Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Islam

After This Muslim Was Granted Asylum, He Just Showed Us EXACTLY Why We Need Trump’s Ban

Sick disease should be hung!

Published

on

Donald Trump’s decision to place a temporary immigration ban on seven terroristic hotbed countries was the right thing to do. Regardless of the disagreement from the far left. An incident took place that proves he was right to be worried about terrorists infiltrating the United States through refugee groups.

A Sudanese migrant named Salah Koubar was granted asylum and allowed into the United Kingdom. He is a Muslim refugee and he violently raped a female tourist. He was twenty years old and met a Korean woman at a nightclub. He proceeded to escort her to another location in London. However, they never made it to the location because he dragged her from the train station to the railing where he brutally raped her.

The victim stated,

I was wearing a short dress and thought I was looking attractive and pretty. After the attack I felt it was my fault as I was wearing a short dress. I do not feel pretty anymore. I now buy long skirts and dresses.”

Via the Express UK:

A SUDANESE sex attacker has been jailed for raping a tourist outside a train station after he was granted asylum to stay in the UK.

Salah Koubar, 20, threw the South Korean woman over the railings at West Dulwich Station and dragged her into the bushes to carry out his attack.

A passer-by later found the woman running along the platform wearing only a T-shirt and knickers in the early hours of the morning.

The court heard the victim had hoped to meet a friend on her last night in London before travelling home to South Korea.

Koubar met the woman at Freedom Bar in Soho, and promised to take her to another venue called VIP in Westminster.

Instead Koubar tricked the woman into taking a bus leaving central London.

The rapist took the woman’s phone away when she realised they were going in the wrong direction and ended up at West Dulwich Station where the attack began.

Prosecutor Warwick Tatford described how a passenger catching an early train heard the woman’s screams and saw her running along the platform.

Mr Tatford said: “The victim grabbed the passenger’s arm and tried to use him as a human shield against the defendant.

“He described the female as ‘shaking like a leaf and with tears in her eyes’.

A passenger catching an early train heard the woman's screams

A passenger catching an early train heard the woman’s screams

“He said she looked like she’d been dragged through a hedge backwards – little did he know that’s pretty much what had happened.

“He said the defendant appeared calm – or ‘a bit too calm really’.”

When Koubar realised the witness was about to call the police he jumped on a train seconds before the doors closed.

Koubar, who came to the UK via France and was granted asylum in this country, was arrested two days after the attack on July 26.

Jailing Koubar for seven years, the judge Mr Recorder Timothy Greene said: “It was terrifying for her to be in a strange city not speaking the language.

Salah Koubar

Salah Koubar

There have been reports of Muslim men using sexual violence to enforce sharia law. This is a perfect example of that as the victim was attacked for wearing what was labeled as immodest clothing. Making it worse, she blames herself for wearing so called inappropriate clothing.

However, Sudan is one of the seven countries listed on the Presidents travel ban. Had the United Kingdom enforced a travel ban as the President had then they would have less violent crime. Especially since Sudan is known as a hotbed of terrorist activity. Showing that Trump’s ban could save lives.

But now federal judge James Robart lifted the ban by labeling it unconstitutional and proceeded to allow thousands of unvetted migrants to come into our country… which has placed all of our citizens at risk for another terrorist attack and more violent crime.

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Islam

1 Week After Muslim Tried To Take Over Southwest Flight With SICK Demand, Look Where She Ended Up

This is why we need the ban!

Published

on

Today, authorities have identified the Muslim woman who was forcibly removed from a Southwest Airlines plane in Baltimore on Tuesday as “Anila Daulatzai.” A professor at Harvard none the less! 

Once this “religion of peace” disciple got on the plane and saw there were two small dogs on board, she told the flight crew that she had a life-threatening allergy to dogs. Yeah, right “Allergies.” But she conveniently had no documentation to prove her medical condition. So she was then asked to leave the plane.

At that point, Daulatzai refused, so the flight’s captain called Maryland Transportation Authority Police, and its officers came on board to forcibly remove her.

Reports later said the dogs on the flight included one small pet and one service animal. If you have a life-threatening allergy to those dogs why would you refuse to vacate the place?

Sadly, Southwest Airlines apologized for police having to drag Daulatzai off the flight at Baltimore Washington International Airport that was headed to Los Angeles. She was still rightly charged with disorderly conduct and released on her own recognizance after appearing in court.

Via Heavy.com:

“The Los Angeles Times reported that Anila Daulatzai “was taken into custody and charged with disorderly conduct, failure to obey a reasonable and lawful order, disturbing the peace, obstructing and hindering a police officer and resisting arrest.” She is from Baltimore, the newspaper reported. According to the Los Angeles Times, the airline’s spokesman contends that Daulatzai “demanded an EpiPen and was uncooperative,” adding, “We do not have or administer shots.”

According to the Harvard website, “Currently Anila Daulatzai is teaching a graduate-level seminar course titled ‘Talibanization’ and its other. This course does not focus on the history of the Taliban movement (or movements described as ‘Taliban-like’), but more importantly on the performative nature of the term ‘Talibanization’. The course explores what deploying the term enables, particularly in the highly militarized contexts of the United States, Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

The site adds, “In particular, the course explores how formations of liberalism, feminism, and secularism give life to a term like ‘Talibanization’, and the violence that is enabled and justified by its deployment.””

The Gatestone Institute Reports:

Muslims Declare Jihad on Dogs in Europe

A Dutch Muslim politician has called for a ban on dogs in The Hague, the third-largest city in the Netherlands.

Islamic legal tradition holds that dogs are “unclean” animals, and some say the call to ban them in Holland and elsewhere represents an attempted encroachment of Islamic Sharia law in Europe.

This latest canine controversy — which the Dutch public has greeted with a mix of amusement and outrage — follows dozens of other Muslim-vs-dog-related incidents in Europe. Critics say it reflects the growing assertiveness of Muslims in Europe as they attempt to impose Islamic legal and religious norms on European society.

The Dutch dustup erupted after Hasan Küçük, a Turkish-Dutch representative on The Hague city council for the Islam Democrats, vehemently opposed a proposal by the Party for the Animals (Partij voor de Dieren) to make the city more dog friendly.

According to a January 28 report in the Amsterdam-based newspaper De Telegraaf, Küçük counter-argued that keeping dogs as pets is tantamount to animal abuse and he then called for the possession of dogs in The Hague to be criminalized.

According to its website, the Islam Democrats [ID] party is “founded on the Islamic principles of justice, equality and solidarity. ID is a bottom-up response to the large gap between the Muslim and immigrant communities and local politics…ID focuses on the political awareness within the Muslim and immigrant communities. Awareness about the need to organize, but also the need for mutual support.”

Paul ter Linden, who represents the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) on The Hague city council, responded to Küçük by saying: “In this country pet ownership is legal. Whoever disagrees with this should move to another country.”

Dutch political commentators believe Küçük’s declarations are a provocation designed to stir up the Muslim population in The Hague. Muslims — who now make up more than 12% of the city’s population of 500,000 — view dogs as ritually unclean animals and Küçük’s call for a ban on them is a sure vote-getter, they say.

The incident in Holland follows dog-related controversies in other European countries.

In Spain, two Islamic groups based in Lérida — a city in the northeastern region of Catalonia where 29,000 Muslims now make up around 20% of the city’s total population — asked local officials to regulate the presence of dogs in public spaces so they do not “offend Muslims.”

Muslims demanded that dogs be banned from all forms of public transportation including all city buses as well as from all areas frequented by Muslim immigrants. Muslims said the presence of dogs in Lérida violates their religious freedom and their right to live according to Islamic principles.

After the municipality refused to acquiesce to Muslim demands, the city experienced a wave of dog poisonings. More than a dozen dogs were poisoned in September 2011 (local media reports here, here, here, here and here) in Lérida’s working class neighborhoods of Cappont and La Bordeta, districts that are heavily populated by Muslim immigrants and where many dogs have been killed over the past several years.

Local residents taking their dogs for walks say they have been harassed by Muslim immigrants who are opposed to seeing the animals in public. Muslims have also launched a number of anti-dog campaigns on Islamic websites and blogs based in Spain.

In Britain, which has become “ground zero” for Europe’s canine controversies, blind passengers are being ordered off buses or refused taxi rides because Muslim drivers or passengers object to their “unclean” guide dogs.

In Reading, for example, one pensioner, a cancer sufferer, was repeatedly confronted by drivers and asked to get off the bus because of his guide dog. He also faced hostility at a hospital and in a supermarket over the animal.

In Nottingham, a Muslim taxi driver refused to carry a blind man because he was accompanied by his guide dog. The taxi driver was later fined £300 ($470).

In Stafford, a Muslim taxi driver refused to carry an elderly blind couple from a grocery store because they were accompanied by their seeing-eye dog.

In Tunbridge Wells, Kent, a blind man was turned away from an Indian restaurant because the owner said it was against his Muslim beliefs to allow dogs into his establishment.

In London, a bus driver prevented a woman from boarding a bus with her dog because there was a Muslim lady on the bus who “might be upset by the dog.” As the woman attempted to complain, the doors closed and the bus drove away. When a second bus arrived, she again tried to embark, but was stopped again, this time because the driver said he was Muslim.

Also in Britain, police sniffer dogs trained to spot terrorists at train stations may no longer come into contact with Muslim passengers, following complaints that it was offensive to their religion.

A report for the Transport Department advised that the animals should only touch passengers’ luggage because it is considered “more acceptable.” British Transport Police still use sniffer dogs — which are trained to detect explosives — with any passengers regardless of faith, but handlers are now more aware of “cultural sensitivities.”

Sniffer dogs used by police to search mosques and Muslim homes are now being fitted with leather bootees to cover their paws so that they do not cause offense.

Critics say the complaints are just another example of Muslims trying to force their rules and morals on British society. Tory MP Philip Davies said: “As far as I am concerned, everyone should be treated equally in the face of the law and we cannot have people of different religious groups laying the law down. I hope the police will go about their business as they would do normally.”

Meanwhile, Muslim prisoners in Britain are being given fresh clothes and bedding after sniffer dogs search their cells.

The inmates say their bedclothes and prison uniforms must be changed according to Islamic law if they have come anywhere near dog saliva. Government rules mean prison wardens must hand out replacement sets after random drug searches to avoid religious discrimination claims.

The dogs have also been banned from touching copies of the Islamic holy book the Koran and other religious items. Prisoners are handed special bags to protect the articles.

In Scotland, the Tayside Police Department apologized for featuring a German shepherd puppy as part of a campaign to publicize its new non-emergency telephone number. The postcards are potentially offensive to the city’s 3,000-strong Muslim community.

In Norway, Gry Berg, a blind woman, was denied entry into four taxis in the center of Oslo because she was accompanied by her guide dog.

In France, Marie Laforêt, one of the country’s most well-known singers and actresses, appeared in a Paris courtroom in December to defend herself against charges that a job advertisement she placed discriminated against Muslims.

The 72-year-old Laforêt had placed an ad on an Internet website looking for someone to do some work on her terrace in 2009. She specified in the ad that “people with allergies or orthodox Muslims” should not apply “due to a small Chihuahua.”

Laforêt claimed that she made the stipulation because she believed the Muslim faith saw dogs as unclean.

The case was taken up by an anti-discrimination group called the Movement against Racism and for Friendship between Peoples (MRAP), which lodged a complaint against Laforêt.

Laforêt’s lawyer said his client “knew that the presence of a dog could conflict with the religious convictions of orthodox Muslims. It was a sign of respect.” But Muslims rejected her defense.

Allergies my hind end! And who are these professors who are indoctrinating our young?

This woman is once again doing what Muslims do best. They come to our freedom loving nation, take advantage of the naiveness we show towards them, and impose their satanic values on the rest of us. The people on that plane needed to be removed from the flight because little miss Islam follows a religion that states that dogs are dirty but goats are ok.

It’s not illegal to bring a small dog with you on a plane, especially if it’s a service dog. After all, dogs have never hijacked or flown any of our planes into our buildings.

Please share if you agree Southwest was correct to have this woman removed from the plane!

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Featured

Theme Park Tells Muslim Her Burka Isn’t Safe For Ride – Here’s What Happened When She Didn’t Listen

Published

on

A Muslim amusement park goer in California decided she wanted to ride the rides like the other patrons but didn’t want to follow the rules to do so. Wearing her full Islamic garb, she approached one of the thrill rides and tried to get on when she was told that her burka was a danger, as loose clothing poses an obvious risk of getting entangled. It’s not just a danger to the one wearing it, but everyone else on the ride as well, who were for forced to take a backseat to what she perceived were her rights. Now, the entire amusement park paid a dear price.

The attire rules aren’t new to venues like this which frequently advertise that no loose clothing or open shoes can be worn when on the ride. The reason is obvious to most sensible people, but for Muslims, they see it as an opportunity to claim discrimination and religious persecution at the cost of others.

Park employees stopped the Muslim teen and her similarly dressed friends before they could get on go-karts. Pointing out the posted signage surrounding it, the worker explained the safety rules which specifically applied to attire. This policy wasn’t put into place to isolate anyone who follows Islam, it was to protect everyone in the park and ensure they had a good time, and that the business didn’t get a liability suit. Unfortunately, the Muslim girl didn’t listen to that common sense reasoning.

“If a scarf were to come partially off and get caught in the motor or wheels it could do deadly harm to the rider. This policy did not allow passengers to use the go-karts while wearing anything loose like a head scarf,” Conservative Daily Post reported of the park’s apparently problematic rules for the Muslim 13-year-old. The business’ policy put it bluntly, which apparently added to the perceived offense.

“If fashion, religious expression, or your hairstyle is more important to you than safety, that’s fine. You can do what you want with your life. You just can’t do it at our park,” the policy read. “When I read the policy, I was shocked — in disbelief — about the material I was reading,” the girl’s father, Nasir Abdo, said in his complaint, according to SF Gate.

Abdo took the policy personally while completely ignoring the fact that it wasn’t a target of his family’s religion, but a concern for the teen’s safety. This didn’t stop him from seeking vengeance and financial gain, having, of course, realized an opportunity at hand to exploit the overly politically correct climate in the liberal state of California.

SF Gate reports:

“A complaint against Palace Entertainment, an amusement park company and owner of the Boomers park in Livermore, was filed in August 2014 with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.”

“The grievance was submitted on behalf of seven Muslim girls and women, and a Sikh man after they were denied access to the go-karts because they refused to remove their religious hijab or turbans.”

It’s been nearly four years of since this complaint was filed, forcing the park to defend themselves and their safety rules. However, they just found out that none of that is as important as catering to Islam in the state of California. The company has now been forced to cave to the discrimination complaint, have changed their “no headwear” policy, and paid out a $32,000 settlement to the “victims.”

According to the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) complaint:

“The law guarantees Californians of all faiths access to places of business and entertainment, and safety concerns must be founded on more than speculation or stereotype. We are pleased that Palace Entertainment worked with DFEH to achieve resolution of these cases without the need for litigation.”

CAIR insists that these seven females and the man in the turban were denied access based on religious bigotry, but failed to point out that each one of them were offered other headgear that would cover their heads as per their religion and make it safe to ride. They declined these options and have now made the entire place unsafe after forcing their religion on others, rather than the park being able to force safety rules on everyone equally — regardless of religion.

Coming to this settlement agreement, the amusement park has to allow ant an all Muslims to wear their headscarves despite risk or injury to themselves or others. There is no solution on how they will move forward with this new policy to protect a religion alongside the safety of other people.

This will inevitably open the park up to more lawsuits. If and when a Muslim’s hijab causes an injury, you can pretty much guarantee the park will be held accountable for that too. Discrimination won’t be the problem at that point, disability will and the turban/headscarf wearer will win again, while everyone else loses out to this religion who would never make the same exceptions for any other faith.

 

Continue Reading

Featured

Trump Just Lit The Fire By Blasting Who’s Really Responsible For Rise In Crime, Doesn’t Care Who He Offends!

Published

on

Donald Trump sparked controversy, possibly offending a lot of people, after Tweeting about a 13% crime rise in the United Kingdom and linking the horrible stat to Radical Islamic terror and reminding readers that “we must keep America safe!” Some people criticized the President by accusing him of pushing “rubbish” that could make people commit hate crimes, fake news, and others spoke of statistics and tried to use facts to negate the point that Radical Islamic terror is a problem.

Leftists suggest that he was wrong in linking Wales and England to terrorism and Trump was said to be spreading fear and xenophobia according to Daily Mail.

Donald Trump was today accused of peddling ‘rubbish’ designed to provoke ‘hate crime’ after he wrongly linked the rise in offences in England and Wales to ‘Radical Islamic terror’.


The US president sent a tweet referring to figures out yesterday showing crime increased by 13 per cent last year and warning ‘We must keep American safe’.
But British MPs tore into Mr Trump for talking ‘nonsense’ and said he is ‘spreading fear and xenophobia’ by wrongly blaming the rise on terrorism.
Others accused him of peddling ‘fake news’ and pointed out terrorism accounts for a ‘tiny’ proportion of crime in Britain.


Mr Trump wrote on Twitter: ‘Just out report: ‘United Kingdom crime rises 13% annually amid spread of Radical Islamic terror.’ Not good, we must keep America safe!’

It was then reported that hate crimes in the UK rose about 30% and Trump was essentially blamed for it on the basis of his Tweet being the type of jargon that promotes hate crimes. Let’s not forget that many hate crimes have been hoaxes committed by delusional leftists looking to cause trouble.

Others have stated that crime has gone up, but that terrorism was only a small portion of it. That must be due to the fact that terrorists don’t strike on a daily basis. the amount of victims they take out in a single day usually isn’t as much as the rest of the location’s victims over a period of time. Obviously terrorism numbers will be lower than the rest of an area, over time, and that’s completely logical. However, the amount of terror attacks may have increased and that’s too high. Also consider that terror attacks are much different than someone stealing a purse. Crime is crime, but there’s variations of crimes and some are simply much more evil in nature.

Labour MP Yvette Cooper, chair of the influential Home affairs Select Committee, hit back saying: ‘Hate crime in the UK has gone up by almost 30 per cent and rubbish like this tweet from Donald Trump is designed to provoke even more of it.’
Figures released yesterday revealed that police forces registered 5.2 million crimes in the year to the end of June.
But while terrorism has surged, with five murderous attacks across Britain killing dozens and injuring hundreds in the last year, it is a tiny proportion of arrests.

This statistic is an attempt to dismiss the problem with terrorism. There could be several reasons why terrorists are a tiny proportion of arrests. One reason is that many terrorists don’t survive their explosive device or get shot by police. How can authorities arrest a terrorist if they’re blown to pieces or filled with bullets on the ground bleeding out into sewer? Terrorists usually only strike once in a while, taking out mass casualties, but it’s likely hard to arrest them due to the nature of the game in which they’re usually not alive after the attacks.

Tory MP Crispin Blunt, former chair of the foreign affairs select committee, said: ‘I think it is a bizarre lack of self-awareness from a supporter of keeping Americans armed to the teeth with wholly predictable consequences.’
He urged caution in using the police data as a basis for analysis, and added: ‘However linking overall crime levels to Islamic extremism is utterly bonkers. Fake news, to coin a phrase. ‘

What doesn’t make sense is this: why can’t crime levels be linked to Islamic extremism? Isn’t terrorism a form of a crime? If so, then terrorist attacks contribute to crime levels. Technically, that makes it real news.

When a terror attack happens and hundreds of people are injured or murdered, does that not count as a crime? Does it matter if it’s by an Islamic person or anyone else? It’s still a crime regardless of who commits it.

Maybe Trump is doing what he does best where he throws a Tweet out there and the media runs wild with it. Or perhaps Trump is reminding Americans to stay aware of the one culture andreligion that continuous spawns terrorists and commits acts of hate.

What’s funny about all of this is how maddening people get over one little Trump tweet. Trump could say anything at all and people on the left will eat it up. They’ll turn it into all sorts of stories. They’ll twist his words. They’ll do whatever they can to make Trump look bad.

Let’s look at it this way – if a particular group of people is well known to commit terror acts, then how can they remove that stigma and reputation? It’s easy. Don’t commit acts of terror and people won’t have anything to talk about.

Whatever you do, don’t let the mainstream media or far leftists spin the narrative.

Think for yourself.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Trending