
It happened when the louts boarded the New Street-bound train at Blake Street Station, near Sutton Coldfield.
Det Con Tim Friend, from British Transport Police, described the ordeal as “degrading bullying” and appealed for help to find the culprits.
“A group of between eight and ten Asian males and females bullied the lads for the whole of the 30-minute journey,” he said.
“They were told ‘kiss our feet’ and anyone who said no was threatened with violence. It was pretty unpleasant.”
A British Transport Police spokesman said: “We are seeking to identify the individuals pictured who we would like to speak to in connection with a robbery on a train service between Blake Street and New Street stations.
“Three young males were subjected to a protracted ordeal of bullying before having property stolen under threat of further violence.”
The victims were heading into the city for a concert on board a train that left Lichfield City station at 5.50pm on November 9 last year.
Police said the ordeal lasted until the train arrived at New Street.
The frightened lads were eventually robbed of their mobile phones, cash, train tickets and one had a concert ticket stolen.
Their assailants were seen giggling and joking with each other as they left the train.
The victims raised the alarm shortly after the train arrived in Birmingham, telling police the torment left them feeling “humiliated and degraded”.
Police checked CCTV footage from the station and Pallasades shopping centre to catch the culprits.
Detectives are now appealing to Birmingham Mail readers to help identify a group of people they want to speak to in connection with the incident after their own investigations drew a blank.
* Anyone who recognises those in the images or who has any information about the incident should contact Det Con Tim Friend on 0121 654 2244 or 0800 405040.
Jail for Muslims Enforcing 'No-Go' Area...
TWO young Asian men were yesterday (Thurs) locked up for an unprovoked attack on a white man walking home through Savile Town.
Supporters shouted abuse at the judge as Sohail Hussain, 19, and 20-year-old Ali Mushtaq were sent to a young offenders’ institution.Hussain, who was armed with a knuckle duster, attacked Robert Dyson in Savile Road on October 23 last year.
A racial motive was ruled out by the court because the attackers were too drunk to know what they were doing.
As Judge James Spencer QC sentenced Hussain to three-and-a-half years and Mushtaq to 12 months, supporters started kicking their feet against wooden benches in the public gallery at Leeds Crown Court.One man banged his fists repeatedly on a table and a woman stood up and shouted: “This is not justice, this is bull****.”The supporters then fled court, some in tears.
Hussain, of Headfield Road, Savile Town, admitted causing grievous bodily harm with intent and carrying a knuckle duster.
Mushtaq, who is from Huddersfield, pleaded guilty to GBH without intent.
Chris Aspinall, prosecuting, said Mr Dyson was set upon in an unprovoked attack as he walked home.
He suffered one-inch cuts to his nose and left ear which needed stitches.Mr Aspinall told the court the attack was not racially-motivated because the accused were too drunk.
Anastasi Tasou, for Hussain, and Andrew Dalton, for Mushtaq, argued for community sentences and said their clients would pay Mr Dyson compensation.
But Judge Spencer said: “This was an offence so serious that this court cannot overlook it.”
The judge told Hussain and Mustaq: “You have perpetrated a violent attack but your precise motivation is not known because the prosecution accepts it was not racially-motivated due to the quantity of drink consumed.”
On Hussain, Judge Spencer added: “It is possible you were trying to show off to some girls in a nearby park.“But the fact that you had gone out armed with a knuckle duster shows you intended to commit violence.”
read more
Supporters shouted abuse at the judge as Sohail Hussain, 19, and 20-year-old Ali Mushtaq were sent to a young offenders’ institution.Hussain, who was armed with a knuckle duster, attacked Robert Dyson in Savile Road on October 23 last year.
A racial motive was ruled out by the court because the attackers were too drunk to know what they were doing.
As Judge James Spencer QC sentenced Hussain to three-and-a-half years and Mushtaq to 12 months, supporters started kicking their feet against wooden benches in the public gallery at Leeds Crown Court.One man banged his fists repeatedly on a table and a woman stood up and shouted: “This is not justice, this is bull****.”The supporters then fled court, some in tears.
Hussain, of Headfield Road, Savile Town, admitted causing grievous bodily harm with intent and carrying a knuckle duster.
Mushtaq, who is from Huddersfield, pleaded guilty to GBH without intent.
Chris Aspinall, prosecuting, said Mr Dyson was set upon in an unprovoked attack as he walked home.
He suffered one-inch cuts to his nose and left ear which needed stitches.Mr Aspinall told the court the attack was not racially-motivated because the accused were too drunk.
Anastasi Tasou, for Hussain, and Andrew Dalton, for Mushtaq, argued for community sentences and said their clients would pay Mr Dyson compensation.
But Judge Spencer said: “This was an offence so serious that this court cannot overlook it.”
The judge told Hussain and Mustaq: “You have perpetrated a violent attack but your precise motivation is not known because the prosecution accepts it was not racially-motivated due to the quantity of drink consumed.”
On Hussain, Judge Spencer added: “It is possible you were trying to show off to some girls in a nearby park.“But the fact that you had gone out armed with a knuckle duster shows you intended to commit violence.”
read more
UK Labour Party Admits Infiltration by Radical Islamists...
The Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) — which believes in jihad and sharia law, and wants to turn Britain and Europe into an Islamic state — has placed sympathisers in elected office and claims, correctly, to be able to achieve “mass mobilisation” of voters.
Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph, Jim Fitzpatrick, the Environment Minister, said the IFE had become, in effect, a secret party within Labour and other political parties.
“They are acting almost as an entryist organisation, placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it’s at local government level or national level,” he said.
“They are completely at odds with Labour’s programme, with our support for secularism.”
Mr Fitzpatrick, the MP for Poplar and Canning Town, said the IFE had infiltrated and “corrupted” his party in east London in the same way that the far-Left Militant Tendency did in the 1980s. Leaked Labour lists show a 110 per cent rise in party membership in one constituency in two years.
In a six-month investigation by this newspaper and Channel 4’s Dispatches, involving weeks of covert filming by the programme’s reporters:
IFE activists boasted to the undercover reporters that they had already “consolidated … a lot of influence and power” over Tower Hamlets, a London borough council with a £1 billion budget.
We have established that the group and its allies were awarded more than £10 million of taxpayers’ money, much of it from government funds designed to “prevent violent extremism”.
IFE leaders were recorded expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people. The IFE organised meetings with extremists, including Taliban allies, a man named by the US government as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and a man under investigation by the FBI for his links to the September 11 attacks.
Moderate Muslims in London told how the IFE and its allies were enforcing their hardline views on the rest of the local community, curbing behaviour they deemed “un-Islamic”.
The owner of a dating agency received a threatening email from an IFE activist, warning her to close it.
George Galloway, a London MP, admitted in recordings obtained by this newspaper that his surprise victory in the 2005 election owed more to the IFE “than it would be wise – for them – for me to say, adding that they played a “decisive role” in his triumph at the polls.
Mr Galloway now says they were one of many groups which supported his anti-war stance and had never sought to influence him.
The IFE has particularly close links to Tower Hamlets council. Seven serving and former councillors said Lutfur Rahman, the current council leader, gained his post with the group’s help.
Some said they were canvassed by a senior IFE official on his behalf. After Mr Rahman was elected, a man with close links to the group, Lutfur Ali, was appointed assistant chief executive of the council with responsibility for grant funding.
This was despite a chequered employment record, a misleading CV and a negative report from the headhunters appointed to consider the candidates. The council’s white chief executive was subsequently forced from his post.
Since Mr Rahman became leader, more council grants have been paid to a number of organisations which our investigation established are closely linked to the IFE.
Funding for other, secular groups was ended or cut. In the borough’s well-known Brick Lane area, council funds were switched from a largely secular heritage trail to a highly controversial “hijab sculpture”, angering many residents who accused the council of “religious triumphalism”.
Schools in Tower Hamlets are told by the council should close for the Muslim festival of Eid, even where most of their pupils are not Muslim.
Mr Rahman refused to deny that an IFE activist had canvassed councillors on his behalf. He said: “There are various people across Tower Hamlets who get excited, who get involved.”
He would not comment on concerns about infiltration, saying they were “party matters”. He said: “If you look at our flagship policies, like investing £20 million to tackle overcrowding, you can see that we are working for everyone.”
The IFE said it did not seek to influence the council and had not lobbied for Mr Rahman. “If anything, existing members of the Labour Party have joined the IFE, rather than the other way round,” it said.
The group insisted it was not a fundamentalist or extremist organisation and did not support violence.
Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph, Jim Fitzpatrick, the Environment Minister, said the IFE had become, in effect, a secret party within Labour and other political parties.
“They are acting almost as an entryist organisation, placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it’s at local government level or national level,” he said.
“They are completely at odds with Labour’s programme, with our support for secularism.”
Mr Fitzpatrick, the MP for Poplar and Canning Town, said the IFE had infiltrated and “corrupted” his party in east London in the same way that the far-Left Militant Tendency did in the 1980s. Leaked Labour lists show a 110 per cent rise in party membership in one constituency in two years.
In a six-month investigation by this newspaper and Channel 4’s Dispatches, involving weeks of covert filming by the programme’s reporters:
IFE activists boasted to the undercover reporters that they had already “consolidated … a lot of influence and power” over Tower Hamlets, a London borough council with a £1 billion budget.
We have established that the group and its allies were awarded more than £10 million of taxpayers’ money, much of it from government funds designed to “prevent violent extremism”.
IFE leaders were recorded expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people. The IFE organised meetings with extremists, including Taliban allies, a man named by the US government as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and a man under investigation by the FBI for his links to the September 11 attacks.
Moderate Muslims in London told how the IFE and its allies were enforcing their hardline views on the rest of the local community, curbing behaviour they deemed “un-Islamic”.
The owner of a dating agency received a threatening email from an IFE activist, warning her to close it.
George Galloway, a London MP, admitted in recordings obtained by this newspaper that his surprise victory in the 2005 election owed more to the IFE “than it would be wise – for them – for me to say, adding that they played a “decisive role” in his triumph at the polls.
Mr Galloway now says they were one of many groups which supported his anti-war stance and had never sought to influence him.
The IFE has particularly close links to Tower Hamlets council. Seven serving and former councillors said Lutfur Rahman, the current council leader, gained his post with the group’s help.
Some said they were canvassed by a senior IFE official on his behalf. After Mr Rahman was elected, a man with close links to the group, Lutfur Ali, was appointed assistant chief executive of the council with responsibility for grant funding.
This was despite a chequered employment record, a misleading CV and a negative report from the headhunters appointed to consider the candidates. The council’s white chief executive was subsequently forced from his post.
Since Mr Rahman became leader, more council grants have been paid to a number of organisations which our investigation established are closely linked to the IFE.
Funding for other, secular groups was ended or cut. In the borough’s well-known Brick Lane area, council funds were switched from a largely secular heritage trail to a highly controversial “hijab sculpture”, angering many residents who accused the council of “religious triumphalism”.
Schools in Tower Hamlets are told by the council should close for the Muslim festival of Eid, even where most of their pupils are not Muslim.
Mr Rahman refused to deny that an IFE activist had canvassed councillors on his behalf. He said: “There are various people across Tower Hamlets who get excited, who get involved.”
He would not comment on concerns about infiltration, saying they were “party matters”. He said: “If you look at our flagship policies, like investing £20 million to tackle overcrowding, you can see that we are working for everyone.”
The IFE said it did not seek to influence the council and had not lobbied for Mr Rahman. “If anything, existing members of the Labour Party have joined the IFE, rather than the other way round,” it said.
The group insisted it was not a fundamentalist or extremist organisation and did not support violence.
Muslim women who refused to take 'naked' full-body scan are barred from Manchester to Pakistan flight
Two Muslim women have become the first passengers to refuse to subject themselves to controversial 'naked' full body airport scans,
The pair - who security officials insist were selected at random - opted to miss their flight to Pakistan and forfeit tickets worth £400 each rather than be screened.
One of the women refused to go through the full-body scanner at Manchester Airport on religious grounds while her companion also declined for 'medical reasons'.
The women were travelling together to Islamabad when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen after checking-in at Terminal Two at the airport.
An estimated 15,000 people have already passed through the scanners, with the pair the first passengers to refuse a scan.
Both told airport staff they were not willing to be scanned. They were warned they would not be allowed to board the Pakistan International Airlines flight if they refused.
The pair decided they would rather forfeit their £400 tickets and left the airport with their luggage.
The £80,000 scanners were introduced at Heathrow and Manchester airports on February 5.
The X-ray machines allow security staff to see a 'naked' image of passengers to show up hidden weapons and explosives, but it has attracted criticism for also showing clear outlines of passengers' genitals.
Manchester Airport confirmed the passengers had refused to be scanned but said it had received no complaint from the women.
The women were travelling together to Islamabad in Pakistan when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen
However, civil liberties campaigners say the incident could form the basis of a legal test case to challenge the use of the Rapiscan device in airports.
Alex Deane, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said the organisation would represent the women if they wished to challenge the decision in court.
He said: 'People shouldn't have to sacrifice their health, their faith, their dignity, or their privacy in order to fly.
'People with health and religious concerns shouldn't be forced to go through these scanners if they have good reason not to. Foolishly, the government has ignored both issues and ignored privacy concerns to boot - they are in the wrong on this.'
Security: The passenger is asked to stand in front of the machine, which produces a virtual 'naked' image that shows if they are carrying explosives or any other suspicious items
There is one Rapiscan scanner in use in a trial at Manchester Airport's terminal two, which has seen 15,000 people pass through it.
A further two devices - one each for terminals one and three - have been delivered and are set to be operational within the next month.
The scanners have been criticised by the human rights group Liberty and the government's own Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Only selected passengers are scanned. Security staff say they are chosen at random and not according to race, religion or ethnicity.
Councillor Afzal Khan, who was Manchester's first Asian lord mayor, said the vast majority of Muslims believed that any privacy concerns should be outweighed by ensuring they are safe when flying.
He said: 'Hundreds of Muslim passengers have gone through without a problem. While I appreciate people's concerns for privacy, these steps are necessary for our safety and security.'
A Manchester Airport spokesman said: 'Two female passengers who were booked to fly out of Terminal Two refused to be scanned for medical and religious reasons.
'In accordance with the government directive on scanners, they were not permitted to fly.
'Body scanning is a big change for customers and we are aware that privacy concerns are on our customers's minds, which is why we have put strict procedures in place to reassure them that their privacy will be protected.'
Last month, Transport Secretary Lord Adonis stressed that an interim code of practice on the use of body scanners stipulated that passengers would not be selected 'on the basis of personal characteristics'.
Two weeks ago, a week after the scanners were introduced at Manchester and Heathrow airports, Islamic scholars in the U.S. said Muslim travellers should not pass through the scanners because they violate religious rules on nudity.
The Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, warning Muslims not to go through the scanners.
‘It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,’ read the order.
‘Islam highly emphasises haya (modesty) and considers it part of faith. The Quran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.'
In the U.S., there are now 40 scanners in 19 airports and could be as many as 450 by the end of the year.
The powerful council of ten scholars that issued the fatwa is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America.
This is good. The body scans are odious, and they should be scrapped, as they ultimately will prove ineffective to stop the ever-innovative jihad terrorists. Jihadis are blazing new trails in the illustrious history of Islamic inventions by always devising new ways to elude airport security procedures and murder flying Infidels. But as long as the scanners are in place, no single group should be able to bypass them and then fly -- and that is what Muslim groups have been angling for, an exemption from the scanners for Muslims specifically, which demonstrates breathtaking chutzpah in light of the fact that it is Islamic jihadists who have made them necessary in the first place, and a breathtaking audacity in the openness of its attempt to smooth the path for jihad terrorists in airports.
The pair - who security officials insist were selected at random - opted to miss their flight to Pakistan and forfeit tickets worth £400 each rather than be screened.
One of the women refused to go through the full-body scanner at Manchester Airport on religious grounds while her companion also declined for 'medical reasons'.
The women were travelling together to Islamabad when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen after checking-in at Terminal Two at the airport.
An estimated 15,000 people have already passed through the scanners, with the pair the first passengers to refuse a scan.
Both told airport staff they were not willing to be scanned. They were warned they would not be allowed to board the Pakistan International Airlines flight if they refused.
The pair decided they would rather forfeit their £400 tickets and left the airport with their luggage.
The £80,000 scanners were introduced at Heathrow and Manchester airports on February 5.
The X-ray machines allow security staff to see a 'naked' image of passengers to show up hidden weapons and explosives, but it has attracted criticism for also showing clear outlines of passengers' genitals.
Manchester Airport confirmed the passengers had refused to be scanned but said it had received no complaint from the women.
The women were travelling together to Islamabad in Pakistan when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen
However, civil liberties campaigners say the incident could form the basis of a legal test case to challenge the use of the Rapiscan device in airports.
Alex Deane, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said the organisation would represent the women if they wished to challenge the decision in court.
He said: 'People shouldn't have to sacrifice their health, their faith, their dignity, or their privacy in order to fly.
'People with health and religious concerns shouldn't be forced to go through these scanners if they have good reason not to. Foolishly, the government has ignored both issues and ignored privacy concerns to boot - they are in the wrong on this.'
Security: The passenger is asked to stand in front of the machine, which produces a virtual 'naked' image that shows if they are carrying explosives or any other suspicious items
There is one Rapiscan scanner in use in a trial at Manchester Airport's terminal two, which has seen 15,000 people pass through it.
A further two devices - one each for terminals one and three - have been delivered and are set to be operational within the next month.
The scanners have been criticised by the human rights group Liberty and the government's own Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Only selected passengers are scanned. Security staff say they are chosen at random and not according to race, religion or ethnicity.
Councillor Afzal Khan, who was Manchester's first Asian lord mayor, said the vast majority of Muslims believed that any privacy concerns should be outweighed by ensuring they are safe when flying.
He said: 'Hundreds of Muslim passengers have gone through without a problem. While I appreciate people's concerns for privacy, these steps are necessary for our safety and security.'
A Manchester Airport spokesman said: 'Two female passengers who were booked to fly out of Terminal Two refused to be scanned for medical and religious reasons.
'In accordance with the government directive on scanners, they were not permitted to fly.
'Body scanning is a big change for customers and we are aware that privacy concerns are on our customers's minds, which is why we have put strict procedures in place to reassure them that their privacy will be protected.'
Last month, Transport Secretary Lord Adonis stressed that an interim code of practice on the use of body scanners stipulated that passengers would not be selected 'on the basis of personal characteristics'.
Two weeks ago, a week after the scanners were introduced at Manchester and Heathrow airports, Islamic scholars in the U.S. said Muslim travellers should not pass through the scanners because they violate religious rules on nudity.
The Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, warning Muslims not to go through the scanners.
‘It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,’ read the order.
‘Islam highly emphasises haya (modesty) and considers it part of faith. The Quran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.'
In the U.S., there are now 40 scanners in 19 airports and could be as many as 450 by the end of the year.
The powerful council of ten scholars that issued the fatwa is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America.
This is good. The body scans are odious, and they should be scrapped, as they ultimately will prove ineffective to stop the ever-innovative jihad terrorists. Jihadis are blazing new trails in the illustrious history of Islamic inventions by always devising new ways to elude airport security procedures and murder flying Infidels. But as long as the scanners are in place, no single group should be able to bypass them and then fly -- and that is what Muslim groups have been angling for, an exemption from the scanners for Muslims specifically, which demonstrates breathtaking chutzpah in light of the fact that it is Islamic jihadists who have made them necessary in the first place, and a breathtaking audacity in the openness of its attempt to smooth the path for jihad terrorists in airports.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
