I've heard it all now

I've just been watching Sky News who were doing a World News piece on Pakistan following the bomb attack on a police station and I had to rewind the coverage to make sure I heard what I thought I heard, and unfortunately I did.

Jeremy Thompson announced "...I have been speaking to a number of people, especially moderate Pakistanis about the violence in the area..."

I didn't know you could get a moderate Pakistani? Do they come in radical too? Of course, this is an attempt to remove any reference at all to their country's religion or it's followers (i.e. Islam or Muslims) when talking about violence, bombing, killing, maiming, and intolerance regardless that these traits are well woven into any Islamic regimes on Earth you can care to mention.

This is almost as sickening as Obamas rebranding of terrorism to 'man caused disaster'.

Regardless of what they call it, it's NOT going to go away, the moderate whatevers or man-caused disasters will continue to happen and only the stupid will still believe that they are random and unconnected instead of being inspired by an evil ideology not seen since Nazism.

They also had Imran Khan (ex cricketer) spouting something about Pakistan not experiencing suicide bombings until after the Allies had invaded Afghanistan - are you sure Imran? What about this?

"The first suicide attack was occurred in the
country's capital Islamabad in 1995 when the bomber rammed his explosives-laden
truck into the embassy of Egypt which killed 14 people. The bomber was
Egyptian."

Now correct me if I'm wrong but we didn't invade Afghanistan until 2001 which is after 1995? Of course, it doesn't matter though because he's said it and the leftists will lap it up and store it as another soundbite to use when preaching their anti-American, pro-Islam bullshit.

Stop press: IDF state the obvious, Western Media in tailspin

"You are fighting a religion war against gentiles: What Rabbis told Israeli soldiers in Gaza" - Daily Mail (20/03/09)

Why is this news? Muslims are attempting to kills as many Jews as possible as dictated in the Quaran:

Quaran 2:193 - "And fight them until there is no more fitnah [disbelief] and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers."

and

Quaran 4:55 - "Sufficient for the Jew is the flaming fire"

and

Quaran 2:96 - "We will not remove a Jew from the punishment. They know the shameful thing that awaits them."

Infact, there are simply too many to quote from the Quaran which reads like a poorly written hate manifesto but the point is that Muslims are simply carrying out orders given to them by Satan...I mean...Allah.

Furthermore, Hamas are open about their objective, a Jihad against Israel. Last time I checked Jihad meant holy war so they consider their actions to be religiously motivated.

So now we have a 'revelation' that the IDF were told by a Rabbi that the war was a religious war and this somehow makes the news as an attempt to portray the Jews as the terrorists. This is no different than Chaplains blessing British troops before they go into battle yet it doesn't make us crusaders.

This is not a revelation, it's just another attempt at making Israel look like the bad guy and rubbish the Jewish faith to those who are receptive to the message without checking the details i.e. Muslims and left wing moonbats who are in bed with them.

But what about being authorised to kill civilians? Civilians always get in the way but targeting them directly (which is what Hamas do yet there is no outrage?) is a no no. But this came from the IDF right? Wrong. Melanie Phillips explains. Yet another case of blatant media bias publishing fiction as fact which may or may not get a retraction but by then it doesn't matter, the fix is in.

Why don't the IDF don't just bulldoze Gaza into the Mediterranean? This is a war. The press will demonise them whatever they do so why not just get the job done? All you need to do is give Hamas a warning - the next rocket that lands on our soil triggers a 10 day unstoppable countdown. Safe passage will be arranged for anyone wanting to relocate in the West Bank or other Arab nation that will have you [chuckle] and anyone left will be fair game - hopefully lefties will flock there in a bid to act as human shields so they can be dispensed also. Carpet bomb it first, then napalm to flush out any fox holes, a period of surveillance and then the armour goes in followed by bulldozers. Job done.

They have declared war on you, what are you waiting for?

Gallows for Galloway

Let's start the weekend with some good news:

"Canada bans George Galloway on ground of national security" - (Daily Mail 20/03/09)

The best quote of all "...a spokesman for Canada's immigration minister Jason Kenney insisted the decision, taken by border security officials, would not be overturned for a 'infandous* street-corner Cromwell' (*'infandous: too odious to be expressed or mentioned)."

Finally, one Western country grows a pair. Too bad Britain can ban him too. Galloway is a traitor and if I were PM I would have him hung for treason. He is colluding with the enemy, spreading their lies, and preying on common senseless liberals who are suffering from a mental illness otherwise known as moral relativism.

Third time lucky?

Do the Germans honestly believe that after two failed attempts they can win a third world war? Yes, they probably do (Daily Mail 14/03/09 - The far right is on the march again: The rise of Fascism in Austria)

Of course I know that geographically Austria is not Germany but they might as well be and let's not forget that Hitler was Austrian.

What has this to do with Islam? This.

Haj Amin al-Husseini was jealous of Hitler's anti-Jewish 'programmes' and wanted the final solution to be extended to the Arab world and in particular wanted the two countries to release a statement regarding the 'illegality of the Jewish home in Palestine' - sound familiar?

Of course, there is no anti-semitism in the Quaran because everything it says about the Jews such as damning them to eternity, urging Muslims to kill them wherever they find them, being equivalent to apes and pigs, evil, mischief makers, has been taken out of context and means something different in the original Arabic scripture that Westerners, even those fluent in Arabic, just don't understand.

I think the precursors to WW3 are shaping up and instead of a Churchill in the wings we have a Government and a populus full of Chamberlains. God help us all.

Too little, too late Ahmed

Do you hear that? It's the worlds smallest violin: Lord Ahmed is out of prison and is sorry (Daily Mail, 15/03/09)

In case you didn't know, Lord Ahmed, the first Muslim Peer - thanks for that one Tony Blair - was texting on his mobile whilst driving and then murder...I mean, collided with Slovakian Martyn Gombar whilst he was beside his broken down car on the M1 who died from his injuries.

But it's OK, the British Legal system threw the book at him for dangerous driving which ultimately led to a death of an innocent man...hang on, I was dreaming, he served 16 days of his 12 week sentence. 16 days.

One part of the article I find particularly sickening:

"I didn't know at the time, but Mr Gombar was over the legal alcohol limit, which may have been why his car had spun out of control and why he was standing there like he was."

What a strange thing to say, so it was Mr Gombars fault that Lord Ahmed was texting instead of concentrating on the road ahead. Priceless. Of course, taking Lord Ahmed's religion into account we know that alcohol is forbidden in Islam (until you get to Jannah of course where rivers flow with wine) which automatically makes Mr Gombar guilty in Lord Ahmed's book thus I wouldn't be surprised if he considers causing his death as bringing glory to Allah.

Lord Ahmed's defense was that the last text he had sent was two minutes before the accident and if I was a lawyer I would have argued to point regarding the operative word - sent. Just because he had last sent a text 2 minutes before the accident which was the fifth text he had sent in total doesn't mean he wasn't typing his sixth when it happened.

Still, the deed is done and it's not going to bring back Mr Gombar. Of course, there's no excuse for drink driving at all and if it were up to me I would set the limit at zero but he shouldn't have had to pay for it with his life and wouldn't have if Lord Ahmed had been concentrating on the road instead of his mobile.

The fact that he only got a 12 week sentence is a disgrace, and that he only served 16 days is a crime and I'm saying this not just because he's a Muslim, it would apply across the board. But as a member of the House of Lords, he needs to be setting an example, and this is a disgraceful one.

To be honest, Ahmed should have lost his peerage when he threatened to summon 10,000 Muslims on the House of Lords to stop Geert Wilders showing his film Fitna, this is pure Muslim intimidation at its worst. Naturally Ahmed has denied ever saying this which is most circumstances would be believeable were it not for a particularly memorable event in Islamic history, the storming of Mecca when Mohammed miraculously summoned...wait for it...10,000 Muslims.

I'm afraid I don't believe that this will haunt Lord Ahmed for the rest of his life as he says, I suspect he has rationalised it with his faith, after all, the Quaran mandates the killing of those guilty of disobeying Allah and I bet he sleeps like a baby knowing that he has done Allah's work.

Luton routes cross dressers

Of course, by cross dressers I actually mean Muslims.

These scenes follow a Muslim protest in Luton following the Royal Anglian Regiment returning from a tour in Afghanistan. They were brandishing plackards that displayed messages that were full of the joys of community harmony such as 'Butchers of Basra', 'Murderers', you know, the usual messages we've come to expect from the Religion of Peace (RoP).

Of course, in good old mutliculturalist Britain what do the police do? Arrest 2 members...of the crowd who didn't appreciate such hateful, slanderous messages. One was charged with racially aggravated harassment (!) and the other for climbing on top of a building and throwing a packed of bacon at them. Why waste a perfectly good packet of bacon on them I ask?

Where is Jacqui Smith? Why isn't she urging the police to arrest the plackard wavers for upsetting community harmony? Because she's a Dhimmi that's why and she's quite happy for the native British to be sacrificed by Allah's demons again and again rather than appear to be 'insensitive' or 'inclusive'. Well Jacqui, the people have spoken and if you don't sort out these scum, the people are going to do it for you and you're sensitivity trained police officers will be powerless to stop it.

Anyway, I've said too much, enjoy the vid.

Islamophobia

Here's a great take on how meaningless the slur of Islamophobia is (watch the whole thing but the explanation begins at 3:50):




Definition of a phobia: "an anxiety disorder characterized by extreme and irrational fear of simple things or social situations"

As Pat says, "...there is nothing irrational about a fear of Islam when you look at the evidence in countries where Islam has control there's repression, torture, precious few human rights and there's no free speech and if the Muslim Council of Britain had it's way, Britain would be one of those countries and I would be arrested and tortured for making this video."

Britain, one step closer to Sharia

OK Britain, our Government turned away Geert Wilders to prevent enraging the local Muslim population thus they have now confirmed our second rate status of Dhimmi to our Muslim masters. This is where we are now and if being Islam's bitch isn't enough self imposed humiliation to our Government, the next stop on this road to oblivion is Sharia law. So let's ask ourselves a question - who benefits from Sharia law?

Not Women

Under Sharia law, a woman is only worth half that of a man. She is an object for the man to use as he pleases. She must cover up most of her body whilst out in public lest she entice other Muslim males to rape her for causing temptation or kill her for not being Muslim enough. Still, if she is lucky enough to be raped instead of killed, she can always take the perps to court as long as she can provide four male witnesses who can testify to the rape and who actually saw the act of penetration. If she can't, well, too bad, she'll then be stoned to death for bringing shame to her family.

Of course, I'm jumping the gun a bit here talking of marriage, she's had 18 years of freedom before this right? Wrong. Turns out a woman can be married off by her parents from quite an early age. What, 14? 15? Actually there isn't a minimum age. Muhammed, Islam's esteemed Prophet, took Aisha as his bride when she was 6 years old. In case you didn't catch that, Muhammed, the person all Muslims hold as the purist symbol of existence, married a six year old girl. Still, he waited until she was nine before he consumated the marriage, what a guy! If at this point you're thinking 'Yeah, well that was 1400 years ago, it's not like it's happening today' you'd be wrong and wrong again.

Still, you can refuse to be married off can't you? Yes, as long as you're good at running away and keeping a low profile from the rest of your family who might try and kill you for dishonouring the family.

If running away doesn't appeal to you and you go through with the marriage then that's OK because you'll be treated with respect wont you? Yes, as long as you do everything your Husband tells you, dress modestly (especially when outdoors), bear Sons instead of Daughters, attend the Mosque (you'll even have your own dedicated area for women, you lucky thing!) and don't answer back. It's OK though, because if you forget any of these things your Husband will know exaclty how to beat you as mandated in the Quar'an (4:34).

Beware though, if you feel like having your own identity instead as being treated as an object and wearing a tent your husband might divorce you. Thankfully though, Sharia a really efficient divorce procedure - for men that is. If he says 'I divorce thee' three times then you'll be out on your heel Mrs. If you want to divorce him however, you'll need to take him to court. Again, lucky for you Britain already has Sharia courts up and running so you needn't worry about receiving a favourable outcome but more a totally unfair outcome as you will be used to being a woman under Islam.

Not Homosexuals

Homosexuality is a sin under Islam. If you're caught, well, actually if you are suspected of being homosexual then I'm afraid your outlook is pretty grim. If you ever over hear a Muslim talk about a homosexual being well hung, they aren't referring to the size of his manhood, this is what they mean and the best you've got to look forward to.

Not Black People

Did you know the Arabs were the original slave masters? If you didn't then it's a fair gamble that you probably don't know who their favourite people to enslave were black people from Africa. That's all in the past right, they wouldn't consider blacks like that nowadays would they?

Still, they don't say the N word do they? No, but they do call all non-believers Kafir, a variation of this word (kaffer) was adopted in Africa as a racial slur against Black people. Yes, they invented that one but it's OK though, because all non-believers are considered inferior to Muslims, not just black people.

Not Non-Believers

When you are given your three choices (convert, agree to dhimmi status and pay tax to your Muslim masters, or die), if you decide that Islam isn't for you but don't want to die then Dhimmi status is the only way to go. Unfortunately for you, you have to pay a tax (the size of which is determined by your Muslim masters) and are forbidden for practising the faith of your choice openly. You can do so in private of course, as long as you keep it down and don't let your neighbours hear you lest they think you are trying to convert them in which case you will probably end up dead.

Not Female Children

Especially if you get married off to a nonce, sorry, a well respected Muslim gentleman as described in the second paragraph of 'Not Women' section above.

Summary

That's some list isn't it? So basically, Muslim Men only benefit from Sharia, especially if you like to beat your wife, mutilate your daughters, take chidren as brides, like your women to wear shapeless, humiliating garbs, and hang around mostly other unclean Muslim men.

If you know your history you'll know that not all of the above groups that wont benefit under Islam have always had favourable rights in this country and we've come a long way as a society and shed a lot of blood to get where we are today. We are the custodians of the liberties our forefathers fought for and handed to us, they are not ours to squander for sake of defending the sensibilities of a religion that originated and is best suited to the lonely desert of Arabia.

One thing is for sure, as soon as Sharia Law becomes mainstream in this country, we'll be right back at square one.

Perhaps the most insulting part of this whole charade of having to 'embrace' sharia is that of just how blatantly contradictory it is to liberal values and it's the most liberal liberals who are championing it! Well, no more, and not in my name. Like Churchill said about the defense of our Island against the onslaught of Nazi tyranny, we shall never surrender and if needs be, die fighting.

Low key, big impact Jihad

There's nothing new about forest fires, especially in Austrailia during the dry, hot summer. Or is there?

Last September, the Age reports on an Islamic Group called Al-Ikhlas Network that argued in arabic that lighting fires is an effective form of terrorism justified in Islamic law under the eye for an eye doctrine. You're damn right it's effective.

The forest fires we've witnessed with horror this week in Victoria, Australia, have left 181 people dead, 500 homes destroyed and devastated over 1000 square miles of of land.

And today, the Times reports that the Australian police have released a photo fit of the person they are looking for in connection with the fires. Let's have a look shall we?

Hmm, I'm no racial profiler but I would say the photo depicts someone who is quite Asian in appearance, no? Of course, you can't ignore Austrailia's indigenous Aborigines who are distinctive in appearance with dark hair, eyes, and skin however one redeeming feature that is missing from this photofit is the wide nose that is common Aboriginal facial feature.

Of course, neither can you discount the fact that not all Asians are Muslims. It's just as likely that a fundamentalist Christian group is....no wait...scrap that, it's not likely at all is it, let's just get down to business. In all likelihood, what has transpired in Austrailia is a new flavour of terrorism. A low key, low effort, low sophistication type of terrorism that even the stupidest of Jihadi's can figure out how to carry out. Stupid or not, the death toll and destruction cannot be ignored and doesn't bode well for Western countries that could potentially be exposed to this threat as detering another attack would be nigh on impossible.

One saving grace is that this happened in Austrailia, the one country that is most likely to take drastic action against Islam/Muslims if they are caught and indeed turn out to be so. Let's hope they catch them whilst the world remains interested.

19/02/09 - Update
Austrailian police arrested Brendan Sokaluk as the suspected arsonist. I have only seen a scrambled picture from his MySpace page but he looks caucasian to me and not as depicted in the above photofit. Interestingly he has also been charged with possessing child pornography and it's well known for Jihadi's to use such sites for communicating because of their high security to protect their identities. It could be coincidence of course.

Britain - please, for the love of God, wake up!

"Foster parent who has looked after 80 children struck off - because a Muslim girl in her care became a Christian" - Daily Mail (07/02/09)

After a hectic day I was all set for a peaceful Saturday night watching TV and some light reading when I stumbled upon the above headline. Needless to say I am now fuming with anger.

In short, a foster carer who was charged with the care of a Muslim girl who came to her to discuss the possibility of becoming a Christian has been sacked because of Council...

"accused her of failing to 'respect and preserve' the child's faith"

You have to read the full article to believe it.

This is nothing short of a socialist frontal assault on a religion deemed to be 'unequal' in the multiculturalist handbok. The 'minority' has to be protected by any means necessary from any sort of influence from the 'majority' whether it wants to protected or not!

It's a clear cut case of socialist liberal thought whose manifestation is so deluded with it's own self-righteousness, no consideration is made for the intentions of the subject.

In this case, a young girl who is well aware of the implications of how apostasy from Islam is dealt with in Muslim countries (beheading, stoning, hanging, having each lim attached to four vehicles/hores and then ripped apart) WANTS to convert to Christianity and WANTS her carer to introduce her to the church.

At this point, all sensible people stop and say, "OK, it's your choice."

But common sense is not in the multiculturalist handbook, you have to check this in at the introduction and forget about it. In it's place is a political and social doctrine that denies free will if it contradicts what is deemed 'acceptable'.

They clearly haven't been able to stop the girl converting to Christianity so instead they do the next best thing, punish the person who facilitated the 'transgression' in order to send a message to everyone else about the consequences should it be repeated. This is nothing short of totalitarianism.

Would the same have happened if a Muslim carer had converted a Christian child in her care to Islam? Of course not! Islam is an accepted 'minority' religion in the multiculturalist handbook, a religion and it's followers who must be left along and whose needs must be met at all times whatever the cost, even if the cost is offending the 'majority' who are expected to just keep quiet and accept it. Not keeping quiet is considered Islamophobic.

The same goes for homosexuality. This is acceptable and any deviation from the path will result in the carers receiving the same fate. In this case, the Christian couple refused to sign up to Labour's sexual orientation regulations as part of the Equality Act 2006 that would require them to discuss same sex relationships with children as young as 11 and promote that they were as valid as hetrosexual marriages. As this goes against their Christian beliefs they refused and have now been removed from the carers register.

Then there is the case of the nurse who is facing disciplinary action for simply to offer to pray for a sick patient.

The patient politely refused but it was the nurse's colleague who raised the alarm! The patient wasn't offended and doesn't want any action taken against the nurse but it doesn't matter, the PC police have their prey and will not be letting fo.

What does this have to do with Jihad? Everything.

The rabid pursuit of multiculturalist, PC policy in this country is leaving a huge religious vacuum in this country, a vacuum being rapdily filled by Islam. Muslims are a protected species and their numbers are growing.

It's easier (albeit longer) to take over a country from within by outbreeding the natives than it is to wage conventional war against them. What we are witnessing in this country is cultural subversion but amazingly they are being witlessly aided an abetted by our own people! It's right in line with The Project, a long term plan by the Muslim Brotherhood to bring down the West from within. The reason why Westerners have a hard time understanding the plan is because we have no patience, everything has to be done now thus the idea of a plan that is designed to take time does not compute.

Why do you think Israel constantly rejects the 'Right of Return' clause in each and every attempt at a peace deal? It's because the Palestinian Authority insists on the application of right of return not just to those who fled the conflict in 1948 but also their descendants too. By agreeing to this demand Israel would be signing it's own death warrant because they would immediately be the minorty in their own country which would immediately be a security risk but also allow a majority party of Palestinian Arabs to be formed in the Knesset who could effectvely remove the state from existence.

And this is exactly what is happening to Britain. Our culture is being quietly replaced by an import form the Middle East. Sharia courts are up and running. The slightest criticism, nay, discussion on Islam is considered Islamophobic and immediately curtailed. The sum effect is that we can't even mention what's threatening our culture, and if we can't mention it then w have to talk around it, and when we talk around it it's easy to marginalise as an eleborate conspiracy theory.

Imagine the 9/11 conspiracy theorists having CCTV footage of government contractors systematically fitting the WTC towers and building 7 with explosive charges months before September 11th, and a memo from the State Department insisting that key employees do not show up to work on September 11th for their own safety, and to top it off a signed confession from G.W. Bush that he orchestrated the attacks in a bid to pursue an aggressive foreign policy. Imagine having all this evidence and still being marginalised as conspiracy theorists? It would be ridiculous wouldn't it?

(For the record, I don't buy into the 9/11 conspiricies one iota)

Well, the evidence of our culture being subverted is all around us and still only a handful believe it.

I do believe more and more people are starting to wake up but this in itself is a dangerous situation because there is no available outlet for frustration apart from the ballot box which will inevitably lead to gains by such parties as the BNP. Whilst the BNP are switched on to the Islamist threat, I don't trust them not to harbour racist and anti-semetic policies they have had in the past. Even though I would fit into the demographic that would be deemed 'acceptable' by the BNP I would be uncomfortable with such people in charge. What we need in this country that is a blend of Nationalist/Conservativism rather than Nationalist outright.

One thing is for sure, if the problem continues to grow unabated and unchallenged I can honestly see a state of Civil War ensuing. People think that civil wars are in the past and we're far too civilised for anything to happen again but fail to listen to warnings resounding from the past. People only need to take a look at the last British Civil War in the 17th century to see how quickly things can go from normal everyday life to fully blown Civil War.

I for one would rather die fighting that be subjected to a life in a beastly hybrid of a communist islamic state we are currently heading towards if as a nation we don't WAKE UP and smell the halal!

What's in a flag?

Flags have been used as symbols for thousands of years and at their basic level are symbolic representations of an idea or group.

Most people will know that a red flag on the beach means danger, a white flag waved during war means surrender. They are symbolic.

A country's flag not only acts as a unique identifier but is also symbolic of what that country represents and stands for. Armies since time immemorial have brandished flags to keep their troops organised, to allow soldiers to identify friend from enemy, to bind them all together in the common goal. Flags are flown at half mast to unite the country in mourning for a tragedy of national importance. Flags are draped over coffins of soldiers in recognition that they have died fighting for their country.

So, the next time you see people burning the flag of your country, they are demonstrating their intentions to destroy the values that the flag stands for, it's a show of hatred, nothing more, nothing less. Physically it might just be a bit of cloth but symbolically it's our country. By burning the flag, they have identified themselves as the enemy, not a friend.

If someone burned a picture of your family outside your front doorstep, would you welcome them in your house? I thought not.

Quick thought of the day

The leftists argument that Israel is an occupying force and Gaza has entitlement to defend itself under international law, and Israel, also entitled to defend itself from the repeated rocket attacks under international law, then isn't it just a clear cut case for all out no holds barred war?

I know one thing, if I were in charge of Israel and I had the responsibility of keeping my people safe I would give Hamas a final ultimatum - one more rocket and you start a 10 day countdown to the wholesale destruction of Gaza. During which time safe passage would be provided for civilians through to Palestinian West Bank and another living left in Gaza wouldn't stay so for long once zero hour on day 10 arrives.

The reason why the media and the leftists have the majority at the moment because no Western power, possibly since 1991 Gulf War, has demonstrated the effectiveness of the use of maximum force to bring about the total defeat of an enemy. I have never subscribed to the whole shock and awe, let's take a timeout for humanitarian reasons approach. This just shows that those in charge of the military machine are trying to win the media war, not the ACTUAL war - the latter I believe to be far more important.

We've seen how Israel have been damned in the Western media since their actions in Gaza and in my opinion this is because they gave Hamas the time to report vastly inflated casualty reports rather than keeping them pinned down and under fire. The IDF wanted to avoid collateral damage but did so at the expense of their own soliders. This is unforgiveable for any commander in chief. Civilian casualties are inevitable, military losses are preventable with good planning.

The longer it dragged on, the longer the leftist media had the chance to dig up the thesaurus and use every word to villify Israel in every way possible. It gave rent a mobs a chance to organise themselves and allign themselves with pockets of Islamists. It gave the media a chance to take a few snippets out of the long history of the region and exploit them as reasons why Israel are the bad guys.

A swift campaign bringing total destruction and total defeat of the enemy along with the inevitable civilian casualties would have been in the papers for a couple of days and then filed under the Israeili-Arab conflict and everyone would have gone back to their lives.

Israel needs to take it's very existence far more seriously and worry less about what the corrupt, political correct, socialist media thinks.

Qur'an Quote of the Day

"So fight them until there are no more fitnah [non-Muslims] and all submit to the religion of Allah alone." - Quar'an: 8:39

Fear not though my fellow infidels, Islam is a religion of peace, or at least it will be once all non-Muslims have been forcibly converted or slaughtered. No wonder we're not allowed to discuss it.

The Quar'an - Prophet of Doom

Today I've found the holy grail of analysis of the Quar'an.

Basically it's the whole Quar'an with commentary on, well, how it isn't a religion but more a satanic death cult. It's an abridged version so it's presented in chronological order - I'm only on page 30 and already I've got a much clearer picture of why Mohammed/Satan hated the Jews, because he wanted to be their Messiah and they weren't having any of it because they could see him for what he was, a complete phony!

I think it was a post on Infidel Bloggers Alliance I read a while back that said to win the war against terrorism/islamic hegemony we only have to kill one thing - Islam.

I think this is spot on however there is one major problem in the way - political correctness. With this in place, even discussing Islam is forbidden (I wonder why?).

That doesn't mean it can't be done, but it'll be difficult but hey, faint heart n'er won fair maiden - ask Mohammed, although his fair maiden was 6 when he married her, and 9 when he consumated the marriage....this religion has to go.

Research info...work in progress v1

After a rather heated lengthy discussion about the Israel/Gaza situation last Friday I had with one of the most leftist liberals you could ever come across (besides his political persuasion he's a sound guy) I spent the weekend downloading the information from my head into a collective onslaught on leftist views on terrorism in general and on Israel.

A number of points were made during the discussion but the two I decided to take to pieces was the premise that (a) Islamic terrorism doesn't exist, and (b) no such Muslim Brotherhood exists with a desire to take over the world.

Whilst it did the trick for the conversation at hand it could easily be expanded into a compendium of rational thought for the purpose of combatting leftist thought, hence why I am posting it here in the hope that it may help someone else and so I can keep building on it.

There is a lot of sarcasm built into the detail - that's just my way.

Enjoy....

------------------------------------------------------
Statement: Islamic terrorism doesn’t exist.

Why let the facts get in the way of the truth? This statement is based on the notion that Islam is a religion of peace and couldn’t possibly provide motivation for people to commit mass murder. This can quite easily be proven false, not only by the obvious attacks we’ve seen in this country and around the world citing grievances for transgressions against Muslims, but also by the provision of actual verses from the Koran that mandate such activity and by taking a little look at Islamic doctrine.

First of all and probably most obviously, the term Jihad relates to a Holy War.

Jihad can mean both an inner struggle within oneself or an external physical struggle which is the more well known of the two. Chronologically, the verses of the Koran from Mohammed’s experiences in Mecca were peaceful and the focus of Jihad was mainly to do with non-violent Jihad and only resorting to violence in self defence. Mohammed’s later experiences in Medina increasingly toward fighting or warfare instead of self defence Jihad. The Koran is unique among sacred scriptures in that it uses a doctrine of abrogation according to which later pronouncements of the Prophet abrogate i.e. declare null and void, his earlier pronouncements.

A relevant example, there are 125 verses that call for tolerance and patience which have been cancelled and replaced by Sura 9:5: “Fight the pagans [Jews, Christians] wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war” and Sura 9:33 “For those who do not submit to Allah their punishment is…execution or crucifixion (you might be interested to know that Hamas legalised crucifixion over the Christmas period), or the cutting off hands and feet, from the opposite sides, or exile from the land.”

So, using the Islamic doctrine of abrogation, the peaceful verses are declared null and void by the downright violent verses. The above is just a small example.
Anyway, back to Jihad.

In Islam, a person who dies fighting Jihad is a shahid (Martyr) and is assured a place in Janna (Paradise) where they will have 72 virgins, rivers of wine and fresh fruit called the Houris. The basis of this concept was Mohammed’s words prior to the battle of Badr where he stated:

“I swear by the one in who hand Mohammed’s soul is, any man who fights them today is killed while he is patient in the ordeal and seeks the pleasure of Allah, going forward and not backing off, Allah will enter him into paradise.”

Both defensive and offensive Jihad are prescribed in different scenarios. Defensive Jihad in Islamic traditional law, holds that when Muslims are attacked then it becomes obligatory for all Muslim men of military conscription age, within a certain radius of the attack, to take up arms against the attackers.

Offensive Jihad is the waging of wars of aggression and conquest against non-Muslims in order to bring them and their territories under Islamic rule.

Mohammed commanded the Muslims to convert the whole world to Islam on pain of death. Those that are trying to achieve this aren’t following a radical interpretation of the Koran, they are simply following Mohammed’s instructions to the letter.

Yes there are ‘moderate’ Muslims who don’t subscribe to the later Medinan Suras in the Koran instead preferring the peaceful Meccan Suras however in doing so are actually not following Mohammed’s explicit instructions which itself is forbidden as the Koran is supposedly the unalterable word of Allah. If the penny hasn’t dropped yet, this is why ‘extremist’ Islamic terrorists accuse ‘moderate’ Muslims of apostasy (leaving the faith) as they are not following the instructions of Mohammed – in a quirky twist of fate, look at what’s in the papers today (18/01/09 – Muslim Civil Servant suspended over ‘killing British troops is justified’ blog - he was consider ‘Moderate’). Whilst the West has labelled them ‘extremist’ Muslims, accordingly to the Koran, they are actually ‘true’ Muslims.

MPs, the media, apologists, liberals, all fall over themselves to enforce self-censorship (such as the Mohammed cartoons) in order to prevent upsetting and this radicalisation of Muslims in blissful ignorance that it’s Islam that allows radicalisation of Muslims, we are the convenient justification.

Now we’ve established that the Koran does actually mandate the killing of non-Muslims by Muslims who are attempting to bring the world under Islamic rule, let’s look at the motivations behind some well known recent terrorist attacks.

Mumbai (26/01/08) – perpetrated by Lashkar-e-Taiba who are the largest and most active terrorist organisations in South Asia that want to….wait for it…introduce an Islamic state in South Asia, Russia, and China. Note the MO – military assault on an urban area, main focus being Nariman House (Jewish Centre). The lone surviving terrorist told police they wanted to send a message to Jews (again, a lesser known subject in the Koran, hatred of Jews and Christians that has risen to the surface in some of the Pro-Palestinian rallies – links are provided further on) across the world by attacking the ultra orthodox synagogue.

London (07/07/05) – perpetrated by British Muslims, the leader of which (Mohammad Sidique Khan) received training in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and linked with terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah and Al Qaeda that want to…wait for it…create a new Islamic caliphate and end foreign influence in Muslim countries.

Bali (12/10/2002) – perpetrated by Jemaah Islamiyah – their now familiar motive described above.

New York (11/09/01) – perpetrated by 19 Muslims on behalf of Al Qaeda, justification for the attack was provided by Osama Bin Laden in his 1998 fatwa issued against the United States and its allies – civilians and military – urging all Muslims to “…fight [the Pagans] until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah”

These are but three of a long list of terrorist attacks motivated by the desire to (1) establish a global Islamic caliphate, and (2) kill non-Muslims (particularly Jews) who are not friends of Islam (as stated in Koran 5:51, “O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them.”) – this is mild compared to later verses!

So, as you can see, denial of the existence of Islamic terrorism given the spiritual justification in the Koran along with the actual events perpetrated by groups of individuals who subscribe to them is a factually flawed standpoint.

But now for a new revelation that no doubt you will be equally unaware of – soft Jihad, otherwise known as cultural subversion/invasion. Quite frankly, this is the most frightening form of Jihad as it’s presence can be seen all around us if you know what to look for – which you will do after you’ve read this.

I’ve already proven that the establishment of an Islamic caliphate is par for the course in ‘true’ Islam. Some groups are attempting to achieve this by committing acts of terrorism however others are attempting this by a far less obvious but far more effective method.

Another point you deny is the existence of the Muslim Brotherhood which now relates to the information I’m about to give. Again, I shall prove that your statement is factually flawed.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna whose mission statement reads:

“Allah is our objective. The prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

The Muslim Brotherhood is widely accepted as being the world’s oldest and largest Islamist group (note: Islamist is a term to describe a group who implement the law of the book (Koran), aka Sharia law, in its purest form where there is no separation between state and religion i.e. Islam is the law).

One of the primary goals of the Muslim Brotherhood is…wait for it…reinstatement of the Islamic caliphate and reunite the “dar el Islam” (House of Islam) and its network includes the a terrorist group currently in action in Gaza, Hamas (founded by Shiekh Ahmed Yassin in 1987 as an offshoot of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood).

Following the 9/11 attacks in New York and the ensuing crackdown on terrorist finances, a raid was carried out by Swiss law enforcement on the palatial home of Youssef Nada – director of the Al-Taqwa Bank of Lugano – due to his suspected money laundering activities. During the search a 12 page document was found, written in Arabic dated December 1, 1982, which outlines a 12-point strategy to….wait for it…establish an Islamic government on earth, prepared by scholars associated with the Muslim brotherhood.

The strategy within the document (now referred to as ‘The Project’) represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the cultural invasion of the West calling for the utilisation of various tactics ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest (I’ll come back to this point later too), deception, political legitimacy and (from the horses mouth), terrorism. The finer points of the plan are as follows and with recent events in mind, make for chilling reading (I’ve provided hyperlinks to relevant recent events for some of the points below):

1. Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;

2. Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of “moderation”;
- Radical links of UK’s ‘Moderate’ Muslim group
- Hot off the press, 18/01/09 – Muslim Civil Servant suspended over ‘killing British troops is justified’ blog.

3. Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood’s collective goals;

4. Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn’t conflict with shari’a law;

5. Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;

6. Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
- 08/08/05 – Islamic Banks – A novelty no longer
- 12/05/08 – Citigroup expands Islamic offering
- 11/12/08 – Hugging Sharia finance at the Fed
- 30/12/08 – Bailing out Sharia
- 17/01/09 – Gordon Brown calls for London to become the international centre of Islamic finance

7. Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;

8. Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of “international plots fomented against them”;
- Permalink to the BBC

9. Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
- MPAC (Muslim Public Affairs Committee)
- CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations)
- MCB (Muslim Council of Britain) – list of various associate organisations
- Letter from various Muslim organisations to Gordon Brown – “The Government is responsible for the country and its foreign policy. I don’t want something to happen here.”

10. Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;

11. Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;

12. Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
- Association of Muslim Schools
- Islamic Relief

13. Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
- Anjem Choudary
- Sadiq Khan – Labour MP

14. Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;

15. Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
- Sharia Law Courts in the UK

16. Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;

17. Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
Creating autonomous “security forces” to protect Muslims in the West;
Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind”;
- 04/01/09 – Gaza demonstrations end in violence

18. Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;

19. Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims- I will come back to this later but keep it in mind as it will become crucial.

20. Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
- Hamas’s charter states, “Israel will rise and remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors.”
- Article 7 of Hamas’s charters goes on, “The day of judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharqad tree would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.”

21. Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
- See Hamas charter above
- 09/01/09 – Jew hatred on display following Gaza demonstrations (nice roundup of anti-semetic occurances around the world), some quick references:
- Thanks to George Galloway, attacks against Starbucks in London as their CEO is Jewish
- “Back to the ovens” chanted by Pro-Palestinian protestors in Ft Lauderdale, Florida
- “Jews to the Gas” chanted by…wait for it…Pro-Palestinian protesters in the Netherlands
- Man wearing Jewish symbol stabbed near Paris

22. Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
- Black September
- Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)
- Hamas
- Hizbollah
- Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
- Palestine Liberation Front
- Palestinian Islamic Jihad
- Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine

23. Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;

24. Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;
- Terrorist financing
- Holy Land Foundation, additional link
- Jihad comes to Wall Street

So as you can see denial of the existence of the Muslim Brotherhood when considered with historical fact and the clearly visible progress they have made towards their plan is another factually flawed standpoint.

This brings us nicely to the recent war in Gaza and hopefully consideration (on your part) of a different viewpoint on the matter.

First, let’s take a look at some history. Jews have inhabited the land of Israel since pre-biblical times (approx 1300 BCE). In a bid to break the bond of the Jewish people to the land of Israel the Roman emperor Hadrian invented the term ‘Palestina’ after the Phillistines, the longtime enemy of the Jews. His theory was that the renaming of the land after their archenemy would break this bond. Interestingly, the name Phillistine in Hebrew is ‘plishtim’, which comes from the Hebrew verb ‘polshim’ (foreign invaders) which is ironic given that they are now referred to as invaders or occupiers of a land they have inhabited for thousands of years!

Anyway, back to the history. There were no Muslims in this region until the 8th Century AD expansion of the first caliphate (Note: expansion by forced conversion although they were given three options – convert, accept a second class citizen status of Dhimmi and pay tax to the Muslims, or die, although this was the peaceful version then abrogated by Koran 9:29, “Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission.”).
From first caliphate to Ottoman empire Muslims had 1300 years to establish a state of Palestine but they didn’t.

Following the fall of the Muslim Ottoman empire during WW1 the Palestinian mandate was given to the British to administer. The Balfour agreement in 1917 intimated of the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine that immediately met Arab opposition. The British mandate was then divided as follows, 80% was given to the Arabs thus Jordan was born. The remaining 20% was divided equally between Arabs and Jews. So out of the 100% of the mandate, 10% of the land was given to the Jews. Looking at the Middle East as a whole, Israel accounts for one sixth of one percent of the land, not exactly a monopoly is it?

The persecution of European Jews at the hands of Hitler led to an influx of Jews into Israel, so much so that the British started to impose quotas – even though no other country would accept them. Following aggression from both Arabs and Jews, the British withdrew its administration and Israel become a official state in 1948 only to be immediately attacked by Arab armies and a quote from Hassan al-Banna (Muslim Brotherhood) outlines their motivation, “If the Jewish state becomes a fact, the Arabs will drive the Jews who live in their midst into the sea”.
1 in every 100 Jews in Israel were killed during the Arab-Israeli war but the Arabs failed in their objective.

The Jews then set about developing the land that was given to them (60% of it was arid desert) using the billions of dollars of UN aid money – money that was also available to the Arabs.
One salient point regarding the creation of Israel is that it was meant to be the one place on Earth Jews can live together and be afforded the right of self protection from persecution dealt out to them over and again since time immemorial, not least Hitler’s attempt to wipe them from the face of the Earth when they made a promise to themselves of ‘never again’.

Summarising the events/wars that followed would be almost impossible however I think a fair approximation of the current status is that (1) Israel exists on land that has always been home to the Jews since biblical times, is a recognised Jewish statehood under international law, and has repeatedly attacked by Arab nations since it’s creation, and (2) Palestinian Arabs believe Israel is occupying Muslim land, do not recognise it as an official state, have been displaced by Israeli settlement activity, subjected to Israeli and Palestinian Authority control (the former imposing an oppressive security regimen on it’s people), and want their land back along with the displaced refugees following the 1948 and 1967 wars and are using terrorist tactics to undermine Israel’s status as a method of achieving this. Both sides have used force to achieve their goals and both sides have suffered casualties as a result. Sound fair?

Fair or not, let’s ask a question - who is responsible for the suffering of the Palestinian people? Rather than the mainstream media’s position on this which would land the responsibility directly on Israel’s shoulders, let’s consider all the information I’ve given above to see if there isn’t a bigger picture at work.

Let’s take a closer look at point 19 of the above list from ‘The Project’ - “Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims”. This could almost imply that the cause of the Palestinians is to be deliberately perpetuated doesn’t it? Surely this can’t be so?
How revealing then that during an interview given by Zuhair Mohsen (Palestinian leader of the Syria controlled as-Sa’iqa faction of the PLO) to the Dutch paper Trouw in March 1977, he said the following:

“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.”Now that is interesting.

What’s also interesting is the amount of international aid that the Palestinians receive as a sweetener to the continuing peace process. It’s a fact that Palestinians receive the highest level of international aid than anywhere else on the planet. Yet the Palestinian people are living in abject poverty. Surely their leaders aren’t squandering the money and spending on themselves whilst their people starve are they? Surely they aren’t perpetuating the situation for financial gain are they?

It’s almost as if the Palestinian people are being starved and exposed to extreme security conditions deliberately to perpetuate the myth that Israel are responsible for their plight thus bringing down more international pressure on them to relinquish land conquered legitimately after being attacked in the hope of progress that always seems just out of reach (such as Sinai, Southern Lebanon, Golan Heights, and Gaza) which will continue and continue until the time that people in the West and Israel’s allies start to believe the myth so much that Israel’s very existence is called into question and brings closer the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas’s stated objective of the destruction of Israel and those in it. In the meantime, the Palestinian Authority ask for more and more international aid dollars because of their people’s plight at the hands of Israel, most of which goes nowhere near the Palestinian people.

What was it Joseph Goebbels said? Oh yes, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

This brings us nicely to point 20 of the ‘The Project’ – “Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination”

So this is a roundabout way of saying that the liberation of Israel is just the first stage of…wait for it…the establishment of a Global Islamic caliphate. Now that sounds familiar, why do they want to do that again? Oh yes, because the founder of Islam, Mohammed commanded the Muslims to convert the whole world to Islam on pain of death.

Who would have thought that it all fits together like that!

Islam isn’t as peaceful as the media likes to make out, the prophet of said religion commands his followers to covert the whole world to Islam, Muslim groups exist globally who are following his command to the letter, Israel is the prime target for the cause but once the job is done, the rest of the world will follow.

Still, we don’t have to worry about these terrorists getting a nuclear bomb do we because that could be disastrous for us all? No, wait a minute, I forgot about the ‘True’ Islamist leader of Iran who is blatantly open about his desire for the destruction of Israel and has a nuclear weapons programme on the go.

Damn.

Nuclear Iran or Nuke Iran?

I've been thinking a lot today about those two scenarios and trying to imagine which one is worse.

There has been an increase in discussion over the last week regarding Israel's next move. It is generally accepted that taking out Hamas completely leaves them with a longer term commitment in Gaza. Anything less than this however might be exploited as a show of weakness and may embolden the Islamists.

One theory I read (it was late last night and I didn't keep the link) which interested me was that Israel might just be crippling Hamas in order to launch an attack on Iran's nuclear installations to prevent, or at least delay, their nuclear weapons programme.

I would agree that having a full strength Hamas and then launching an attack against Iran would leave them exposed to a Hamas reprisal. Even though I don't think Hamas have the arsenal or ability to inflict major carnage on Israel, by not having that distraction would be a benefit for concentrating on any Iran operation.

The recent press reports about Israel approaching Bush for support for their planned use of bunker busting bombs on Iran made me a little curious to start with. The request was secret, but insider sources leaked the information. Looking back I this could be seen as a direct attempt to further villify Israel's actions in Gaza by the outgoing/incoming administration or it was an open threat to Ahmadinejad of what to expect if it doesn't play ball.

I was also reading that the deadline to be able to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons is fast approaching. If this is true, everyone will be aware of it, nobody more so than Israel. As Ahmadinejad has already vowed to wipe Israel off the map, a nuclear weapon could be a more convenient method of doing this than small scale intifadas from Hamas/Hezbollah. Israel have every right to be afraid.

With this in mind, twinned with the incoming Obama administration who have (publicly anyway) not being overly supportive to the Israeli cause, if they were going to take such action, now would be the time. It would certainly force Obama's hand in having to deal with it now rather than when he's ready which is unlikely to be the first few years of his term.

But of course, Israel attacking Iran would have huge consequences - the media alone would attempt to tear them apart. The protests would follow but I imagine they would be on a bigger scale and more likely involve greater amounts of violence/shows of vitriloic hatred towards Jews/Israel.

And then the UN would get involved but as they've shown recently they are less than useless.

What happens after that would be anyones guess and I'm going to devote more time to that later but in short, Israel might just be sacrificing any media/public support they have left (but not from those who can see the bigger picture naturally) that may endanger their own existence.

Should Israel, or anyone for that matter, not taken any action and Iran do manage to produce nuclear weapons then it's not only Israel that would be endangered, but the more secular countries in the Middle East - not to mention the rest of the world that would then be held to ransom.

It would also mean that an Islamist country has the ultimate WMD and the power associated with such a possession wouldn't just be enjoyed by Iran, but by Islamist states/groups the world over. This my friends, would be very, very bad news.

Coming to a Britain near you

"Dancing girl murdered by Taliban after refusing to give up traditional performances despite death threats" - Daily Mail (12/01/09).

This is Sharia law in action folks. Not an extreme, hijacked version of Sharia, but pure Sharia.

'Not in my country' I hear you cry. Wrong.

'But it's only for civil disputes between Muslims'.

Maybe, but what about one law for all? What about womens rights under Sharia which are virtually non-existent? Muslim women should receive the protected legal basis and rights available under UK law yet these courts will put pay to this. Do you think Muslim women are given the choice as to which law governs the court their case is heard in?

The link might detail an event in Pakistan but the lesson should not be lost on every person in the UK who values their freedom. Sharia law must be opposed at all costs.

A lone voice of sanity

Whilst the majority of the MSM are tripping over themselves to show more and more support for the Palestinians, a lone voice in the corner pipes up and, as usual, speaks the sense the public should be made to sit down and read.

That voice, my friends, is Melanie Phillips - "Yes the war in Gaza is terrible. But the alternative was worse - for all of us".

All the critical points are made:

• Israel's actions are in response to over 6000 rockets fired into Southern Israel indiscriminantly by Palestinians over several years - what country wouldn't retaliate?
• Comparisons to the IRA and Britain are flawed as it wasn't the Irish government authorising and co-ordinating the attacks.
• Several Arab countries have condemned Hamas (including Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia) yet the Israelis are still seen as aggressors.
• The notion of disproportion is absurd (*1)
• Palestinians are killing Palestinians (*2)
• The land claims are baseless given that Jews inhabited the land centuries before Mohammed was even born

...and more (read it in full).

*1 - I would actually argue that disproportion is actually required as a part of war in order to bring the conflict to a speedy conclusion otherwise it would be endless.

*2 - This point could have been clarified that Hamas are executing those they suspect of assisting Israel. So much for habeus corpus, eh?

The only thing I would have added to the article is to rain down hellfire on the protestors that tooks to the streets calling for a halt to the military action. People seem to believe that the Palestinians only suffer when Israel take action against them.

I would argue that the passion behind the protests stems not only from ignorance of the facts but also from disturbing them from the ignorance of events i.e. when Palestinians are firing rockets indiscriminantly into Israel it isn't reported in the media and as such is like it isn't really happening and we don't have to worry about it.

But when Israel take justifiable action against them our attention is suddenly drawn to the situation and in true leftist fashion sympathy is handed out to those deemed innocent by no other measure than their financial/power status. The demented logic is that Isreal have more money and more power ergo can't possibly be the victim.

The unarguable fact is that Palestine receives more international aid than anywhere else on the planet that runs in into billions of dollars (including money from Isreal) yet it's people are supposedly still living in poverty. If this truly is the case then nobody else is to blame but their government for buying weapons rather than provisions for its people and the ideology of hatred that binds them all together.

But don't take my word it, listen to the son of Hamas leader who was a player himself until he saw the light - Mosab Hassan Yousef. His story and the video Fox News recently broadcast should be required reading for everyone.

Iran's shadow in Gaza

A brilliant piece by Walid Phares at Counterterrorism blog.

A key point that sums up the failure of the peace process is made succintly;

"By 2005 Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip and the Palestinian Authority was closer to statehood than ever. But Hamas, which won the Palestinian legislative elections in January 2006 thanks to massive Iranian support and its armed omnipresence, refused to follow the course of the Camp David process. According to its ideologues and leaders, and unlike Arafat and Abbas, the radical group “cannot” recognize the existence of the state of Israel"

This says it all really. Isreal basically handed the PA a golden opportunity for them to achieve a Palestinian state internationally recognised but they chose instead to use the territory as a more convenient launch pad for sending indiscriminate missiles into Isreal in line with their Iranian dictated objectives.

So whilst they maintain this goal there is no point negotiating with them as there is no common ground. At the same time they must be shown that their actions have consequences, this is exactly what the IDF are showing them right now. It's simple.

Iran's involvement is a different matter/discussion altogether and is way more frightening.

As Walid says, "Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, most of the Gulf States are nervous about Iran’s influence in Gaza". And rightly so. If Hamas aren't dealt a swift blow in the current engagement they will be emboldened and that can only mean a further escalation in violence towards Israel. An Israel subdued by international pressure to accept the incoming violence from Gaza and an emboldened Hamas backed by Iran is a deadly scenario. If we allow this to happen we are sealing Israels fate whilst rubber stamping Islamist aggression against us all.

What the world is conveniently forgetting however is the one weapon that Israel has that Iran doesn't (yet). Cutting Israel adrift citing moral superiority may leave Israel with no choice but in a dying bid for existence to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike against Iran. If Iran disappears, so do Hamas. An extreme option but if it's a choice between fight or die, you've already seen which option is favoured.

Stupid is as stupid does

And this sure is stupid - "Thousands protest over Gaza conflict" - Yahoo News.

What's even more stupid than people exercising their freedom of speech and free will protesting against a fellow western valued country defending itself against a regime that DENIES it's people freedom of speech and free will, is calling upon the not-yet President of the USA to do something about it.

If any group of people symbolise Lenin's 'useful idiots' perfectly then look no further, they've been on the streets of Britain today.

The stupidty of their moral hypocrisy is only outdone by their ignorance of the mortality and remit of Obama. Are people in the UK so stupid as to believe that Obama gives a rats ass about what us in the UK think? We didn't elect him and if his cabinet appointments are anything to go by, he is setting himself up as leading from the centre rather than the left with domestic issues being his priority.

Obama isn't going to fix the world. If he lets America's hyper power status slip any more he will actually endangering the world as we know and like it.

World power is like energy - it's never lost, just transferred. A transfer of power to say Russia, or China would lead to huge stability problems that we would inevitably feel the effect of.

Britain may have nuclear weapons, but we are a small island off the coast of mainlaind Europe. Our global power has been steadily diminishing for the last two centuries. Like it or not, if the United States hadn't been a factor in the last two World Wars Britain as we know it wouldn't exist. Now ask yourself this question - how long do you think we would last with an isolationist America and a communist super power intent on annexing the West? Not very long is the answer, especially when people in this country are so blind to the truth they'll sacrifice their time to support a murderous regime and condemn a country taking action to prevent the murder of its own people - they will no doubt open the door to communism with open arms!

Whatever you thought of Bush as President, he did a good job of maintaining the US power stronghold. Admittedly this weakened during his second term as he bowed to relentless media resistance and Democrat flip flopping regarding Iraq but overall he kept his nerve. Look at how successful the troop surge was and remember that none other than Obama was against it.

Even though it was plainly obvious that Obama won not through talent but on popularity the point is, he's not President yet. The 'useful idiots' might think that because he scored such a landslide victory the rules should be changed because like kids on Christmas Eve, they just can't wait for their presents, but he's not there yet.

Personally, I think we should all chip in and buy these useful idiots plane tickets to Gaza so they can personally voice their support to the people who would like to put an end to our way of life. One of Frank Dreben's quotes would suit that situation quite well , "irony can be quite ironic sometimes".

Gitmo comes to Britain

Well, some of the prisoners anyway.

"Britain may take in Guantanamo prisoners in deal to help Obama close notorious jail" - Daily Mail (01/01/09).

This is just plain wrong on so many levels but the most important one is that the 'punishment' they will face in one of our prisons will feel like a reward compared to the treatment they've received in Gitmo.

Of course, this 'punishment' will only last as long as we can keep them in jail before the human rights mob have them not only released into our society and given an extensive suite of benefits to make up for their Gitmo days.

What will be conveniently forgotten is the role these prisoners had in contributing to the death toll of allied soliders in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention their possible connections with terror plots to be carried out against soft targets the world over.

The families of soldiers who have died at the hands of these prisoners will maybe get 10 seconds of airtime to complain about it followed by a 10 minute 'back in the studio' debate (minus service personnel representation) to explain why the prisoners are the real victims.

It's worth a read if only for the dumbass comments from the public at large, especially the ones that go something like "It wasn't our war, let America sort it out". We need new prisons to house the stupid!

Happy New Year!

I hope to one and all that 2009 brings happiness and health.