Anders Breivik Might Have Schizotypal Personality Disorder.

This is only my theory based upon education, observation and a little research. Qualified Psychiatrists, which I am not, no doubt should weigh in but I hope they will consider this possible disorder before coming to their final pronouncements.

So far the police officers and lawyer who've met and talked with Breivik came away from their interactions with him with the conviction that he is absolutely insane. But they do not understand the significance of the symptomatic behavior he has exhibited.
Breivik actions and personality reminded me of something I came across while memorizing the DSM in school and so I examined current descriptions of the disorder. That disorder is Schizotypal Personality Disorder. Every medical and psychiatric site has a slightly different description of it but it all fits Breivik to a T.

Odd beliefs - An early definition of this from years ago said people with this disorder often seem lucid but will relate things that cannot be true. Someone with this might go to the police and calmly and rationally insist that their neighbor is pointing a death ray at them, or that they have been abducted by a UFO. But in all other respects they seem perfectly mentally competent.

The police officers and lawyer were flummuxed by the sheer oddness of what he was saying to them (I don't know if it was the same as in his "manifesto").  Police all have experience with paranoid schizophrenics so would have realized pretty quickly that his cognition and perceptions were impared if they had been. But they didn't seem to be even though he was saying such odd things.

Extreme eccentricity- we all saw the photos and he spent god knows how long patching together that "manifesto".

Social avoidance- He took a year off to play video games. And have you noticed that there have been no friends comming forward to talk about him?

Odd manner of speech (I think this was described by police but am not sure. I think they did discuss his general extreme oddness aside from his beliefs).

Paranoia (bingo) yet not full blown paranoid schizophrenia with attendant breakdown of congnitive functions. If you have ever had the distinct discomfort of talking to a paranoid schizophrenic they at first seem insistant about something , then you think you are having trouble following what they are saying, then you realize it is in fact a stream of conciousness where one sentance is leading to another with no actual connected narrative. In contrast Breivik was saying extremely odd things but in a coherent way.

Chance of degredation into schizophrenia, that may be what changed him from being a quiet loner into a violent pscyhopath. He may have started on his way to full blown paranoid schizophnrenia yet still have worldly competance.

Chance of violent psychotic attacks. Nothing needs to be said.

Conversly he does not appear to conform to the definition of Narcissism.

Such people require constant POSITIVE reactions and ONLY POSITIVE reactions (hysterionics require any reaction). Breivik did not expect a positive responce for his act.

They brag about themselvs and are envious so constantly PUT EVERYONE else down. Breivik expresses admiration for Al Quida of all things, just the sort of nemisis a narcissist would need to belittle. (caevat: he does put down the EDL people who were doing far more then he ever did).

Such people interact with others in order to manipulate and exploit them. It doesn't seem like Breivik, who didn't appear to actually have any social life whatsoever. Not even people who hate him. Which there would be if he was a narcissist. Though people might yet come forward, the press hasn't appeared to find anyone.

I am not saying he is not responsible for and does not understand the consequences of his actions. I am not saying he is deserving of an insanity plea. There are all sorts of disorders where the person is fully lucid and competant and understands the results of their actions.

Here is a video of a psychiatrist describing Schizotypal Personality Disorder. See if it reminds you of Breivik.

Schizotypal Personality Disorder

You should also find on that page a vid of this psychiatrist describing narcissism.

UPDATE: The Psychiatrists who examined him concluded that he has Paranoid Schizophrenia and was Psychotic during the mass murder. The assessment is was published in english and is fascinating reading. The comments below it also bear reading but are more technical. Psychiatric assessments are not written in stone but these were working experts who had direct access to Anders Breivik so their conclusions should be taken with far less salt than mine.

As far as that highly innacurate assesment that he is a Narcissist that was bandied about by a psychiatrist on the TV news- the assessment does discuss his lack of empathy regarding the victims and their families but at no time say he is Narcissistic. They say that symptoms of his paranoid schizophrenia have to be noticiably absent for a period of time before his underlying personality can even be assessed. So it is far too soon to say he has any personality disorder at all, let alone what it might be.

Schizotypal Personality Disorder is on the Schizophrenia scale so isn't really a personality disorder per se despite it's name - So my assessment that he could have had SPD which turned into Paranoid Schizophrenia is still an acceptable interpretation - though it's possible that it was paranoid schizophrenia without previously being SPD.

Forensic psychiatric statement — Anders Behring Breivik

Shooters, Bombers and Pedos, Oh My!

Naser Abdo, the failed next Fort Hood jihadist, was found with child pornography on his computer. Why do so many Islamic terrorists have child porn on their computers?

They could be perverts or it could be propoganda to discredit them. Or it could be for another reason...

With what we know of the general islamic obsession with "purety" and the erotic associations with innocnece and youth, does make it plausable that an extremely intensified indoctrination in the belief system might cause this sort of perversion. Especially with terrorists because they are fighting to make the world "pure" and expect the "holy" reward of sexual gratification from virgins and pure young boys.

I'm not saying it's the normal relationship with the religion that could cause this. Rather it is the far more intense indoctrination terrorists recieve that might cause this obsession to develop.

HOWEVER-

When doing a search about terrorists and child pornography I VERY QUICKLY found mention of digital Steganography.

Stegonography is hiding information within other information. Like using the first letter of each word in a message to express the true message of a letter. Or using lemon juice to write a message.

Digital Steganography is the concealment of information within computer files such as a document file, email or IMAGE file (also executables).  You use software to hide the message in the data file and the reciever uses software to extract that message. The Sept 11 plotters used steganography to communicate with each other. The simplest method to detect modified files is to use software to compare them to known originals.

People have posited that terrorists hide messages inside chld pornography and transfer the images via child pornography sites. There are 4 benifits to this:

1. Pedo sites are clandestine operations already. And if they get busted it's no skin off the terrorists nose as they are just piggy backing on the operation.

2. The scumbags running those sites won't call the police on them even if they do suspect their illegal site is being exploited by terrorists.

3. The shocking content of the images is perfect cover - it is so shocking people won't think to examine them for hidden content.

4. It would probably be harder to find original files of child pornography images with which to compare original and modified.

So the two reasons are:

An intensified indoctrination in Islam coupled with the belief that ones soon to be achieved eternal reward will involve lots of sex with virgins and young boys can create a desire for child pornography.

The other is that there are messages hidden in the images.

Though, considering the prevalence of concept of duality in Islamic culture it could also be both at the same time. Messages could be hidden in the child pornography to make them an extra little "perk". This "perk" might be able to then serve as reinforcement (of some sort) of the intensified belief system to remote terrorists who are not in direct contact with the indoctrinators.

Put Them All In Internment Camps? Not So Fast...

I occasionally read or hear comments made by a few fed up angry people suggesting that all muslims be put in internment camps. This is very rare and spoken in anger and I'm sure regretted very soon after.

I can't address the feelings involved in such statments as I am a guy and we don't have feelings. But let's look at why this is a very bad idea for practical reasons.

One reason is pure American vanity. Nobody will ever tire of holding the internment of the Japanese against us, particularly to assuage their own feelings of residual cultural guilt from that time. I don't want our country to do something else that we will have to apologize for over and over again forever without ever getting actual concrete forgiveness. It's just another pain in the neck I don't want.

More importantly internment camps would have the exact oppisite effect we would intend to get from them. If such a thing ever did happen- The agitators would continue to work within these camps to make everyone in those internment camps radical. They would have a captive audience AND one that was made far more suseptable to their message.  Maybe 5% would be sympathetic to radicals going in but 60% would be sympathetic coming out.

Our country would then be as filled with these vicious psychos as is the rest of the world.

It is both ethically wrong and tactically wrong headed.

The federalis have been pretty successfull and lucky at stopping these attacks so far. They just need to enforce anti sedition laws to boot out or jail the muslim brotherhood affiliated groups at work here. And we need to work as hard as possible in the ways we are able to make people motivated to put pressure on them to do so.

Many states have developed anti sharia legislation. That means groups like SIOA have been effective and the right people have been listening. That is precisely why these anti"fa" type dupes have gotten nastier.  And they ain't anti-fa they are pro-fa. Especially PRO because we all know the ones at the top are getting payed big time to hire out their members like Angolan war mercenaries.

There may or may not yet be a light at the end of the tunnel but there will always be one where we decide to make a stand. The more of us there are, the brighter that light.

Brighter and brighter untill we won't even need an end of the tunnel because the tunnel itelf will be blasted apart.

We don't need to put anyone in internment camps.

Are We In A World War? Yup.

Many are saying we are in a world war. But is that an exaggeration?

WWII was fought on many fronts against a unified enemy bent upon world domination. Despite their transparently mendacious propaganda, Islamic supremacists are fighting to create a world straddling Caliphate, which in turn will seek to dominate and conquer the rest of the world, creating a world where muslim men are first class and everyone else is subordinate. But are they just a handful of resentful cranks operating in a few countries? NOPE.

I just looked at the thereligionofpeace.com 2010 list of islamic inspired attacks across the world. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2010.htm
Here are the countries that had islamic "religious" inspired attacks in 2010. Where a country was only listed once I specified the attack. Not very many were listed only once. Even the countries we don’t think of as having a jihad problem and the little or new countries on this list that you would be excused for having never heard of before have had several attacks.

Abkhazia
Azerbaijan
Afganistan
Algeria
Bangladesh
Bosnia
Canada (honor killing)
Chechnya
China
Dagestan
DRC (congo)
Egypt
Ethiopia
France (jewish man stabbed in neck by muslim yelling about zionist conspiracy) (An actress-playwright is doused with petrol and nearly set on fire by three Algerians angered by her negative portrayal of Muslim men.)
GERMANY (2 jewish women and 1 man are brutally beaten after their identity is confirmed by muslims)
India
Indonesia
Ingushetia
Iraq
Israel
ITALY (2 in an honor killing)
Jordan
Kenya
Kosovo
Lebanon
Mali (a pensioner is taken prisoner by alquida and killed)
Mogadishu
Niger (not nigeria) Five members of a border patrol lose their lives to an al-Qaeda ambush.
Nigeria (over 500 christians killed and 600 wounded in a 2 day rampage, and that was not the only attack in Nigeria that year. A similar rampage this year took the lives of over 300 christians)
Pakistan Aside from the military violence shia pilgrims are always bombed by sunnis during their religious festivals. Every year.
Pal. Auth. (gaza) 62 yr old woman murdered outside her home by islamic fundamentalists.
Philipines
Russia
Saudi Arabia Four British cyclists deliberately run down by drivers in two cars. A 54-year-old humanitarian worker dies from injuries in that attack.
Somalia
Sudan
Sweden
Tajikistan
Thailand
Turkey (honor killing (arrest))
Uganda (76killed 65 more wounded and maybe killed for watching the world cup)
UK
Ukraine (A Muslim fanatic yells ‘Allah Akbar’ as he stabs a 5-year-old boy to death.)
USA (honor killing over islamic dress)
Yemen

Just over 9000 civilians were targeted and murderd in these countries in 2010. Around 8,000 in 2009, The state dept says around 10,000 in 2007 and 2008. Furthermore there are many listed as critically wounded who die later from their wounds but cannot be kept track of by the website AND they cannot keep track of places where the worst is happening like The Sudan so the real numbers are undenialbly far far higher. This isn't just a world war. It is a very real genocide against non muslims all across the planet - just not with the industrial capabilities that the Nazis had.

These are not small groups of likeminded nutjobs. Every single jihadi who participates in these atrocities is given orders thru a chain of command and every manner of support required by a large network of "innocent" civilians.

As for the fact that some of these people were muslim- Shia and Sunni do not consider each other to be muslim and are allowed to treat each other as they treat the rest of us sub human kufars.

I heartily recommend you follow the link, study the information and draw your own conclusions, especially because they will be different from mine.

Not counting countries that only experienced honor killings, the number for 2010 is somewhere around 40 countries.

That’s a world war alright.

A damning Indictment of Muhammad

I am not usually interested in religion, only the imperialist crimes commited against humanity in it's name. But this is the most comprehensive yet concise list of Muhammads crimes against humanity and its standards of ethics and morality (and decorum) I have yet read. If all this stuff is true he was nothing short of a lunatic. And here's the kicker- It is all taken directly from the Koran, Hadith and Sira. The author shows original sources and their translations for every single point he makes.

I do not personally endorse the christian stuff in the piece but it does show quite effectively the contrast between the teachings of both men.

The argument is that Islam says Muhammad is the standard for morality and behavior by which muslims must guide themselves. Unfortunately Muhammad was a mass murderer, tourturer, adulterer (you know, that thing muslim women are still executed for), predatory pederast upon both female and male children, bandit, transvestite, homosexual (you know, that thing muslim men are still executed for - and have to seek asylum IN ISRAEL for), and big big big big big big fibber.

Of course most muslisms do not guide themeselves by this example and not all of them even know what sort of complete bastard and pervert Muhammad was. Very few who consider themselves muslim have actually read the koran in translation and very very few have read the other two central books. But the people who composed the islamic holy books sure did know.

Unfortunately everyone calling himself an Imam or islamic religious scholar has read these books and knows full well how foul an excuse for humanity Muhammad really was. That they can read those books and still follow the faith the man in those books proffessed is either the height of self delusion or the knowing embrace of evil - I do not propose that I have the authority to say which.

Anyhoozle: Here is the presentation- BE WARNED - there are photos of real decapitations early on.

http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/12/perfect-man-of-islam.html?showComment=1305891380948#c4000033595055624522

Here is the excelent resource WikiIslam. Wikipedia has been compromised by cyber jihadists and so is no longer a reliable source of information on this subject.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Main_Page

Hey O'Reilley, Keep Your Venemous Pie Hole Shut About Our Right To Free Speech.

Here's the order of events that lead up to this post:

-Pastor Jones burned a Koran.

-Nobody cared.

-After about 10 days a bunch of bloothirsty savages decided that it was as good and excuse as any to start murdering people. (Not quite- the killings had specific purposes that had nothing to do with bullshit claims of hurt feelings)

-They created illusory mobs and peppered those mobs with hardened Taliban Butchers with specific orders to kill.

-While the mobs were creating the illusion of popular anger the Taliban Butchers committed the pre planned murders.

The killings in Pakistan were really about ethnic cleansing of christians from that country. The killings in Afganistan are really about ginning up anger at the forces that prevent the Talibans return to power. If Pastor Jones had not burned a koran the Imams would have made up a story about someone else burning a koran.

Several western commentators and leaders thought this was as good an excuse as any to disgrace themselves forever by betraying the first amendment of the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by blaming Pastor Jones for the murders committed by other people on the other side of the world for unrelated reasons merely because those bloodthirsty savages used his action as a pathetically transparent pretext.

Recently Bill O'Reilley blamed Pastor Jones for the murder orgy being orchestrated on the other side of the planet.

Before blaming Pastor Jones for this Bill O'Reilley should have remembered he himself lives in a pico thin glass house crammed to the rafters with pitch plack pots.

Gee, Truthiocity, what ever do you mean by that? Let me explain:

O'Reilley incited people against one Dr. Tiller and presented information about the man's location to the public. Shortly after somebody went to Dr. Tiller's location and killed him. That is far worse than what he mistakenly accuses Pastor Jones of.

Pastor Jones expected protests like those over the Danish Motoons. He did not forsee that his act of defiance would be cynically exploited for political and military purposes. How could he have?

Seriously, have any of you ever thought someone would use your forum comment or youtube video or blog post as an excuse to kill 20 or more people in cold blood?

OF COURSE NOT!

You would have to be insane to think any one thing you said could have such an effect.

There is no possible way Pastor Jones could have predicted his actions would be used as an excuse for a series of murders. Murders, I might add, that were entirely planned out and orchestrated not by random mobs but by hardened Taliban butchers. If anything Pastor Jones was too rational in his thinking.

O'Reilley on the other hand knew exactly what would happen if he puplished the location of somene he was railing against.

He should keep his venomous pie hole shut about Pastor Jones, and by extension, our, constutionally granted right to free speach.
There is another sinister factor. The OIC was recently successfull in mounting a putch against free speech at the UN concearning the criticism of religion. The OIC is currently SLIPSTREAMING behind these atrocities to give weight to this obscene attack against our right to free speech. They are trying to bully us into inhibiting the rights of expression of our own citizens in regards to the aggression many believe to be directly inspired by religous teachings for the furtherance of an anti democratic agenda.

An anti democratic agenda the results of which can be seen in every single country that is a member of the OIC. Could any of those places be mistaken for The Platonic Ideal of Utopia? Hells no.

The OIC arguement behind the anti defimation of religion nonsense is that if you criticize a religion it will lead directly to members of that religion being physically attacked. They are using the murder orgy in Pakistan and Afganistan as a specific example of what can happen if countries do not comply with the defamation of religion hog wash.

HOWEVER this series of murders is not the example the OIC would like it to seem. A religon was insulted- but the result was NOT members of that religion being killed. Rather it was the members of that religion who killed non members as a result. So it is absolutely not illustrative of the dangers of permitting the defamation of religion. It is, in fact, the perfect example of what happens when the right to free speech is not universally respected (ta-DAAA!).

The invasions of Afganistan and Iraq may or may not have been about defending our American way of life- BUT THIS BATTLE ABSOLUTELY IS. And so far Senator Graham and Bill O'Reilley have disgraced themselves by so quickly betraying the constitution (the benifits of which they have made full use of) and have given aid and comfort to the enemy by not standing behind Pastor Jones right to free speech.

Some say Pastor Jones was right and some say he was wrong. I DON'T CARE. Under our constitution he has the right to make whatever statements he likes. It is up to other people to agree or disagree. It is NOT up to other people to determine what he is allowed to say. And it is ABSOLUTLY NOT up to other people to decide to kill in responce.

Many people are right now thinking of ways to respond to this. I hope your responce will be to defend our constitution.

Claim That Muslim UN Workers are Denying Asylum to Non Muslims!!!

The OIC is not the only source of curruption at the UN. The infrastructure itself has become infested with ideologically commited Islamic Supremicists!

More proof that the UN has been handed over to the jackals. This is a travesty! I demand heads!

When non Muslims suffering from persecution in Muslim countries try to flee to neighboring countries Muslim office workers throw out their paperwork! When people complain the Muslims in authority refuse to approve the complaints. The result is that Muslims are actively denying persecuted Christians asylum in Europe while only granting it to fellow Muslims.

Muslim workers at the UN are actively complicit with Middle Eastern Muslims in the current genocide of Christians.

We demand that the asylum process of the UN be investigated for religious bias at once!

Here is the YouTube. It is only hearsay at this point but keep in mind that it's a nun who's buiding an orpanage that is speaking.

Sister Hatune - The persecutors are given refuge instead of the persecuted

Sister Hatune is not a anti Jihad Activist- here's her site where she is raising money for an orphanage- How many orphanages has Imam Rauf started?

http://www.sisterhatunefoundation.com/

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Found Guilty. Of Not Being a Lawyer.

In Austria Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has been found guilty of denigration of religion of an official state religion by saying Muhammad was a pedophile. The act is one thing and there are ways to label the act and the person who commits the act. The appellation of pedophile refers to a mental disorder. The judge said that because he maintained a relationship with the victim after she reached age 18 he must not have been a pedophile. Because of this, the judge said Ms Wolf denigrated an official state religion and fined her.

This is the quote from the judge:

"Paedophilia" is factually incorrect, since paedophilia is a sexual preference which solely or mainly is directed towards children. Nevertheless, it does not apply to Mohammad. He was still married to Aisha when she was 18. It is a "denigration of religious teachings"

Because he was still married to her at age 18?

If a pedo used that defence do you think that judge would find him innocent? NO!

Furthermore if a dirty pedo only molests on Tuesdays he is still a dirty pedo the rest of the week too. He doesn’t all of a sudden become not a pedo for 6 days.

The judge is saying the crime was that Ms. Wolf convoluted the description of a perpetrator of a specific act with the term for the disorder which would most likely have caused the perpetrator to commit the act . So if Ms. Wolfe had said he was a child molester or serial child rapist but not said he was a pedophile then she would not have been found guilty of denigration of religion. That is what this ruling by this judge means.

So according to this ruling it is legal to scream from the rooftops in Austria that Muhammad was a child molester as long as you don’t make pronouncements upon his mental health that this judge disagrees with. Fair enough.

Child Molester sounds worse then pedo anyway, so Muhammad the Serial Child Molester it shall be.

It is the judge that is making an unqualified judgement in a subject matter she is not an expert in. It shows a misunderstanding not only of male sexuality but of islamic law.

By saying the man who willfully demanded to be given a child as a sexual partner and consummated his relationship before she reached puberty was not a pedophile, the judge is saying it is physically and mentally normal for a man to be capable of being sexually exited by a child. She is saying it is only cultural norms that prevent all men from desiring and being capable of having sex with children. As a man I find such an accusation unspeakably insulting. The judge not only willfully misunderstands the phenomenon of pedophilia, she shows she has absolutely no understanding of male sexuality. It is not normal to be able to be sexually aroused by a pre pubescent.

In order for him to have had sexual congress with a 6 to 9 year old little girl he would have to have had aberrant psychology. That he had an obsession with rape and sexual slavery is proof enough of some sort of sexual pathology though one more involving power. He obviously got pleasure from the domination of women. His lust for a child, as a physically small and unworldly being that could not defend itself from him fits into that particular pathology.

But the verdict betrays ignorance about religion in general and islam in particular. Zeus, Jesus, and Vishnu are mythical beings that are the central source of their religions. To say things unpleasant about them can denigrate their religions. Muhammad was a historical figure who promoted a religion but is not a deity in that religion and not a figure of spiritual worship or bestower of material or spiritual rewards. In fact to worship him would be one of the worst sins imaginable in Islam. Believing god has other deities as "partners" (such as Jesus), is called shirk, which is one of the worst sins in Islam.

So to say anything at all about his personal life, no matter how unpleasant or debatable is not denigration of the religion he started. Only a statement about the beliefs of that religion can be denigrating.

By saying Ms Wolf denigrated Islam by saying something about Muhammad, the judge committed one of the worst crimes in Islam and every single Islamic jurist knows this. She is saying Muhammad is the religion as much as Allah or the teachings and that is the exact islamic definition of shirk. The offence she committed is worse then the one Ms Wolff committed. Though as the judgment is in the Jihads favor no islamic jurist will be honest or careless with their own lives enough to say so publicly.

If you would like to know more about this travesty of justice and common sense here is a list of stories about it at Gates of Vienna up to feb 15 2011: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at Gates of Vienna

UPDATE: Ms. Wolff Found Guilty! Of Not Being Guilty? Huh?

It has been reported at Gates of Vienna today that the accusation and verdict against Ms Wolff was because she said the exact opposite of what the Judge said Ms. Wolff said.

Darg?

Ms. Wolf told people that you cannot call Muhammad a pedophile.

The judge used those statements to say that Ms Wolff called Muhammad a pedophile.

Let me repeat: Darg?

That is like accusing me of conspiracy to commit murder because I go around telling people it is illegal for them to murder.

Could it be that the judge misread the evidence?

No. The bitch lied. It's as simple as that.

She accused Ms Wolff of saying the opposite of what the evidence showed she said. Only after that did she split hairs over appropriate terminology. Perhaps that is why the lawyers for the prosecution kept mum so much during the trial. Perhaps they did not want to destroy their careers.

Those who actually respect the law in Austria should seek to get this judge removed from the bench, disbarred if appropriate and prosecuted for libel against Ms. Wolff.

Here is the story at Gates of Vienna. Judge for yourself if that judge used poor judgment.

Sentence First — Verdict Afterwards

The Muslim Brotherhood Renounced Violence Decades Ago? In What Universe?

Mohamed ElBaradei, the now recognized leader of the democratic uprising in Egypt has just said the Muslim Brotherhood has renounced violence for forty years. On what planet has ElBaradei been living for the past forty years? Because it certainly hasn't been this one.

They have engadged in violence, their extensive propoganda is military in purpose and they take advantage of violence commited by groups they claim to not be connected to.

1. They have assassinated not one, but two Egyptian rulers.  Prime Minister Mahmoud an-Nukrashi Pasha in 1948 and Anwar Sadat in 1981. I don't know where ElBaradei has been living, but on the planet where I live that's kind of a big deal.

And unless you've learned basic math in Egypt, 3 decades does not equal 4 decades. But that's just MB's "official" violence, because:

2. Groups split off from them before becoming violent precisely in order to allow them deniability. Does anyone remember the horrific Luxor massacre? al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya split with the Muslim Brother hood after the MB "renounced" violence. Members of Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya jumped the police at Luxor then hunted down and killed 58 tourists who hid among the ruins for hours before more soldiers arrived. And that's just one group that has "split off" from the MB before committing violence.

3. Hamas is the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza. Have they been lobbing cupcakes and sunshine into Israel, instead of all those Qassam rockets as the media reports? And yesterday is not the same as forty years ago unless you do some pretty fancy quantum physics. It seems like a rocket science joke would be apt here but for the life of me I can't think of one.

4. Their current action plans for various countries call for the future use of violence after the subversion campaigns bare fruit. If an axe wielding lunatic is surrounded by dead bodies and saying he will kill people very soon but won't chop your head off right now if you let him in your house- is it safe to believe him?

5. In the last few days MB members have said publicly that they will go to war with Israel once they get power. Since when is warmongering the renunciation of violence?

6 Subversion is, though non violent, still an aggresive military tactic that goes back to Sun Tzu and the Romans. The purpose is to use propaganda techniques to attack the ideals and resolve of an enemy countries population and leaders untill they let your country have its way. The MB specializes in it and is engaged in a campaign of subversion in the United States for decades (yes that is exactly what your little darling is up to at those MSA meetings at school). Muslim Brotherhood documents released in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial prove this beyond doubt.

7. The MB makes use of the violence and extreme rhetoric of terrorist groups to deceptively present its oeratives and goals as moderate alternative even though they are just as radical. In these instances it's not an exact group committing specific violence but the MB is intentionally using it to further their goals.

8. They make use of the news grabbing violence and rhetoric of violent groups by making their advances quietly and under the radar. While we are distracted by one maniac battering down the front door, another is using lockpicks to sneak in the back.

9. These "moderates", claiming to be unrelated to the violent groups, nevertheless ask for concessions immediately after attacks, in a way that is just as coordinated as the attacks themselves in what security professionals refer to as "slipstreaming".

10. They have exactly the same goals of making the whole world submit to Shariah Law, the creation a single empire so as to be able wage offensive jihad (as if that "defensive" jihad nonsense wasn't obvious bullshit) thus turning the whole world into a place where muslim men are first class and everyone else has to eat shit.

When taking those things into account you cannot but conclude that The Muslim Brotherhood and Al Quida et all are in fact one and the same.

It's exactly like a stoning. If you have witnessed the horror of one of those religiously sanctified murder orgies, no matter where the victim turns there is some blood crazed bastard throwing a rock at their head.

Islamic aggression on all levels is like that, whether it be a stoning, a gang rape or the UN Human Rights Council, It's always multiple sources cooperating like a predatory pack. And the Muslim Brotherhood is the pack leader.

Obama is sucking up to them right now because he thinks their triumph in Egypt is inevitable but since when is "just relax and try to enjoy it" been a better response to a rapist then kicking him in the nuts?

I hope that the white house and ElBaradei might really be thinking that once the Egyptian people have real democratic reforms and a better economic life their support for the MB will fade. Unfortunately that will take time and the MB are so adept at conspiracies that even allowing one of them to be elected dog catcher would be a huge mistake. (He'd probably just circumcise all the dogs and then train them to kill Copts)

Seriously, any Muslim Brotherhood member of government will conspire to give his group advantage and work towards non democratic Islamist control of the country in any legal and illegal way he can. If you give one of those guys an inch they will grab the whole ruler and try to cut your head off with it.

If Murburak had done his job and dealt with those assholes as thuroughly as he should have we would be viewing the past weeks events in Egypt with more enthusiasm and less trepidation.

The Muslim Brotherhood's Infiltration of the Conservative Movement

There is a battle roaring as I write this. Instead of the blast of mortar rounds we hear, it is the click clacking of keyboards and the susserations of whispers in the corridors of power.  It is being waged by boring, suit wearing, briefcase wielding people in boring ways so we can be forgiven for not being aware of it- BUT IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT! One side wants to prevent the subversion and destruction of our country by the other side.

Frank Gaffney and Suhail Khan both members of a very influential conservative group I couldn't possibly give more of  a shit about are duke-ing it out.

On one side is Frank Gaffney, President of the Center for Security Policy in Washington,
and instrumental in the development of the actually important Team B II Report, Shariah: The Threat To America. That report states that the Muslim Brotherhood is using a web of groups and agents of influence to subvert the United States.

On the other is Suhail Khan, a fucking snake.

Suhail Khan is a Muslim Brotherhood operative who has wormed his way into the corridors of conservative power in order to further the fascist agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood. He has done this by (among other things) subverting various anti terror initiatives and policies and engaging in acts specifically designed to split and nullify the Conservatives on the issues relating to Islam, Anti-Terror and National Defence. He is also using his position to try to stifle Frank Gaffney's attempts to bring his dark deeds to light.

The Muslim Brotherhood's goal is to make the whole world subject to Shariah Law. To do this they use agents of influence to to infiltrate any politically useful group in a target country weather it be left or right. Once in power these infiltrators use deception and political connections to make the target country more and more hardline Islamic.

It is a group started in Egypt in 1928 and now has operatives and organizations all over the world. In the United States these groups form a web identical in appearance to the web of groups the Soviets fielded in the US during the cold war. It has been proven in US courts that these groups are committed, despite any public statements they may make, to the destruction of the United States and the implementation of hardline Islamic rule.

They use the news attractive screaming mee-mees of Al Quida to further their own agenda. They try to present themselves to the government as a moderating counter influence to Al Quida but in fact have the EXACT same agenda. While Al Quida gets all our attention by pounding on our front door, the Muslim Brotherhood has been sneaking in the back door.

Many of these people have presented themselves as moderates in order to get influence with the US government but have been later proven to have ties to terror. Several people connected to these groups are in fact serving well deserved prison terms or have fled the country.

It's not Alex Jones paranoiac nwo nuttiness. All the info about this has been documented by real journalists working for respected news outlets and people with verifiable and extensive law enforcement, defence, and other government experience.

Subversion is not just anti pinko commie paranoia either. It has been a widely used military strategy for thousands of years. It was written of by Sun Tzu in the Art of War and was even used by the ancient Romans. The point of subversion is to crush the enemy's resistance thru deception and the sowing of confusion of the leaders and population. Instead of fighting them in a battlefield you fight them in their minds and perceptions and confuse and demoralize them so they cannot take decisive action. A very good example of it can be seen in the manipulations of Theodin by Wormtounge in the Lord of The Rings. There are many people who claim the soviets did this to western countries in various ways.

Here is the link to an article that delineates Khans maleficent deeds by Frank Gaffney, one of the guys in the fight. A lot of it appears to be boring or confusing but is actually very very alarming so please READ IT CAREFULLY.
Muslim Brotherhood Influence Operations and the Conservative Movement

Here is the Team B II Report on Amazon - I don't get any money from this link and do not monetize this blog and there are lots of other legal ways to get a hold of it for free on the Internet.

Update on Saudi Arabia's Clampdown on Free Speach

The news about NAZI GERMANY'S Saudi Arabia's clampdown on free speech on the Internet keeps getting worse. It turns out the rules are worse then the Saudis had previously said they would be.

- Non citizens cannot write about news (whatever the fuck that means).
-Chat room users are encouraged to register with the government.
-ALL electronic news sites must strictly abide by Islamic sharia law (you know, that system of jurisprudence that has a zillion different schools of interpretation).
-Electronic news sites must not compromise public order. (Whatever Muhammad's cock that means- probably whatever the Nazis Saudis want it to mean at any given time.)
-Mobile phone/smart phone content is included in these rules.
-All news bloggers to provide the Saudi Arabian government with detailed information on their hosting company. This could easily allow the Saudi Arabian government to block access to a particular website across domains or to even force hosting companies to take dissidents' websites offline.

And of course:

-ALL Saudi news blogs and electronic news sites are now required to include the call to Islam.

People will have to get a licence to operate a blog. If they break the rules above (and don't bribe the correct officials- it is a 3rd world country after all) they will have their sites taken down and refused permission to write on the Internet.

What this means is that ALL bloggers are now going to be strong armed into paying baksheesh to various Saudi Officials in order to keep their blogs going. I don't know about corruption in Saudi Arabia specifically but we all know about corruption in 3rd world (and especially arabic) countries. In many of those countries not only is it completely acceptable for bureaucrats to "feed at the troth", you are considered a fool for not doing so.
Here is the story from Jihadwatch about Neal Ungerleider's Story for Fast Company

Saudi Arabia to bloggers: Hey, guess what you're going to write about!

What I want to know is this. Will the internet group known as "Anonymous", who fought for Wikileaks and the freedom of information, chime in on this? It could be suspected that Julian Assange and "Anonymous" are really working for a foreign government or a group that is only anti American or anti capitalist. If they make their feelings known about this then we will know they are actually committed to their ideals. If they don't it will make me think that they are actually working for a foreign government and only paying lip service to the ideal of freedom of information.

Saudi Arabia's Fascist Takeover of Blogging

Saudi Arabia has announced that anyone in Saudi Arabia who wants to e-publish in any way must have a licence from the Government. If you want to have a a blog, online newspaper, or similar form of electronic publishing  in Saudi Arabia you will specifically have to be a Saudi National, over 20, Hold a high school or higher qualification, be of good conduct and behaviour, and hold an appropriate licence given by the Ministry.

And remember this is what The OIC working to make these sorts of rules for the entire world. Lets take a look at what each of the "qualifications" really mean.

Have to be a Saudi National. Self explanatory. No sub human fernrers have the right to express themselves publicly. That means if you are one of the gazillion foreign workers treated like shit in Saudi Arabia you will no longer be allowed to tell people how shitty the Saudis treat foreigners.

Over 20. So even if you are Saudi you don't have the freedom to express yourself if you are not old enough. Talk about your nanny state.

Hold a high school or higher qualification. So any Saudi who is poor no longer has the right to free expression.

Be of Good Conduct and Behavior. WHAT THE FAT FLYING FUCK IS THIS CUNTING SHIT? That means you have to conform to an unspecified, subjective and arbitrary opinion of whichever random person is reviewing your licence application. Also you can't be a dirty faggot (not a "bottom" at least- they don't consider "tops" to be dirty fags- even their bigotry has double standards).

What it really means is that if you conform to everything else but say something the government doesn't like they will cook up a lie that you did something that is not of good conduct and behavior and deny you the right to free expression on the internet.

Furthermore unless they are different from every other bureaucrat in the shit eating third world they will use that threat to suck bribes out of everyone.

Must have a licence that is up for renewal every three years. If you say something they don't like (which is the ONLY actual rule though in typical muslim fashion it's poorly hidden behind a bunch of bullshit) they will revoke your licence and you won't be able to express yourself freely on the internet.

So the real rules are - 1) Don't say anything negative about Islam, Muhammad or life in Saudi Arabia or the government and 2) have enough cash on hand to pay a bribe.

The actual news piece is here: Saudi Arabia clamps down on Bloggers, News Sites, Others

Now If you are in Saudi Arabia you will have to send your story to another country to be e-published.

I guess we had better say whatever we want to say about Saudi Arabia now before it's illegal.

I love Wikileaks. But Please Don't Interfere With Our Next Election.

I tried to send this letter to Wikileaks but there isn't Email contact information on the Wikileaks site so I will post it here and mail modified versions of it to letters/opinion pages of newspapers.

It is Truthiocity's Official Policy that Wikileaks does Rock. Asange may or may not be a commie pinko semi-sorta-not really-but-at-least-we-got-the-rumor-out-there rapist. ( I and everyone else in the world seriously doubt that last one - the timely exposure of a targets supposed sexual activities/alcohol and drug use/sanity/cannibalism by, er, certain government bodies, has not been entirely unknown to have happened in the past. If he was a bloodthirsty psychopathic warlord or a tin pot fascist dictator it would be one thing. But he ain't- so it's in bad taste to pull this crap. )

It's absolutely hysterical to see right/conservative leaning sites calling for his head in one post and then saying "see? We were right about xxx because Wikilieaks confirms what we've been saying all along!"  I have taken advantage of their reporting on this blog to toot my own measly horn as well (see the post "I am so smart! I am so smart! I am so smart!" below).

All that being said,

It is my humble(ish) opinion that to release any leaks about American diplomatic or military matters during the Presidential Election would be damaging to the democratic process. It will put Mr. Asange and Wikileaks in the same boat as the people who illegally knocked African American voters off the voting rolls in 2000, the republican appointee judges who helped George Bush II steal the election of 2000, the Swifboaters of 2004, those who manipulated color alerts preceding the 2004 election and, those behind the manipulation of electronic voting machines in 2004 (don't you dare say it didn't happen). It will look like Wikileaks is attempting to manipulate an election.

Mr. Asange will no longer be able to claim any sort of impartiality or objectivity.

I am not arguing for any particular side. There is a Democratic president in the whitehouse now and cables about the current administration will damage a democratic candidate as revelations about the previous president would damage a republican candidate. Revelations about democratic and republican administrations both could cause general disaffection and lowered voter turn out in general and confirm assertions in many minds that Wikileaks is really an anti American operation of a foreign government.

The press and "commentators" will spend time discussing what Wikileaks intentions might be rather then discussing the candidates or issues.

In the heat of an election people may not realize that cables are what the government is saying to itself and can inform about the governments decision process but THEY ARE NOT THE SAME AS FINAL DECISIONS on the subjects being discussed. A discussion on a subject incorporates information from many sources and opinions before a decision is made. I am sure Wikileaks knows this. I am sure most people know this. Unfortunately the leaks may not be presented that way when reported and "commented" on.

It would be very tempting to release something big a few days before a debate in order to influence what is discussed. It would be very tempting to release information that might affect the platforms of the candidates.

Of course drop a big one on day one after the election is decided or on day one of a new administration. but releasing revelations during the election would cause damage to the democratic process of the election itself.

Open Call For Vatican to Take More a More Active Role In Protecting the Lives of Christians Under Threat.

News has come to light that the Egypitan Police sent to guard the church in Alexandria removed themselves an hour before a car bomb was placed in front of that church. It is clear that muslim countries are only interested or capable of protecting their own citizens when those citizens are muslim. It thus falls to other entities to protect these non muslim citizens.

Christians are under physical attack in muslim countries now more then ever. Doesn't the Vatican have a dedicated police force called the Gendarme Corps of Vatican City State?  The Gendarme provide security, border control, and investigation. There is also The Swiss Guard, a small military force with the walls of Vatican City. The Vatican should send members of these forces to act as securtity when christian churches are under threat.

If they are not allowed into such countries officially then they should be sent covertly or as private security.

Statements from the Pope have no effect upon the actions of muslim countries.

If it was me I would just send them as private security contractors. If the vatican actually asks for permission then the muslim countries will just ask to build another mosque in Rome in return but then reneg on allowing the security detatchment to enter or actively hinder them once they are there.

Of course if there are Vatican supplied guards outside churches then the muslims will just stick to home invasions and murder on the street.

In any case the Vatican should be taking a more physical role in the protection of christians under attack in muslim countries.

Is a Site Supposedly about Veterans a Cover for Jew Bashing and Israel Bashing Propoganda?

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.

Call For a Serious Investigation: How many Muslim Artists are There?

This is in reaction to what I read in a short article at Jihadwatch. The article is about how middle school teachers cannot find enough books about being a muslim teenager in America for their students to read.

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.

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

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.

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 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

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.

Or to put it another way:

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."

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.

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.