Top Menu

London: Muslim Mother Attacked For Wearing Hijab


Another Islamophobic attack. Of course the usual suspects will deny that it is even a significant issue.

Evening Standard

Police are investigating after a group of women allegedly ripped off a Muslim mother’s hijab during a “racist” attack as she went to collect her children from school.

The young mum was allegedly set upon by three women “for wearing a headscarf” as she walked towards private Islamic primary school Al-Khair in south London.

She was going to collect her two young children on Thursday when a number of women started “shouting and hurling abuse”.

They allegedly asked if she was hot in the headscarf – before yanking it off and punching her.

The mother, who wished to remain anonymous, told the Standard: “They pulled my headscarf off and started punching and kicking me.

“One was dragging my head down while the others were hitting me.

“They were being so racist and using derogatory terms.”

She said she was left with whiplash and chunks of hair missing, but suffered no significant physical harm and the London Ambulance Service was not called.

The alleged attack in Derby Road, Croydon, close to the school, only stopped when another parent jumped in, according to police.

Officers were called to the scene at about 3pm. Two women, aged 18 and 35, were arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated assault.

They were taken to a police station before being bailed to return at a later date. Officers continue to investigate, Scotland Yard said.

Read the entire article…

, , , , ,

  • 1DrM

    What is ludicrous is your attempt to pass yourself as a normal commenter, schizo Nazi sock puppet. The fact that you have repeated the lie that Iraqi had chemical weapons circa 2003 is proof that you have zero credibility.

  • George Carty

    Why didn’t the marriage-before-university concept ever take off among American Christians?

  • The greenmantle

    I disagree in that MEMRI is very reliable , every day it spouts Zionist propaganda 😉 The Truth and facts er not so much

    Sir David

  • George Carty

    The problem is that it now takes far longer (due to the qualifications arms race) for young people to become economically self-supporting.

    I’ve heard some American Muslim families have their children marry before they start university (thus preserving the “no sex before marriage” principle at the expense of “husbands support wives and children”).

  • Drifter

    Do you know the historical position of chrsitians in the matter? You guys act like clock started yesterday. Thomas aquainus one of the most respected chrsitian thelogian and saint promoted heretics to be put to death.
    Pope Nicholas advocated on the apostolic authority to search capture and enslave muslims(saracen).
    today in plains of africa LRA fights the kills and enslave in hundreds.
    Just because in ‘civilized’ world and in the countries where these ‘civil’ chrsitians who tried doing a crusade in middle east the madcap parties who rose from the ashes of bombing gets the main stream media attention doesnt mean that in other part of the world nothing happens and that you guys are peaceful like anything. KKK in recent history and their cross burning adventures are not that colorful.

  • Drifter

    true dat. No one bats an eye with christian death in palestine but when its syria world is in uproar.
    Filthy hypocrites.
    Also i find it funny when the guy,andrew, say i read the Quran many times then switch the bait to i see musilms kiling and then to christian evangelica bs.
    If you are not giong to get into the topic of what Quran and the sunnah has to say about the issue of violence rather be bantering on current case of terrorism most of which are the backlash of the hegemony and annexing campaign by the west then why mention i ve read the koran many times. LOL

  • Andrew
  • Lithium2006

    “I checked everything that Charlie posted and it does appear to be the truth about Islam and Muhammad.”

    Of course you have. Care to show us where you checked?

    “Saying it isn’t so does not make it so.”

    Actually, I have debated and exposed inane post like his for years to the point where it pretty much does.

  • George Carty

    I thought you would have guessed he was a troll from his name…

  • Lithium2006

    “I learned that Islam was created by a violent bandit named Muhammad who used to raid caravans with his small band of followers”

    And that’s pretty much where you loose any credibility you had.

  • Lithium2006

    “Musims like you have been promising to convert us one way or another for
    over thirteen centuries now and STILL haven’t succeeded.”

    We went from a few hundred members in the early 600s to over 1.5 billion today, with Muslim majority countries encompassing a large fraction of the globe, and we are still growing while Christianity continues in a downward spiral into irrelevancy.

    I guess success is relevant.

  • Lithium2006

    It’s not enough to have to discredit yourself by linking to the dailymail, you must destroy any credibility you have by posting a video of a man who is considered a laughing stock in the Muslim world.

  • Lithium2006

    “I’m up for looking at facts if you are”

    Says the guy who posts a link to the dailyfail.

  • Lithium2006

    Posts link to the dailymail, are you even trying to be taken seriously here?

  • Lithium2006

    Typical islamophobe.

  • Lithium2006

    Ah, another half-brained google scholar.

  • Lithium2006

    “Yet another Muslim apologist who says I don’t know jack”

    i have a feeling it’s not just Muslims who tell you this but everyone you come into contact with.

  • MichaelElwood

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Awww, too bad. Hey, here’s a novel idea for you…if you don’t have the time or inclination for a proper debate, why don’t you just keep your ridiculous opinions to yourself?”

    Here’s a novel idea. . . why don’t YOU keep YOUR ridiculous opinions to yourself.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “You seem to think people here have all the time in the world to run around and jump through hoops for you. Here’s another novel idea for you, why don’t you address me and what I have said directly instead of giving me a link to your “greatest hits”? If you can’t do that, see my first suggestion for you.”

    Clicking on a link takes about as much time and energy as doing a google search. If you can’t do that, see my first suggestion to you.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Now, seeing as there are NO Jewish tribes REMAINING in Arabia TODAY, who’s version of events seems MOST plausible, mine or yours?”

    You still haven’t answered the obvious question: Who were those Jews that both Muslims and non-Muslims traveling through the Hijaz came across? The ghosts of those who had been “wiped out” by Muhammad? Seeing that there were Jews who remained in the Hijaz centuries after they were supposedly “wiped out,” who’s version of events seem most plausible, mine or yours?

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “So put that in your Hijaz and smoke it Mike”

    So put that in your google and smoke it, Chuck!

  • MichaelElwood

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Uh, no, she WAS actually only SIX years old when he married her. And she was only NINE years old when he violated her.”

    Uh, no. Aisha’s older sister, Asma, was 10 years older than her. If Asma was born in 595 AD, then Aisha was born in 605 AD. Aisha would have been 15 years old in 620 AD when she married Muhammad and 18 when she consummated the marriage.

    In the Quran, people are said to “reach the age of marriage/balaghu l-nikaha” when their determined to be of “sound judgement/rushdan” (see 4:6). This is the point at which people are said to be “mature/ashuddu”. Lane’s Lexicon describes it thus:

    “. . . . and as used in the Koran it has somewhat different meanings: (Az, TA:) in the phrase hata balagha ashudduhu, (S, K,) and other phrases in the Koran (TA,) ashuddu is explained as meaning The state of strength; (S, Mgh, L K;) which is from eighteen to thirty years: (S, L, K:) or from about seventeen to forty: (Zj;) or from thirty to forty: (Zj in another place:) or puberty: (Az, Mgh, L:) or firmness, or soundness, of judgement, produced by experience: (L:) or puberty together with such maturity as gives evidence of rectitude of conduct or course of life; (Zj, Az, Mgh, L;) which may be at, or before, the age of eighteen years; according to most of the men of science, and among them Esh-Shafi’ee; (Zj, Az, L;) and the extreme term of which is three and thirty years: (Mgh:) or the age of forty years”

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Did you read that Mike? You DO know what the word ‘consummated’ means right? Now I ask you, what part of ANY of these Hadiths gives you the impression that Aisha was somehow a ‘girl in her late teens’ when a SIXTY year old Muhammad violated her?”

    You do know that neither Muslim nor non-Muslim scholars take the historicity hadiths for granted, don’t you? There’s a reason for this. Unscrupulous Sunnis and Shia sometimes fabricated hadiths in order to give theological justification for later beliefs and practices. As Prof. Aisha Musa points out in her book Hadith as Scripture (pp. 7-8):

    “Scholars such as Ignaz Goldziher, Joseph Schacht, and G.H.A. Juynboll have used textual content and historical milieu to conclude that the majority of Prophetic traditions are later inventions of the second and third centuries AH that were back-projected into the mouths of the Prophet and his companions.”

    Your hadiths that try to justify child marriage by attributing the practice to Muhammad are an example of this. Another example is a hadith attributed to Aisha that tries to justify the later Sunni practice of stoning adulterers and suckling grown men (neither of which can be justified from the Quran). When non-Sunnis criticized these practices as un-Islamic in the classical era, Sunnis claimed to have discovered an “authentic” hadith justifying them, and posthumously attributed it to Aisha. According to the hadith, there used to be a verse in the Quran justifying both practices, but a sheep conveniently ate it (kinda like the my dog ate my homework excuse):

    “It was narrated that ‘Aishah said: ‘The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.'”

    Unlike Islamophobes, Muslim and non-Muslim scholars and laymen don’t have the luxury of accepting hadiths of dubious historicity.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Can you provide ANY evidence more authoritative than these Hadiths that support YOUR claims?”

    See above.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “The point which you have so spectacularly missed was that the Iraqi law in question was INSPIRED by the example of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. The point is that the law reflected Aisha’s age at the time that Muhammad violated her which was NINE years of age.”

    In Christian countries like Ethiopia, child marriage was inspired by the example of Joseph and Mary:

    “And the powerful Ethiopian Orthodox Church has long played a role in early matchmaking. Church teachings traditionally encouraged marriage before age 15, declaring that this was the age of the Virgin Mary at the Immaculate Conception of Christ.”

    For this reason, child marriage was common in the Christian World throughout history. For example, the conquering anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish Christian monarch, Queen Isabella I of Castile, was betrothed at the age of six.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Like I said before, a basic Google search for Muslim child bride will bring up THOUSANDS of such horror stories from across the ENTIRE Islamic world.”

    I think you need to supplement your google searches with a book or two.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Child abuse does indeed exist everywhere genius. The difference is that child abuse appears to be enshrined and even encouraged by the tenets of Islam.”

    It may “appear” that way to you, Einstein. But Child abuse isn’t enshrined in or encouraged by the tenets of Islam (see above).

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “In the civilized world it is considered a crime and rightfully so. In the Islamic world? Not so much.”

    It’s considered a crime in the “Islamic World” too.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Like I said, a basic Google search on this subject proves ME right.”

    And like I said, you need to supplement you google searches with a book or two.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “I prefer forgiveness to a religion that mandates death and torture for every ‘transgression’.”

    I prefer a religion that mandates justice over some incoherent Christian notion of forgiveness.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Petty theft? CHOP! ‘Adultery’? CHOP! Rape? The WOMAN who was RAPED gets the CHOP! Gays? CHOP! ‘Blasphemy’? CHOP! ‘Insulting’ the ‘Prophet’? CHOP!”

    Did you “learn” that from a google search?

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “I could go on and on and on ALL day Mike.”

    LOL! I’m sure you could, Chuck. Just don’t expect people here to indulge you all day, or at all.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “And THERE it is right on time! You played the RACE card! Exactly on schedule! LOL!!!”

    How is noting the inconsistent application of Christian “forgiveness” playing the race card? Who created the modern notion of racial speciation within the human race? Who went all over the world assigning people to arbitrary “races”? Who literally invented the deck of race cards?

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Okay Mikey, can you tell us to WHAT race of people that Islam belongs to exclusively? Is it ONLY ‘brown people’ that worship Allah? Really?”

    You should ask your fellow Islamophobes that question. They constantly mistake Sikhs, Arab Christians, and atheists from the Middle East and South Asia as Muslims.

  • MichaelElwood

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “No, the fact that those conquests profoundly changed the religious and cultural character of the nations they conquered is what makes them Islamic.”

    No, saying it doesn’t make it so. If the Quran prohibits endless conquests–specifically, against non-Muslim peoples–how are those actions Islamic in any meaningful sense? Because you insist?

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “The ENTIRE Middle East (save Zoroastrian Persia), was at one time CHRISTIAN land. It is now OVERWHELMINGLY Islamic. This was achieved through brutal CONQUEST Mike.”

    The ENTIRE Middle East was at one time PAGAN land. It was OVERWHELMING Christian during Muhammad’s time. This was achieved through brutal CONQUEST, Chuck.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “The Temple Mount of Jerusalem, the HOLIEST site in Judaism, is where the Muslim conquerors of Jerusalem built the Al Aqsa Mosque. The church of the Hagia Sophia was once one of the most revered places of worship in Christendom. It was converted into the ‘Blue Mosque’ after the Islamic conquest of Constantinople.”

    Both the site of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople were previously pagan temples. They were converted to Jewish and Christian places of worship after the Jewish and Christian conquests:

    “When the site was first awarded sanctity cannot be known. Prehistoric peoples may have venerated pagan gods on the hilltop and the tradition continued, in changing forms.”

    “Known as the ‘Great Church’ or ‘Magna Ecclesia’ in Latin, the first church was built at the same location where there had been a pagan temple before. It was Constantius II who inaugurated Hagia Sophia on 15 February 360. From the chronicles of Socrates of Constantinople, we know that the church was built by the orders of Constantine the Great.”

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Are you sensing a pattern here?”

    Are YOU seeing a pattern here? These Jewish and Christian conquerors were apparently inspired by the Bible:

    “I will make my arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh” [Deut. 32:42]

    “And it came to pass, when the letter came to them, that they took the king’s sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king’s sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.” [2 Kings 10:7-8]

    “And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, Abner took him, and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand.” [1 Samuel 17:57]

    “So David gave an order to his men, and they killed them. They cut off their hands and feet and hung the bodies by the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-Bosheth and buried it in Abner’s tomb at Hebron.” [2 Samuel 4:12]

    “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” [Matthew 10:34]

    THAT’S how Judaism and Christianity resort to violence, by exhorting its followers to murder and enslave others. You really ARE making this TOO easy for me, Chucky. That’s sarcasm, by the way. . .

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Perhaps that quack should call his book ‘A new introduction to apoloigist propaganda’? Because that is what it sounds like. Meanwhile in the REAL world, here is Dr. Bill Warner who has used scientific modelling to paint a picture of the brutal spread of Islam in the time before the Crusades.”

    Right, because there’s no reason to believe that a professor of Islamic Studies like Daniel W. Brown would know what he’s talking about. It’s much more reasonable to believe that some dude with a PhD in physics named Bill Warner, or Bill French, would know a lot more about the subject. That’s sarcasm, by the way. . .

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “If you watch that presentation, you may just discover that Islam was NOT spread through ‘demographic trends that began well before the Muhammad’s lifetime’. It was spread at the point of a VERY bloody sword. How in the Hell could Islam have been spread before Muhammads time as you are trying to imply.”

    Your reading comprehension sucks, doesn’t it? I didn’t say that Islam was spread by demographic trends that began before Muhammad’s time. I said, “The ‘conquests’ of the Middle East were part demographic trend that began well before the Muhammad’s lifetime.” Meaning that the Arabs were not “foreign invaders” to the Syria/Palestine region as Islamophobes often portray them. The Arabic speaking Muslims certainly had more in common with the Aramaic and Arabic speaking peoples of the Syria/Palestine region than the Latin speaking Christian barbarians who claimed to be their liberators during the Crusades.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Really? Well here is another historian who says otherwise about Christians and Jews living under Islamic rule.”

    Again, your reading comprehension sucks. That quote was in reference to the Middle East shortly after Muhammad’s death, not the “Arab Conquest of Spain”. I specifically said:

    “The conquests of North Africa, India, Spain, and France were of a different nature however. The conquerors sometimes claimed to be conquering these lands in the name of Islam, but Islam provides no theological justification for such actions.”

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Which lends much credence to the popular criticism that Islam is a parasitic religion of extortion and thuggery, NOT a religion of free thinking or innovation. That Persian and Greek bureaucracy was indeed superior to any Islamic methods at the time and they recognized it as such. THAT is why it wasn’t ‘immediately replaced’.”

    The Persian and Greek bureaucracy was retained for the same reason some Arabs (mudejars and moriscos) and Jews (marranos) were retained in Christian Spain after most of the Arabs and Jews were murdered or expelled. They had technical skills that the Christian Spanish didn’t have as evidenced by the numerous words of Arabic origin that found their way into English (many of them of a technical nature):.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Now knowing this, what actual VALUE or benefit did the Muslims bring the people they had brutally conquered? None. That’s what.”

    I think the public bathhouses alone were of considerable value to the Spanish Christians. Queen Isabella I once said that she only bathed twice in her life. . . when she was born and when she was married:

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Yeah, yeah…and the Qur’an ALSO says:

    “Qur’an (8:39) – And fight with them (non-Muslims) until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah”

    You really need to get some new material, Chuck. Verse 8:39 is in the context of defensive warfare, as a previous verse makes clear:

    “The disbelievers plot and scheme to neutralize you, or kill you, or banish you. However, they plot and scheme, but so does GOD. GOD is the best schemer.” [Quran 8:30]

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Now, which one of THOSE two verses do you think MIGHT have inspired the Muslims to do what they did in North Africa, India, Spain, and France?”

    Neither. Verse 4:94 explicitly prohibits attacking non-Muslims just because they’re non-Muslims and 8:39 is in the context of defensive warfare (as I pointed out above).

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “History has proven time and again that Muslims have ALWAYS chosen the violent verses in their Qur’an OVER the “lovey dovey” Meccan verses that we spoke about earlier.”

    And history has proven time and again that Christians have ALWAYS chosen the violent verses in the Old Testament OVER the “lovey dovey” New Testament verses.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Did you EVER hear about the Islamic concept of ‘verse abrogation’ in the Qur’an? Look it up, you just might learn something today.'”

    Yes, I have. Have you? Instead of “looking it up” on the internet, you might want to read about it in scholarly book. I recommend John Burton’s book, “The Sources of Islamic Law: Islamic Theories of Abrogation”. You might just learn something.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “I’m sorry but can you tell me when it was that Charles Martel brutally conquered the Arabs in Arabia? I must have missed that chapter of history somehow. I did however read that Martel “the Hammer” brutally EXPELLED the Arab Muslim invaders from France. Because THAT is the ONLY brutality that is germane to THIS conversation Mikey.”

    LOL! You don’t get to dictate what’s germaine to this conversation, Chucky. Charles Martel is germane to this conversation because it reveals what a hypocrite you are. You condemn Muhammad’s supposed treatment of “infidels” while justifying Charles Martel’s treatment of infidels.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Ah, the moral relativism gambit! Well played sir! Bravo! Yes, Europeans DID in fact engage in brutal colonialism and empire building. But there are a couple important differences between European imperialism and its Islamic counterpart. First of all, Western imperialism DID in fact bring technological innovation and scientific advancements to the conquered peoples.”

    That’s your position in a nutshell: European imperialism is good but “Islamic” imperialism is bad. But *I”M* the moral relativist, eh? You could’ve saved me and everyone else the trouble of reading your rambling comments by just getting to the point.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “I hate to break it to you but for the GREAT MAJORITY of illiterate Muslims in the world, the Qur’an and the religion itself is what their local Imams and notable scholars SAY it is.”

    And I hate to break it to you, but what the Quran actually says doesn’t change based on what the majority of Muslims in the world think it says. And to help you save face, I’m going to ignore the ad populum fallacy you committed.

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “And the FACT is, MANY Sunni scholars DO believe in the theory of abrogation, Qur’an be DAMNED. And they GET these ideas are from the HADITH’S which, I must inform you, are VERY important to the understanding of the Qur’an. Quite simply, one can NOT call themselves a TRUE Muslim if they IGNORE the Hadiths. PERIOD.”

    Wait, lemme guess, you “learned” that from a google search? Like I said, you might want to supplement you google searches with a book or two. You’ll actually learn how Muslims around the world and throughout history actually view the position of hadiths in Islam. Much of the scholarship on the place of hadiths in Islam used to be in non-Western languages like Arabic, Turkish, Urdu, etc. But now there’s a lot of scholarship about the role of hadiths in English. For a general overview, I recommend Aisha Y. Musa’s book, “Hadith as Scripture: Discussions on the Authority of Prophetic Traditions in Islam”. For a focus on the Middle East, I recommend Daniel W. Brown’s book, “Rethinking Tradition in Modern Islamic Thought,” and G.H.A. Juynboll’s book, “The Authenticity of the Tradition Literature: Discussions in Modern Egypt”. For a focus on South Asia, I recommend Ali Usman Qasmi’s book, “Questioning the Authority of the Past: The Ahl al-Qur’an Movements in the Punjab”. For a focus on America, I recommend Yvonne Y. Haddad and Jane I. Smith’s book, “The Oxford Handbook of American Islam (pp. 150-156)”

    Charlie Hammer wrote: “Aren’t you TIRED of being made to look COMPLETELY clueless in these matters at this point Mikey? LOL!!! If I were a Muslim, I would be BEGGING for you to STOP defending us!”

    Aren’t you tired of making a fool of yourself, Chucky? Why don’t you give it a rest!

  • Charlie Hammer

    I have read the Qur’an and Hadiths and everything that Chowderhead was saying in the video concurs with what I read. It’s not just me though…

    SHOCK POLL: 81% Of Al Jazeera Arabic Poll Respondents Support Islamic State

  • Charlie Hammer

    SHOCK POLL: 81% Of Al Jazeera Arabic Poll Respondents Support Islamic State

    Your Taqqiya needs work Vicky.

  • Charlie Hammer

    SHOCK POLL: 81% Of Al Jazeera Arabic Poll Respondents Support Islamic State

    Fred Phelps and his lunatic followers make up only 0.00000000000000000001 percent of the Two BILLION Christians in the world. Tell us Ilisha, how many ISIS loving Muslims would that be according to that Al Jazeera poll? 700 Million? 900 Million?

    Yeah, KEEP believing Islam and the majority of Muslims are rational or peaceful, that’s a BRILLIANT idea.

Powered by Loon Watchers