Saturday, June 27, 2015

Fifteen More Pedophile Rape Jihadists Arrested in U.K.

The rape jihad continues in Great Britain. Of the fifteen Muslims arrested in the latest case, four are named Mohammed. Will there ever come a time when we can have an open, honest discussion about the treatment of non-Muslims in the Qur'an and Hadith?
Halifax Courier—Another 15 men have pleaded not guilty to historic sexual offences against a West Yorkshire schoolgirl following six others who denied charges involving her earlier this week.

A total of 25 men have been charged and 18 of the defendants attended Leeds Crown Court yesterday(wed) for plea and case management hearings. The charges were not put to three of them at the request of their counsel.

One man from Halifax also denied an offence against a second girl, the only charge involving her.

The defendants have been split into groups and at least four separate trials are due to be held next year. A court order is in place preventing publication of the full addresses of any defendants.

Mohammed Ramzan, 34, from Bradford denied three charges, trafficking the schoolgirl complainant for sexual exploitation on April 11, 2011 by arranging or facilitating travel within the UK, raping her between April 10 and April 13, 2011 and conspiring with Khalid Zaman to engage in sexual activity with a child.

Zaman, 37, also from Bradford denied conspiracy with Ramzan to engage in sexual activity, two charges of raping the girl on April 12, 2011 and supplying her with the drug mephedrone on April 11 that year.

Hedar Ali, 35 from Nantwich, Cheshire pleaded not guilty to four charges, they were two alleged offences of trafficking the girl for sexual exploitation between 10 June and 21 July 2011 by arranging or facilitating travel for her within the UK and two charges of raping her.

Mohammed Janjuha, 34, from Bradford pleaded not guilty to raping the girl between July 20, 2009 and 21 July, 2011.

They are due to be among defendants in the third trial next year.

Tahir Mahmood, 42 from Halifax who denied two charges of sexual activity with a child involving the same schoolgirl and a further charge of sexual assault on another girl will be among defendants in the second trial.

Other defendants on that trial include Tauqeer Butt, 30 from Halifax who denied four charges of sexual activity with a child between 20 July 2009 and 21 July 2011.

Haaris Ahmed, 31 from Halifax who denied two charges of sexual activity with a child under 16 between July 20 2009 and 21 July 2011 and denied one charge of supplying her with cannabis but admitted a second.

Arshad Majid, 25 from Shipley and Christopher Mulqueen Bennett, 36 of Gwent, Newport who each pleaded not guilty to one charge of sexual activity with a child between 20 July 2009 and 21 July 2011.

Zameer Asif, 25 from Halifax sexual activity with a child between June 1 and December 31, 2010.

Azeem Subhani, 24 from Halifax denied two charges of sexual activity with the schoolgirl as did Amaar Ali Ditta, 26, also from Halifax.

Mohammed Ali Ahmed, 42 and Sikander Malik, 30, both from Halifax each denied one charge of sexual activity with the schoolgirl.

Talib Sadiq, 30 of Halifax denied two charges of sexual activity with a child between 20 July 2010 and 21 July 2011 when the girl was 15.

Charges were not put to Mohammed Askar 32, from Bradford, Atif Ali, 32 and Haider Ali, 40 from Halifax. (Continue Reading.)
To understand the rape jihad in Great Britain, watch this:

14 comments:

King Harkinian II said...

Here we go again...

jay shawn said...

Disgusting

Paige said...

I'm not sure if it's on my side but I've not been able to post on this website for few days. Just thought I'd mention it, in case this one goes through and others are having problems.

Radical Moderate said...

This isn't even news anymore

Nojmul Huda said...

Paige,

By seeing your post, now I know I am not alone. I hope this will go through. I wonder, blockage is done by David Wood or by some virus. Anyway I took chance for this post by virtue of freedom of speech.

Jason Chiew said...

need help~!
the death of david’s son vs Deuteronomy 24:16 Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.

Deuteronomy 17:6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death

bam bamba said...

But wait a minute--- islam is religion of peace----- blah blah blah- a la Cameron, Abbot and Obama- the chief of them all

King Harkinian II said...

Also, Tauqeer Butt.

Ricardo Hotatio said...

This is a bit off-topic, but very important nevertheless.

I saw a lot of meaningless discussions between Muslims and non-Muslims, what I do most often miss is the importance of including and emphasising the difference between Islam and Christian.

James White does it here in a more then brilliant way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N9Y6kp7toY

patricia300100 said...

Cant you send koran and hadith quotes to uk gov that show what they do is islamic religion based...David? Easy to see why they call themselves best of all people because no one who knows what they do would ever call them that. We should take steps to makre islam illegal all over the west..worldwide us better...evil ideology produces hitler and germany.

patricia300100 said...

Despucably disgusting rape religion Islam!

Paige said...

Dear Jason,

The story of the death of David and Bathsheba's son is not about a transferal of PUNISHMENT for sin, but about the CONSEQUENCES of sin for David. It is perhaps understandable that some would see the child's death as God transferring David's punishment onto the child, especially after Nathan's prophecy, but when we read the whole story we realize something else is going on here.

In Deuteronomy 24:16 we hear God telling the Israelite people that sin is individual and personal. What David did (which was more than just adultery and murder!) was on his own shoulders. God removed the punishment that was due to him under the Mosaic law, but he did not place it on the baby's shoulders but onto His own Son, Jesus.

Have a look at David's response to his son's death.

When David and Bathsheba's son died, David stopped grieving, washed himself and ordered that food be brought to him. Everyone was shocked and a little horrified. This was hardly the behaviour of a man who has just found out that his son has died, even less than someone who believes his son has been punished for the crimes that he himself committed. In fact, if most Dad's found out their son had received the punishment for their sins, they would be close to suicidal, I would think. Not David, he was at peace!

Why? Because he did not see his son's death as the transferal of punishment, but as the consequence of is own sin. This is why he knew it was okay to pray that His son might be healed. But when he died he obviously knew his son was now in the safest place in the world, in his Heavenly Father's care, which is why David could say "I will go to be with him (my child)".

I have wondered also if this little boy's death reflected God's loving kindness in other ways. What might he have faced if he were to live? What ridicule and emotional trauma might have been his? God removed all these possibilities when he took him into the perfect protection of His own arms.

Under normal circumstances, you would expect a woman (whose loving husband had also been murdered) to take a pretty stark view of the man who caused both her husbands and her sons death, but instead we read that she becomes David's wife, and the wonderful mother of Solomon. This too stands against a belief that this little baby was punished.

In summary, David's peace of mind when his son finally dies, tells us that he did not consider that God was punishing his son, he considered that this was the CONSEQUENCE of his own sin. But both David and the child effectively came under God's grace in that David was forgiven and the child was taken home to be with His Heavenly Father. This is not a story about punishment, but about God's love.

Eventually, however, the penalty prescribed for David's crime was paid, not by a baby but by the Lord Jesus Christ.

This is my reading of that story anyway. There are probably others with a much better grasp on it, but I hope this might help you a bit.

Cheers,

Paige

Paige said...

Patricia300100

You wrote: "We should take steps to makre islam illegal all over the west..worldwide us better...evil ideology produces hitler and germany."

First up, Germany has produced great people like Martin Luther, Goethe, Gutenberg, Planck, Bach, Bornhoeffer, etc. etc. How is it that Hitler is the only one that people in the West can remember???

Secondly, evil ideologies are produced by men, not the other way around. Also, Hitler got into power through an ideology called democracy.

Finally, as you want to legislate and ban religions worldwide you have aligned yourself with the most tyrannical, evil and despotic governments in history, including ISIS.

I'm sure that's not where you were heading, but that's definitely where you'll end up if you start talking about Muslims the way Hitler talked about the Jews. Hitler, who gets way too much air time on these forums, hated and was also terrified of the Jews. He called for legislaton to have their work restricted, to have them exiled, to have their religious practices banned, to have them imprisoned, and then secretly called for their extermination.

Do you see where I am going?

Jason Chiew said...

Hi Paige, we have the same thoughts but you got me clearer explanation thank you.