All Episodes
Previous Next
July 27, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
28:58
Western Sharia Police
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
These girls are usually raped several times a day.
And so if we accept the views of our lead police officer for child protection, of Rotherham's MP and of the recent Jay and Quilliam reports, we seem to be looking at millions of rapes of white and Sikh girls by Muslim men, only 222 of whom have been convicted since 2005.
So my lords, will the government ask our Muslim leaders whether the perpetrators can claim that their behaviour is sanctioned in the Quran and to issue a fatwa against it?
And second, my lords, will the government encourage a national debate about the various interpretations of Islam?
Can we talk about Islam without being accused of hate crime?
I'm sorry for doing my best gammon impression for you with this video, but this was an important subject and I thought I should probably put my face to what I'm saying here.
Because this is something I really mean and it's something that genuinely causes me concern.
I honestly worry about how much the police in my country side with Muslims when the Muslims should be the ones who take responsibility for their own actions.
They export the responsibility for the actions of Muslims onto the people who have done nothing wrong but have instead provoked them by asking questions or levelling criticism.
This happened to an activist I know called Janaya English who posted criticism of Islam online and then started receiving death threats.
This is what happened when she went to her local police.
If people were threatening to kill you and your family and an officer wouldn't deal with it, you'd have a problem with it.
Well I won't put the messages out that you've put in the first place.
What messages are those?
This is all live by the way.
Everyone can hear what you're saying.
What messages are those?
Look, I'm not going to discuss it anything.
What messages are those?
You told me that you were putting messages out there which anti-certain religions, yeah?
Yeah, yeah.
Go, can you all hear this guys?
So are you saying that I deserve it as well?
No, I'm not saying that at all.
I'm saying I think it's a problem that could have been avoided.
A problem that could have been avoided by keeping her mouth shut.
It doesn't matter that she has been threatened.
What matters is that she could have avoided this by simply not speaking at all.
Janiah filed a complaint about these threats and this is the response that she receives back from the police.
Let's go through it and see just how crazy this is.
Number one, lack of police action in terms of the online threats of you reported to have received.
Let me start if I may by putting on record my disgust at the online abuse that you've received, some of which is indeed criminal in its nature, and has been correctly recorded as such under the above mentioned crime reports.
Nobody should have to suffer such abuse and it is regretful that the freedoms afforded by the internet are all too misused in this way.
In an ideal world, the police will be able to fully investigate all criminal offences reported and bring offenders to justice without fail.
However, in current times of greatly reduced police resources and increased demand, this clearly cannot be delivered in all cases.
And unfortunately, many difficult decisions have to be made each day in respect of which crimes and incidents are investigated.
These decisions are carefully made with the consideration in such vulnerability, threat, risk and harm that may be present.
In this case, your reported crimes have been fully reviewed by Detective Inspector Sandiford and in consultation with DCI Atten.
A decision made that the crimes are to be finalised with no further investigation.
This is not a decision taken lightly and has been made after liaison with GMPs, cyber unit and the considerations at the level of complexity of digital investigative work required and the associated authorities required under the RIPA Act, all of which has to be of course be balanced in terms of proportionality and available resources.
I'm not an expert in digital investigations, but the explanation I've had of the above considerations is evident that such matters are vastly more complex than any simple submission for details of a given internet user or IP addresses to be disclosed.
The police simply weren't going to bother following the threats up.
Of course, had those people posted something Islamophobic, I'm sure the story would have been different.
The next example is from a lady who frequents Hyde Park.
She was complaining about the fact that Muslims were doing group prayers in Speaker's Corner, which is something forbidden by the ordinances of the park.
But police were turning a blind eye to it.
Excuse me, officer.
Do you know that they're not allowed to do that in the parks and royal parks?
No, they aren't.
No, they're not.
They're not.
It's against park rules.
They've been given an area that is not blocking off the main concourse of the city.
Well, it goes against the park rules.
The royal park rules.
It shouldn't.
Because we're not allowed to do anything.
No form of prayer is allowed.
As far as I've been, they've been given an area which is not infringing on people walking past.
Despite the fact that no one else is allowed to pray on mass in Hyde Park, the Muslims had been given an area of their own to do their mass prayers in.
Why?
Why should they be?
Why should anyone be if this is a restricted area that you can't pray in?
It's against the regulations.
It's not my job.
It's the regulation.
You're an officer of the law.
You're supposed to be at home.
Yeah, but I don't know, and I couldn't.
You just admitted to me.
I'm not going to debate this.
Well, you just admitted to me that you are aware of the law.
Yes, and you're choosing to disobey.
Because there's so many.
Even though I'm asking you why it's being allowed, as a citizen of the people, I'm telling you, that that activity is not allowed.
And you're permitting it as an officer.
I am, yes.
For what reason?
Well, so are all my colleagues.
Why?
Because my boss has said it can carry.
Why?
Because it's okay.
Because all of his colleagues are doing it and his boss said it was okay too.
Well, I guess we can just let off the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials then.
It's all right for everyone to break the rules as long as the boss is okay with it.
Because at the end of the day, laws are discretionary, aren't they?
You cannot enforce it.
You can't allow it to continue.
So whether it's allowed or not, you've been in front of the city.
All laws are discretionary.
No, they're not.
Well, they are.
That's the office of the law.
All laws are discretionary!
She's trying to go against the law!
All laws are discretionary now!
They're just up to the discretion of the police officer involved.
If he doesn't want to enforce the law, then he doesn't have to.
He's not under any obligation to do so.
But let's be honest here.
We know exactly why they're not enforcing this law, and this lady does too.
You know full well that the reason why you let them is because you don't want any trouble.
That's why.
Am I wrong?
Am I actually, come on, am I wrong?
Come on.
If you went over there now and said, excuse me, gentlemen, yeah, could you please, you know, you're not allowed to do this.
Do you think you'd get out in one piece?
Or do you think you might have a riot on your hands?
And it is, as this lady points out, a two-tier legal system.
It's one rule for one and another rule for everyone else.
And that is frankly not acceptable.
And I think you know why?
Because for some reason, everybody else has to follow the law.
There's exceptions being made for a certain group of people who believe in a certain ideology and it's totally unfair.
But that's not where this stopped.
The next day, at 9 in the morning, that lady received a knock on her door from the police.
Watch what happened next.
and you're not going to tell me what it's about all right so um what time is it It's 10 to 9 in the morning on a Tuesday morning, and the police were at my door filming.
I can see your footage going.
And I'm going to open my door and I'm filming what is going on.
You're not coming in.
No, no, you need to come out then.
You're not.
Okay.
What are you doing?
What are you doing?
For what?
Around the course of justice.
What?
Course of justice.
Do not resist us.
Do not resist me.
Do not lie on the path.
Ready given her.
If that doesn't put a shiver up your spine, I don't know what will.
At the end of the day, why were they even arresting her for perverting the course of justice?
It's just a discretionary law.
What's the big deal?
I don't know what happened to this woman after that either, but you know, I'm sure she was just fine.
I'm sure we can trust the cops to have done nothing wrong.
But you know what's funny about this is that after this happened, the police went to Hyde Park and told the Muslims there that they couldn't pray en masse, citing the very ordinance that they said was just discretionary.
Royal Parks does not permit collective acts of worship or adverse religious observances in the Royal Parks estate.
Even their own right was part of a demonstration of mental arbor activities.
And at least one of the Muslims there identified this woman as the cause of them no longer being allowed to break the law.
You know who done this again, I'm gonna say it's the old lady who made the complaint and now there's a rule coming out.
The glass here and they bought the fountain over there.
Why start with the Muslims all the time?
The London Metropolitan Police in particular seemed to have a real problem with enforcing British law in regards to Islam.
In particular when it comes to extremism.
In September 2016 a Muslim sergeant called Jawariya Saeed actually became a whistleblower for the allowance of extremist Islamist ideology within the London Metropolitan Police.
She was of course stonewalled at every avenue until she felt she had to become a whistleblower to the press to let people know what was happening.
And well to start off with the first day that I joined the unit I was told by an officer to get down on my knees and beg God for forgiveness for the way that I choose to make my decisions as a Muslim woman and then later on there were comments around FGM, advised to other police officers that FGM is a clean and honourable practice in Islam and we should be careful not to criminalize it.
This was a unit set up to presumably engage with people within the Muslim communities within London and also to protect Muslim women from being victims of FGM and also of domestic violence.
That's right, the unit was very much designed to give advice, theological advice to our officers, our colleagues who were dealing with domestic violence and FGM, but also to bridge a gap between the Muslim community and the Met.
You complained about this at the time.
This was two years ago.
Why didn't you make a formal complaint?
When I raised it with my line managers the response that I got was that these are their views and if they upset you then we will talk to them.
And then I raised it with professional standards and I was told time and time again that I should go away and think about the impact a complaint would have on me and my career.
So I was told that the Muslim community will turn against me if I spoke out about conservative Muslim men.
I was told that I would lose the case and they will come out a lot stronger.
Did that frighten you?
It did in the sense that I understood that I didn't have confidence in professional standards after they'd advised me not to make a complaint.
The Met says that each time that you raised a complaint and a concern you were asked to document your complaint but you declined.
During the review that took place, I did document some of my allegations in the review and they were never investigated.
I also raised my allegations with senior officers, including BME officers, and they all advised me to not make a complaint because it would tarnish my career.
You even met with the Met Commissioner regarding your concerns before you left.
You described it, the Met says, as a good chat with him.
They think you left on good terms.
They are now saying that you've gone to the papers with your story when they believe that this matter was resolved.
The matter wasn't resolved because when I met with the commissioner, I briefly informed him of my experiences on the MCU.
He, in fact, said to me, he confirmed if I was talking about the officers in the traditional dress, and then he said that he himself has concerns about them and that he will be making discreet inquiries.
And you left in March and you're still looking for work.
You rose to the rank of sergeant after 10 years in the Met.
Thank you very much for coming to talk to me.
Thank you.
Her fellow officers had said things that I personally find absolutely reprehensible, such as that female genital mutilation is a clean and respectable practice, or that women with domestic issues should go to a Sharia court rather than a legal court.
And as she said, she raised these problems with her managers, but they were afraid to do something just in case they appeared to be racist.
She also said that in her experience, it was Muslim officers being racist towards her individual views, also in private, holding racist views against white officers and sexist views against females.
If such views were held and expressed by white officers, they would have been fired.
And allegations of the London Metropolitan Police covering up Islamist violence go back four years.
This is an article from 2011 that alleges that the police in London covered up a violent campaign to turn a London area Islamic.
Victims say that the officers in the borough of Tower Hamlets have ignored or downplayed outbreaks of hate crime and suppressed evidence implicating Muslims in them because they fear being accused of racism.
The claim comes as four Tower Hamlets Muslims were jailed for at least 19 years for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls.
The Sunday Telegraph has uncovered more than a dozen other cases in Tower Hamlets where both Muslims and non-Muslims have been threatened or beaten for behaviour deemed to breach fundamentalist Islamic norms.
One victim, Mohammad Monzo Rahman, said that he was left partially blind and with a dislocated shoulder after being attacked by a mob in Cannon Street Road, Shadwell for smoking during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
He reported it to the police and they just said they couldn't track anyone down and there were no witnesses, said Ansar Ahmed Ulla, a local anti-extremist campaigner who advised Mr. Rahman.
But there is CCTV in that street and it is lined with shops and people.
Tower Hamlet's gay community had become a particular target of extremists.
Homophobic crime in the borough had risen by 80% since 2007-2008 and by 21% over the last year, a period when, at the time, there was a slight drop in London as a whole.
Canadian activist Lauren Southern went to London in November of 2017 to interview Muslims about what they felt British values were.
When she was interviewing people outside of a mosque, the Imam of the mosque called the police on her and the police treated her like she had done something wrong.
Hey there, okay.
So I came out to Whitechapel in London to do some interviews in the area because it's a very multicultural area and we wanted to ask people what they thought the British culture was.
Thought it would be an interesting place to do that.
Because we were outside the mosque, we started having a guy follow us around with his cell phone and come up to us and basically say like you're not allowed to film here, which we perfectly are allowed to film here.
It's a public street.
The Imam himself ended up calling the police on us.
We're just doing interviews, hopeful, just for you two.
Okay.
Sorry, that's okay.
That's alright.
We're just asking people their thoughts on British culture.
Do we have to move on or do we have to stop?
No, we've actually had a complaint from the Imam in the mosque.
Really?
The Imam complained.
Yep.
Yep.
What have we done?
About you're harassing the congregation here.
No, harassing.
He just came out and he's quite happy.
We do want to carry on.
Maybe not as close to the entrance to the mosque, maybe slightly further away.
I don't know.
Yeah, sure.
There's just lots of people to interview.
Then you might not get people obviously hopefully not calling us again.
Obviously, because you're right outside the mosque.
Well, we were walking around actually.
We just stopped because there were a lot of people.
Yeah, outside.
A lot of test cards or something.
It might be alright.
But it's been lovely chatting.
It has been.
I didn't feel harassed in any way.
Okay.
We're literally going to get arrested for standing outside a mosque.
This week, Lauren has been in Australia doing there what she was doing here.
Going to Muslim areas of Australian cities to interview the people there to see what they think about Australian values.
And the police wouldn't let her go.
Sarvan is in speaking.
Inspector Rick Ages from Kempsey Police.
Yep.
I've been informed that you're intending to attend the Lakemba Mosque.
Is that correct?
I actually have no intentions of attending.
I was just planning on walking through the streets and seeing how the culture was here.
Yes?
Yep.
Are you satisfied with that?
Yep.
So where do you intend on walking to now?
I was just going to walk out and check how the mosque was.
Check where the mosque was?
Yeah.
Would I not be allowed to attend if I wanted to?
I've got grave concerns that you may cause an imminent breach of the peace down there.
So I'm asking you not to attend.
Why would I cause a breach of the peace?
Because it's highly religious down there.
And would it be me causing a breach of the peace or would it be the people there?
Well, your presence may cause them to be offensive or be objective to your attending there.
Her presence might cause them to become violent.
That's what you're really saying there, isn't it, officer?
You're not saying that she's going to do anything wrong because she's not.
She's going to speak and they're going to turn violent and you're going to blame her for them turning violent because you don't think they can be held to the same standard as us.
That's what you're saying, isn't it, officer?
And so that would be them being offended by me.
Can you turn not interview me?
The local community walk around here without any fear.
I walk around here without any fear.
Right, but I'm a critic of Islam.
Yes.
So I can't be in this multiculture because my culture is allowed to have free speech and criticize Islam.
I understand you have your own beliefs and you're allowed to have your own beliefs.
I have no issue with that.
I'm asking you not to attend down there because I have a fear that you may cause an imminent breach of the priest.
In doing so, you may commit an offence.
Am I allowed to walk through the area?
I'm asking, no, I'm asking you not to go down to Helden Street.
You're asking me, but do I have the legal right to walk down this area?
At this point of time, no.
I know you're walking away, but I would like to do some interviews.
Would I be allowed to do interviews?
You're not welcome in there.
No, I'm not welcome.
No, no, no, just to do interviews on the street.
Am I allowed to?
No.
Why not?
Because I'm asking you not to.
Would I be allowed to, would I, okay, no cameras, nothing?
Would I be allowed to talk to people and criticize Islam?
No.
Why?
Because I'm telling you, no, you're committing a thing.
Why do you need to do it here?
Because this is a highly Islamic area.
What questions do you intend asking?
Could I not talk to people and criticise Islam?
Why do you want to?
I don't.
Why do you want to criticise Islam?
Like I said, if you're inside, I have fear that you're going to cause a breach of the peace.
No, you have fear people will be offended by me.
No, yeah.
Yes.
Yes, thank you.
And you're committing a breach of the peace.
I've given you that warning.
And if you do that, you may be breaking the law.
Do you understand that?
Yep, I understand it.
I perfectly understand.
As far as I'm concerned, you have Sharia law here, as far as I'm concerned.
He is practically begging her not to go down to a Muslim area and ask them questions about their religion, as if they can't be expected to understand that their religion has to be defended through argumentation and that their violent response is them acting no better than animals.
They can't be expected to be peaceful and responsible and engage in a dialogue in his opinion.
It is an absolutely outrageous level of condescension with which he treats Muslims in his country.
And yet, this is how the activists who greeted Lauren when she arrived treated her.
As if she is not holding Muslims to the same standard with which we'd hold one another, and she is the one being racist, when it is in fact they who are the ones treating Muslims with the bigotry of low expectations.
I'm a refugee.
Can I just ask why you're such a racist dog?
Like you just find what evidence do you have for that?
You're just a racist dog.
Do you have any evidence for it?
No, you're just a racist dog.
No, you don't have any evidence.
Do you have any evidence?
No, all of these things.
All so I would like this one bit of evidence.
Why the hell are you?
I love one bit of evidence.
You're a racist dog, that's all.
The evidence is that you're yelling over an act of a refugee...
I came to fucking...
You can't tell who a racist is.
A refugee isn't a race.
What does it matter?
Oh, okay, what is a race?
Tell us about a racist.
Race is a skin color.
It's a race.
A racist dog!
Racist dog!
You're the only racist!
You're a racist dog!
You tell me what a race is!
All these people are fucking Nazis!
I'm only shast!
Oh, dress like shit!
They got me.
I guess race isn't a skin color.
I guess that's a good thing.
Racist is!
There wasn't an argument there!
She didn't say anything racist!
They didn't present anything racist that she had said, and yet they're howling and barking like a bunch of bloody animals themselves at her just screeching racist, as if that's an argument.
As if anything's being solved here!
As if they're not making fools of themselves in front of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people who will see this video.
It's absolutely insane.
And then you have the example of Tim Poole, who went to Rinkaby in 2017 because of the allegations that there were no go zones in these Swedish cities.
Well, he arrived there and the police recommended that he leave for his own safety.
So it's the middle of the day.
Yeah.
Police will follow Louis.
The police are following us because we're being followed.
The police have warned us that if we don't leave now, things are going to get bad.
They said within minutes, 50 people could be here.
And lock the doors and let's get the hell out of here.
We saw that the police were there.
And so I'm really thinking, okay, you know, look, we're going to walk in.
There's people shopping.
It's a market center.
This is the last place I expect anything to happen.
And sure enough, you know, we filmed a couple things, as you saw, and decided to talk to the police.
You know, I didn't know if they spoke English, but one of the officers recognized me.
I had a pretty good conversation with him.
He said, you know, yeah, you know, immigrants, they might be, you know, they're overrepresented in crime, these poor areas, they have more crime.
But he told me he felt like they could do a lot of good there and that it was, you know, something he liked doing.
They told us there was a concert happening later that night, and it was all very interesting.
I asked him about no-go zones.
Are these real things?
Because we hear that they don't exist.
And he said, well, you know, like, there's problem areas that they've referred to where they can't go in unless they have at least two units because one cop will watch the other cop.
And that's the gist of the conversation.
I look over and Cheng and another officer were speaking.
They, you know, gave me one of these, like, come over here.
And I walked over and, you know, there were several men.
They started, you know, they were pulling up masks on their faces.
One guy, he throws a hood over his head.
And we had noticed this.
We started kind of getting, okay, what's happening?
The officer said that, you know, hey, have you noticed what people are doing around you?
If we leave in a few minutes, it might be very bad for you.
So it might be smart for you to, you know, to go.
And I, you know, and then I was like, are we should leave?
Like, are you saying maybe we should just go to our car?
He's like, that's my tip for you, maybe.
And I said, okay.
And the cop said, look, you know, maybe if we arrest one of these guys, there will be, there could be 50 more in a few minutes with stones.
And I was like, okay, okay, so we should just go to the car.
And he said, yes.
And then I said, would you, are you going to follow us out?
You know, what are you?
And he said, I think that would be a smart idea.
I'm sure I don't have to explain why that's unacceptable, but I'm going to anyway.
Timpool has the right to go and speak to anyone he wants, and those people don't have to speak to him in return.
And the people who would do something to violate his rights are the ones that must be held to account.
It is not good enough that we simply avoid these areas because Muslims can't be trusted not to become violent savages when someone asks questions about their core beliefs.
It is simply not good enough for Muslims to be expected to never have their beliefs challenged.
And if someone does challenge their beliefs, to blame the person who has questions.
The onus is on the person who takes action.
If someone were to attack Timpool or Lawrence Southern or any of these other examples, the problem is with them.
They are the ones who have to be held to account.
The people exercising their free speech have done absolutely nothing wrong and yet the police are treating them like criminals.
It seems that Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, was right when in 2015 he said that Britain basically has blasphemy laws.
He made these comments in response to the Charlie Heddon massacre, where various apologists had said, well, maybe if they just hadn't published the cartoons, everything would have been just fine.
In his opinion, a de facto blasphemy law is operating in Britain today.
The fact is that publishers and newspapers live in fear of criticizing Islam.
He said the threat to free speech from radical and political Islam had been allowed to develop unchecked since 1988 with the hounding of the author Salman Rushdie over his novel The Satanic Verses.
He said, I wish back then we had dealt with it.
For those of you not familiar with what happened back then, let me show you.
In a sense, is it a surprise that you've had the depth of reaction from the Muslim community?
Certainly, I mean, the scale of it is a surprise to me and also is a great distress to me.
I think what's true about the book is that it does break a number of taboos, which in my view are very important to break.
The first is the idea that Muhammad's life cannot be discussed as if he was a human being.
Muhammad himself always insisted not to have divine status.
And yet, nowadays, we talk about him as if he was a perfect being.
There are other taboos.
There's taboos about the discussion of Islam as it developed as a historical phenomenon.
So, yes, I think it's very important if the culture of a religion is to have an intellectual life, that such things should be discussed.
And of course, the people who wish to control thought, the thought police, that's who's responsible for this action, don't wish one to do that.
Rusty was now receiving death threats, and Penguin was targeted by bomb threats and hate mail.
Muslim groups organized a massive rally in London, followed by a week-long vigil outside Penguins' offices.
It was unacceptable then, it's unacceptable now.
Muslims in this country will have to learn to tolerate criticism.
This is the heritage of the British people.
Criticism of religion is a core British value.
We are free to criticize each other's religions and in turn we must tolerate those criticisms and form arguments of our own in defence of our own positions.
Muslims in Britain will have to learn this because the alternative is too gruesome to contemplate.
It leads Britain into becoming a Sharia-compliant state where Islam is given special privileges above every other religion in the land and Muslims are given special privileges over every other type of person in the land.
This cannot stand.
This is very urgent business, ladies and gentlemen.
I beseech you.
Resist it while you still can and before the right to complain is taken away from you, which will be the next thing, you will be told you can't complain because you're Islamophobic.
The term is already being introduced into the culture as if it was an accusation of race hatred, for example, or bigotry, whereas it's only the objection to the preachings of a very extreme and absolutist religion.
Watch out for these symptoms.
They are not just symptoms of surrender.
Very often ecumenically offered to you by men of God in other robes, Christian and Jewish and Smami ecumenical.
These are the ones who hold open the gates for the barbarians.
The barbarians never take a city till someone holds the gates open for them.
And it's your own preachers who will do it for you and your own multicultural authorities who will do it for you.
▲
Export Selection