BRITISH ARMY CHIEFS warn interrogators not to yell at or insult Muslim terrorist suspects because it might hurt their wittle fweewings


British soldiers have lost their capability to interrogate Muslim terrorist insurgents because of strict new rules on questioning that ban shouting at captives. The rules also prevent military intelligence officers from banging their fists on tables or walls, or using insulting words when interrogating a suspect.

UK Telegraph  The regulations replaced a previous policy that had to be withdrawn after a series of legal challenges and the death in custody of Baha Mousa, an Iraqi detainee in Basra. But there is growing disquiet within the ranks that the latest guidelines, officially called Challenge Direct, are so stringent that it makes interrogation pointless.


There is also concern that the rules can be so easily breached — especially given the pressure under which soldiers are operating — that military personnel will be left exposed to legal claims and possible disciplinary action.

There was global condemnation last week when a Senate report in the United States disclosed how the CIA had systematically tortured detainees in the wake of the September 11 attacks. Despite this, British military chiefs fear the current restrictions on Army interrogators are hindering the gathering of information. They insist interrogations can be vital in thwarting future terrorist attacks and in combating insurgents in hostile environments. 


Col Tim Collins, who made a celebrated eve-of-battle speech during the Iraq war and now runs a private security company with expertise in intelligence gathering, said: “Since I was serving, the rules on interrogations have been tightened up because of the lawyers. We [the military] are no longer able to carry out tactical questioning. 

“The effect of the ambulance-chasing lawyers and the play-it-safe judges is that we have got to the point where we have lost our operational capability to do tactical questioning. That in itself brings risks to the lives of the people we deploy. 

“These insurgents are not nice people. These are criminals. They behead people; they keep sex slaves. They are not normal people.”


Lord West, the former First Sea Lord and national security adviser, said: “We have gone too far in letting people take us to court.  “While these insurgents are chopping people’s heads off and raping women, the idea they can take us to court because somebody shouted at them is ridiculous.”

In an interview with The Telegraph, Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, voices his concern about the legal scrutiny on British troops. He says he is gravely concerned about the rising cost of legal cases “that turn out to be completely spurious”. He added: “What’s important for us is to understand the legal scrutiny that we are under all the time now, the cases that are being brought sometimes spuriously by law firms representing people who claim they were wrongly detained. 

“Our Armed Forces are under a huge degree of scrutiny.” He said he feared this could inhibit commanders in the field in future. 


The rules on interrogation are contained in a Court of Appeal judgment handed down in the summer and obtained by The Sunday Telegraph. The policy was introduced two years ago after outrage over the death of Mr Mousa, an innocent Iraqi civilian who was beaten to death while in British custody in Basra in 2003. An inquiry into his death, published in 2011, disclosed that he had been subjected to sustained and gratuitous beatings by soldiers from 1st Battalion the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment. 


The legality of the Challenge Direct interrogation technique was disputed by lawyers acting for Haidar Ali Hussein, an Iraqi civilian arrested in 2004 who alleged that during his detention he had been subjected “to substantial periods of shouting”. Mr Hussein was also claiming damages from the Ministry of Defence over alleged mistreatment. 

Although Mr Hussein’s detention predated the new policy, his legal team had argued that Challenge Direct should be ruled unlawful because it constitutes “inhumane treatment” in contravention of the Geneva Convention.  The Court of Appeal threw out Mr Hussein’s challenge to the interrogation policy — but in doing so disclosed how the technique works and when it can be applied. It also highlighted a series of breaches. 

The judgment handed down by Lord Justice Lloyd Jones, the Lord Justice of Appeal and one of the most senior judges in the country, discloses what appear to be enormous constraints under which interrogators must now operate. 


One source said: “This ruling shows just what a nightmare it now is for interrogation teams. Interrogators have been left wondering if it’s worth the bother.”

The previous policy — known as “Harsh” — gave soldiers the right to “shout as loud as possible [with] uncontrolled fury” at a captive. It also permitted soldiers to show “psychotic tendencies”, and aim “personal abuse” at a captive who could be “taunted and goaded”.  The Challenge Direct technique reined in those excesses and allows shouting for only a few seconds at a time — the actual length is redacted for security reasons in the ruling — under strict regulation which is designed only to gain a captive’s attention. 

The judgment discloses that under the new policy interrogation “must not be insulting” and that a “captured person’s attributes must not be ridiculed”. The policy adds that “the questioner must not touch the captured person” and “must not shout into the subject’s ear”. 


The Challenge Direct approach can only be carried out with prior permission and if the session is being recorded to prevent abuses. “There must be no intimidation of any kind,” state the rules. 

Lord Justice Lloyd Jones and two fellow Court of Appeal judges ruled the Challenge Direct policy lawful in itself, but on reviewing many hours of video evidence decided that on a series of occasions, interrogators had breached it. The judges were shown recordings of the interrogations of 13 captives in Afghanistan who were subjected to the Challenge Direct technique. They found a number of occasions when the rules had been broken. 


Such breaches, the senior judges found, included an interrogator who “held the hand of the captured person during the use of Challenge Direct, a breach of the prohibition on physical contact”; an interrogator who “slammed the desk with his hand” and one who “slammed the wall with his hand”. 

Judges also found other violations, including a soldier who used “insulting words throughout an interview” and “vulgar abuse” at a captive. They said the “most striking example” of a breach of the policy was when an interrogator “suddenly moved forward from a crouching position so that his face was right in front of the captured person’s. This was physically intimidating.”


But the judges said the breaches did not in themselves make the technique unlawful. “I have come to the clear conclusion that the policy which the appellant seeks to challenge does not involve any violation of the duty of humane treatment or any other relevant standard under the Geneva Convention,” said Lord Justice Lloyd Jones. 

The judge questioned why Mr Hussein had been allowed to bring the case, given that he was never subjected to the technique. Mr Hussein was represented by Public Interest lawyers, a human rights legal firm which has brought a number of successful claims against the British military. The firm is led by Phil Shiner, who represented Mr Mousa’s family. 


Mr Mousa, 26, a hotel receptionist and a father of two children, had been held in custody for 36 hours, for the majority of the time hooded, and suffered at least 93 injuries prior to his death. Practices such as hooding had already been banned by the Army, while the case highlighted the lack of control exercised by senior commanders on the soldiers conducting his interrogation. 

The MoD has paid out millions of pounds in compensation and costs to hundreds of Iraqis who complained that they were illegally detained and tortured by British forces. The payouts followed legal rulings that abuse cases can be brought in Britain.

The Green 0pp Commons Westminster London SW1 27/04/11



UNBELIEVABLE! Leave it to a filthy leftist writer at the UK Guardian to trash one of the biggest charitable Christian organizations in the world


The evangelical giftwrapping of “Islamophobia” marches on, by Giles Fraser. “It’s depressing that a decade after I wrote about a Christian charity’s thinly disguised Islamophobia, they’re still at it.”


The Guardian  It’s a simple idea. Find an empty shoe box. Fill it with toys, toothpaste or school crayons. And allow Operation Christmas Child to fly it out to some of the neediest children in the world. It’s the sort of thing that you can do together as a family. And it’s a pretty good way to introduce our children to how fortunate they are in comparison to others – not a bad lesson at Christmas.


Given this, it is unsurprising that hundreds of UK schools have become involved.  Samaritanspurse – What we do

So far, so good. Except all is not quite what it seems with this charity. Yes, it is open about the fact that it is an evangelical Christian organisation, with a mission to share the love of Jesus with those who do not believe in him. It is slightly shifty about the fact that it distributes evangelical literature along with the boxes – though not actually in them – and that this literature promotes an exclusivist version of Christianity in the form of innocuous-looking comic book with the sinister message slipped in:


“There is only one way to be friends with God.” In many places these boxes are distributed, this is thinly disguised code for: Islam is wrong. (It is!)


And here we come to the heart of the purpose of OCC. For, according to the boss and guiding force of OCC, Franklin Graham – son of the evangelist Billy Graham – Islam is not just wrong, it is “a very wicked and evil religion.” (It is!) And by that he does not mean that Islam has been taken over by dangerous radicals, but that Islam itself is intrinsically evil. (It is!)


He recently told the British journalist Ruth Gledhill that Islam has been the same for 1,500 years. It “has not been hijacked by radicals” but is essentially a “religion of war.” (Right again) But this comes from someone who, when recently asked about Muslim fundamentalism, insisted that they only respond to force… I think there is going to have to be much large US involvement militarily. 


This is also a man who thinks the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated every level of our government (they have) and that President Obama’s “problem” is that “he was born a Muslim, his father was a Muslim. The seed of Islam is passed through the father”. (He was and it was)


This year 60,000 OCC shoe boxes have been shipped off to Islamic State-displaced children in northern Iraq. It’s an irresistible political move for Graham and his compatriots. “These children will be reminded that there is a God who loves them,” says OCC domestic director Randy Riddle, making a clear contrast to the Muslim God that doesn’t. “That is the point and purpose of Operation Christmas Child, to share the love of Jesus Christ.”


A lot of fuss has been made about Muslim charities like Islamic Relief supporting the political agenda of violent religious radicalism, something of which it has been cleared. But we seem unconcerned that many of our schools might be supporting something remarkably similar – in Christian form. More than a decade ago, in this paper, I wrote a column criticizing OCC for “giftwapping Islamophobia”. It is depressing to find that, since then, very little has changed. (No, idiots like you are what is depressing)


Ewwww, Muslims and Leftists don’t like it when you play their favorite game of shutting down speech

The Morning Star has condemned the decision by Birkbeck College management to cancel a conference against Islamophobia in response to threats from the pro-Britain, anti-Islamization party, Britain First.


Morning Star  Birkbeck College has let itself down badly in surrendering to threats by Britain First against this weekend’s Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) conference on Islamophobia. The IHRC has succeeded in finding a new venue, but this does not absolve the University of London of the charge of knuckling under to far-right Islamophobic anti-Islamization demands with menaces.

The college took its decision without any discussion with either staff or students, as Birkbeck Unison joint branch secretary Steven Ellis confirmed. Birkbeck officials should have publicized the Britain First threat and emphasized their refusal to be intimidated.


They ought to have discussed the situation with IHRC and made joint arrangements to ensure the security of people attending the conference.

If they were intent on involving outside elements, they could have informed the Metropolitan Police that there was a danger from hate-filled bigots disrupting a lawful event on their premises. Rather than working with IHRC, Birkbeck chose to involve the government’s dodgy Prevent organization.


Prevent is detailed to work within Britain’s Muslim communities to counter “radicalization” but is more preoccupied with pointing the finger at the supposed failure of these communities to keep a lid on the anger many Muslims feel about imperialist states’ casual resort to invasion or aerial bombardment of Muslim countries.


Involvement of Prevent in what should be a simple matter of ensuring that a lawful and peaceful event can take place is extremely worrying.

It indicates that the author of this decision has switched the blame for possible difficulties from violent bigots to people who are guilty only of organizing an academic conference. (Riiiight, that’s all muslims are guilty of)


The college decision to pull the plug on the IHRC event, which is supported by both Muslim and far left wing non-Muslim bodies, is worrying in itself.


However, the subsequent actions that effectively impute the motives of an organisation that has a track record of working with a broad array of forces to break down barriers of ignorance suggest a more sinister agenda.


Community relations have come under huge strain in recent decades, but their prime sources have not been within Muslim communities. (Yes, as everyone knows, Muslims in the UK are perfect little angels all the time)


A combination of aggressive wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and elsewhere, combined with official backing for Israel’s murderous assaults on the Palestinian people, together with strident and factually inaccurate media campaigns against Islam and its adherents, has caused growing instability.


Pseudo-religious pronouncements by venal politicians intent on dividing people into “good” Muslims and “bad” Muslims have increased fears.


They reflect a political elite’s refusal to accept that its piratical overseas wars were indeed criminal and that the undeniable community anger directed at their mass slaughter is fully justified.

This Muslim resides in the UK

This Muslim resides in the UK

Despite the implications of the government’s “anti-terrorism” legislation, only a tiny minority of Britain’s Muslim communities have taken their resentment to the extent of joining extremist jihadi forces.


The readiness of IHRC to play a leading role in facilitating discussions about the problems that we all face as a society should serve as an example to government.

Smearing and stigmatising entire communities as a means of whitewashing government crimes should be unacceptable to everyone.


According to Prince Charles: Muslims beheading people isn’t the problem, internet service providers allowing beheading videos to be shown online is


The Prince of Wales has stepped up pressure on internet service providers over the spread of Muslim jihadist beheading videos online, warning that showing the photos and videos is dragging the world back into “the dark ages of public executions.”  

UK Telegraph (h/t Mike F) Charles said everyone had a “duty of care” to the victims and their families to ensure that the graphic images are not shared or broadcast. (Wouldn’t want to make Muslims look bad, now would we?) 

His intervention follows warnings from Robert Hannigan, the new head of GCHQ, that Facebook and Twitter have become “command and control centres” for terrorists so-called Islamic State – ISIS. 


Last month David Cameron described the internet as an “ungoverned space” and said technology giants must and do more to take down Muslim extremist material to “live up to their social responsibilities.” (Yep, we can’t seem to do anything to stop the Muslim extremists, but we can make reporting about their activities illegal. That’ll show ‘em)

The Prince’s comments came as he visited a church in west London to meet Iraqi Christians whose families have fled the threat of genocide (by Muslims). Islamic extremists attacking other faiths were bringing “nothing but dishonour” on their own religion, he said. (Because beheadings have nothing to do with Islam?)


He also spoke with passion about his own Christian faith, speaking of the need to “love our enemies and pray for those who persecute”. 

But he went on: “As these truly dreadful images of executions and beheadings are transmitted around the world by the internet I cannot help but feel that we are in serious danger in this so-called modern age of descending into the dark ages of public executions. (Better to hide the images and leave people in the dark about the true teachings of Islam, I guess)


“We hear much at present about the ‘duty of care’. “Then ladies and gentlemen I am bound to ask whether there is not a duty of care towards the victims of violence and their families who, like you, are daily distraught by the graphic transmission of violent images of their loved ones.” (Yes, it’s the images that upset people, not the fact that Muslims in their own neighborhood might try to behead them)

He added: “As some of you may know, throughout my life I have appealed for greater understanding between people of faith, for greater tolerance and for harmony between the great religions of the world. (How’s that workin’ out for you, Chuck? Ever hear of Lee Rigby?)

“Therefore for me it is utterly inconceivable that a person of one faith could find it within themselves to persecute a person of another faith, surely to do so brings nothing but dishonour on the faith of the persecutor.” (Not at all, they are considered heroes by many in the Muslim community)

He went on: “It seems to me that all faiths to some extent shine a light on the divine image in every human life.  “If that is so then surely to destroy another human being is to desecrate the image of the divine and to do so in the name of faith is nothing less than a blasphemy.” (Beheading of unbelievers and apostates is found all over the hadiths and in the quran )



Dog-walking British senior citizen fighting for his life after savage attack by three Muslim teens

The 78-year-old man was walking his dog in a Luton park when he was brutally punched and kicked to the ground and left to die in a pool of his own blood.


UK Mirror (h/t David Y)  He was set upon by three Asian (Muslim) teenagers who attacked him and left him lying unconscious.

Bedfordshire Police have launched an investigation. Detective Sergeant Tom Hamm said: “The victim is in a stable condition in hospital having suffered a fractured jaw and a bleed to the brain.

“This was a very serious assault and we are asking anybody who was in Wardown Park between 1pm and 4pm to contact us if they saw this incident or the three Muslim youths in the park before or after the attack took place.” The teenagers were described as dark haired, skinny, around 5ft 7ins and aged between 15 and 17.



WOO HOO! Great Britain actually strips UK citizenship of British-born Pakistani family whose daughter went to fight with ISIS in Syria

1416590933652_Image_galleryImage_ISIS_jpgA British-born father and three of his sons, all accused of being Islamist extremists with ties to al-Qaeda, have been exiled by Theresa May because of the threat to national security. They are believed to be the first British family to be collectively stripped of their citizenship since Mrs May took over in 2010 and the father said the decision was ‘tearing our family apart’. The father admitted his daughter had gone to fight in Syria with her husband, a known jihadist, but denied the terrorism allegations leveled at him.


UK Daily Mail  (h/t Terry D) The 51-year-old father from Newcastle had his citizenship revoked, along with his three sons aged in their twenties, under the British Nationality Act 1981 while they were in Pakistan. His wife and their fourth son, a disabled teenager, have not been exiled but could not return to Britain because they wanted to remain with the rest of the family.

[Below are photos of  British-born Pakistani father (left with his two granddaughters and his fourth son) who has been stripped of his British citizenship because of the threat to national security. Right: One of his exiled sons, who is in his twenties]


‘We are innocent of all the allegations but our situation prevents us from answering the allegations,’ the 51-year-old told the Sunday Times. ‘We are British through and through. The best of British values don’t contradict Islamic values. To this day, English is the only language we speak. ‘We as a family have been abandoned by the British [government] and this is tearing our family apart.’ (Oh, Boo Hoo)


He denied ‘ridiculous’ claims that he was linked to both al-Qaeda and Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), saying that would be like being involved in the Conservative and the Labour party. But he revealed that his daughter, 22, was now living in Syria with her three children and ‘abusive husband’ who was treated like a VIP by jihadists. He said he saw a picture of his daughter, who still has British citizenship, posing with a heavy sub-machine gun.


The family will be appealing the decision after a legal attempt to reinstate their citizenship was thrown out by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).  They all have Pakistani passports, but said they feel like outsiders in the country and were desperate to ‘return home’. 

Farooq Siddique A former senior government adviser on tackling radicalisation and extremism has defended the right of British Muslims to travel to Syria and fight.

Farooq Siddique A former senior government adviser on tackling radicalization and extremism in the UK, has defended the right of British Muslims to fight with ISIS

A spokeswoman from Liberty, the human rights body, said the family were victims of the UK’s secret courts. In his judgment, Mr Justice Mitting acknowledged the impact on the private and family life of the wife and youngest son who both remain British citizens.

But he said the move was ‘justifiable’ because of the ‘threat to national security’. Mrs May said her decision was based on an assessment by MI5, the security service and the claims that they were linked to terrorist groups. A letter sent to the family in 2011 and signed by the Home Secretary said their citizenship would be revoked because ‘it would be conducive to the public good’. 



Muslim convert & honorary member of Hamas, UK MP George Galloway, thinks he should head investigation of alleged Muslim paedophile gangs who have raped and enslaved thousands of white girls

He said no charges have yet been made against the “alleged” paeophile rape gang members when, in fact, many have been charged and convicted with hundreds more accused and awaiting trial.























In the UK, radical Islamic hate preachers get police protection while anti-Islamization British patriots get roughed up by the gestapo police

unnamed-2Britain First has released a shocking video showing the police brutality and aggression used against our activists, and contrasts it with the way they treat Islamic State (ISIS) terrorist-supporting Muslim extremists.



Britain First  (h/t Caroline R) The persecution and sabotage of Britain First’s patriotic anti-Islamization movement is proceeding with increased intensity. The latest outrage is the sudden and scandalous closure of their YouTube account, containing up to 50 videos and reaching hundreds of thousands of people worldwide.

Then, to top the multiple arrests Paul Golding, Britain First leader, has faced for combating Islamic extremism,  deputy leader, Jayda Fransen, confronts hate preacher and terrorist manufacturer Anjem Choudary and finds herself arrested too. 


By all accounts Jayda was assaulted, pushed, verbally abused and manhandled by the Muslim extremists but managed to get in Choudary’s face and tell him he’s not welcome, before the police grabbed her and took her away to a stinking cell.

Jayda Fransen confronts Muslim community

Jayda Fransen confronts Muslim community in person

Unlike other political parties, Britain First is facing a persistent barrage of police, local authority and media hostility.

Here is some of the sabotage and hostility Britain First has faced recently:

- Paul Golding has been arrested no less than 5 times this year and have also been pulled in for questioning on a further occasion.

- Golding is currently the subject of two separate investigations and have a trial coming up on January 5th in which he could be sent to prison.


- Several of these arrests have seen the involvement of “SO15 Counter Terrorism Command”.

- Britain First offices have been raided and equipment seized and taken away, including such innocuous items as dongels and office phones, all intended to shut them down.

- Britain First’s website is subjected constantly to intense and worsening cyber terrorist attacks.

Britain First Fake Story

- In the last 6 weeks, two Britain First HQ office addresses have been closed down.

- Several BF high ranking leadership officials have been subjected to unwarranted and un-welcome visits by Special Branch officials.

- BF leadership officials have received thousands of serious death threats.


- Various media outlets have thrown money at Britain First activists to get them to turncoat and betray us.

- Britain First Conference forcibly closed down by the police half way through.

- The Royal Mail, contrary to electoral law, refuses to distribute Britain First election literature.

Britain First election leaflets like this go undelivered

Britain First election leaflets like this go undelivered

- When Britain First takes to the streets during legal democratic activities the police have blocked their routes and subjected their activists to violence and aggression




Stop kidding yourselves, ‘moderate Islam’ is nothing more than a Western elitist’s wet dream.

Muslims know there is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam.’ Many even believe that the concept of moderate Islam is an invention of British PM David Cameron (and other Western leaders) who struggle to find a way to fit the tyrannical, supremacist theology/political system that is Islam into the big tent of freedom and democracy, an ideal which doesn’t even exist in Islam. 

h/t phase33game


Omar Bakri Muhammad, radical Muslim hate preacher linked to Lee Rigby killers, justifies murder of women and children who oppose ISIS

Omar_Bakri_CBS_news_Media_6-300x225An extremist Muslim preacher who is said to have played role in radicalizing the murderers of soldier Lee Rigby has attempted to justify the killing of those fighting jihadis in Syria and Iraq. Omar Bakri Muhammad, who was known as the Tottenham Ayatollah, has been openly using Facebook to say that it is sometimes necessary to kill women and children sheltering in schools and hospitals.

THIS-is-IslamUK Daily Mail  Bakri, who is banned from Britain and is facing terrorism charges in Lebanon, has been blamed for radicalizing several young extremists, including the killers of Lee Rigby, Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale. His posts on the social media site come just days after several websites were criticized for not raising the alarm about extreme messages posted by one of the killers of British soldier Lee Rigby in the six months before his death.


On his account, which has now been deleted from Facebook, he the made a post under the title ‘killing women and children.’ According to the Sunday Telegraph, he wrote that even though this was not usually permitted, he added: ‘One must distinguish between killing women and children and the Mujahideen fighting the Kuffar (non-believers) wherever they find them, whether that be in a school or hospital or elsewhere.’

He also added that the Mujahideen must kill people who do not believe in the extreme version (actually, it is the only version) of Islam, ‘wherever they find them’. A Facebook spokesman told the newspaper they don’t comment on individual cases but added they do not permit terrorist material on their site.


Bakri, believed to be 54 now, was previously the London-based spiritual leader of the extremist Islamic group Al-Muhajiroun. He previously live in London and was under investigation by UK police after he called for young British Muslims to take up arms and join Al Qaeda.

On the London bombings it was also reported that Bakri referred to the four suicide bombers who killed 56 people on July 7 as ‘the fantastic four’. He said the British people were to blame for the terror attacks on the capital because they ‘did not make enough effort to stop its own government committing its own atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan’.


In March he told The Daily Mail when speaking of the troubles in Tripoli ‘only jihad salafi can save it and save Lebanon’. He added: ‘This country needs to be made an Islamic state, obviously. 

The radical Islamic cleric was under house arrest in Tripoli since Lebanese security forces released him from jail in 2010, after striking a deal with the Shia extremist group Hezbollah. Bakri was sentenced to life following a terrorism conviction, but was released on bail after witnesses recanted their testimony.

Omar Bakri Muhammad said if his son, who was sitting on his father’s knee during the interview, grew up and killed a soldier he would be ‘happy.’


THE NOTE SAYS IT ALL: “Enough is enough. A mosque is not wanted in Woodford. The rivers of blood are close to overflowing.”

A plan to build yet another Islamic Community Center & Mosque has neighborhood British residents fuming.


Ilford Recorder  Cllr Robin Turbefield has asked his Bridge ward constituents to offer their opinion on the prospect of the Woodford Green Muslim Community Centre, replacing the vacant retail unit in Snakes Lane East, Woodford Green. The planning application shows two prayer or activity rooms side-by-side. The application states on Friday during prayer time the centre can expect to hold 50 to 60 people for around 20 minutes each time. 

The Islamic organisation, which submitted the plan, writes on the application its main objective is “to advance the Islamic faith for the benefit of the public”. (Which public? Certainly not the British public)

A website called tellmamauk, posted a photo of a note it claimed to be on the side of the retail unit on Monday. The note read: “Enough is enough. A mosque is not wanted in Woodford. The rivers of blood are close to overflowing.”


Speaking to the Recorder, Cllr Turbefield said: “We have had a petition from people in favour [of the planning application] and we have heard from people against it.” Cllr Turbefield said the main objection was the site should remain as a retail unit. (No, it isn’t, it’s about not wanting a mosque there)

Natasha Kundi, a Muslim, of the Rodings, in Snakes Lane East, wrote in support of the application on the Redbridge Council website.  She wrote: “I am very happy to hear that there is a plan for a local Muslim community centre.  “I have been living in the area for a few years and have been suffering due to a lack of Muslim facilities in the local area.” (How about moving back to your Muslim country of origin?)

Carole Kennedy, of West Grove, Woodford Green, lodged her objection to the planning application. She wrote: “This centre seems to me something that would disturb this community rather than enhance it.”