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.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
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)