Inciting Holy War in New Zealand

From Stuff.co.nz:

Muslims at New Zealand's largest mosque claim its Pakistani imam taught jihad or holy war and preached on the need for men to make as many babies as they could with burqa-wearing women.

Muslims involved claim imam or mufti Abdul Qadir Siddiquei preached jihad against members of Islamic sects he did not approve of and ran a madrasa or school for boys on jihad at the mosque.

The allegations of preaching jihad and of the madrasa emerged in speeches and pamphlets as around 200 Muslims gathered in thewomen's room at Auckland's Jamia Musjid Al-Mustafa mosque on Thursday night.

Police intervened amid tense scenes as members fronted up to each other and at times wrestled and abused one another.

The extremist claims were based on four YouTube video recordings of speeches that are now removed from the website.

The mosque, which has more than a 1000 followers, has united various Sunni sects and Pakistani and Indo-Fijian Muslims, who combined to pay for the building.

Also known as the South Auckland Islamic Centre, it is the most influential mainstream mosque in New Zealand and Fiji.

....

Mr Karim said he saw the videos and heard some teachings, calling them "half way to jihad". He claimed the imam wanted Muslims from other sects killed.

"He said people from Fiji were not knowledgeable, then he started saying get all the women who wear the burques, have sex with them and have babies with them."

Australian Preadators Arrested in New Zealand...

From Stuff.co.nz:

One Australian man has been jailed while another has walked from court after they had sex with a 14-year-old girl they met via the MySpace Internet site.

The Victorian County Court heard Steven Hondros, 19, contacted the victim and her friend through the Internet social networking site MySpace.

Hondros and his friend Ravinder Singh, 31, later picked up the victim and her friend from a train station before going to Singh's home in suburban Lalor in September last year.

The girls had been drinking from a bottle of alcohol in Singh's car and after they arrived at Singh's house, Singh had consensual sex with the 14-year-old girl.

Hondros also had consensual sex with her.

The court was told the victim had told Hondros earlier that day she was under 16.

...

Judge Sexton said the law was intended to protect young girls too immature to make proper choices about sexual activity and deal with the consequences.

For this reason the law protected them from themselves and adults who may take advantage of them, she said.

Judge Sexton said the victim was now suffering from the emotional impact of having sex with the accused, despite it being consensual.

She said she had nightmares and her confidence had deteriorated.

"She gets upset, feels guilty, has difficulty sleeping and trouble concentrating at school," Judge Sexton said.

Singh, who pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual penetration of a child under 16, was sentenced to two and a half years' jail, to serve a minimum of 10 months.

The judge acknowledged his tragic personal history and that his judgment at the time of his offending was impaired due to post traumatic stress disorder.

Hondros, of Thomastown, pleaded guilty to one count of sexual penetration of a child under 16.

He received a wholly suspended 15-month jail term after the judge found there were exceptional circumstances in his case including his youth, admissions, willingness to give evidence against his co-accused, and the narrow age gap between him and his victim.

I've never understood men being treated lightly in cases such as this because they have a "tragic personal history" - does making sure some other poor unfortunate does alleviate that in some way?

Amnesty's Human Rights Report 2009

Amnesty International has released its individual country reports which reveal the 'state of the world's human rights'. The reports for several Western countries are ridiculously critical, particularly concerning the area of migration, admission and treatment of refugees and the right of a sovereign nation to decide whom may settle and whom may not.

I thought I would use this opportunity to highlight the outrageous approach this organisation has to border control, a nation's primary line of defence against those who wish to harm it in any way, either physically or by absorbing resources they are simply not entitled to.

A few examples are used to condemn Western countries, when the simple fact is if other countries had better human rights records, we would not be obliged to take any refugees at all. If Germany, Denmark and Holland et al are so brutal and terrible, why do the immigrants keep coming, by any means?

The reports highlight examples, but they make no suggestions as to rectifying the situation. For example, if the Belgian government wishes to deport someone and they won't come quietly, what is wrong with restraining them?

Why should the Belgian government, elected by the Belgian people, not be able to decide who it hosts within its own borders, on its own territory?

Why should Germany harbour the Third World's military deserters? Why should the Netherlands not detain people who enter illegally and make it deliberately difficult to ascertain their identity?

The following examples show everything that is wrong with the thought processes of the average Westerner; however, if you go to Amnesty's site, the reports on China, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are worth a look.

Germany

In an accelerated asylum procedure at Frankfurt Airport on 14 May, immigration authorities forcibly returned Eritrean nationals Yonas Haile Mehari and Petros Aforki Mulugeta after their asylum claims were rejected as manifestly unfounded. Both men were arrested upon arrival in Eritrea. On 20 July they were transferred to Adi Abeto prison. On 30 July, Petros Aforki Mulugeta was transferred to Wia prison. Yonas Haile Mehari, classified as a military deserter by the authorities, was transferred to his military unit where he was at risk of torture and other ill-treatment.

Amnesty International criticized the government’s discriminatory approach on the admission of Iraqi refugees. The Minister of Interior had provoked controversy in April when he announced that only Iraqi Christians would be admitted. After a public debate the policy was modified to apply to religious minorities in general and other vulnerable Iraqi refugees.

All public institutions, including those that provide social services, are required by law to report the identity of any irregular migrant to the authorities. This provision restricts migrants’ access to health care and access to judicial remedies in case of violation of their labour rights, and children’s access to education.

To conclude:

Germany again referred to diplomatic assurances as appropriate means in deportation cases where individuals may be at risk of serious human rights abuses, in violation of its obligations under international law. Irregular migrants continued to be deprived of their economic, social and cultural rights.

France

The UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern at reports of overcrowding and inadequate hygiene, food and medical care for irregular migrants and asylum-seekers – including unaccompanied minors – held in detention. It called on France to review its detention policy and improve living conditions in detention centres, especially those in the Overseas Departments and Territories.

In April, the government agency that determines the status of refugees (OFPRA) reported that the rate of recognition of asylum claims reached almost 30 per cent in 2007, one of the highest rates in recent years.

On 3 July, a bill was presented by several members of parliament to amend the right of appeal before the National Court on Asylum for asylum-seekers whose claims were being examined under the accelerated procedure. Under the new proposal asylum-seekers who were appealing against an accelerated decision could not be forcibly returned to their country of origin while their appeal was still in progress. The bill was not supported by the government.

There was also concern over a death in police custody:

On 9 May Abdelhakim Ajimi died during arrest in Grasse. Police officers arrested and restrained Abdelhakim Ajimi after an altercation in a bank where he was trying to withdraw money. A judicial investigation into the incident was opened and was still in progress at the end of the year. According to the autopsy report, Abdelhakim Ajimi died as a result of asphyxiation caused by the restraint techniques used against him. Several witnesses to the event reported an excessive use of force by the police. The officers involved remained on active duty at the end of the year.

To conclude:

Individuals having their asylum claim examined under the accelerated procedure remained at risk of forcible deportation while waiting for a decision. Despite the risk of serious human rights violations, France forcibly returned one man to Algeria and attempted to return another. New legislation authorizing indefinitely renewable “preventive detention” and a decree authorizing police to collect broad personal information on individuals believed to be a possible threat to public order, undermined the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Finland

The strict application of the “Dublin II” EU regulations saw asylum-seekers returned to the EU member state in which they first arrived for determination of their asylum claim, even when those states were less likely to provide some form of protection than Finland. The total number of “Dublin returns” from Finland increased from 320 in 2007 to at least 430 in 2008.

At least 22 asylum-seeking children were detained, including seven who were unaccompanied.

To conclude:

Asylum-seekers were sent back to EU countries where they were less likely to be offered some form of protection than if their claim had been considered in Finland.

Belgium

On 26 April, Ebenizer Sontsa, a rejected asylum-seeker from Cameroon, was forcibly restrained by several law enforcement officials during an attempted deportation from Brussels Airport. Following protests by other passengers at his treatment, the deportation was abandoned and he was returned to the immigration detention centre of Merksplas where he made a complaint of ill-treatment. A new deportation was scheduled for 9 May, but on 1 May Ebenizer Sontsa committed suicide. In December, the Public Prosecutor closed the investigation into Ebenizer Sontsa’s death.

On 24 January the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the conditions of detention of two rejected Palestinian asylum-seekers who were held in the transit zone of Brussels Airport in February 2003 for 11 days amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment. The Court also ruled that the repeated detention of the two men, in spite of judicial decisions ordering their release, constituted a violation of their right to liberty. The CERD expressed concern at the detention of asylum-seekers and the conditions of their detention.

Sweden

Ahmed Agiza and Mohammed El Zari were awarded around 3,160,000 Swedish kronor (€307,000) in compensation for the grave violations they suffered during and as a result of their unlawful deportation from Sweden to Egypt in December 2001. Both men were tortured while held incommunicado in Egypt. They had been denied access to a full and fair asylum determination process in Sweden, and were deported on the strength of worthless “diplomatic assurances” given by the Egyptian authorities.

Mohammed El Zari was released from prison in Egypt in October 2003, without ever having been charged. Ahmed Agiza remained in prison in Egypt, following an unfair trial before a military court. The Swedish government did not make a final decision on the appeals brought by both men against the rejection of their applications for residence permits in Sweden.

In June the UN Committee against Torture (CAT) called on Sweden to investigate in depth the reasons for the deportation of Mohammed El Zari and Ahmed Agiza and, if appropriate, prosecute those responsible.

In June the CAT expressed concern that the detention of asylum-seekers before deportation was common, and regretted that Swedish law provides “no absolute limit on the length of time that an asylum-seeker can be detained”.

Most new applications from Iraqi asylum-seekers were rejected after the Migration Board and the Migration Court of Appeal decided that there was no internal armed conflict in Iraq. Previously, the majority of asylum-seekers from Iraq had received some form of protection.

In February, the authorities in Sweden and Iraq reached an agreement on the forcible return to Iraq of rejected asylum-seekers. Prior to this, only Iraqi nationals who agreed to be returned were accepted by the Iraqi authorities.

The Swedish authorities continued to reject applications from Eritrean asylum-seekers. This exposed them to the risk of being returned to Eritrea, despite the UNHCR’s recommendation that all states should halt forcible returns to Eritrea. At least one Eritrean national was forcibly returned from Sweden to Eritrea, in April.

Denmark

In November, new legislation imposed further restrictions on the “tolerated residency” status given to foreign nationals against whom an expulsion order has been made but cannot be carried out. This includes people whose return to their country of origin has been ruled to be unsafe by the Refugee Appeals Board. In November there were believed to be 18 people with a “tolerated residency” status, including the Tunisian national referred to as S.C. The new legislation required these people to live in designated centres for asylum-seekers and to report daily to the police, in all but exceptional cases. The legislation increased to one year the maximum period of imprisonment which can be imposed for failure to comply with these requirements.

At least 11 Iraqis were forcibly returned to Iraq, contrary to the recommendations of the UNHCR, the UN refugee agency.

Some asylum-seekers who had been subjected to torture or other ill-treatment did not receive adequate medical treatment in Denmark.

United Kingdom

In March, 60 rejected asylum-seekers were forcibly returned to Erbil in northern Iraq; in October, it was reported that a further 50 Iraqis had been returned to northern Iraq.

In March, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) gave its decision on an important test-case concerning humanitarian protection for asylum-seekers who have fled armed conflicts. The AIT ruled that, although there was an internal armed conflict in Iraq, the appellants in the case would not, just by virtue of being civilians, face a “serious and individual threat” if returned, and therefore were not entitled to protection under EU legislation known as the Qualification Directive. This decision would, if followed, result in even more Iraqi asylum-seekers being denied protection in the UK. By the end of the year an appeal against this decision was pending.

Australia

In August, the government finalized the abolition of Temporary Protection Visas for asylum-seekers.

In January, the government closed its offshore detention facility on the island nation of Nauru. In May, the UN Committee against Torture expressed concern that the detention facility on Christmas Island was still in use. Despite this, Australia began use of a new high security facility on the Island in December.

In July, the government announced that asylum-seekers would be temporarily detained for identity, health and security checks, but only those who posed a risk to society would remain in detention. At the end of the year, this commitment had not been implemented.

New Zealand

In July, the government tabled an Immigration Bill which had provisions for passenger screening at the point of departure to New Zealand. The Bill would allow withholding of reasons for denial of entry, and would deny the applicant access to judicial review.

Concern was expressed that the passenger screening process outlined in the Bill could expose asylum-seekers to harm if they were denied permission to board an aircraft when they were facing persecution, including possibly torture or death, in their own countries. The Bill also contained provisions that raised concerns about the possibility of prolonged and arbitrary detention.

Netherlands

The State Secretary of Justice announced in September that asylum-seekers from central and southern Iraq would no longer be automatically entitled to protection in the Netherlands. Residence permits previously issued to Iraqis from central and southern Iraq would be withdrawn and each case would be made subject to individual review, to determine whether the individual was a refugee or otherwise in need of international protection.

At least five people were forcibly returned to northern Iraq, at least five to central Iraq and at least one to southern Iraq. Rejected asylum-seekers from Iraq were told that they were expected to return to Iraq, that they had no right to remain in the Netherlands and that they were not entitled to any support from the state, beyond the most basic emergency health care. Many, therefore, were faced with a choice between returning “voluntarily” to Iraq, despite real risks of human rights violations there, or being made forcibly destitute in the Netherlands.

According to government figures, around 4,500 irregular migrants and asylum-seekers were subject to administrative detention in the first half of 2008. They were held in detention centres under a regime designed for remand prisoners. Some were detained for excessive periods, in some cases more than a year. Alternatives to detention were used infrequently, even for people belonging to vulnerable groups, such as unaccompanied minors and victims of trafficking or torture.

Not all allegations of ill-treatment in immigration detention were followed by prompt, impartial and thorough investigations.

Although the regimes for immigration detention were under review, few concrete proposals for improvement were made. The supervision and complaints mechanisms were under review, but few measures for improvement were announced, apart from the creation of a mechanism to investigate complaints of ill-treatment by officers of the Transport and Support Service, which is responsible for the transport of detained individuals.

In January the government announced reforms to the policy governing the detention of asylum-seeking families with children, including the introduction of a maximum detention period for families of two weeks prior to expulsion, and the improvement of detention conditions. However, the government indicated it would continue to detain unaccompanied minors in juvenile justice institutions.

ANZAC Day

I would like to pay tribute to the many brave Australians and New Zealanders who have served and died for the British Empire & Commonwealth.

Today is the anniversary of the 1915 Gallipoli landings, in which countless young men were slaughtered at ANZAC cove, and also at the British landing sites.

Their sacrifice will not be forgotten.

With thanks to MKS and Koalsa69.

The Joys of Diversity & Cultural Enrichment (IV)

Four main stories about the success of various immigration policies this time, two new, two slightly older but worthy of inclusion.

1) Sweden

All this week fires have been deliberately started in the Malmö suburb of Rosengård, which is heavily populated by what the Swedish government euphemistically terms 'New Swedes'; when the emergency services have arrived, normally under heavy police guard, they have been attacked with stones, bricks and eggs.

Youths have set fire to rubbish bins and cars, then attacked the fire brigade and police officers, but road workers and other workmen have also been attacked.

Apparently these attacks are 'revenge' for the recent arrest of high-profile criminals:

“According to our intelligence, the fires and stone throwing are directed toward us. The trigger is that we’ve succeeded in picking up five important figures from the criminal network which is ravaging the area. They are now being subject to a number of measures,” said Börje Aronsson of the Rosengård neighbourhood police force to the TT news agency.

In some parts of the area adult unemployment stands at 86%.

Yesterday in Malmö a 52 year old teacher was attacked in his classroom at Segervångs School by three men wearing brass knuckle-dusters. It was reported that they marched in and asked him to confirm his name before attacking him.

He was left shaken and bloodied, but chased them outside and detained a 21 year old man with help from a passer-by.

Police are seeking the other two, however, the media left out whether or not this incident was carried out by 'New Swedes'. My money's on yes, though.

The Headmistress said: "I find this incredibly unpleasant."

Quite.


2) New Zealand

A Samoan woman gave birth in the toilet of a flight over the Pacific yesterday, then dumped the baby in a rubbish bin.

It was not discovered until an hour after the Pacific Blue flight to Auckland landed.

Shocked staff are now trying to work out why she was given a visa to fly to New Zealand whilst so heavily pregnant, how she gave birth on the aircraft undetected, and why she would abandon the baby.

Police are seeking to bring criminal charges against her for the callous act.


3) Germany

On the 3rd of March 2009, a Turkish man went berserk in a disco in Leipzig and stabbed three American soldiers, wounding one very seriously.

Initial reports suggest the arguments may have been over a blonde woman.


4) United States

On the 8th of february 2009, a gang of illegal immigrants in South Carolina attempted to kill a Deputy Sheriff with a 12 gauge shotgun.

Deputy Ted Xanthankis and his police dog Arcos were on a routine patrol when they came under fire.

Three individuals, all illegal immigrants, were arrested. The one who pulled the trigger was 15, and believed to be targeting the officer as part of a gang initiation.

From the Washington Times:

'Two of the men were identified in a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) report as members of the Surenos gang, or SUR-13, a collection of Mexican-American street gangs with origins in the oldest barrios of Southern California.

Hundreds of SUR-13 gangs operate in California and have spread to many other parts of the country. The paramilitary organization has been described by federal law enforcement agencies as actively involved in illegal-immigrant and drug smuggling.
According to the ICE report, the attack occurred as the deputy responded to a call about a suspicious vehicle.

The 15-year-old and two others, Carlos Alfredo Diaz De Leon, 17, and Lucino Guzman Guttierrez, 20, were later arrested by sheriff's deputies and members of the U.S. Marshals Service. Diaz De Leon and Guzman Guttierrez were charged with assault and battery with intent to kill.

Deputy Xanthakis and his dog were in a marked patrol car at the time of the shooting.
The 15-year-old was taken to a pre-trial detention facility, where he was awaiting a hearing in family court. Prosecutors said they would recommend that the boy be prosecuted in family court on a charge of assault and battery with intent to kill.

Under state law, law enforcement officials cannot identify the boy because he is a juvenile.
Lexington County Sheriff James R. Metts told reporters that Diaz De Leon, Guzman Guttierrez and the 15-year-old illegally entered the United States from Mexico. He said Diaz De Leon and Guzman Guttierrez were living in West Columbia and a search of their house netted items thought to have been stolen in vehicle break-ins in Lexington County, including a Global Positioning System devices and car stereo systems.

The sheriff also said that deputies recovered the shotgun that was used to shoot at Deputy Sheriff Xanthakis.

ICE detainers have been lodged against the adults.

The ICE report, made public Wednesday by the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC), said interviews determined that the 15-year-old was the shooter and the incident was a gang initiation. It said gangs "have long posed a threat to public safety and law enforcement but the threat is now increasing in scope. ... Never before have the street gangs in South Carolina actively targeted law enforcement officers for gang initiation."

ICE agents, as part of a nationwide crackdown on gangs, have arrested members of SUR-13 in Tennessee and Georgia on charges ranging from felony theft and illegal re-entry after deportation to murder, attempted murder, carjacking, armed robbery and drug dealing.

William Gheen, president of ALIPAC, described the attack as the "beginning of America's nightmarish future as we descend into the type of anarchy found in Mexico.

"In Mexico, things have deteriorated so much that police are demoralized and are being killed by these gangs of a weekly basis," he said. "That's what happens when your nation loses respect for the rule of law as we see with the effect of millions of illegal aliens in America."

He said the U.S. needs to secure its border and enforce its immigration laws "or we will begin to lose more officers and as we loose officers, gang rule will replace the rule of law." '