Is Sharia Law Coming to a Neighborhood Near You? Ex-Muslim’s Answer is Terrifying

We’ve entered at time when the Islamic conquest of the West is no longer happening quietly behind the scenes.

Every day, we witness the further surrender of our American values and society in a vain effort to appease Islam.

Sharia Law is here, and, according to ex-Muslim author Raheem Kassam, you can expect it to start affecting your life very soon.

Kassam, a British political activist, recently wrote the book No Go Zones: How Sharia Law Is Coming to a Neighborhood Near You.

Liberty Nation Radio interviewed Kassam about just how dire the threat truly is.

LN: The image on the cover of your book is the Statue of Liberty veiled in a full burka. Is this meant to imply or state outright that the American system of justice is in danger of bowing to Sharia law? Just how great is the threat you outline in your book?

Mr. Kassam: I think it’s a very grave threat, and in fact, the truth is the subtitle of the book should actually be, “How Sharia is already in a neighborhood near you.” That’s the point to which we have gone so far. You can see that all over the United States nowadays, all across Europe as well, and that’s exactly what I did, exactly what I want to do is find out where. Not just where there were large pockets of Muslim migration, but actually where that migration, that ghettoization, that self-segregation was turning into something more … that resembled a sort of dual track system of government, a dual track justice system, a dual track standard of living. Unfortunately, while I wish it were true and while I wish the Anderson Coopers and CNN’s of the world were right when they say these places don’t exist, I’m afraid they are incorrect.

LN: To what extent is Sharia law currently a factor in the American justice system as opposed to the many nations of Europe you visited in writing this book?

Mr. Kassam: Sharia law doesn’t try to be a factor in any other justice system. It holds itself up as a justice system in and of itself. It doesn’t need the authority and the approval of man-made law, as they call it in a derogatory fashion. You have in the United Kingdom, for instance, Sharia councils that exist, and they will weigh in on all manner of issues, be they local family disputes, business disputes, inheritance-related, divorce, marriage, all of that kind of thing.

Your question is a good question in the sense that in the UK we actually acknowledge the power of these councils and these courts because they find their legitimacy in the Arbitration Act, which is an Act of Parliament that allows religious communities to internally arbitrate their own disputes. Unfortunately, you can’t really guarantee fairness, safety, security, integrity when that goes on when you have a parallel justice system because they’re not being held to the same standard as the rest of us.

For instance, we know what the Quran says about women. We know that the Quran states that a woman’s testimony is worth half of that of a man’s. And therefore, when a woman is hauled before a Sharia council in the United Kingdom, her view is deemed to be half as legitimate, half as likely to be the truth, as perhaps the man she is trying to divorce or the man that’s trying to divorce her or the inheritance she’s trying to get, etc., etc.

Now, to use an old tactic from the left, “this is 2017.” You often hear that from the cultural Marxists out there, “This is 2017, how dare we have a Robert E. Lee statue up.” Well, why don’t we have protests against female genital mutilation? This is 2017. Why don’t we have protests against Sharia councils discriminating against women? This is 2017. Why don’t we have a protest against people that are being forced to wear the burka or the hijab or who are being beaten and lashed? This is 2017. But these arguments fall on deaf ears. They have this sort of moral and cultural relativism that they deal with when addressing Islam and radical Islam and fundamentalist Islam.

LN: Let’s talk about the issue of the left and the incompatibility of their pronounced virtue signaling in favor of every form of cultural, racial and gender diversity with their protection of an Islamic tradition that places little to no value on the input of women. How does the left reconcile those seemingly irreconcilable points of view?

Mr. Kassam: Well I don’t think it does, but in the arguments, I have with people about this…they tend to argue, “they’re different, you gotta leave them to their own devices, it’s Islamophobic if you say they can’t exercise their culture and their religion.” Of course, the United States has this incredible freedom of religion … acceptance. It’s built into the very fabric of your society, and of your country. But, when it gets to the point that people are being actively, seriously discriminated against, when women are being lashed, when children are being trafficked and sexually groomed and raped, as is the case in many of these areas…to what extent do we continue to allow this?

You have Maajid Nawaz in the United Kingdom, a former extremist himself, who has turned into a liberal leftist, who is now being shunned and shamed by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center. They call him a hater, they call him an Islamophobe, and why? He’s still a practicing Muslim. And why do they call him an Islamophobe? Because he does not want Sharia law in the west. And those who think like him are called Uncle Toms; they’re called House Muslims, they’re called Islamophobes, you name it.

It’s not like we can convince the left that they’re wrong on this issue. But at least we can hold up a mirror to them.

LN: Now the issue you constantly bring to the forefront in your book and in this conversation is assimilation, and how Muslims are, or are not, assimilating into the nations where they live. And what you seem to be saying is that Muslims have to a large extent isolated themselves in Islamic ghettos where no non-Muslims, or infidels, are permitted to tread, for fear of what?

Mr. Kassam: Well I mean it’s not like they have a gatekeeper standing at the entryway to these neighborhoods, but it becomes extremely uncomfortable for non-Muslims, for documentarians or police, for journalists, for women, especially white women, and especially blond white women, and I’ve seen that with my own two eyes, to go into these neighborhoods. I know people in the United Kingdom who grew up in those neighborhoods who simply won’t go there anymore because when a non-Muslim goes into that neighborhood, they’re set upon. They can be spat at; they can be shouted at, as I have been. They can be threatened; they can be insulted. The insults, I can’t even say them on radio, that I’ve heard hurled at women in these areas are absolutely extraordinary.

And in some parts of Europe, police don’t even want to go into these neighborhoods anymore, and they certainly won’t go in twos, they will go in sixes, sevens, eights, maybe even ten at a times. The postal services will refuse to deliver to some of them. When I was on a bus in the northern parts of the Parisian suburbs, the bus wouldn’t stop in these neighborhoods because it was too dangerous.

This is…our new reality. I often hear, “Yes, Raheem, sure, but when the Irish came over they ghettoized them, and when the Italians came over they ghettoized,” and so on and so forth. And then the next generation is supposed to integrate, and they did, but the problem with Islamic migration and the difference between all those other migrant groups, whether your average Muslim on the street acknowledges it or even knows it, is that…they believe that their law is better, they believe that their law is God-given and that every other law is man-made and therefore they don’t have to abide by it.

Source: Liberty Nation




Video: Watch Tucker Carlson Take Apart a Top BLM Supporter Over White “Demand” List

My Note: I grew up in Poverty and am white, My Dad had to go from job to job after leaving the military trying to raise 4 kids and a wife. We got second hand shoes and clothes and ate bologna sandwiches and beans and lived in shacks most the time. I’d like to know what “White Privilage” is because being white, I never seen it growing up and never had that as an adult. These people are racist and this is flat out wrong! I dont fall within that “White Privilage” group and Im sure most hard working white people dont! They earned what they got and deserve what they have because they busted their hind ends for it. No one should be forced to give up what they worked hard for, if they want something, they need to go out and earn it like these “White Privilaged” people did! 


Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous dream was that Americans would be judged by their character, not the color of their skin.

Shockingly, it looks like that dream has been corrupted by groups such as “Black Lives Matter” — and they’re now obsessed with race in a way that would make Dr. King cringe.

That focus on skin color was made all too apparent in recent magazine article by Chanelle Helm, a BLM activist. In a barely literate rant published in LEO Weekly, the leftist organizer outlined a list of demands for “white people.”

That list included telling white homeowners to give their property to “a black or brown family,” as well developers to to provide free apartments to blacks.

“White people, re-budget your monthly so you can donate to black funds for land purchasing,” admonished one of the items on the list, while others suggested that people should be assaulted and fired for their opinions.

The blatantly race-baiting list caught the attention of Fox News host Tucker Carlson. While he was unable to book the author of the racist magazine article, he brought on an attorney and Black Lives Matter supporter named Jasmine Rand to debate the issue.

Tucker began by acknowledging that the Black Lives Matter movement may have some valid concerns, but questioned the usefulness of a race-baiting magazine article.


“It seems to me the one thing we don’t need at this hyper-charged, divided moment in American history is public figures encouraging more division, and encouraging us to think of ourselves as members of a group first instead of Americans first,” he argued.

“Here is the second recommendation for making the country better,” the host continued, referring to the article’s list of demands.

“’White people, if you’re inheriting property you intend to sell upon acceptance, give it to a black or brown family. You are bound to make that money in some other white privilege way.’ That is attacking people. Right? How can you be for that?” Tucker asked his guest.

Rand defended the clearly racist demand by bringing out the well-worn playbook of “white privilege.”

“Carlson, you and I both grew up with white privilege which means we didn’t have to think about race first while growing up,” she stated. “That’s not true for many African-Americans and for many Latino people, and I think we need to acknowledge that important and distinct difference.”

Tucker immediately stopped Rand, and pointed out that she was essentially making assumptions based on skin color.

“What you’re doing is making a generalization based on race. Which is the textbook definition of racism,” he said.

The Fox host then explained that assuming a person’s background based on complexion is inherently wrong.

“You are assuming that a person’s race is the most important thing about him,” he said. “There are plenty of white people in this country who grew up with no privilege at all and there are a lot of black people, including some of my neighborhood, who were very privileged and great people. A person’s race is not the important thing about that person. You seem to think it is.”

Pushed onto the defensive, the BLM-backing attorney tried to defend making racist statements due to the fact that some black individuals are poor.

“She’s making an extremely important point that it’s undeniable that still in our nation today, African-Americans remain some of the most unprivileged groups,” Rand said. “What she is calling upon white Americans —”

That’s when Tucker had heard enough.

“Hold on. First of all, she’s addressing this to white people. OK?” he responded.

“Which, by its nature, is divisive and I would argue racist, as if all white people have something in common and it’s meaningful. They don’t. At all. A recent arrival from New Zealand has nothing in comment with my kids. That the premise itself is false,” Tucker lectured.

“And yet, she is basically saying, give your house or your possessions to someone of a certain color. Again, she’s assuming that a person’s color is the most important thing,” the host continued, calling out the blatant racism. “Why would you want to be in the same world as someone like this?”

“You wouldn’t understand because you’ve lived with white privilege your entire life,” Rand retorted.

Tucker realized that the debate was going nowhere. “I’m trying to take you seriously, but I can’t,” he told the leftist guest.

The point may be completely lost on race-obsessed liberals, but Tucker Carlson’s take-down of “list” and its defenders is right on target.

Lumping individuals into groups based on their skin color, and then demanding that a certain color give up their property and money is not just racism… it is bordering on apartheid.

Nobody disputes that there are still great strides to be made, and that people of all races deserve greater opportunities and success. The American dream is universal.

By acting as if achievement is a black-versus-white struggle, a zero-sum game, people like Rand and Helm are undermining decades of progress.

They see life only through the lens of skin color, and that is the complete opposite of the post-racism nation to which we should aspire.

Like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you are fed up with race-obsessed demands.

How would you respond to these BLM activists? Scroll down to comment below!

Video: Watch Tucker Carlson Take Apart a Top BLM Supporter Over White “Demand” List


Politico: Donald Trump Will Close DACA Amnesty


President Donald Trump has decided to formally end President Barack Obama’s legally troubled “DACA” amnesty for 800,000  younger illegal immigrants, according to Politico.

The leak to Politico came from two officials, according to the Politico article.

President Donald Trump has decided to end the Obama-era program that grants work permits to undocumented immigrants who arrived in the country as children, according to two sources familiar with his thinking.

Trump’s decision will anger business interests, progressives, and the establishment media sector, and some business-friendly GOP leaders, such as House Speaker Paul Ryan. But the decision likely will be broadly popular among the majority of Americans.

Many polls show that Americans sympathize with the illegals, but also strongly prefer that immigration laws be used to ensure that Americans workers are not disadvantaged by the corporate hiring of cheap illegal migrants.

Trump is expected to combine his Tuesday announcement of the program’s demise with a call for Congress to pass pro-American immigration reform, such as the popular  Raise Actmerit immigration bill.

According to Politico:

In a nod to reservations held by many lawmakers, the White House plans to delay the enforcement of the president’s decision for six months, giving Congress a window to act, according to one White House official. But a senior White House aide said that chief of staff John Kelly, who has been running the West Wing policy process on the issue, “thinks Congress should’ve gotten its act together a lot longer ago.”

Read the article here.

The immigration reform debate is expected to stretch far into the 2018 election year, partly because many other issues clog up Congress’ near-term calendar. Also, Democrats and business groups oppose any reduction in the annual legal inflow of roughly 850,000 low-skill, low-wage workers.

Trump’s pending Raise Act reform would trim the inflow of lower-skilled immigrants who are now being brought into the country via “chain migration” family reunification rules. That reform would likely save $1 trillion in long-term aid, education, retirement, and welfare spending for every decade the inflow is halved, according to a recent estimate. That reduced taxpayer spending translates into lower revenue forecasts for business interests.

The Trump reform would also help many Americans and their children find better jobs at higher wages, business groups admit.

Since 2012, the DACA amnesty has provided work permits to roughly 800,000 illegal immigrants, including many who arrived in the 1990s. Their ages range from 15 to the mid-30s. Establishment media outlets describe the illegals as “children” or “kids,” but their average age is roughly 25. DACA supporters depict the migrants as productive and well-educated, but the available data shows the illegals’ skills are relatively low.

The decision to end DACA was driven by several factors. They included Trump’s campaign trail promise to close down the amnesty, and the broad consensus among legal experts — including Attorney General Jeff Sessions — that Obama’s Oval Office offer of work-permit to illegal violates the constitutional separation of powers. Also, a group of nine Attorneys General

Also, a group of nine Attorneys General is slated to file a lawsuit against the program on September 5.

Each year, four million young Americans turn 18 and beginning looking for well-paying jobs.

Each year, the government provide Green Cards to roughly 1 million legal immigrants. It also hands out almost 3 million short-term work permits to foreign workers. These permits include roughly 330,000 one-year OPT permits for foreign graduates of U.S. colleges, roughly 200,000 three-year H-1B visas for foreign white-collar professionals, and 400,000 two-year permits to DACA illegals.

The current annual flood of foreign labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families.

President Donald Trump Sets Internet on Fire, Retweets Hilarious Slam on Hillary Clinton’s New Book



On Saturday evening, President Donald Trump set the Internet ablaze by endorsing a hilarious tweet trolling Hillary Clinton and the title of her new book, What Happened.

After spending most of the day helping survivors of Hurricane Harvey on September 2, Trump took a few minutes off Saturday night to fire up Twitter, as he so often does.

The president retweeted a message from a Trump fan account called Team_Trump45. It was a meme image featuring the cover of Clinton’s campaign autopsy book, What Happened. Next to the image of Clinton’s book cover was a similar but fake book cover with a large photo of a smiling Donald Trump under the words, “I Happened.”

Along with the president, the Tweet reached over 44,000 likes, more than 15,000 re-tweets, and 4,500 comments by press time.

The president’s endorsement of the hilarious jab at the former Democrat party banner carrier comes just ahead of Hillary’s book tour, which is drawing criticism before it even starts.

Last week news broke that the former Secretary of State and two-time losing candidate for president was charging $2,000 and more for an opportunity to meet her and get an autographed copy of the book during the book tour.

A “VIP platinum ticket” for a Sept. 28 talk in Toronto, Canada will cost a hefty $2,375.95. Similar pricing is available in other Canadian cities. General admission tickets, which are already sold out, went for approximately $70 each, according to Fox News.

Meanwhile, President Trump spent Saturday serving meals and meeting with victims of Hurricane Harvey in Texas.

Indeed, due to his warm demeanor and sunny optimism, one victim of Harvey said that after meeting Trump, she changed her mind about him.

On Friday, the president also pledged to donate one million dollars of his own money to Hurricane Harvey relief. Thus far, though, it isn’t known when or how that donation will be fulfilled.

President Donald Trump Sets Internet on Fire, Retweets Hilarious Slam on Hillary Clinton’s New Book

VIDEO OFF THE RAILS: California legislators – White Shaming, The New Rage On College Campuses

Reclaim Our Republic

OFF THE RAILS: California legislators may deal a SHOCKING blow to free speech

What do you get when liberals are in charge: sky-high taxes, reduced liberty, ever-expanding governmental regulations or ever-shifting definitions of morality?

Actually, all of the above. Liberals pass laws. Tons of them. It’s what they do, and in California, America’s most liberal state, even the most basic of rights — freedom of speech — may be going the way of the dodo bird.

From Allen B. West

A few days ago, we learned that the mayor of San Francisco was incensed because freedom of speech was going to be allowed in his city; and now the Golden State may take yet another leap of liberal lunacy.

If California legislators have their way, failing to use a person’s preferred pronoun — that is, not calling a transgender a “she” if he claims that…

View original post 1,888 more words

3 Ways To Defeat The ‘Tear Down Movement’

Reclaim Our Republic


Aug 31, 2017  by Larry Tomczak

Momentum continues across America to purge the public square of symbols deemed distasteful reminders of America’s past. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who formerly hailed Richmond statues as “part of our heritage,” now lampoons them as “flash points for hatred, division and violence.”

Protesters in this “tear down movement” say they are protesting past injustices. The memorials are “racist, painful reminders that must go!” They site flaws of leaders to discredit them and as an indictment of an America “needing cultural cleansing.”

Activists target not only Confederate displays but presidents, founders, patriots, explorers and religious figures deemed “offensive.”

ESPN caved in by catapulting Robert Lee as a sportscaster due to his name! “Honest” Abe Lincoln’s flaws were excavated, so his 100-year-old bust was smashed, tarred and burned in Chicago. And Columbus’ 225-year-old statue was smashed in Baltimore to say “Kaput!” to his “covered up cruelties.”

View original post 1,671 more words

VIDEO FBI Antifa Domestic Terrorism Long Before RINOs Ryan, Rubio, Romney Declared ‘No Sides’ – End Their Politics

Reclaim Our Republic

1 Sept 2017 by Breitbart News

Politico reports that the Obama Administration “formally classified” Antifa’s activities as “domestic terrorist violence” as early as April 2016.

From Politico:

Federal authorities have been warning state and local officials since early 2016 that leftist extremists known as “antifa” had become increasingly confrontational and dangerous, so much so that the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence,” according to interviews and confidential law enforcement documents obtained by POLITICO.

Since well before the Aug. 12 rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, turned deadly, DHS has been issuing warnings about the growing likelihood of lethal violence between the left-wing anarchists and right-wing white supremacist and nationalist groups.

Previously unreported documents disclose that by April 2016, authorities believed that “anarchist extremists” were the primary instigators of violence at public rallies against a range of targets. They were blamed by authorities for attacks on the…

View original post 1,245 more words