GOOD NEWS FOR ISRAEL BAD FOR BDS : British appeals court rules that selling Ahava products is "perfectly lawful" - common sense prevails

British appeals court rules that selling Ahava products is "perfectly lawful"

British appeals court rules that sellingAHAVA Dead Sea Laboratories products is "perfectly lawful". An inside source with knowledge of the situation tells us that this could open the door for businesses like our friends at EcoStream - The Refill Store to be able to sue the bullies that harass them on a daily basis with their hateful BDS nonsense. This is HUGE news that further de-fangs the haters and a big win for the good guys! 

In November, 2010:

Pro-Palestinian activists blockaded an Ahava store in London's Covent Garden on Monday, resulting in temporary closure of the store.

Two activists reportedly locked themselves to a cement-filled barrel at the entrance to the property. Police were called to the store, and the two were subsequently arrested on charges of aggravated trespassing, and taken to a central London police station.

They were convicted, and they appealed, on numerous grounds. 

All of which have been thoroughly rejected by the UK Supreme Court.

Their 13-page judgment disproves the arguments made by the Israel-haters to support their position. There are four conditions for being guilty of this category of trespass. The four categories are:

i) the defendant must be a trespasser on the land; 

ii) there must be a person or persons lawfully on the land (that is to say not themselves trespassing), who are either engaged in or about to engage in some lawful activity; 

iii) the defendant must do an act on the land; 

iv) which is intended by him to intimidate all or some of the persons on the land out of that activity, or to obstruct or disrupt it.

The haters claims that part 2 doesn't apply to them because selling Ahava products is illegal. They brought a number of specious arguments.

First, they claimed:

i) The company running the shop was guilty of aiding and abetting the transfer by the Israeli authorities of Israeli citizens to a territory (the OPT) under belligerent occupation; the transfer was said to be contrary to article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of August 1949, and aiding and abetting it to be an act ancillary to a war crime, made a criminal offence in England and Wales by sections 51 and 52 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001.
The court answered:

It is very doubtful that to employ such people could amount to counselling or procuring or aiding or abetting the Government of Israel in any unlawful transfer of population. Such an employer might be taking advantage of such a transfer, but that is not the same as encouraging or assisting it. Even if that company could have been aiding and abetting such transfer, that cannot amount to an offence by the separate retailing company, whatever the corporate links between the two companies. And even if the companies had been the same, such a crime of assistance was not an integral part of the activity carried on at the shop, which was retail selling. On the contrary, it was antecedent to, and remote from, the selling. The selling was perfectly lawful. The defendants, for their own reasons, elected to trespass and to stage a sit-in which was intended to (and did) stop that lawful activity in its tracks. They thereby committed the offence under section 68.

Their other arguments were equally ridiculous and dismissed accordingly; for example that the products were mislabeled as being from "the Dead Sea, Israel," the court noted that even if they were mislabeled that does not make their sale illegal. Similarly, they claimed that since the labeling said Israel, it violated a Cosmetic Products Safety Regulation where the country of origin must be prominently displayed, but the judgment found that this was a consumer safety issue and while "the Regulations are not directed at disputed issues of territoriality" the clear labeling that it came from the Dead Sea was accurate. (Which indicates that the UK legally considers the territories to be disputed, not occupied!)

The conclusion was that 

It follows that of the postulated offences all were either not demonstrated to have been committed by the occupants of the shop at the time of the defendants’ trespass or were at most collateral to the core activity of selling rather than integral to that activity. The occupants of the shop were, accordingly, engaged in the lawful activity of retail selling at the time and section 68(2) provided no defence to the defendants.

It is so funny how, in the echo chamber of the haters, they assert that so many things are illegal, and when courts actually rule otherwise they are shocked that all those "experts" in their social media were wrong. 

Elders of Zion

GOOD NEWS FROM THE UK as Britain bans 'anti-Semitic' French comic from entering UK using tough new laws outlawing anti Semitism

On grounds of public security and strick laws to fight anti Semitism, Britain's interior ministry slaps exclusion order on Dieudonne M'bala M'bala after he reportedly planned to visit country to support Nicolas Anelka in footballer's 'quenelle' row. Dieudonne responds by giving Queen Elizabeth II his trademark Nazi-like salute

French comedian Dieudonne M'bala M'bala was on Monday banned from entering Britain after he reportedly planned to visit to support Nicolas Anelka in the footballer's anti-Semitism row. Dieudonne responded by giving Queen Elizabeth II his trademark Nazi-like salute.

The comic, who has a string of convictions for hate speech in his homeland, performed the stiff-armed gesture after naming the queen in a rant during a show in the Swiss town of Nyon.

Britain's interior ministry said earlier it had slapped an exclusion order on 47-year-old Dieudonne who in his homeland has a string of convictions, for hate speech, using Britain's strict new laws that were brought in to combat anti Semitism  on the grounds of public security.

Dieudonne invented the allegedly anti-Semitic"quenelle" gesture that Anelka used during a goal celebration in December, landing the striker with a charge from English footballing authorities.

 

"We can confirm that Mr. Dieudonne is subject to an exclusion order," a Home Office spokeswoman said in a statement.

 

"The home secretary (Theresa May) will seek to exclude an individual from the UK if she considers that there are public policy or public security reasons to do so."

 

British media last week quoted Dieudonne as saying that he was planning to perform a show in Britain and hold a press conference in support of his friend, former French international Anelka.

 

The Home Office refused to give further details on the order banning from Britain.

 

But a British government source told AFP on condition of anonymity: "The reason for the exclusion order is that he was going to come to the UK."

 

Dieudonne, who also faces accusations of fraud at home, says he is being persecuted by the French authorities.

 

"So many things have happened over the past year. Just today... Shit, what have I done? I don't know," he said during his show in Nyon.

 

His lawyer Jacques Verdier said he did not know if his client had actually intended to go to London.

 

He said that the ban showed British authorities were "nervous" and added that "it's appalling but nothing surprises us at the moment."

 

Trademark stiff-armed gesture

Anelka has been charged by the Football Association, the sport's governing body in England, after he made the "quenelle" gesture, which critics say is anti-Semitic but Dieudonne insists is anti-establishment.

 

The West Bromwich Albion striker made the gesture during a goal celebration after scoring against West Ham during an English Premier League match on December 28.

 

Anelka denies the charge, saying he is neither anti-Semitic nor racist, and that he made the gesture in support of Dieudonne.

 

Britain is using new laws to combat anti Semitism which were brought in last year and has used exclusion orders on rare occasions in recent years to keep out public figures deemed as having extreme views.

 

France has in recent weeks intensified a crackdown on Dieudonne, who has been widely accused of promoting anti-Semitism and has been convicted in France for hate speech and other related offences.

 

The French government in December succeeded in preventing him from starting a nationwide tour of a new show, "The Wall", because of its perceived anti-Jewish content.

 

Last week French police seized €650,000 and $15,000 in cash during a raid on his house as part of a probe into suspected fraud.

 

Authorities are currently trying to force Dieudonne to pay more than €65,000 in outstanding fines related to his convictions and suspect that the 47-year-old was planning to fraudulently declare himself bankrupt.

 

The "quenelle" is Dieudonne's trademark stiff-armed gesture that critics say is a disguised Nazi salute but that he defends as a generic "up yours" to the French establishment.

 

Some followers of Dieudonne have been photographed doing the quenelle at sites including Auschwitz, synagogues and outside a Jewish school in Toulouse where a rabbi and three children were shot dead by Islamist gunman Mohamed Merah in 2012.

Ynet news

“The Dealers” : American presidents come and go but only those of wisdom follow in the footsteps of those that achieved

American presidents often defer to great predecessors and the founding fathers as a source of inspiration and guidance. So did Abraham Lincoln as well as Ronald Reagan. 

In making his choices regarding a nuclear crises President Obama had at his disposal his predecessors’ experience manifested in two schools of thought: the one represented by the Republican Ronald Reagan and the Democrat John F. Kennedy. Reagan’s tough stance towards the U.S.S.R had reached its pinnacle in the Reykjavik summit of 1986.

 It was this tough and principled position that led only a year later, for the first time ever, to the elimination of an entire class of nuclear weapons and eventually to expediting the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed a few years later, during President H.W Bush’s term. 

Kennedy’s tough stance during the Cuban missile crises of October 1962, rolled back the expansion of the U.S.S.R nuclear ambitions from the Americas. 

The Nobel winning President Obama chose to follow another school of thought, the one represented by Presidents Clinton and the Nobel winner President Jimmy Carter (“for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts”), in what might seem a smaller-scale crises. Clinton’s and Carter’s policy (as a former president) of “A Deal” with North Korea in which the North committed to freeze and eventually disarm its atomic capabilities in return for economic and political benefits totally collapsed as North Korea broke all agreements. Not only, ”The Deal” did not contain North Korea, it was North Korea that was instrumental in building, what the international media referred to, as the Syrian military atomic capability reactor. 

According to the international media the reactor was destroyed by Israel in September 2007.

Apparently, “The Deal” that was advocated by President Obama was so bad that the president of France, Holland, had to veto it, which prompted the WSJ in a spurt of self-Irony to hail France as a savior of the West. 

On the “final Deal” Prime minister of Britain David Cameron said In Chanukah reception in the Jewish community “I share your skepticism over the Iran deal” – a strange announcement from one of its chief architects and allies of the US.  

On this deal, one can recall the famous words of the French Prime Minister Édouard Daladier returning from the notorious peace conference in Munich 1938 to the adoring crowd cheering for him in Paris for “The Deal”: Ah, les cons!” (“Ah, the fools!”). Daladier has warned that the Western Powers capitulation will only precipitate the war they wish to avoid, and yet he signed “The Deal”.

It is also important to note the reasoning behind the decision of President Obama. Only last year, it was Obama who said that he was committed that Iran will not be a nuclear state and threatened a use of force if need be. 

However, that was before he got re-elected. The president current reasoning is that he is committed to find a peaceful solution and end the cycle of violence. As if reality and world safety is a story from Alice in wonderland in which the reality is what the president wants it to be. 

Along the same lines secretary of state, John Kerry, warned in Congress that increased sanctions on Iran will lead to war. President Obama and John Kerry are repeating mistakes not only of the appeasement of Hitler but also of British leaders before World War 1. 

In her Pulitzer book Guns of August 1914, two time Pulitzer winner Barbara Tuchman shows how indecisiveness of British politicians resulting from public objection to an involvement in Europe was a major contributing factor in the German plans of operations and calculations on submitting France. 

This public sentiment led the British government to fear commitments and alliances in fear of a threat of war. The same public, unwilling to commit to detering Germany, found it-self burying its young generation in the notorious battles fields of Europe fighting Germany to exhaustion in battles such as the Battle of the Somme in which it is estimated that 1 million people died or were injured.  A war America eventually intervened in.

The stakes in the current Genève accord are not diminished compared to the previous Geneva accord with North Korea. This agreement is not marginal and not limited to the Middle East. North Korea also was not limited to the Korean peninsula. It is important to note that the deranged regime of North Korea has been using the Nuclear weapon to extract economic and other benefits for its dying populations but China has leverage over this regime and is a stabilizing factor. Despite this stabilization only this year North Korea threatened the USA with a preemptive nuclear strike. 

The situation with Iran is even graver. In Iran rules an extreme Islam ideology which believes in its historic role as leaders of the global Islamic revolution and bent, inter alia, upon the destruction of Israel. It is not just the former president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that on numerous times declared publicly that his country commitment to wipe Israel of the map, but it is also the current President Hasan Rouhani, who said: “Israel is ‘a wound on the body of the Islamic world.”

Never Again? In 2006, another Pulitzer Prize laureate, Charles Krauthammer published a chilling article in which he asks: can the world really guaranty that a massacre of 6 million Jews will never happen again? In his, article explains Krauthammer that Israel is a tempting target to those who wish to finish Hitler’s work: “a tiny territory by the Mediterranean, eight miles wide at its waist. A tempting target for those who would finish Hitler’s work.” Krauthammer explains the logic behind the Iranian approach: “Former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the presumed moderate of this gang, has declared that “the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.” The logic is impeccable, the intention clear: A nuclear attack would effectively destroy tiny Israel, while any retaliation launched by a dying Israel would have no major effect on an Islamic civilization of a billion people stretching from Mauritania to Indonesia”.

Approximately 2500 years ago another law educated man named Themistocles (etymology means glorious supporter/defender of the law) from Athens foresaw the upcoming Persian invasion. He was also from a humble origin but with the foresight resolve and leadership. He persuaded the Athenians to upgrade the navy and enlist the entire Athenians people (and in the process free the Athenians slaves) and eventually he united Greece against the annihilating Persian army. It is this foresight and understanding that made him one of the West great protectors forever.

In a speech to parliament in 1914, Sir Edward Grey, then foreign secretary of Britain, united Britain on the war against the invading German army. 

Lord Grey is probably best remembered for this speech, which is known as: “The lamps are going out all over Europe. We shall not see them lit again in our time”. In this speech Grey quoted a British Prime Minister who was differing to a similar problem of an aggressive Germany trying to devour tiny Belgium in the 19th century. 

Regarding British involvement, Gladstone said and Grey quoted: ““it is found in an answer to the question, whether under the circumstances of the case this country, endowed as it is with influence and power would quietly stand by and witness the perpetration of the direst crime that ever stained the pages of history and thus become participators in the sin”.

Today we have Barack Hussein Obama and we will not hear him make such speeches. He defers mostly to himself. 

He is no protector of the West, nor a true a friend of Israel. Contrary to his many promises he is bent on isolating and breaking Israel (as if for its own good, of course) – this is the international underlining meaning of Global Obamacare.

On this I am sadly reminded with the words of the Swedish leader Axel Oxenstierna, who was the chancellor for Sweden for more than 40 years, in a letter to his son in 1648: “Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?” (in the original Latin An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?). It is obvious that President Obama has a failed plan and he is bent on executing it, repeating history disasters. The letter of chancellor Oxenstiema of 1648 is probably relevant today as ever.

Times if Israel 

‘Palestinian group carried out Lockerbie bombing’

Gaddafi may have commissioned attack that killed 270 people 25 years ago, ex-Israeli security official tells Times of Israel, but Ahmed Jibril’s PFLP-GC carried it out

Twenty-five years after Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland, with the loss of all 259 passengers and crew and 11 people on the ground, a former senior member of the Israeli security establishment said he was certain the bombing was carried out by Ahmed Jibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

The Israeli source, who spoke to The Times of Israel on condition of anonymity, said Israel was “listening in” during the months prior to the December 21, 1988 bombing on preparations for what “we thought was a plan to target an Israeli plane” and that it was “clear that Jibril prepared the operation.”

The comments came ahead of Saturday’s 25th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack ever carried out on British territory, and the worst terror attack on American civilians with the exception of 9/11. The anniversary is prompting another slew of conspiracy theories as to who was responsible.

Among the claims that have come to the fore in various newspaper reports, TV documentaries and new books in the last few days are allegations that the bomber was Palestinian terrorist Mohammed Abu Talb, who carried out a series of bombings in Copenhagen and Amsterdam in 1985; that the CIA subverted the investigation; and that a fair-minded examination of the evidence demonstrates that the bomb, rather than beginning its fateful journey in Malta, was smuggled onto Flight 103 via a baggage container at Heathrow Airport.

The Israeli source did not dispute that Col. Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya, which in 2003 accepted responsibility for the bombing and paid compensation to victims’ families, had commissioned the attack. And he said that while an Iranian role made sense, Israel had found no proof of Iranian involvement. (Iran, a prime orchestrator of international terrorism, had pledged to avenge the July 1988 accidental downing by the USS Vincennes of Iran Air Flight 655 in the Persian Gulf, with the loss of all 290 people on board.)

Several Israeli prime ministers and former heads of the Mossad intelligence service have told this reporter over the years that it is their belief that the Libyans instigated the bombing.

The source, who was a senior figure in the Israeli military intelligence hierarchy at the time of the Lockerbie blast, said there was a “huge alert” in the Israeli security establishment in the months before the bombing, because of indications that the PFLP-GC was about to strike. “We told the British and the Americans what we knew, which was that there was an intention to hit an Israeli plane,” he said. “We didn’t warn about a British or an American plane because we didn’t know that,” he said.

The only man ever convicted for the bombing was a Libyan intelligence officer, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was found to have placed a suitcase containing the bomb on a flight from Malta to Frankfurt, from where it was transferred to a flight to London’s Heathrow, before detonating on Flight 103 a little more than half an hour after the Pan Am plane took off for New York. Megrahi, who was jailed in 2001 after a trial in which his fellow alleged Libyan conspirator, Lamin Fhima, was acquitted,went to his death in 2012 insisting on his innocence.

Times of Israel 

Lee Rigby Murder Trial: Guilty Verdicts announced for the vile filth that committed the murder

WE AT THIS BLOG JUST HOPE THAT TRUE JUSTICE IS SERVED BY THE OTHER PRISONERS IN THE PRISON ;-)

An Old Bailey jury has convicted two young London men of the brutal murder of fusilier Lee Rigby.

It took the jury of eight women and four men about 90 minutes to return guilty verdicts on Michael Adebolajo, 28, and Michael Adebowale, 22.

The pair were found not guilty of attempting to murder police officers at the scene of the killing on May 22.  

Adebolajo glared at journalists and the jury as he was led to the prison cells and kissed his copy of the Koran. Adebowale did not react to the verdicts.

Members of Lee Rigby's family sobbed on the court steps as a statement was read by Detective Inspector Pete Sparks on their behalf.

The statement read: "No one should have to go through what we have been through as a family.

"We are satisfied that justice has been done, but unfortunately no amount of justice will bring Lee back.

"These people have taken him away from us forever but his memory lives on in all of us and we will never forget him.

"We are very proud of Lee, who served his country, and we will now focus on building a future for his son Jack, making him as proud of Lee as we all are. Lee will be sorely missed by his siblings, nieces, nephew and all of those who loved him.

"We now ask that we are left alone to grieve through our loss."

The murder of the off-duty soldier both horrified and united the nation, as politicians, faith leaders and members of the community in south east London came together to condemn the killing.

The 25-year-old drummer with the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers was singled out by his attackers because he was a soldier.

Adebolajo, the only defendant who gave evidence, admitted killing the young serviceman, but claimed his actions were justified as part of a war against the British military and British government for wars waged by the UK in Muslim countries.  

During the trial, he was asked directly for his defence to the charge of murder.

Adebolajo told the jury: "I am a soldier. I am a soldier of Allah and I understand that some people might not recognise this because we do not wear fatigues and we don't go to the Brecon Beacons to train. But we are still soldiers."

He told the court he considered al Qaeda to be "mujahideen".

He said: "I love them, they're my brothers. I have never met them. I consider them my brothers in Islam."

Both Adebolajo and Adebowale had been known to the police and security services because of their extremist beliefs, but they had not been considered a significant or immediate threat.

Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee is examining whether any opportunities to prevent Mr Rigby's murder might have been missed by the authorities.

Scotland Yard's head of Specialist Operations, Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick, told Sky News the Met was fully co-operating with the inquiry.

"If we had known, if we had information that told us that these people were likely to commit this attack, or if somebody had said this was about to happen, of course we would have done everything we could to try to prevent it from happening.

"The profile of these two young men is not unique, sadly. And we will do our level best to try to find out about such people and to try to find out what they may intend. But we can't reduce the risks to zero," she said.

Lee Rigby's mother, widow and other family members sat through each day of the three week long trial, listening to often very harrowing evidence and viewing graphic video of the events outside Woolwich barracks.

At times, the evidence was just too much for the family to bear and they left court in tears on several occasions.

It was also a very difficult trial for the jury to sit through.

On occasions, some were visibly distressed as they watched CCTV footage taken at the time of the attack and listened to testimony from some of the eyewitnesses.

Witness Cheralee Armstrong said in a statement that there was "pure evil" in one of the knifemen's eyes, and that she thought she would die.

At first she thought they were trying to help the soldier after a road accident, but then saw that they were stabbing and hacking at him.

"It was like they were mutilating the person's body. It seemed like they were trying to remove his organs from his torso," she said.

When she shouted at the attackers to stop, she described one of them looking at her.

"The man in the hat (Adebolajo) stared at me, his expression was blank. Pure evil, and his eyes were bulging," she said.

He then pointed a gun towards her and James Henegan, who was driving her in his Citroen C3.

Mr Henegan wept in court as he described the moment he left his car and saw one of the men withdraw the gun from what looked like a "carrier bag".

"I thought he was going to shoot …fire a gun at us," he said.

The jury was told how Mr Rigby's killers refused to leave the scene after the murder, as they waited for police to arrive.

Those police officers were to have been their next victims, the prosecution claimed.

Dramatic CCTV and other video of the moments an armed response vehicle arrived outside the barracks were played to the jury.

There were gasps from the court as the footage showed the two men running towards the police vehicle and then being shot.

One of the officers - identified only as D49 - said she "instantly" thought she would die when Adebolajo ran towards her car.

She claimed he had a meat cleaver or machete and was "shouting something", adding that his eyes "were so wide" she could "see the whites of them".

Adebolajo claimed both men had wanted the police to kill them, to make them martyrs.

They did not get that wish, as both have since made a full recovery.

Nor did the jury believe their justification for killing Lee Rigby.

They ruled that death of the young fusilier was murder, pure and simple.

• Sky news

UK TO BAN RADICAL ISLAM - Common sense prevails at last

It’s easy to slam all the nonsense about Islamic extremism as willful denial and the notion that Islamism is something separate from Islam, rather than the political implementation of Islam through Islamization, as delusional.

But this is potentially a quite important step. For the first time, a major Western country is moving to criminalize a variant of Islam. And that’s an interesting precedent.

The UK is separating a part of Islam (based on specific characteristics, e.g. a worldwide Islamic state, approval of violence) that the religion shares as a whole. And it’s doing this by classifying it as a political ideology… rather than a religion.

That’s a good thing. Yes, this isn’t an actual ban. But it is a declaration that it is unwelcome and is to be treated the way that “right-wing extremists” like the EDL are. That is going to have plenty of invisible consequences especially on the policing level. Assuming that it’s truly implemented.

The UK isn’t going to suddenly go full Angola. Even Angola isn’t going full Angola. But these represent three important steps

1. Classifying a form of Islam as an ideology rather than a religion

2. Taking legal steps to move it out of the public square

3. Making that classification based on characteristics that Islam overall shares

That’s a base for something much bigger.

It would be premature to make too much of this right now. Cameron is worried about his political prospects and European leaders have a tendency to talk big going into elections before scampering away… but this does look like it was workshopped through the bureaucracy.That means it may actually turn into policy.

The British government said Wednesday it needs new powers to help combat the spread of violent extremist Islam, including administrative authority to ban groups and restrict the movement and behavior of alleged recruiters.

A special task force of senior ministers set up by Prime Minister David Cameron reported Wednesday, recommending new quasi-judicial authorities and defining Islamic extremism as “a distinct ideology that should not be confused with traditional [Muslim] religious practice,” according to a statement from Mr. Cameron’s office.

The report also recommends the government work with Internet providers in Britain to get them to block access to sites based abroad that carry material “illegal under U.K. law.”

The new powers recommended for use against extremist recruiters would be similar to the controversial “anti-social behavior orders” introduced in 1998. Such orders are imposed by local magistrates on hooligans and other reckless youths — banning them from being in places like malls or parks, associating with certain people and exhibiting behaviors like swearing or playing loud music.

Anti-social behavior orders can be imposed “on the balance of the evidence.” By contrast, criminal sanctions can be imposed only after conviction “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

That last part is rather important. It makes it possible for the authorities to begin harassing people because everyone knows what they’re up to.

The move is part of a sweeping package of measures drawn up by an anti-extremism task force set up by David Cameron after the death of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich.

In its initial report to be detailed to Parliament today, the task force will also propose new internet filters to block extremist websites and extended powers for watchdogs to shut down charities suspected of being fronts for extremist groups.

‘I want to see an end to hate preaching in Britain,’ the Prime Minister said.

As well as new civil orders against extremists – dubbed ‘Tebos’, or terror and extremism behaviour orders – the Government is to consider the case for another new type of order to ban groups which ‘seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech, when necessary to protect the public or prevent crime and disorder’.

Both types of order are to be based on a new definition of extremism which specifically includes a ‘distorted interpretation of Islam’.

It identifies Islamist extremism as a distinct ideology which should not be confused with traditional  religious practice. This ‘distorted’ view argues for a global Islamic state and against ‘liberal values such as democracy, the rule of law and equality’, and tells people they cannot be both Muslim and British.

This “distorted view” just happens to be Islam. And if the UK government just blindly classified Islam as a political ideology to be repressed… that puts him on the same line as Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Cameron made the announcement in China, which like Russia, has government clergy and clergy not sanctioned by the government who are subject to all sorts of government sanctions. Europe is slowly drifting toward that solution. It’s not a real solution since it does not address the demographic issues, something China can afford to ignore, but it’s a potentially important step.

The task force includes Home Secretary Theresa May, Deputy Premier Nick Clegg, Minister for Faith Baroness Warsi, and has taken advice from police and intelligence chiefs.

Clegg is well on the left and Warsi is a Muslim and has some suspicious ties. So I would like to see how this is actually implemented, but there is potential here.

Washington times

UK MP's Launch Inquiry Into Lack of Prosecution for FGM

Thousands of girls have been cut, yet since the practice became illegal in the UK in 1985, no one has ever been prosecuted for the crime.

In 1985, Britain made Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) illegal. In 2003, Britain further made it illegal to have the cutting carried out abroad.

Yet, to date, no charges have ever been brought in Britain against known perpetrators of the practice or parents who take and arrange to have their daughters taken abroad to undergo cutting.

While British prosecutors say that they are “close” to bringing the first case to court in the 28 years since the law has been in place, Parliament’s powerful Home Affairs Select Committee has launched a major investigation into the scandal of the lack of prosecution for this crime.

The committee intends to call out ministers and police, as well as national health workers and school officials in a hope to eradicate the practice in Britain.

"It is astonishing that since FGM was made a crime in 1985 nobody has been prosecuted,” said committee chairman Keith Vaz. “This is a concern both to the diaspora communities and also the NHS (National Health Service) and it is important that light is cast on this practice and action is taken. That is why this committee is launching an inquiry into FGM. We are keen to hear from any victims and those who have been affected by this practice.”

Vaz also said that, “The committee is prepared to take evidence from anyone so that we can get to the truth. This is the first time that the Home Affairs Select Committee has done such an inquiry.”

Although there are no official statistics about how widespread the practice is in Britain, the Evening Standard reports that close to 3,500 women who were suffering from consequences of FGM had been treated in London hospitals over the last few years.

The Standard also reports that anti-FGM activists estimate that 66,000 women living in Britain have been subjected to FGM with an additional  24,000 girls up to age 11 currently at risk of being cut.

source

Hague warns Israel of 'undermining' this so-called 'deal' - Well its OK for him Britain hasn't got thousands of rockets hitting London, paid and financed by Iran with the possibility of a very big one taking out a whole city.

Should mind his own business

British Foreign Secretary William Hague on Monday cautioned Israel and other states from taking action to undermine an agreement struck with Iran a day earlier

While briefing Parliament, Hague called the agreement a “thorough and detailed first stage agreement” which he said was a “significant step towards enhancing the security of the Middle East and preventing nuclear proliferation.”

                

“We would discourage anybody in the world, including Israel, from taking any steps that would undermine this agreement and we will make that very clear to all concerned,” Hague said.

The agreement signed early Sunday between Iran and six world powers rolls back some sanctions on Iran in return for limits on nuclear enrichment, the shuttering of certain sites and an agreement by Tehran to allow some international oversight.

Israeli had lobbied intensively against the deal, which it says lets Iran keep enrichment capabilities. On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the agreement a “historic mistake.”

Speaking about the particulars of the deal, Hague remarked that the “bulk of the international sanctions” in place “will not be lifted until a comprehensive settlement is reached and we will enforce them robustly.”

He said the still-stringent sanctions levied against the Islamic Republic are an incentive for Iran to comply with the agreement and halt its nuclear program.

“The fact that we have achieved for the first time in nearly a decade an agreement that halts and rolls back Iran’s nuclear program should give us heart that this work can be done and that a comprehensive agreement can be attained,” he said. He warned, however, that if Iran does not abide by its agreements, it would bear “a heavy responsibility.”

Hague’s counterpart across the English Channel, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, said Paris could lift some of the crippling sanctions against Iran within weeks.

“We have agreed to ease a certain number of sanctions,” Fabius was quoted by France24 saying, emphasizing that an eventual final deal with the Islamic Republic rested on mutual respect of the deal signed in Geneva on Sunday.

Fabius was also quoted saying that Israel was unlikely to attempt military intervention in Iran for now, “because no one would understand” it “at this stage.”

Hague said the implementation of the interim agreement would take place after discussions with Iran and the IAEA, and would likely take effect at the end of January.

On Monday, India indicated it would begin paying Iran some $5.3 billion it owes for oil exports as early as next week, Reuters reported.
----------

Preacher Anjem Choudary's hotline to terrorist White Widow

Richard Spillett


HATE preacher Anjem Choudary was last night faced with shock claims he has links to White Widow Samantha Lewthwaite.

LINK: White Widow Lewthwaite has praised Anjem Choudary on social networking sites [GETTY]

A new report reveals the radical cleric incites his army of British fanatics to take up arms with Lewthwaite’s jihadists in Somalia.

And Lewthwaite – on the run after the Kenya mall massacre – supports Choudary, 46, by praising him online, it says.

Choudary has sparked fury in Britain for burning poppies and urging Muslims to milk Britain’s benefits system. Meanwhile, Lewthwaite, 29, spouts extremism on a Twitter feed claiming links to terror groups al-Shabaab and al-Qaida.

FURY: Choudary has sparked fury in Britain for burning poppies and urging Muslims to milk the benefits system [PA]

She tweeted: “When Anjem Choudary speaks, so-called ‘moderate Muslims’ start to sweat & tremble.”

Another message said: “Anjem Choudary remains a noble & brave Muslim who speaks his mind & fears Allah like a pious Muslim should do.”

Former BBC Panorama and ITV World In Action investigator Nick Lowles uncovered the links between the radical pair.

He said: “Too many people dismiss Anjem Choudary as a clown but this report reveals the true extent of his group’s links to terrorism at home and abroad.”

EVIL: The White Widow poses for a picture that was found on her laptop [REX]

"Peace in our time" said Chamberlin in 1938 - "Deal of our time"from Kerry in 2013 : And this will turn out just as disastrous -Americans and other nations seriously need to wake up

Kerry's appeasement will end up with the same nightmarish results as Chamberlin's appeasement  

Israel has learned a lot lately, especially in the last 24 hours, that she cannot trust anyone, now including her allies. 

The nuclear deal signed enabling Iran to effectively build a nuclear weapon via the back door, is the ultimate insult to Israel. 

America and the others know Israel's predicament yet they have now allowed Iran time knowing fully well that Iran will use it to build a nuke. Anyone, including a child of four, can see that all Iran's talk and promises of change is just that, talk. 

Even after Rouhani made his first promises Obama and Kerry didn't exactly give it time to see if they were genuine. A sensible world leader would have waited at least a year to see if any positive action by Rouhani to prove he'd changed, like stopping further hangings of women in public places, or gays being lynched from cranes. Or most of all a good world leader might have given it a year to see if the anti Israel rhetoric coming from Tehran might cease. 

But no, after a couple of smiles and a few words of encouragement Obama and Co Jump straight into the trap and sign a deal that could effectively mean the end of human existence. After just three months these incompetent bungling fools have swallowed the lie and have now given the worlds most dangerous regime a blank cheque to do what it wants. 

This deal will just give Iran time and now resources, to build a nuclear weapon and the sole reason for this is Iran's hatred of Israel, which will be the main target of any Iranian nuclear attack.

The whole world is at fault here for letting this happen. All of them could have helped prevent this, including Britain, Russia, China and Germany, but they chose not to. Instead they chose appeasement. 

But most shocking of all is the actions of America. America is 'supposed' to be Israel's closest ally, yet America has been the driving force for this 'deal', as it has also for the so-called 'peace talks' in the middle east, another 'deal' detrimental to Israel's interests. 

Israel has learned one thing from the last few weeks and that is that it can no longer trust its supposed allies let alone its enemies. Despite the good hearted nature of the millions of Americans, Britons, Europeans and Russians to name s few countries, the leaderships of those countries are out for a quick fix to look good temporarily for the voters, yet they are leaving an ally and the middle easts only democracy in the lurch, not forgetting putting the lives of millions of people world wide in jeopardy, including their own citizens. 

But the striking event to arise from this shamboc 'deal' is the conduct of France. Out of all the countries who has been vocal in standing by Israel was France. A nation that is regularly the object of jests on FB and elsewhere due to the policies of its governments in the past; jests and gibes about radical Islam on French streets and the influence of radicals in this or that sector to name some; jests and jibes coming from many quarters, but much often coming from keyboards in American homes. 

People from all nations need to step back and take note, but more so Americans need to step back and take a very close look at their own backyard before criticising others because the potential  harm done against Israel and the free world in this Iranian nuclear deal, far outweighs an Islamist buffoon shouting his mouth of on a French street or a radical nut insisting the traffic stops in Paris during prayer. 

France might have major problems, but it has not got the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood directing foreign policy in its parliament and it hasn't got an Islamist president causing problems of potential global destructive scale. 

As grateful as Israelis are at the support, past and present, from ordinary Americans, as indeed all nations, sadly its not them that hold the reigns of power. The power comes from Government and going by the actions in this latest 'Deal' involving Iran, France has actually shown more signs of being Israel's closest friend and sadly America under Obama has done Israel's interests harm, together with the lapdogs that masquerade as politicians from Britain and other appeasers.
------