The Cost Of Criminals’ Human Rights

Fed up with reading about the ‘human rights’ of criminals who have denied their victims’ basic rights?

Well, here’s a news story guaranteed to make you see red.  Here in the UK, the Parole Board has announced that human rights compensation claims by murderers, paedophiles and other serious criminals demanding their freedom has now reached ‘new heights’.

 

Specifically, this litigation is costing £100,000 – a month. The Parole Board’s annual report states:  ‘This is extremely expensive for the public purse.’

And this news comes despite promises by politicians to deal with the compensation culture within British prisons.

 

I suspect that many decent Brits who saw this story in their newspapers will have shared the same sentiment. Namely, that if you violate someone else’s rights to safety and life, then you can damn well do your stint in prison and quit complaining.  We’re not interested.

Britain, Israel, And A Case Of Rank Hypocrisy

 

 

David Miliband must have enjoyed himself today. For finally, Britain’s Foreign Secretary got to announce an arms embargo on Israel.  Never mind that Britain itself sent soldiers thundering into two foreign countries.  The embargo might only have been declared today, but ever since Israel retaliated against Hamas at the end of last year, Britain has been waiting eagerly for this day to arrive.

 

Indeed, during Operation Cast Lead, nowhere was condemnation of Israel louder than in Britain. It’s a matter of public record that Muslims across the country bombarded their MPs with demands for Britain to sever all ties with the Jewish nation. Three British politicians, including Louise Ellman, received death threats purely because they had the guts to remind both parliament and the media that Israel had endured eight years of terrorism before finally responding.

 

The British media, led by the Guardian, threw out journalistic ethics entirely, dispensed with context, and swapped fact for fiction as they repeatedly ignored Hamas terrorism against Israeli civilians.

 

Forget the obscene suicide bombings that Hamas had routinely unleashed on Israel. Forget the roll call of women, children and babies who had died at the hands of Hamas operatives.  Forget the fact that when Israel left Gaza, it did so because this departure was deemed – by the international community – to be a necessary condition for DEcreased terrorism.

 

Forget all that. Nobody gave a damn. Israel had gone into Gaza to get rid of Hamas terrorists and that was all the media and the government cared about. What – Jews, defending themselves? How dare they. 

 

During this period I attended a meeting at the House of Commons, organised in fact by a Christian group whose members were distraught at the way Israel was being demonised. There, we were told by a small number of politicians, that the atmosphere in parliament was ‘poisonous’.  An out and out hate-fest was going on, and the few souls who spoke up for Israel were being shouted down and ‘bullied’ on a daily basis.

 

And so, here we are some months later, and finally the British government has done what it was longing to. In other words, punished Israel, publicly, for fighting its own War On Terror. Britain has revoked five export licenses, in what it calls in Brit-speak, a ‘gesture’.

 

I’m making a gesture right now, as it happens. It involves the middle finger of my right hand and I’m sure you can imagine to whom I’m directing it.

 

Because let’s face it, Britain’s hypocrisy here is staggering. How many civilians have died because of British troops, in Afghanistan and Iraq? Only yesterday, reports surfaced of British soldiers’ sadism in these countries. And yet here sits the holier-than-thou British government, judging Israel for trying to protect her own citizens?

 

Writing about the British government’s arms embargo against Israel, because of Gaza, Melanie Phillips  notes:

It says Israel’s actions were “disproportionate.” What is it talking about? The actual evidence showed that the proportion of civilians killed in Gaza was very small – far smaller than might have been expected given the tactics Hamas was using of embedding itself within the population.

 

The claims of large numbers of civilians and children killed were fabricated by Hamas and recycled by the Israel-bashers of the UN and media. Far from being “disproportionate,” Cast Lead was a carefully targeted operation which, given the circumstances, was astonishingly successful in its aim of confining its attack to terrorist operatives.

 

  The false flag of “disproportionality” is hoisted only by those who find it “disproportionate” that Israel should ever defend itself against the Palestinians by military means at all. Israelis are expected instead passively to die under rocket and bomb attack – or perhaps live in shelters for ever. That’s proportionate.

 

 

 

 

Britain showed its true colours today.  Several months back, David Miliband called for new coalition of consent’ between the West and the Islamic world. And if he has to hand Israel over on a platter to achieve this, then that’s just what he and the rest of the dhimmi Labour government will do.

 

Sharia Courts In Britain – Ruling Against British Law?

Eighty-five Sharia Courts are issuing private rulings that contradict British law, claims a new report. Independent think tank Civitas has issued this warning with regard to the Muslim courts that rule on things including child custody, polygamy and marriage.

Given that under Islamic laws, women have few rights, there is rising concern about these Sharia Courts. They meet behind closed doors and apparently don’t maintain any form of records.

Sharia courts have existed in Britain since 2007, primarily in London, Bradford, Birmingham, Coventry and Manchester. The courts’ rulings are legally binding under the 1996 Arbitration Act, on condition that  both parties are happy touse them, and as long as their decisions do not contradict British law.

But the Arbitration Act specifically excludes rulings on divorce and child-care cases.  Now Civitas notes that many  Sharia courts are exceeding the original mandate.

“Some of these courts are advising illegal actions,” said the report’s author, Denis MacEoin, a former lecturer in Arabic and Islamic studies. “And others transgress human rights standards.”

Last year, the House Of Lords ruled in one case that Sharia law ‘is wholly incompatible’ with human rights legislation.

In this case, British law  prevented the deportation of a woman whose child would have been removed and placed with an abusive father under sharia law in Lebanon.

As he could not gain access to the actual Sharia courts,  MacEoin has  had to examine online fatwas ( religious decrees) issued by websites run by British mosques. He says:

Among the rulings … we find some that advise illegal actions and others that transgress human rights standards as they are applied by British courts.

Here are some examples: A Muslim woman may not under any circumstances marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam; such a woman’s children will be separated from her until she marries a Muslim man.

Also, polygamous marriage ( two to four wives) is considered legal … a wife has no property rights in the event of divorce … sharia law must override the judgments of British courts …

…taking out insurance is prohibited, even if required by law … a Muslim lawyer has to act contrary to UK law where it contradicts sharia …

a woman may not leave her home without her husband’s consent (which may constitute false imprisonment); legal adoption is forbidden … a woman may not retain custody of her child after 7 (for a boy) or 9 (for a girl) …

fighting the Americans and British is a religious duty ….”

Neil Addison, an expert on the law as it applies to religion, says:

“About two thirds of Muslim marriages are not being registered under the Marriages Act, which is illegal.  A woman in this type of marriage would have to submit to sharia law for a divorce proceeding. But it’s not the way arbitration is supposed to work.”

Some people argue that Sharia courts are the same as the Jewish Rabbinical courts, the Beth Din.

But Addison begs to differ:

“The beth din acknowledge that ‘the law of the land is the law,’ and a rabbi cannot perform a synagogue marriage ceremony unless a registrar is present to simultaneously register the marriage under English law.”

Several newspapers have carried stories of how, for instance, Sharia courts have arranged for fees of up to ten thousand pounds to go to youths attacked by Muslims, to avoid  any legal action on the part of the victim.

Now, I ask you: can you imagine the reaction if either Jews, or Christians or indeed any other religious group behaved in this manner?

Christians would be lambasted in the media if they ever sought to buy victims’ silence. Similarly, we all can envisage the slurs that would fly if the Jewish Rabbinical courts went around bribing people to avoid the courts!

But when it is the Muslim community doing it, well, that’s just fine, apparently.

It seems to me – and indeed to most sane people, I’m guessing – that the issue is a clear one. If a person – of any faith – wishes to live in Britain, they must abide by British law. It’s not complicated. It really isn’t.

Thus Muslim women have every right to wear the niqab or the burkha – in Muslim countries.

And if Muslim families wish to buy the silence of victims of their relatives’ aggression, then again – fine, in Muslim countries.

But here, in Britain, we already have an albeit flawed legal system and all people should be equal under the law. After all, isn’t this premise at the heart of  democracy…?

Crime And Punishment, British Style

What a happy time it must be for the criminal fraternity in Britain.  These days, all they have to do is mutter an apology, affect an expression of slight remorse, and off they saunter. No prison time, no punishment. No, they’re free to carry on causing havoc, with the blessing of our ‘criminal justice’ system.

Here’s a case in point. A drunken thug, who attacked a policewoman, has just walked free. WPC Gemma Maggs was punched in the face, and shoved to the ground. She suffered a five inch face wound and was unable to work for a month.

Her attacker, one Ryan Thomas, has a previous conviction for assaulting a woman. During his assault on WPC Maggs, he was screaming racist abuse and had also just imbibed nine pints of lager. Oh – and the entire attack was caught on CCTV!

Yet Ryan Thomas has walked away with a suspended prison sentence, a community service disorder (a mere 80 hours of unpaid work) and a fine.

Wonderful, isn’t it?

Criminals have never had it so good.

Tory MP Billed Taxpayers £57,000 – For His Own Flat

Just when you think you’ve heard it all, along come more revelations about the greed of our MPs.

A prime example is the millionaire Brian Binley, MP for Northhampton South. He charged taxpaye£1,500 a month for over three years, even after being told these claims were unacceptable and a clear breach of the rules.

Commons officials reprimanded Mr Binley in April 2006, but he appealed to the then Commons Speaker, Michael Martin, who failed to do anything until this April.

By paying himself rent, Mr Binley has made a nice fat profit.

He’s quite a greedy chap, is Binley. When he first entered the Commons, back in 2005, he claimed the ‘second homes’  allowance for staying in the expensive and luxurious Carlton Club.

Pitiful, isn’t it?

Why People Are Really Voting BNP

Is the BNP, that party of vile wannabe Hitlers, set to become the real opposition in Britain?

It could happen, and easily. The sole reason the BNP secured any votes in the recent elections is because they are addressing one topic that no other party will: immigration.

Of course, the BNP are anti immigration because the mere idea of any more ‘non whites’ setting foot on the fair streets of Britain sends them into panic mode. Bad enough that there are Jews and Asians and Muslims and Black people living in the country right now! But let even more in? Perish the thought!

And so, desperate to ‘cleanse’ Britain, the BNP is only too  happy to tackle immigration.

Meanwhile, the mainstream parties are still busy ignoring what Brits are saying on this topic. And what we’re saying is pretty damn clear. Eighty  per cent of people questioned in a YouGov poll for the independent think-tank MigrationWatch  are ‘concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ about levels of immigration.

But this concern has nothing  to do with the racist sentiments of the BNP.

Max Hastings neatly sums up the cost of chaotic immigration to Britain in his recent piece: ‘BNP In Power: Immigration And This Insidious Silence’.

Consider these facts:

*In 2007, the last year for which figures are available, 333,000 more foreign nationals entered Britain than left.

* There are also an estimated 725,000 illegal immigrants in the country, 518,000 of these in London.

*On the Government’s own, almost certainly understated, numbers, our population will pass 70 million by 2028. It could reach 80 million in the course of the century.

*We are the most overcrowded country in Europe, save Malta.

*Asylum-seekers now account for only 10 %  of newcomers  –  though still 30,000 a year. Most new arrivals come from the Third World, at a rate which is increasing the national population by almost one per cent every two years.

*A report by the House of Lords’ Economic Committee  concluded that, contrary to  Labour propaganda, immigration has had ‘little or no impact’ on the economic well-being of Britain and offers ‘insignificant’ benefits to the existing UK population.

*The argument that we need masses of immigrants to compensate for our ageing domestic workforce is nullified by the reality  –  obvious to all except Labour ministers  –  that immigrants, too, get old and become pensioners.

* There are 300 primary schools in England where more than 70 per cent of pupils  –  nearly half a million children  –  use English only as a second language

*Police officers in Cambridgeshire, for instance, must deal with cases in almost 100 languages. The county’s translation costs have risen from £220,000 in 2002-3 to £800,000 in 2006-7. Its drink-drive figures show a 17-fold increase in arrests of foreigners.

And especially worrying:

*There are also heavy health costs  –  which seem especially relevant in a week when new figures show the NHS heading for a major financial crisis by 2011.

*A few years ago, tuberculosis was all but extinct in Britain. Today, there is a striking increase in reported cases, 65 per cent of them involving patients not born in Britain, with 21 per cent Africanborn. Hepatitis B cases have almost doubled in six years, to 325,000, 96 per cent of these involving patients born outside the UK.

Sir Andrew Green of MigrationWatch says: “The Tories decline to discuss immigration at all. The LibDems have no policy except for an attack on illegal immigration. The Government gives an appearance of activity, but has not yet taken effective action.

‘We have been warning until we are blue in the face that if the major parties fail to address this issue, extremists would start to gain public support.“

 

The recent BNP success should be a clarion call to the mainstream parties. What will it take for Labour to reform immigration? What will it take for the Conservatives to start acting like a decent Opposition party?

People want change on immigration. If the mainstream parties don’t provide it, then the BNP and only the BNP will profit. So if either Labour or Conservative truly care about this country, they need to act on immigration, and fast.

 

British Prisons Now Hotbed Of Islamic Extremism

An expert on terrorism today warned that UK prisons are now a hotbed for Islamic extremism.  Professor Michael Clarke, director of the Royal United Services Institute, stated: “Since 2001 we have seen only the first round of the struggle. Prisons around the world are universities of terror and there is no reason to believe that the UK’s will not be the same.

“The 90-odd convictions will have their own longer-term consequences for which the Government must be prepared.”

In other words, this renewed threat is partly a result of successful anti-terrorism operations, filling prisons with terrorists and turning them into “universities of terror”.

 

Now there’s a cheery thought for you…

Latest Lunacy From UK: Ditch The Red Cross Symbol – It’s ‘Offensive’…

Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant is suggesting we find an alternative symbol for the Red Cross because of the logo’s supposed links to the Crusades.

MPs are debating the adoption of the ‘red crystal’ – a diamond-shaped badge – to avoid the religious connotations of the cross and crescent symbols currently used by the international body.

But critics said the new insignia was a sop to political correctness and warned that it may be the first step towards it replacing cross and crescent. Others fear that it may not be as widely recognised on the battlefield.

‘It is, in an effort not to be contentious, possibly too anodyne to serve its purpose,’ Tory MP John Hayes said.

Philip Davies, a Tory backbencher, said: ‘At face value to the layman it seems at best a solution looking for a problem and at worst another example of extreme political correctness.

‘There is also a risk of confusion with many different symbols, and that terrorists may exploit that to mask themselves when carrying out attacks,’ he added.

The founding Conference of the Red Cross Movement in 1863 adopted a red cross on a white background – the reverse of the Swiss flag – as the emblem of the voluntary medical personnel who assisted the wounded on the battlefield.

It was never intended to have any religious meaning and is thought to have been intended as a tribute to traditionally neutral Switzerland, which hosted the conference.

However, the symbol unintentionally raised suggestions that it was somehow linked to the Hospitallers, a military order which took part in the Crusades, the centuries long series of military campaigns waged by Christians from Europe.

Subsequently, a red crescent emblem was adopted in tandem.

Mr Bryant told the Commons: ‘The reference to the Crusades is… not lost to some people which, of course, anybody involved in the Red Cross would wholly deprecate.

The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement hope that the neutrality of the red crystal will help improve protection for casualties, military medical services and humanitarian workers.

It was chosen because it is devoid of religious and other partisan connotations.

Only In Britain – Public Pay For Muslim Hate Preacher’s House

Hate preacher Abu Hamza is about to present taxpayers with a whopping  £800,000 bill for legal fees he was meant to cover. Two years ago, Hamza was ordered by the courts to pay the £1,000,000 defence costs in his trial – but what has he actually paid?

Nothing.

The judge recommended that one of Hamza’s houses should be sold as a contribution. But it looks like Hamza has managed to wriggle out of that one, by claiming the house belongs to his sister – who lives in Egypt.

And property experts note that even if the 1930s property in Greenford, West London, is grabbed it will probably fetch only £200,000 instead of its original £235,000 valuation.

A Whitehall source said last night: “If nothing else is found it means the taxpayer will have to pay £800,000 for the shortfall.”

 A spokesman for the Legal Services Commission, which oversees the legal aid system, said: “We will go to court to apply for the seizure of the property. We are waiting for a date.”

 Conservative MP Patrick Mercer is more candid: “This is Abu Hamza continuing to thumb his nose.”

 Hamza was jailed for seven years,  in 2006, on a charge of soliciting murder.

 

 

Muslim Chef Accuses Police Of ‘Religious Discrimination’ – Because He Was Asked To Cook Pork

Have you heard the latest from Dhimmiland UK?

A Muslim chef is suing Britain’s largest police force, claiming he suffered religious discrimination –  because he was asked to cook bacon and pork sausages for breakfast.

Hasanali Khoja is due to put his case against the Metropolitan Police before an employment tribunal. The ten day hearing begins tomorrow.

And Mr Khoja’s case is being supported by the Assocation Of Muslim Police and also the National Black Police Assocation. Khoja insists that he was refused permission to avoid handling pork, while working as a catering manager at a West London police HQ.

Personally, I think columnist Richard Littlejohn sums it up rather well: “There are some stories which are so preposterous on so many levels that it is difficult to know where to start.

“Whoever heard of a chef being excused pork? Naturally, he now wants a large sum of money by way of compensation. The Met has a long and undistinguished record of grovelling to this kind of opportunist bullying.

“What astonishes me is that he ever applied for a job cooking for policemen in the first place. What, precisely, did he think they serve up in a police canteen – vegetarian samosas?”

Funny how you never hear of British Hindus, Jews, Sikhs, or Pagans kicking up a fuss and howling about ‘religious discrimination’, isn’t it? But then, members of these faiths don’t have a nasty and frankly duplicitous habit of freely choosing to work in a SECULAR arena, then protesting when their RELIGIOUS sensibilities are offended.

The case should be slung out of court. Of course, this being Britain, no doubt the chef will win, be paid damages, and then laugh all the way to the Mosque.

Some people have suggested that the whole thing looks like a set up. I can’t disagree.   This man knew that, at some point, he’d be required to handle pork. Yet he took the job despite this – no doubt biding his time. Now he’s set to be rewarded for this deceit.

And where are all the dissenting cries from other British Muslims…?  Oh, silly me. There aren’t any. All of the so-called ‘moderate’ Muslims seem to vanish the very second their voices most need to be heard.

Jacqui Smith Strikes Again – UK Home Secretary Bans US Radio Personality

Good G-d, is there no end to the stupidity of this woman?

First she banned Dutch politician Geert Wilders, purely on the basis that British Muslims threatened to riot,  and now she’s gone and banned America’s third most popular Radio personality, Michael Savage.

Savage was astonished to find his name appearing on a list of people banned from Britain. The other people named are all extremists who have called for genocide against Jews and for Jihad against the West.

.

The Home Office said Mr Savage might ‘provoke others to serious criminal acts’ Photo: AP

Mr Savage, whose daily show has an audience of millions, condemned “the country of Magna Carta” for “cowardly and distorted liberalism”.

And he quipped: ” I was just planning a trip to England for their superior dental work and cuisine,” he told WorldNetDaily.

Savage has now urged his millions of listeners to boycott British goods. He is also taking legal advice and says he’s considering suing Jacqui Smith.

“It’s interesting to me that here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence, who advocates patriotic traditional values … and I’m now on a list banned in England,” Mr Savage said. “What does that say about the government of England? It says more about them than it says about me.”

The Home Office said Mr Savage, 67, might “provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence”.

Right… And what about the numerous Muslim clerics who are busy preaching hate in Mosques across the country…? Not to mention … who has been let out of prison early and is now at liberty to spread his hateful views?

But no. Instead of dealing with the real problem of Islamic extremism, Jacqui Smith is far too busy persecuting men like Wilders and Savage, who actually have the guts to speak the truth about Islam.  And if Savage does end up suing Smith, who will foot the bill? Why, us, of course! The British tax payers. Call that justice?

And for those of you wondering who else is on the list, along with Michael Savage, they include: Stephen Donald Black, a former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard who set up a racist website; Fred Waldron Phelps, a pastor who is known for picketing the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq, claiming their deaths are divine punishment for society’s tolerance of homosexuality, and his daughter Shirley.

By placing Michael Savage on the same list as dangerous Muslim extremists, Jacqui Smith demonstrated – again – that she is an utter fool.  Feel free to write to her and convey your dismay at her latest idiocy. I have.

British Air Stewardess Fired – For Not Agreeing To Play By Islam’s Rules

Here in Dhimmiland UK, news just in that a female employee of British airline BMI has been sacked – because she refused to wear an ‘abaya’ and walk behind male colleagues when in Saudi Arabia.

I kid you not. This is the story, courtesy of the Times Online:

“A BRITISH air stewardess was sacked for refusing to fly to Saudi Arabia after she was ordered to wear a traditional Islamic robe and walk behind male colleagues.

Lisa Ashton, a £15,000-a-year stewardess with BMI, was told that in public areas in Saudi Arabia she was required to wear a black robe, known as an abaya. This covers everything but the face, feet and hands. She was told to follow her male colleagues, irrespective of rank.

Ashton, 37, who was worried about security in the country, refused to fly there, claiming the instructions were discriminatory. She was sacked last April.

“It’s not the law that you have to walk behind men in Saudi Arabia, or that you have to wear an abaya, and I’m not going to be treated as a second-class citizen,” Ashton said last week.

“It’s outrageous. I’m a proud Englishwoman and I don’t want these restrictions placed on myself.”

Earlier this year an employment tribunal in Manchester ruled that BMI was justified in imposing “rules of a different culture” on staff and cleared it of sexual discrimination. Ashton has consulted Liberty, the human rights organisation, and may seek a judicial review of the decision.

Ashton joined BMI in March 1996, flying to the Caribbean, the United States and India. Based in Manchester, she was told in the summer of 2005 that BMI was starting a service to Saudi Arabia and she might be required to work on it.

The Foreign Office was then advising visitors of a “threat of terrorism” in the country. Ashton did not want to travel there because of the security risks, and was offended by the rules for staff travelling to the region.

A BMI document circulated to staff who might travel to Saudi Arabia stated: “It is expected that female crew members will walk behind their male counterparts in public areas such as airports no matter what rank.”

Staff were also given abayas and were required to put them on when leaving the aircraft.

Ashton, a practising Christian, was advised by union officials that it was considered a part of the uniform and she could face disciplinary action if she did not wear it.

Why the hell should any NON Muslim woman, from a NON Muslim country, be forced to don traditional Muslim garb? Do Muslim women from Saudi Arabia take OFF their abayas when visiting Britain? No, of course they blinking well don’t!

As usual, it’s we ‘infidels’ that are being required to change and give up our rights in order to fit in with Islam.

And for a British company to be the force behind this latest travesty is alarming. Of one thing we can all be sure: this is not the first such incident, and it won’t be the last.

Multiculturalism? Or Lunacy?

.

And the latest from Dhimmiland UK, is that some schools may now shut completely – for Ramadan.

Yep – you read it correctly the first time. In some areas of the country, entire schools will close for the Muslim festival.

From an article in the Daily Mail:

Now local authorities including Manchester, Oldham and Tower Hamlets in East London are granting schools permission to close for up to three days to cover holy days such as the Islamic festivals of Eid al Fitr and Eid ul Adha.

Strange, isn’t it? Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Buddhists, and Sikhs have always managed perfectly well in Britain; we take the occasional day off to observe and enjoy our respective religion’s holy days and festivals – but nobody would ever have dreamed of even suggesting that entire schools be closed down!

Yet now it seems as though the Muslim festival of Ramadan is being given the status of a national holiday!

Why on earth should non Muslim pupils lose out, and why on earth should non Muslim parents be forced to reorganise their timetables, just because it’s Ramadan…?

I’m British and Jewish. I applaud learning about other faiths and their customs – indeed, at age eleven I chose to attend a mixed faith school.

But being prevented from attending school just because members of a completely different religion are observing a festival?

This is not ‘multiculturalism’.

This is LUNACY.

It’s Official: Britain Has Gone Mad

British ‘justice’ is a thing of the past. If any of us doubted this, then today’s newspaper story confirms it:

The family of a man stabbed to death has been denied compensation: because the victim tried to fight off his murderers.

Kevin Johnson, 22, was killed by three teenaged thugs, after he stepped outside his own house to ask them to keep the shouting down.

The killers, aged 16, 17 and 19, invited him to ‘meet Mr Stanley’ and then plunged their Stanley knife into Johnson’s chest, arm and back.

And after they left him there to die, the three thugs later attacked a second victim.

Yet after applying for some compensation, Kevin Johnson’s family have been told that they do not meet the ‘criteria’ because he had ‘significantly contributed’ to his own death.

In fact, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority has now twice rejected the case brought by Kevin Johnson’s father.

Great Britain. Not so ‘great’ anymore.

——————————————————————————————

Today’s must-read article appears over at Pajamas Media, and concerns the activities of a major UK Muslim organisation. Don’t miss it!

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/major-uk-muslim-group-wallows-in-anti-semitism/