While looking online for info about current numbers of artists who identify as muslim I found this
As it is sooo egregious I thought I'd better bring it to my readers attention.
"VETERANS TODAY HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO PUBLISH THE FOLLOWING DECLARATION:" It is a list of people with a lot of Phds who supposedly endorse the statement that No Muslims were involved in 9/11. Which the website, supposedly devoted to American Veteran's issues, dutifully published.
If you enjoy vomiting in rage here is the link to the "declaration": http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/10/21/declaration-requesting-endorsement-no-muslims-proven-involved-in-911/#respond
It is on a website called Veterans Today. It is posing as a website by and for Veterans but if you look on the main page it becomes quickly obvious that it is really an anti Isreal-pro Hamas propoganda rag. Below a few window dressing veterans interest stories almost all of the articles are about bashing Isreal and Jews.
Just a few of the articles on the main page were:
There are articles about an Isreali serial killer.
Israeli War Crimes Ads Banned in Seattle that mentions Atlas Shrugged's Seattle bus campagn. (Why would veterans care about that?)
an article on the Second Annaversary of Isreal's "brutal assault on Gaza" (my quotes).
At the top of the "living section" is an article bemoaning how "our" country has aided in the slaughter of palestinians. (what does that have to do with a lifestyle section?)
In history is an article about the origin of the word goy and the sentence that just happens to be under the title is someone saying "the goyem were born to serve us". (An interesting choice considering there is 3000 years of military history to choose subject matter from.)
These articles are all on the main page. I did not have to search thru the site to find them.
Get a load of this filth: http://www.veteranstoday.com/
If anyone knows which veterans groups would be interested in these people spouting propoganda in their name please forward this information to them. I will look for some as of this minute don't know any.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Syrian Government was Involved in Motoon "Outrage".
I think the people who orchestrated the ginned up riots over the Motoons were just out for material rewards and didn't really give a crap about hurt muslim feelings.
I just read an illuminating article at Jihadwatch. Wikileaks released diplomatic cables showes that the US knew the Syian Government was involved in controlling the ginned up Motoons protests.
The Syrian Govenrment told the chief Imam to tell all other Imams to screach about the Motoons. There were then attacks on several embassies in Damascus in early February 2006. Embassies targeted included those of Norway, Denmark and Sweden. Then the Syrian Government told him to tell them to stop.
At first this struck me as odd. I always thought Syria only acted in direct ways for their own local interests and didn't use Islam as a tool to expand influence like the Saudis do. Ya Ya I know about Hizbolla but that is directed at Lebanon and Isreal, not Europe. If they had a hand in the riots it had to be ONLY for their own political reasons in Arabia and Europe and not for some show of Islamic force.
Perhaps they probably did it to make a statement to other Arab/OIC countries that they are islamitically patriotic as they are and can be significant like Iran and Saudi Arabia. Or they were doing it in agreement with other Arab/OIC governments.
It is significant that it is revealed that it was the government that started the protests and not the religious leaders.
Which brings us to the Vocabulary word of the day: Slipstreaming.
I have only heard the term "Slipstreaming" once but it was used by a US government counter terrorism expert. After a terrorist attack, "moderate" muslims will stream out of the woodwork to make requests and demands from a victim government "to ease tensions between Muslims and non muslims".
It has been suggested that the current explosion of Muslim population in Europe started after a wave of terrorist attacks in the 60's. The same source said after Europian countries eased restrictions on immigration and gave Arab countries good trade deals the wave of terrorist attacks "in support of the palestinians" ended.
As the source of the Motoon protests was state rather then church, I would bet a bippy or two that Syrian diplomats slipstreamed on this to pressure EU countries for favorable trade deals.
So what I am saying is it is entirely possible that Syria made their people all upset over some cartoons but were really using those protests as a show of violent force as a diplomatic tool to get concessions form Europian countries and didn't really care about hurt muslim feelings.
Here is the original article from Jihadwatch I am commenting on:
Syria helped orchestrate 2006 Motoon riots
I just read an illuminating article at Jihadwatch. Wikileaks released diplomatic cables showes that the US knew the Syian Government was involved in controlling the ginned up Motoons protests.
The Syrian Govenrment told the chief Imam to tell all other Imams to screach about the Motoons. There were then attacks on several embassies in Damascus in early February 2006. Embassies targeted included those of Norway, Denmark and Sweden. Then the Syrian Government told him to tell them to stop.
At first this struck me as odd. I always thought Syria only acted in direct ways for their own local interests and didn't use Islam as a tool to expand influence like the Saudis do. Ya Ya I know about Hizbolla but that is directed at Lebanon and Isreal, not Europe. If they had a hand in the riots it had to be ONLY for their own political reasons in Arabia and Europe and not for some show of Islamic force.
Perhaps they probably did it to make a statement to other Arab/OIC countries that they are islamitically patriotic as they are and can be significant like Iran and Saudi Arabia. Or they were doing it in agreement with other Arab/OIC governments.
It is significant that it is revealed that it was the government that started the protests and not the religious leaders.
Which brings us to the Vocabulary word of the day: Slipstreaming.
I have only heard the term "Slipstreaming" once but it was used by a US government counter terrorism expert. After a terrorist attack, "moderate" muslims will stream out of the woodwork to make requests and demands from a victim government "to ease tensions between Muslims and non muslims".
It has been suggested that the current explosion of Muslim population in Europe started after a wave of terrorist attacks in the 60's. The same source said after Europian countries eased restrictions on immigration and gave Arab countries good trade deals the wave of terrorist attacks "in support of the palestinians" ended.
As the source of the Motoon protests was state rather then church, I would bet a bippy or two that Syrian diplomats slipstreamed on this to pressure EU countries for favorable trade deals.
So what I am saying is it is entirely possible that Syria made their people all upset over some cartoons but were really using those protests as a show of violent force as a diplomatic tool to get concessions form Europian countries and didn't really care about hurt muslim feelings.
Here is the original article from Jihadwatch I am commenting on:
Syria helped orchestrate 2006 Motoon riots
Friday, December 24, 2010
More accurate translation of the Koran
I just watched this fascinating video on YouTube. It is about the a) earliest versions of the Koran (70 years after the death of Muhammad) found to date and b) an innovative translation method that is extremely accurate. Muslim countries have banned it. Natch.
The oldest versions don't have vowel markings or distinguishing dots over letters so words from the original can have up to 30 different meanings.
At the time of the Koran's original construction Arabic writing was just starting. In fact the Koran is the VERY FIRST BOOK WRITTEN IN ARABIC. So the language would be very different from today. As different as english was a thousand years ago. See if you can understand an olde inglishee style version of Beowulf or even the Canterbury Tales, written in the middle ages. So the very first arabic writing was a mishmash of spoken arabic and other established written languages - like english is (a great many of the words we use are of french or german or latin origin).
The author posited that one of the languages was Syro-Aramaic. A widely used written language in the region at that time but which is no longer used. When applied to an understanding of the ancient Koran it turns many passages on their heads.
For instance the passage that many claim is responsible for women having to wear the hajib is just telling them they should go about wearing belts (like monks of the time wore). Another passage mentioned is the one about the 72 virgins (or houris (make up yer mind Muhammad!)). In the more accurate translation it is talking about white grapes. In frescoes in the region made at that time people can be seen sitting on angels laps being given white grapes as a symbol for spiritual succor. As Islam took bits and pieces from Christianity and Judaism, that the Koran says you can have wonderful wine in heaven may be sourced to that christian symbolism too.
There are other examples.
I suggest that the anti jihadist of the sort who reads the Koran/hadith/sira HAS to get a copy of this book. It is The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran by Christoph Luxenberg (Not the author's real name. He used a nome de plume because he didn't wanna go boom).
Here is the book at amazon: The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran (I don't have a deal with amazon and have not monetized this blog).
What is so mind boggling about this is that it may well turn out that muslims who preach a strict literal following of the Koran et all have been following a complete mistranslation. The mother of all mistranslations in fact. All those women covered head to toe in bee keeper outfits could have been walking around in shorts and breathable cotton blouses all these centuries- just as long as they also wear belts.
Update on that last paragraph. The 90 year old brother of Hasan al Bana, the originator of the ultra right wing Muslim Brotherhood (the group behind the resurgance of the burka phenomenon) and the author of over 90 books on the Koran and Islam, said there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING anywhere in the holy books that says anything about wearing the head scarf or burka. The passage he says is used to justify the burka actually says muslim woman are not allowed to expose their breasts in public. THATS IT. So according to real orthodox fundamentalist islam, muslim women are allowed to wear WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT, they just can't go topless or appear in a muslims go wild video. It makes all those public beatings in Sudan and Afganistan women get for wearing trousers or toe polish even more inescusable. Not that that's possible.
Here is the link to the video. It is a 50 minute documentary by a mulim man interviewing other muslim men about the Muslim Brotherhood posted by Kitman TV:
Freedom, Equality and the Moslim Brotherhood
So in fact Bin Ladin Al Quida, the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood really really are actual apostates. They believe the Koran is the exact word of god and cannot be refuted by man. But that word of god they have based their beliefs has been mistranslated by men. In fact ALL MUSLIMS COULD BE APOSTATES. Jeez louise. You see now why I think this is a big deal?
There are a few muslim scholars in the vid who argue against him but their arguments are pretty old hat and have been refuted by experts on the subject (people who have actual degrees in this stuff - not doofoids like yours truelly). If you do a little looking up you might find which middle eastern country funds the various chairs one or more of these islamic scholars hold.
The oldest versions don't have vowel markings or distinguishing dots over letters so words from the original can have up to 30 different meanings.
At the time of the Koran's original construction Arabic writing was just starting. In fact the Koran is the VERY FIRST BOOK WRITTEN IN ARABIC. So the language would be very different from today. As different as english was a thousand years ago. See if you can understand an olde inglishee style version of Beowulf or even the Canterbury Tales, written in the middle ages. So the very first arabic writing was a mishmash of spoken arabic and other established written languages - like english is (a great many of the words we use are of french or german or latin origin).
The author posited that one of the languages was Syro-Aramaic. A widely used written language in the region at that time but which is no longer used. When applied to an understanding of the ancient Koran it turns many passages on their heads.
For instance the passage that many claim is responsible for women having to wear the hajib is just telling them they should go about wearing belts (like monks of the time wore). Another passage mentioned is the one about the 72 virgins (or houris (make up yer mind Muhammad!)). In the more accurate translation it is talking about white grapes. In frescoes in the region made at that time people can be seen sitting on angels laps being given white grapes as a symbol for spiritual succor. As Islam took bits and pieces from Christianity and Judaism, that the Koran says you can have wonderful wine in heaven may be sourced to that christian symbolism too.
There are other examples.
I suggest that the anti jihadist of the sort who reads the Koran/hadith/sira HAS to get a copy of this book. It is The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran by Christoph Luxenberg (Not the author's real name. He used a nome de plume because he didn't wanna go boom).
Here is the book at amazon: The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran (I don't have a deal with amazon and have not monetized this blog).
What is so mind boggling about this is that it may well turn out that muslims who preach a strict literal following of the Koran et all have been following a complete mistranslation. The mother of all mistranslations in fact. All those women covered head to toe in bee keeper outfits could have been walking around in shorts and breathable cotton blouses all these centuries- just as long as they also wear belts.
Update on that last paragraph. The 90 year old brother of Hasan al Bana, the originator of the ultra right wing Muslim Brotherhood (the group behind the resurgance of the burka phenomenon) and the author of over 90 books on the Koran and Islam, said there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING anywhere in the holy books that says anything about wearing the head scarf or burka. The passage he says is used to justify the burka actually says muslim woman are not allowed to expose their breasts in public. THATS IT. So according to real orthodox fundamentalist islam, muslim women are allowed to wear WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT, they just can't go topless or appear in a muslims go wild video. It makes all those public beatings in Sudan and Afganistan women get for wearing trousers or toe polish even more inescusable. Not that that's possible.
Here is the link to the video. It is a 50 minute documentary by a mulim man interviewing other muslim men about the Muslim Brotherhood posted by Kitman TV:
Freedom, Equality and the Moslim Brotherhood
So in fact Bin Ladin Al Quida, the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood really really are actual apostates. They believe the Koran is the exact word of god and cannot be refuted by man. But that word of god they have based their beliefs has been mistranslated by men. In fact ALL MUSLIMS COULD BE APOSTATES. Jeez louise. You see now why I think this is a big deal?
There are a few muslim scholars in the vid who argue against him but their arguments are pretty old hat and have been refuted by experts on the subject (people who have actual degrees in this stuff - not doofoids like yours truelly). If you do a little looking up you might find which middle eastern country funds the various chairs one or more of these islamic scholars hold.
That muslims have made this guy scared to show his real name or face shows they care far more about the earthly benefits of power and wealth the current translation of the Koran gets them and don't really give a shit about spirituality or their souls in the afterlife. If they did they would certainly be more interested in a provably more accurate translation. If they believe the Koran is the direct word of god to Muhammad- don't they want to know what god REALLY said? Not if it makes the bitches and Covassier dry up they don't.
I couldn't get it to display as well as it appears on YouTube so I put a link to it instead. Right click and choose open in new tab or window so you can come back here for the link for the book if you are interested. If you have comments about the vid please make them on the vids YouTube page. If you have comments about this commentary leave those comments on this page.
The Vid: The Qur'an - Original Manuscript and Interpretation
The Vid: The Qur'an - Original Manuscript and Interpretation
Saturday, December 18, 2010
The OIC is attacking the Internet!
The OIC is the Organization of the Islamic Conference - an organized voting block of Islamic States at the UN . They have filled their group with countries that don't have muslim majority populations in order to get a significant voting block at the UN. They have already taken over the UN's Human Rights Council in order to corrupt it from it's original purpose. Now they want to do the same thing to the whole internet.
The ICANN controlls domain names. It was started under Clinton and was controlled by the US but will soon be under mulitnational controll. The current chairman has UK/Egyptian citizenship.
The OIC/League of Arab States wants to use its voting power to get controll of ICANN. Their internet steering committee is composed of Tunisia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
The Lawfare Project Reports:
On October 28, 2010, at OIC-CERT’s Second Annual General Meeting, OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu noted the following as a core mission of OIC-CERT: To use technical, administrative and legal methods to:
1) Stamp out citicism of Islam on the internet.
2) Enforce Islamic standards of public morality. (On the whole fucking world!!!)
Do we want Tunisia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt's concept of public morality determining what we can access on the internet?
This is an open call to Anonymous:
Unleash the nerds of war!!!
Here is the actual article from Vlad Teppes that made my head blow up:
OIC SETS ITS SIGHTS ON ICANN TO STIFLE CRITICISM OF ISLAM ON THE INTERNET
The ICANN controlls domain names. It was started under Clinton and was controlled by the US but will soon be under mulitnational controll. The current chairman has UK/Egyptian citizenship.
The OIC/League of Arab States wants to use its voting power to get controll of ICANN. Their internet steering committee is composed of Tunisia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
The Lawfare Project Reports:
On October 28, 2010, at OIC-CERT’s Second Annual General Meeting, OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu noted the following as a core mission of OIC-CERT: To use technical, administrative and legal methods to:
1) Stamp out citicism of Islam on the internet.
2) Enforce Islamic standards of public morality. (On the whole fucking world!!!)
Do we want Tunisia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt's concept of public morality determining what we can access on the internet?
This is an open call to Anonymous:
Unleash the nerds of war!!!
Here is the actual article from Vlad Teppes that made my head blow up:
OIC SETS ITS SIGHTS ON ICANN TO STIFLE CRITICISM OF ISLAM ON THE INTERNET
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Nya Nya Missed Us!
This a-hole blew himself up in a Swedish neighborhood today while people were out Christmas shopping. He lit his car, which was full of petrol tanks, on fire then one of the 12 pipe bombs he had strapped to himself went off prematurely. Only 2 people were hurt and not too badly. He sent an email to police saying the attack was because- who cares. He left behind a wife and 3 children to look after themselves and live with the shame and horror of what he's done for the rest of their lives. Someone made a memorial facebook page for him but I thought this memorial would be more fitting.
Taimour: Can I haz jihad?
GOD: NO! You go boom now Taimour.
His name was Taimour. So now when some jihadi wannabe makes a nuisance of himself to you online just say to him "you go Taimour now" or "go Taimour yourself."
Or to put it another way:
GOD: NO! You go boom now Taimour.
His name was Taimour. So now when some jihadi wannabe makes a nuisance of himself to you online just say to him "you go Taimour now" or "go Taimour yourself."
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
I am so smart! I am so smart! I am so smart!
On Thursday Sept 30 2010 I wrote a blog article saying Iran was far more likely to Nuke Saudi Arabia then Israel. And Guess What People- According to Wikileaks, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia thinks so too! BOOYAA! Not only that- He (and the UAE too) have been begging America to attack Iran! BEGGING. AMERICA. TO. ATTACK. IRAN. Muddafudda.
Of course if we did physically attack Iran all those Saudi funded radical mosques and terrorist cells will be baying for the blood of all us evil crusaders. - So fuckum.
Another scrumptious tidbit from Wikileaks shows that WE KNOW the Saudis are STILL funnelling majillions of petrodollars into terror cells, anti American propaganda and radicalization programs all over the world - So fukum sum-more.
Sunni and Shia have had 1300 years to make peace. And they didn't. Saudi Arabia has had 30 years to develop better relations with Iran. And they didn't.
They made their bed. Let them burn in it.
Anyone wanna go halvsies on a wind farm?
Update: Saudi Arabia and The UAE have been begging America to make Isreal attack Iran. So SAUDI ARABIA AND THE UAE GOT ON THEIR KNEES AND BEGGED ISREAL TO SAVE THEM!!! Is that why Stuxnet was unleashed? If that's so then you're a better Gunga Din then I am, Isreal.
Of course if we did physically attack Iran all those Saudi funded radical mosques and terrorist cells will be baying for the blood of all us evil crusaders. - So fuckum.
Another scrumptious tidbit from Wikileaks shows that WE KNOW the Saudis are STILL funnelling majillions of petrodollars into terror cells, anti American propaganda and radicalization programs all over the world - So fukum sum-more.
Sunni and Shia have had 1300 years to make peace. And they didn't. Saudi Arabia has had 30 years to develop better relations with Iran. And they didn't.
They made their bed. Let them burn in it.
Anyone wanna go halvsies on a wind farm?
Update: Saudi Arabia and The UAE have been begging America to make Isreal attack Iran. So SAUDI ARABIA AND THE UAE GOT ON THEIR KNEES AND BEGGED ISREAL TO SAVE THEM!!! Is that why Stuxnet was unleashed? If that's so then you're a better Gunga Din then I am, Isreal.
Pretty Good Doc on Police Perspective of EDL UAF Confrontation.
Vlad Tepes posted a pretty good TV news show about an EDL demo at which the UAF and other groups tried to force a violent confrontation. What is useful about it is that it's from the police point of view. It is vitally important to examine events from several points of view in order to understand them. The police were disinterested in the subject matter of the protests and were only interested in preventing a riot. Furthermore the police get a worms eye view of who is doing what at a protest that is often just as illuminating as the statements made by participants in a protest. Participants, it needs to be said, have considerable motive in delivering a, shall we say, not entirely disinterested spin on the events at a demonstration.
Even if the story was slanted to paint the police in a favorable light some interesting facts came through
1 The police were objective in how they prevented escalation. They did this by verbally warning people on both sides, either curtly or by way of lengthily explanation, and by promptly arresting people (on both sides)who were aggressive to them. - The left wingers said they weren't doing anything but they are trained to say that when arrested at demonstrations. I know that because that was what I was taught to do.
2 They noticed that a second, more threatening group arrived at the end of the demonstration. This second was an entirely Muslim group. The police noticed a) they intentionally came late in the protest b) they weren't saying the same things as the UAF/Left wing groups. The police noticed that this new group was only interested in trying to start violence against the Anti Shariah protesters.
3 The Police say on camera at the demo to each other that the EDL aren't a problem and they knew they would leave when asked. They weren't concerned with violence from the EDL at all. They were concerned with uninvited people that came to the protest who were members of The National Front (an actual fascist racist group) and the BNP (who knows what the hell they are now - aside from opportunistic and racist - don't spend any time wondering about that). Executives in the police have recently said they no longer believe the EDL to be a dangerous or extremist group and now realize that it's fundamentally different from nefarious groups such as the National Front. This is partly because of what the police have actually seen at EDL demonstrations and learned themselves through investigation rather then what has been reported in the media.
4 From a "keeping the peace" point of view the UAF/Left wing groups caused far more trouble, both individually and organized, then the Anti Shariah group. The police had to arrest 58 UAF/Left wing people and only 18 Anti Shariah protesters (I can't be sure of the precise number but it's mentioned at the end of the video). There is a specific reason for this. the UAF/Left wing groups see manipulating the police into arresting or using violence on demonstrators as part of a normal protest strategy. This paints them as victims and makes it look like the police have made a specific political decision to help whichever is the protesters oppressor du jour.
4.1 The Anti Shariah protesters on the other hand are not experienced protesters and don't want an antagonistic relationship with the police and really, really don't want to be seen by the public as anti social (they do want the government to see that they are angry though). They are English working class, which is somewhat analogous to American middle class and don't have an anti establishment point of view. They are in fact far less radical or right wing then Tea Party people. I would bet all of the bippies currently in my possession that they and their families have voted Labor (i.e. socialist (before Tony Blair at least)) for generations. I won't bet a single bippy they will be voting Labor again in the foreseeable future. This is important- they are an establishment respecting group. The goal of their political actions is to make the establishment aware of and respectful of their concerns and change it's policies. That is how free democracies work. It is fascist dictatorships like Nazi Germany and Iran that send thugs to physically attack people who won't shut up.
I argue that their concerns are in fact very liberal concerns and are based upon a respect for the true liberalism of political equality and human rights which started in the enlightenment of the 18th century and that they now see is under attack. A liberalism that is under attack by people who have said countless times in the press and court documents that they are actually attacking it and that it is their absolute duty to do so.
The Left wing mush heads I saw at that demonstration seem to think these people are fascists when in fact they are merely loud moderates. They are still thinking in terms of the 20th century's right/left polarizations which just do not apply in this issue in the way that the left thinks it does. Tactically they are playing the old stupid game of position. That is they see a group on one side of an issue and just decide reflexively to take the opposite side for a whole swath of cynical self serving reasons that have everything to do with political gain and nothing to do with a concern for equality. When protesting the first gulf war I found the whole anti war movement was engineered by socialist groups who I knew from reading their material would also have protested if the US had done nothing. But protesting a big news event was useful in drumming up membership from the ranks of college students who wanted to be like the romantic figures of the anti Vietnam protests.
Anyhoozle, here is the link to the actual video. I hope it is as illuminating to you as it was to me.
UK Documentary on police, the ‘Anti Fascists’ and the EDL
Even if the story was slanted to paint the police in a favorable light some interesting facts came through
1 The police were objective in how they prevented escalation. They did this by verbally warning people on both sides, either curtly or by way of lengthily explanation, and by promptly arresting people (on both sides)who were aggressive to them. - The left wingers said they weren't doing anything but they are trained to say that when arrested at demonstrations. I know that because that was what I was taught to do.
2 They noticed that a second, more threatening group arrived at the end of the demonstration. This second was an entirely Muslim group. The police noticed a) they intentionally came late in the protest b) they weren't saying the same things as the UAF/Left wing groups. The police noticed that this new group was only interested in trying to start violence against the Anti Shariah protesters.
3 The Police say on camera at the demo to each other that the EDL aren't a problem and they knew they would leave when asked. They weren't concerned with violence from the EDL at all. They were concerned with uninvited people that came to the protest who were members of The National Front (an actual fascist racist group) and the BNP (who knows what the hell they are now - aside from opportunistic and racist - don't spend any time wondering about that). Executives in the police have recently said they no longer believe the EDL to be a dangerous or extremist group and now realize that it's fundamentally different from nefarious groups such as the National Front. This is partly because of what the police have actually seen at EDL demonstrations and learned themselves through investigation rather then what has been reported in the media.
4 From a "keeping the peace" point of view the UAF/Left wing groups caused far more trouble, both individually and organized, then the Anti Shariah group. The police had to arrest 58 UAF/Left wing people and only 18 Anti Shariah protesters (I can't be sure of the precise number but it's mentioned at the end of the video). There is a specific reason for this. the UAF/Left wing groups see manipulating the police into arresting or using violence on demonstrators as part of a normal protest strategy. This paints them as victims and makes it look like the police have made a specific political decision to help whichever is the protesters oppressor du jour.
4.1 The Anti Shariah protesters on the other hand are not experienced protesters and don't want an antagonistic relationship with the police and really, really don't want to be seen by the public as anti social (they do want the government to see that they are angry though). They are English working class, which is somewhat analogous to American middle class and don't have an anti establishment point of view. They are in fact far less radical or right wing then Tea Party people. I would bet all of the bippies currently in my possession that they and their families have voted Labor (i.e. socialist (before Tony Blair at least)) for generations. I won't bet a single bippy they will be voting Labor again in the foreseeable future. This is important- they are an establishment respecting group. The goal of their political actions is to make the establishment aware of and respectful of their concerns and change it's policies. That is how free democracies work. It is fascist dictatorships like Nazi Germany and Iran that send thugs to physically attack people who won't shut up.
I argue that their concerns are in fact very liberal concerns and are based upon a respect for the true liberalism of political equality and human rights which started in the enlightenment of the 18th century and that they now see is under attack. A liberalism that is under attack by people who have said countless times in the press and court documents that they are actually attacking it and that it is their absolute duty to do so.
The Left wing mush heads I saw at that demonstration seem to think these people are fascists when in fact they are merely loud moderates. They are still thinking in terms of the 20th century's right/left polarizations which just do not apply in this issue in the way that the left thinks it does. Tactically they are playing the old stupid game of position. That is they see a group on one side of an issue and just decide reflexively to take the opposite side for a whole swath of cynical self serving reasons that have everything to do with political gain and nothing to do with a concern for equality. When protesting the first gulf war I found the whole anti war movement was engineered by socialist groups who I knew from reading their material would also have protested if the US had done nothing. But protesting a big news event was useful in drumming up membership from the ranks of college students who wanted to be like the romantic figures of the anti Vietnam protests.
Anyhoozle, here is the link to the actual video. I hope it is as illuminating to you as it was to me.
UK Documentary on police, the ‘Anti Fascists’ and the EDL
Sunday, November 21, 2010
UK Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit Counter Common Sense Too
Echo Chamber Alert. I saw this story on Jihad watch but wanted to give my 2 cents. I will post a link to the original Jihadwatch story and the Radio Interview it sources.
A UK counter terrorism official said to BBC Radio 5 Live recently that The EDL encourages Islamic extremism. This UK anti terrorism official has far too little understanding of the Islamic radicalization process to help defend his country. That is if the UK actually has any intention to defend it's citizens from radical Islam.
"Many EDL demonstrations and counter-demonstrations have ended in violence, and Det Supt John Larkin says they have witnessed signs of radicalisation afterwards."
Examine the wording of that sentence. British officials are always very careful in their choice of words. The sentence is vague as to the source of the violence. It does not put the blame for the violence on the EDL because the police KNOW the violence is caused ONLY when Muslim gangs attack the peaceful demonstrators.
The statement says that after the EDL has a demonstration. Radical activists show up and agitate the local Muslim population.
So because some nere-do-wells are committing subversion the dumbass British police blame the people who are protesting AGAINST that subversion and not the people who THEY KNOW are the one's committing subversion.
This statement says the country needs to get along to get along. Don't make the aggressors angry by standing up to them or calling attention to what they are doing. I might be wrong but didn't the British learn the hard way right before WWII that that just doesn't work?
Let me put this another way. A bully has been bullying you for weeks. You finally complain to teacher. The bully then says (even though the teacher has been watching for weeks) it is really you who is picking on him. The teacher knows this is a lie but is afraid the bully will get a larger gang if he is sent to the principals office. So the teacher sends you to the principles office instead for the crime of making the bully angry. As a result the bully now knows he can do what he likes. Do you think he will stop bullying? That is what the British police seem to think. Maybe they should ask an American fifth grader what is wrong with their current stance.
So far Britain has let radicals have their way. The result is that the radicals think Britain is weak and intensify their radicalization efforts. But if people stand up to them they then use that as fuel for their radicalization efforts.
If radicals=trouble and radicals+anti radicals=trouble it ain't the anti radicals that's the problem. I seem to have a better understanding of basic math then the British police do.
The police would actually be doing their jobs if they found out who those agitators were and deported or incarcerated them.
Furthermore the cops are complaining about a few EDL demonstrations but radical Muslims have had countless demonstrations many of which have been intentionally violent and offensive. Did those turn non Muslim Britons into mad bombers? NO. So, the police should be wondering, why is Muslim radicalization so common a response to a non Muslim demonstration. Could it be that they have already been radicalized by years of agitation and subversion?
It could also be that such signs of Muslim radicalization the British police are whinging about are only temporary effects immediately following demonstrations that would normally peter out in a few weeks. If that is the case then the British cops are making a dangerous display of cowardess. Agitators will see this statement as a sign that the British establishment is afraid of them and, guess what, redouble their efforts at radicalization of Muslim youth.
Here is the Jihadwatch story.
UK police blame EDL for Islamic jihad
Here is the radio interview that was posted on YouTube. If you can stomach the snotty interviewer you are a better man than I am, Gunga Din.
Tommy Robinson on BBC live 5
A UK counter terrorism official said to BBC Radio 5 Live recently that The EDL encourages Islamic extremism. This UK anti terrorism official has far too little understanding of the Islamic radicalization process to help defend his country. That is if the UK actually has any intention to defend it's citizens from radical Islam.
"Many EDL demonstrations and counter-demonstrations have ended in violence, and Det Supt John Larkin says they have witnessed signs of radicalisation afterwards."
Examine the wording of that sentence. British officials are always very careful in their choice of words. The sentence is vague as to the source of the violence. It does not put the blame for the violence on the EDL because the police KNOW the violence is caused ONLY when Muslim gangs attack the peaceful demonstrators.
The statement says that after the EDL has a demonstration. Radical activists show up and agitate the local Muslim population.
So because some nere-do-wells are committing subversion the dumbass British police blame the people who are protesting AGAINST that subversion and not the people who THEY KNOW are the one's committing subversion.
This statement says the country needs to get along to get along. Don't make the aggressors angry by standing up to them or calling attention to what they are doing. I might be wrong but didn't the British learn the hard way right before WWII that that just doesn't work?
Let me put this another way. A bully has been bullying you for weeks. You finally complain to teacher. The bully then says (even though the teacher has been watching for weeks) it is really you who is picking on him. The teacher knows this is a lie but is afraid the bully will get a larger gang if he is sent to the principals office. So the teacher sends you to the principles office instead for the crime of making the bully angry. As a result the bully now knows he can do what he likes. Do you think he will stop bullying? That is what the British police seem to think. Maybe they should ask an American fifth grader what is wrong with their current stance.
So far Britain has let radicals have their way. The result is that the radicals think Britain is weak and intensify their radicalization efforts. But if people stand up to them they then use that as fuel for their radicalization efforts.
If radicals=trouble and radicals+anti radicals=trouble it ain't the anti radicals that's the problem. I seem to have a better understanding of basic math then the British police do.
The police would actually be doing their jobs if they found out who those agitators were and deported or incarcerated them.
Furthermore the cops are complaining about a few EDL demonstrations but radical Muslims have had countless demonstrations many of which have been intentionally violent and offensive. Did those turn non Muslim Britons into mad bombers? NO. So, the police should be wondering, why is Muslim radicalization so common a response to a non Muslim demonstration. Could it be that they have already been radicalized by years of agitation and subversion?
It could also be that such signs of Muslim radicalization the British police are whinging about are only temporary effects immediately following demonstrations that would normally peter out in a few weeks. If that is the case then the British cops are making a dangerous display of cowardess. Agitators will see this statement as a sign that the British establishment is afraid of them and, guess what, redouble their efforts at radicalization of Muslim youth.
Here is the Jihadwatch story.
UK police blame EDL for Islamic jihad
Here is the radio interview that was posted on YouTube. If you can stomach the snotty interviewer you are a better man than I am, Gunga Din.
Tommy Robinson on BBC live 5
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Of all the Nerve: Reza Aslan calls the silverware black.
On last nights Colbert Report the guest was Reza Aslan. On the show he refered to a veague nebulous group of people as bigots. I wonder who he meant? No. No I don't.
I am sure Mr. Aslan's book is very good and I am sure he is not a nefarious character and does not himself have any spooky kooky intentions to take over the world or even to floridate our drinking water. But I do think he should learn more about people before calling them bigots on national television. Am I crazy or is applying an epithet to an entire group of people the sort of thing a bigot does?
I just saw Mr. Aslan refer to the whole group of anti jihad activists as anti muslim bigots on last nights show. I have never heard or read a bigoted statement against muslim people in general from any public anti jihad activist. The group of people Mr Aslan refers to as bigots get their information thru the study of Islamic texts, from statements made by islamic supremicists themselves and from documents that are in the public record. The few I know about have never been successfully sued for spreading falsehoods.
These "islamophobic bigots" aren't fat ignorant southern sherifs who dance around in sheets burning crosses on the weekend. Nor are they proffesional tin hat conspiracy theorists. They are highly educated people who have spent their lives in study and public service. They have studied religious texts, history and foreign media, have lived in islamic states, worked in anti terror, been district attorneys in high profile anti terror cases etc. They are experts in their fields and not merely talking heads or PR flaks.
These "bigots" are concerned about the political activities of a small but influential group of people affiliated with a group that has stated outright that they want to damage our country. That group advocates non lethal methods such as currying influence in high places, manipulating public opinion and the manipulation of our own systems of laws and governance. Sounds tin hatty I know but it was in documents siezed and presented during in a trial involving a group called the Holy Land Foundation in 2008.
We have one side of the debate using verifiable facts and statements and the other side using the veague emotionally charged epithets of "bigot" and "islamophobe" to manipulate public opinion in an attempt to ostracize and intimidate. Who would you believe?
Notice that Mr. Aslan caught himself and did not name anyone specifially. Perhaps that was because he knew his description of these academics, lawyers and public servants as bigots was pure 100% certified grade A bullshit.
I am sure Mr. Aslan's book is very good and I am sure he is not a nefarious character and does not himself have any spooky kooky intentions to take over the world or even to floridate our drinking water. But I do think he should learn more about people before calling them bigots on national television. Am I crazy or is applying an epithet to an entire group of people the sort of thing a bigot does?
I just saw Mr. Aslan refer to the whole group of anti jihad activists as anti muslim bigots on last nights show. I have never heard or read a bigoted statement against muslim people in general from any public anti jihad activist. The group of people Mr Aslan refers to as bigots get their information thru the study of Islamic texts, from statements made by islamic supremicists themselves and from documents that are in the public record. The few I know about have never been successfully sued for spreading falsehoods.
These "islamophobic bigots" aren't fat ignorant southern sherifs who dance around in sheets burning crosses on the weekend. Nor are they proffesional tin hat conspiracy theorists. They are highly educated people who have spent their lives in study and public service. They have studied religious texts, history and foreign media, have lived in islamic states, worked in anti terror, been district attorneys in high profile anti terror cases etc. They are experts in their fields and not merely talking heads or PR flaks.
These "bigots" are concerned about the political activities of a small but influential group of people affiliated with a group that has stated outright that they want to damage our country. That group advocates non lethal methods such as currying influence in high places, manipulating public opinion and the manipulation of our own systems of laws and governance. Sounds tin hatty I know but it was in documents siezed and presented during in a trial involving a group called the Holy Land Foundation in 2008.
We have one side of the debate using verifiable facts and statements and the other side using the veague emotionally charged epithets of "bigot" and "islamophobe" to manipulate public opinion in an attempt to ostracize and intimidate. Who would you believe?
Notice that Mr. Aslan caught himself and did not name anyone specifially. Perhaps that was because he knew his description of these academics, lawyers and public servants as bigots was pure 100% certified grade A bullshit.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
The Organization of Islamic States is a Fraud
Gates of Vienna has posted an article that is astounding. During the 90's the oil rich states used, ahem, "influence" on 28 poor states that didn't have Islamic majorities (one has only a 1% Muslim population!!! 13,000 people!!!) to get them to join the OIC voting block at the UN. Without those muslim minority states the OIC wouldn't have significant influence at the UN. After they got the muslim minority states on board, that's when all the bogus human rights complaints and attacks on the freedom of speach started to get traction.
Everything the OIC proposes must be ignored because it is a fundamentally fraudulent entitiy.
I am curious to know in how many of these Muslim minority countries it is the Muslims who rule over the Non Muslims. That is certainly the case with Sudan which only has a 50% Muslim population (for now).
Here's the article The Incredible Shrinking OIC
Everything the OIC proposes must be ignored because it is a fundamentally fraudulent entitiy.
I am curious to know in how many of these Muslim minority countries it is the Muslims who rule over the Non Muslims. That is certainly the case with Sudan which only has a 50% Muslim population (for now).
Here's the article The Incredible Shrinking OIC
Monday, October 18, 2010
Islamic Concessions: Just A Little Breathing Room.
An excelent article from Citizen Warrior about the islamic campagn of concession grabbing going on in Europe America and Canada.
It is always some little thing that people won't make a big deal over. But if you look at a list of them all you cannot help but recognize a pattern. Here is the list
It is an orchestrated attempt to wear away western democratic freedoms and replace them with sharia law masquerading as religious and cultural sensitvity. I think islam has so many rules precisley in order to make demands concearning them from the host society in order to make Non muslims conform to muslim norms and thus become subjugated. Every single concession is specifically chosen in areas where Democratic laws and sharia clash. Quite often those who demand these concessions are often not the person making the request but rather it's a strategist who has told them to do so, often thru a mosque.
Note that there is no similar string of demands for concessions coming from any other religion in the world.
When you hear about such demands for a minor concession, try to think of a concession a muslim country has EVER made regarding the practice of a non muslim religion. When you note that the recent increase in these demands has coincided with increased misstreatment of non muslims in muslim coutnries it becomes clear that there is an orchistrated world wide jihad afoot.
We can see from history and the present that giving in to demands only leads to more demands. It only tells those that make demands that they can get more. The recent coup in Thailand had to do with this. A muslim group was demanding concessions and fighting a gurilla war. A muslim general overthru the Thai president and gave the gurillas what they wanted. As a result the islamic violence increased instead of ending.When Iranians kidnapped Americans, Reagan negotiated thier release by giving arms to Iran. Instead of better relations with Iran it lead to a campagne of kidnappings. Any schoolboy will tell you that when you give a bully your lunch money he will just demand it again tommarow.
It is always some little thing that people won't make a big deal over. But if you look at a list of them all you cannot help but recognize a pattern. Here is the list
It is an orchestrated attempt to wear away western democratic freedoms and replace them with sharia law masquerading as religious and cultural sensitvity. I think islam has so many rules precisley in order to make demands concearning them from the host society in order to make Non muslims conform to muslim norms and thus become subjugated. Every single concession is specifically chosen in areas where Democratic laws and sharia clash. Quite often those who demand these concessions are often not the person making the request but rather it's a strategist who has told them to do so, often thru a mosque.
Note that there is no similar string of demands for concessions coming from any other religion in the world.
When you hear about such demands for a minor concession, try to think of a concession a muslim country has EVER made regarding the practice of a non muslim religion. When you note that the recent increase in these demands has coincided with increased misstreatment of non muslims in muslim coutnries it becomes clear that there is an orchistrated world wide jihad afoot.
We can see from history and the present that giving in to demands only leads to more demands. It only tells those that make demands that they can get more. The recent coup in Thailand had to do with this. A muslim group was demanding concessions and fighting a gurilla war. A muslim general overthru the Thai president and gave the gurillas what they wanted. As a result the islamic violence increased instead of ending.When Iranians kidnapped Americans, Reagan negotiated thier release by giving arms to Iran. Instead of better relations with Iran it lead to a campagne of kidnappings. Any schoolboy will tell you that when you give a bully your lunch money he will just demand it again tommarow.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Hamas and the Left
I just saw this video on youtube. It's a bunch of Hamas supporters attacking/protesting outside of a place in london where an Isreali diplomat is. They raid a starbucks and steal coffee mugs to use as projectiles.
The clip is by someone called Sovietfilms.
Why are Socialist and other leftist groups supporting so many militant Islamic groups and innitiatives?
I support a free palestinian state but you can't be a leftist humanist and support Hamas, a theocratic totalitarian facist group, when the secular Palestinian Authority is a functioning alternative. You just can't.
I'm very serious. The only difference between Hamas and the spanish facists is the specific religion of those involved. Hamas is part of the far right wing islamist group called the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood helped Hitler in WWII and is pressing for extreme right wing Islamic doctrine to be dominant over secular humanist laws all over the world.
Fatah and the Palestinian Authority spent their lives trying to create a state and Hamas have tried to steal it from them like Lenin and the bolsheviks stole Russia from the original Democratic Russian revolution. (*Yup that's right. The original Russian revolution was democratic. While the democratic Russia was new and weak the communists crushed it then claimed credit for the original revolution)
Leftists, librals, marxists, Socialists, communists, athiests, humanists et all must think of ways we can support a free palestinian state without becoming the dupes of theocratical facists.
These guys at Sovietfilms may or may not know something about marxist ideology but they absolutely know nothing about the extrene right wing islamic ideology they are now supporting.
The clip is by someone called Sovietfilms.
Why are Socialist and other leftist groups supporting so many militant Islamic groups and innitiatives?
I support a free palestinian state but you can't be a leftist humanist and support Hamas, a theocratic totalitarian facist group, when the secular Palestinian Authority is a functioning alternative. You just can't.
I'm very serious. The only difference between Hamas and the spanish facists is the specific religion of those involved. Hamas is part of the far right wing islamist group called the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood helped Hitler in WWII and is pressing for extreme right wing Islamic doctrine to be dominant over secular humanist laws all over the world.
Fatah and the Palestinian Authority spent their lives trying to create a state and Hamas have tried to steal it from them like Lenin and the bolsheviks stole Russia from the original Democratic Russian revolution. (*Yup that's right. The original Russian revolution was democratic. While the democratic Russia was new and weak the communists crushed it then claimed credit for the original revolution)
Leftists, librals, marxists, Socialists, communists, athiests, humanists et all must think of ways we can support a free palestinian state without becoming the dupes of theocratical facists.
These guys at Sovietfilms may or may not know something about marxist ideology but they absolutely know nothing about the extrene right wing islamic ideology they are now supporting.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Will Iran Nuke Israel? Nope. And Here's Why.
Everyone thinks Iran will nuke Israel if they get nuclear capability.
But consider this. Iran would much rather take credit for giving Israel back to the palestinians. I am sure they would want all those nice cities and resorts to be intact. Isreal is just too valuable a parcel of real estate to destroy.
Sunni kill more shia every year then both sides have ever killed Isrealis and shia know this full well. Muslims are forbidden to make war upon each other but both shia and sunni conveniantly think of the other as not really muslim. So there is no religious dogma preventing them from doing so.
Iran always wants to increase it's power in the reagion. What better way to do so then to knock out other influential countries. Countries with lands of no particualr interest to Tehran populated with sunni who kill shia all the time. They will threaten to use it against everyone but would only use it against Sunni dominated countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt.
They know if they use it against a western country that would be the end of them. But they know if they use it against a muslim country they won't even get a slap on the wrist from the other states in the OIC.
Worst case scenario is that they could use it on a sunni muslim country but try to put the blame on Israel to create a pretext and galvanize the muslim world into attacking Israel in a conventional war. This is a very good reason to prevent them ever having any sort of nuclear capability.
So I doubt they would ever nuke Israel or a western country but be far more likely to Nuke a sunni country. The real power of a nuclear weapon is that everyone knows you have it and not in it's actual use. They will be more protected from invasion and will be more able to exert their will in the international community. That is to say they will use it to protect themselves and extort whatever they want from other countries.
Even though they won't nuke Isreal they must be prevented from gaining nuclear capability.
But consider this. Iran would much rather take credit for giving Israel back to the palestinians. I am sure they would want all those nice cities and resorts to be intact. Isreal is just too valuable a parcel of real estate to destroy.
Sunni kill more shia every year then both sides have ever killed Isrealis and shia know this full well. Muslims are forbidden to make war upon each other but both shia and sunni conveniantly think of the other as not really muslim. So there is no religious dogma preventing them from doing so.
Iran always wants to increase it's power in the reagion. What better way to do so then to knock out other influential countries. Countries with lands of no particualr interest to Tehran populated with sunni who kill shia all the time. They will threaten to use it against everyone but would only use it against Sunni dominated countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt.
They know if they use it against a western country that would be the end of them. But they know if they use it against a muslim country they won't even get a slap on the wrist from the other states in the OIC.
Worst case scenario is that they could use it on a sunni muslim country but try to put the blame on Israel to create a pretext and galvanize the muslim world into attacking Israel in a conventional war. This is a very good reason to prevent them ever having any sort of nuclear capability.
So I doubt they would ever nuke Israel or a western country but be far more likely to Nuke a sunni country. The real power of a nuclear weapon is that everyone knows you have it and not in it's actual use. They will be more protected from invasion and will be more able to exert their will in the international community. That is to say they will use it to protect themselves and extort whatever they want from other countries.
Even though they won't nuke Isreal they must be prevented from gaining nuclear capability.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
more insight on the Muslim Brotherhood
An important point the memorandum cited says the muslim brotherhood wants to destroy america "by their hands" that means using american institutions to subvert america. The Muslim Student's Association is proven to be part of the subversion network.
Because this is CBN such reports can be dismissed as crying wolf or fear mongering. Notice though that the experts have worked with the US government and the material in this report is from the US government. It is a serious shame that too many liberal public interest groups get caught up in the disasterous political game of position. In the game of position politicals take the opposite side of the opposing party regardless of what they personally believe to be right, and then react.
Unindicted co conspiritor (like CAIR), means a group or person has been found by the government to be a part of a criminal conspiracy but the government hasn't gotten around to procecuting them yet.
Because this is CBN such reports can be dismissed as crying wolf or fear mongering. Notice though that the experts have worked with the US government and the material in this report is from the US government. It is a serious shame that too many liberal public interest groups get caught up in the disasterous political game of position. In the game of position politicals take the opposite side of the opposing party regardless of what they personally believe to be right, and then react.
Unindicted co conspiritor (like CAIR), means a group or person has been found by the government to be a part of a criminal conspiracy but the government hasn't gotten around to procecuting them yet.
Who are the violent protestors?
If you have heard reports about the mild violence at EDL protests in England look at the vid linked to at the bottom of this post.
First of all actual fighting only starts when large gangs of muslims attack those who are having a legal demonstration.
A few EDL and Stop Islamization of Europe people were going to protest at a Mosque in Harrow England. In responce a thousand muslims converged on Harrow. When only a few protestors showed up and were quickly removed by police the muslims ran amok, attacking police, the press and innocent bystanders. If you watch the video you will see projectiles thrown and hear car windows being smashed.
It was a calculated show of violence and intimidation to make protestors and police afraid to allow future protests against Islamic supremasists. When you hear negative things about people standing up to Islamic Supremacists in Europe and America remember this video.
Here is the vid Muslims attack bystanders and press at Harrow 11/09/09
And this one of a london protest in 2009 Islamists rioting in London - 2009 Palestine protests
It was a vid made by a Pro Hamas protestor and cannot be refuted. They chased the police and called them faggots, pussys, cowards, and kufars while throwing missiles at them and laughing. There can be no doubt they were trying to instigate violence while at the same time their strategists knew the police wouldn't actually fight back if the physical violence was only ratcheted up to a certain point. The other intent was to make the government afraid to do things in future that would cause events like this. They said it was about palestine but you can see from their strategy that they were full of shit. They were trying to make it like the anti cartoon riots. A threat that can be used in future to intimidate the government.
At one point bunch of them gang up on a police officer and when other police come to his rescue the muslims shout "Racist Cops! Racist Cops!" This is a specific strategy they use in confrontations in the west and like much Islamist trickery it has been thought out by their experts and has multiple intimidation purposes at the same time. It's always done when the person they are attacking responds or stands up to them. It makes the victim pause, it switches the identifications of agressor and victim in order to set up a confusion loop so the thinking and responce of the real victim will be hindered. It also makes the police afraid to respond in case camera footage will be manipulated to make them look racist and further inflame the radicals.
Think I'm Lying? Look here Homophobic Harassment During Gay Pride
In this vomitous display some American gay men were coming from a pride march in minnesota. A local "moderate and All American" mosque was holding an anti gay rally. As they passed it these muslim kids were sicced on them in a large group. The kids followed them yelled out cries from thier anti gay demonstration called them names and threw things at them. When one of the men responds with "you have problems" the gutter scum immediately squeal "what did you say about black people? RACISTS! RACISTS!". It's the same evil tactic we have evidence of on both sides of the Atlantic and the kids were obviously instructed to do it by someone. If you listen carefully you will never hear their victims say anything other then "you have problems".
Note that these are children the organizers sicced on grown men. If the guys had physically defended themselves the muslim protestors story would have been "Adult White Men Commit Hate Crime Against innocent Muslim Children." And don't you think for a second they wouldn't. Muslims ALWAYS use the victimization of their children for propoganda. If the victims don't respond the muslim story is "see how afraid of us they are" and if they do it's "look how those horrible Americans beat up our innocent children".They used an act of aggression in a (failed) attempt to perpetuate the narrative of victimhood and to incite more muslim violence. That's what this video is really about and why it's significant.
Also note that in vids like this muslims always pick people they think are incapable of defending themselves - just like Nazi thugs did before the war. It is cowardess disguised as strength. Fortunately these guys were smart and civilized in how they treated the situation.
First of all actual fighting only starts when large gangs of muslims attack those who are having a legal demonstration.
A few EDL and Stop Islamization of Europe people were going to protest at a Mosque in Harrow England. In responce a thousand muslims converged on Harrow. When only a few protestors showed up and were quickly removed by police the muslims ran amok, attacking police, the press and innocent bystanders. If you watch the video you will see projectiles thrown and hear car windows being smashed.
It was a calculated show of violence and intimidation to make protestors and police afraid to allow future protests against Islamic supremasists. When you hear negative things about people standing up to Islamic Supremacists in Europe and America remember this video.
Here is the vid Muslims attack bystanders and press at Harrow 11/09/09
And this one of a london protest in 2009 Islamists rioting in London - 2009 Palestine protests
It was a vid made by a Pro Hamas protestor and cannot be refuted. They chased the police and called them faggots, pussys, cowards, and kufars while throwing missiles at them and laughing. There can be no doubt they were trying to instigate violence while at the same time their strategists knew the police wouldn't actually fight back if the physical violence was only ratcheted up to a certain point. The other intent was to make the government afraid to do things in future that would cause events like this. They said it was about palestine but you can see from their strategy that they were full of shit. They were trying to make it like the anti cartoon riots. A threat that can be used in future to intimidate the government.
At one point bunch of them gang up on a police officer and when other police come to his rescue the muslims shout "Racist Cops! Racist Cops!" This is a specific strategy they use in confrontations in the west and like much Islamist trickery it has been thought out by their experts and has multiple intimidation purposes at the same time. It's always done when the person they are attacking responds or stands up to them. It makes the victim pause, it switches the identifications of agressor and victim in order to set up a confusion loop so the thinking and responce of the real victim will be hindered. It also makes the police afraid to respond in case camera footage will be manipulated to make them look racist and further inflame the radicals.
Think I'm Lying? Look here Homophobic Harassment During Gay Pride
In this vomitous display some American gay men were coming from a pride march in minnesota. A local "moderate and All American" mosque was holding an anti gay rally. As they passed it these muslim kids were sicced on them in a large group. The kids followed them yelled out cries from thier anti gay demonstration called them names and threw things at them. When one of the men responds with "you have problems" the gutter scum immediately squeal "what did you say about black people? RACISTS! RACISTS!". It's the same evil tactic we have evidence of on both sides of the Atlantic and the kids were obviously instructed to do it by someone. If you listen carefully you will never hear their victims say anything other then "you have problems".
Note that these are children the organizers sicced on grown men. If the guys had physically defended themselves the muslim protestors story would have been "Adult White Men Commit Hate Crime Against innocent Muslim Children." And don't you think for a second they wouldn't. Muslims ALWAYS use the victimization of their children for propoganda. If the victims don't respond the muslim story is "see how afraid of us they are" and if they do it's "look how those horrible Americans beat up our innocent children".They used an act of aggression in a (failed) attempt to perpetuate the narrative of victimhood and to incite more muslim violence. That's what this video is really about and why it's significant.
Also note that in vids like this muslims always pick people they think are incapable of defending themselves - just like Nazi thugs did before the war. It is cowardess disguised as strength. Fortunately these guys were smart and civilized in how they treated the situation.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
England Enforces Pure Sharia. Muslims are allowed to do what the English cannot.
It's all there in Muhammad's Trilogy of Terror (The Koran, the Hadith and the Sira). More rights for muslims then for non muslims.
Vlad Teppes posted a pair of videos at his blog that can be seen on youtube. The first is of a man being stopped by a police officer, who may or may not be muslim, from burning a Koran. He is admonished that he can be "done" for inciting racial hatred. Which race was the cop talking about? Moroccan? Lybian? Saudi Arabian? Pakistani? Thai? Malaysian? Indonesian? If Muslim is a race then so are American and English as both those groups are composed of people of different races.
A small ways away a group of muslims, surrounded by their ennablers in the press, chant "Queen and Country go to hell" while they burn an American flag. Why aren't they arrested? If Islam, a religion of many races, is now legally a race in England then so is American and British and the muslim flag burners HAVE TO BE ARRESTED FOR INCITING RACIAL HATRED of Americans and British. It's all there on video.
I've seen both posts previously and commented extensively on youtube but Vlad made a post about it first so I will link to him rather then copy him. Vlad Teppes UK police stop people from burning a page of Koran while American and UK flags burn
Vlad Teppes posted a pair of videos at his blog that can be seen on youtube. The first is of a man being stopped by a police officer, who may or may not be muslim, from burning a Koran. He is admonished that he can be "done" for inciting racial hatred. Which race was the cop talking about? Moroccan? Lybian? Saudi Arabian? Pakistani? Thai? Malaysian? Indonesian? If Muslim is a race then so are American and English as both those groups are composed of people of different races.
A small ways away a group of muslims, surrounded by their ennablers in the press, chant "Queen and Country go to hell" while they burn an American flag. Why aren't they arrested? If Islam, a religion of many races, is now legally a race in England then so is American and British and the muslim flag burners HAVE TO BE ARRESTED FOR INCITING RACIAL HATRED of Americans and British. It's all there on video.
I've seen both posts previously and commented extensively on youtube but Vlad made a post about it first so I will link to him rather then copy him. Vlad Teppes UK police stop people from burning a page of Koran while American and UK flags burn
Response to Imam Rauf Exposed: Off Mic
I just saw the youtube vid Imam Rauf Exposed: Off mic and had a lot to say.
It doesn't show him to be a sinister nazi creep as people were posting. It did show that he is far more interested in political strategy then religion. To this end he fosters relationships with powerfull people in order to use them in his machinations. He is also interested in altering public perception. Fine and dandy for a political but a bit much for a simple Imam.
Is this how the pro rally that was organized by a former attorney general and comprising several socialist groups was organized? Did Rauf and The Cordobists (nice one, eh?) develop relations with socialist groups or with people who could deploy socialist groups so they could be put into action with signs decrying islamophobia and racism when needed? It sounds pretty tin hatty to me but listen to what he said and look at the pro mosque protest on 9/11/10.
The young socialists and other socialist groups are all nice, well meaning, sincere people who are legitimately concearned about racism and social fairness. HOWEVER I knew such groups back in my student days and it is very easy to manipulate and use them and get them to protest when you frame an issue correctly (and have cool hair - and if your clothes look like something a krautrock band would wear you're in like flint). Rauf here says he strategizes in terms of perception and makes connections with people to use them.
I saw advertisements before the protests calling for people to join the Pro protest framing the issue as one of racism against all muslims that would quickly turn into genocide. This would make the student socialists think it was important to protest and I say good for them for doing so. HOWEVER they were cynically used by people who know it's not about racism at all. For the organizer, a man who fields astroturf protests for a living, it was about a paycheck.
Like The Muslim Brotherhood and their student group the Muslim Student Association, he supports Hamas instead of the secular leaders in palestine. Saying that the US should engage them or it would drive them into engagement with Syria or Iran. A statement that is at once begging and threat. Kind of similar to his statement on Larry King that if we made him move his mosque then the radicals would attack Americans traveling abroad.
And Finally: Who are the "We" he talks about in the Cordoba Innitiative work? He is the one visible to the public but who are the hidden Cordobists and to what other groups have they belonged?
That sounds like McCarthyism, I know, BUT what people often fail to mention is that McCarthy was actually right. There had been a major Soviet campagn of influence and subversion in America. Except it had been in the 1930's and not the 1950's and those people had been found out and arrested. Soviets kept it up to a smaller degree all thruought the Cold War right up to the end of the Soviet Union. This isn't anti red hysteria - It's what ex Soviets and Soviet era documents have said after the Soviet Union was disbanded and before Putin got into power and started restricting access to archives again. It turned out that the Commo-phobics hadn't been so phobic after all.
The Muslim Brotherhood and Al Quida are not the new "Red Meanace" boogeymen. They are people who have learned from history how to strategize. If a group used espionage and subversion techniques in the past you can bet your bippy that Al Quida and The Muslim Brotherhood know about it. And the web of Muslim Brotherhood groups in the US is exactly like the web of Soviet fielded groups in America during the Cold War. Both create multiple groups with members migrating between those groups in order to make them difficult to examine. Watch a youtube vid about it here The Muslim Students Association and the Jihad Network
It doesn't show him to be a sinister nazi creep as people were posting. It did show that he is far more interested in political strategy then religion. To this end he fosters relationships with powerfull people in order to use them in his machinations. He is also interested in altering public perception. Fine and dandy for a political but a bit much for a simple Imam.
Is this how the pro rally that was organized by a former attorney general and comprising several socialist groups was organized? Did Rauf and The Cordobists (nice one, eh?) develop relations with socialist groups or with people who could deploy socialist groups so they could be put into action with signs decrying islamophobia and racism when needed? It sounds pretty tin hatty to me but listen to what he said and look at the pro mosque protest on 9/11/10.
The young socialists and other socialist groups are all nice, well meaning, sincere people who are legitimately concearned about racism and social fairness. HOWEVER I knew such groups back in my student days and it is very easy to manipulate and use them and get them to protest when you frame an issue correctly (and have cool hair - and if your clothes look like something a krautrock band would wear you're in like flint). Rauf here says he strategizes in terms of perception and makes connections with people to use them.
I saw advertisements before the protests calling for people to join the Pro protest framing the issue as one of racism against all muslims that would quickly turn into genocide. This would make the student socialists think it was important to protest and I say good for them for doing so. HOWEVER they were cynically used by people who know it's not about racism at all. For the organizer, a man who fields astroturf protests for a living, it was about a paycheck.
Like The Muslim Brotherhood and their student group the Muslim Student Association, he supports Hamas instead of the secular leaders in palestine. Saying that the US should engage them or it would drive them into engagement with Syria or Iran. A statement that is at once begging and threat. Kind of similar to his statement on Larry King that if we made him move his mosque then the radicals would attack Americans traveling abroad.
And Finally: Who are the "We" he talks about in the Cordoba Innitiative work? He is the one visible to the public but who are the hidden Cordobists and to what other groups have they belonged?
That sounds like McCarthyism, I know, BUT what people often fail to mention is that McCarthy was actually right. There had been a major Soviet campagn of influence and subversion in America. Except it had been in the 1930's and not the 1950's and those people had been found out and arrested. Soviets kept it up to a smaller degree all thruought the Cold War right up to the end of the Soviet Union. This isn't anti red hysteria - It's what ex Soviets and Soviet era documents have said after the Soviet Union was disbanded and before Putin got into power and started restricting access to archives again. It turned out that the Commo-phobics hadn't been so phobic after all.
The Muslim Brotherhood and Al Quida are not the new "Red Meanace" boogeymen. They are people who have learned from history how to strategize. If a group used espionage and subversion techniques in the past you can bet your bippy that Al Quida and The Muslim Brotherhood know about it. And the web of Muslim Brotherhood groups in the US is exactly like the web of Soviet fielded groups in America during the Cold War. Both create multiple groups with members migrating between those groups in order to make them difficult to examine. Watch a youtube vid about it here The Muslim Students Association and the Jihad Network
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The writer then goes on to suggest, tounge in cheek, various innacurate portrayals of Muhammad and Islam as good examples of islamic fiction. Well and fine but the revelation about a derth of creative writing for YA readers on the subject raised a potentially important question.
We know that Islamic countries have contributed very little to the sciences in modern times but what about the arts? Exactly how many Musilms contribute to the arts? And how does that number compare to other various peoples contributions in various locales? If a lot then it should be lauded (to offset negative perceptions on both sides about negligible islamic contributions to the sciences). If not a lot then this should be encouraged.
I posit here that the contribution to the arts of an immagrant group is an indicator of actual assimilation. For arts I mean hand or digital painting, drawing, fine art photography, music composing, music playing, fiction writing (and ONLY fiction writing), poetry. and comic books.
I don't include Political Cartooning and Film/TV as those are too commonly used to disseminate political/religious propoganda.
Specifically:
What is the percentage of muslims who contribute to the arts in various western and muslim countries?
Or more specifically:
Is thre a difference in percentage between western and muslim countries?
between different muslim countries?
between different western countries?
In Western countries, how does that percentage between different Western countries?
In Western countries how does that percentage compare to other immagrants of 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation in those countries.
What is the difference between western and muslim contries of similar GDP or standard of living?
How many muslims or people of muslim descent or people who identify as muslim are proffesional fine artists, commercial artists or involved in arts administration?
If there is a negative discrepancy then arts education can be enhanced in various ways as a way to facilitate assimilation of youth from islamic countries. Also contests with rules against political or religious content can be held to encourage the arts in "various communities".
I am not a sociologist, anthropologist or statistician. I hope a study of this has been done but if not I hope this inspires someone who is in a position to make such a study.