Saturday, August 06, 2005

Nowhere Again

Secret Machines are a David Bowiesque in a kind of techno pop-rock style. Here are the lyrics from their song Nowhere Again. Somehow, they seem to express for me, in a prophetic manner, the current state of our beautiful civilization:

cellophane flowers never happened for me
been sleeping the day off
watching the night fall
covering nowhere
filling my time share

there's a woman in the mirror in a firey state
as she motions to me I start turning away
she's lifting her dress up
trying to keep up

oh you'd be surprised
how we race
while our lives


another moon on an everyday night
thinking the morning looking for alright
warming the blood flow
with poison I dont know why

maybe the rain stops following me
dripping the colors
running the daylight
over the cloud burst
hoping they don't burst

right before my eyes
our lies


we know we're lost we're lost we're lost in nowhere now
we know we're lost we're lost we're lost in nowhere now
now we know we're lost in nowhere now

maybe the rain will stop following me
with millions of colors reflected in daylight
right on the kickdrum
turning the sound up full

another alone on an everyday night
I think in the morning I think I'll be alright
watching the blood flow
no wonder I dont know why

theres a woman in the mirror in a firey state
she motions to me I start pulling away
she's lifting her dress up
all the way up

oh don't look surprised
our lives

our lies


God help us.

Do Not Waste Thy Seed Upon The Ground
Why The Catholic Church Is Against Contraception
Oh Yes, And A Whole Bunch Of Musing From Pastorius
On Why We Modern People Don't Want To Have Lots Of Kids

From the Anchoress comes a wonderful exposition of a lifestyle choice I can't ever imagine making:

I am sharing this with you because I am sure this fellow is not the only one confused out there. I am surely no spokesperson for the church, for that matter, I’m not even an “expert,” in this subject. I am only a Catholic laywoman who has thought long and hard about all of this - as many of us Catholic laywomen have! :)


it must be said, when you’re talking sperm and ova you are talking about essences - our essential selves, which are derived from the deepest parts of our beings, and you are talking about the material which was designed specifically for the purpose of assisting God in the creation of humanity.

God loves us into being - we are begotten. Our creation is no accident, but the Love of God made manifest, and the “tools” or “materials” that He uses for that creation - committed love and the mysterious and miraculous products of that love - do, simply by their designation as “tools of God” demand a certain respect and recognition, because they are a great deal more than the equivalent of nasal mucous or earwax. They are the essentials of human creation, and therefore they are of staggering value and import. In THAT sense, yes, every sperm is sacred.

As to the teaching that every sex act must “hit the target,” (that’s a rather, errr, colorful way to put it), it simply means that every sex act, if it is truly to be respectful of God’s design and creation, must be opened to the possibility of new life, to God and to His will as to whether or not new life will be created. If the couple is NOT open to that possibility, if they take steps to suppress that possibility, then they have - essentially - excluded God from the act.

It is, really, kind of an ultimate surrender, an ultimate trust. For Christians who routinely say, “Thy Will Be Done,” it is where the rubber meets the road. No pun intended.

What one must keep in mind is that what the church is putting forth is an IDEAL. And that’s part of the job of the church, to teach and inform us as to what the ideals are, and in this case, the ideal is that we humans remain open to the will of God, in all circumstances.

That’s a tall order, and one that we cannot possibly meet without Grace.

But the church does understand that we, in our imperfect humanity and willfulness, will very likely not meet that ideal ...

Nevertheless, if the church did not put forth the IDEAL, it would be terribly, sinfully remiss in its teaching, because it would basically be telling people not to bother to strive for perfection in our openness to God’s will because “it’s not possible.” A fatalist message is never a good one, particularly when Jesus tells us in the Gospel that “…with God all things are possible.” (Mark 10:27)

One of the jobs of the church is to help us find our openness to God - to help us to maintain that openness to His will, so that we might reach our own best and highest spiritual potential, because we are not called to dwell in darkness but to live in the light, and in holiness. We are called to holiness: “Be holy as my Father in heaven is Holy.” If holiness is our quest, there can then be no limits to our openness.

One of the common misunderstandings is that “the church says sex must always and only be about procreation, and if it’s not possible, then sex is a sin.” This is nonsense. Sex is the gift and privilege of married couples, both pleasurable and procreative. When fertility has come to an end, when the possibility of new life is no longer there, that means the procreation part has ended, not the pleasure.

I want to add to this another thought of The Anchoress', from another post wherein she discussed the awesomely sad fact that in Japan they are beginning to attempt to market huggable human dolls to lonely people:

This is one of the saddest things I’ve ever read:

"As Japan produces fewer children and more retirees, toymakers are designing new dolls designed not for the young but for the lonely and elderly—companions which can sleep next to them and offer caring words they may never hear otherwise."

Look in scripture - in any tradition - all you want, and you will not see a baby described as anything but a blessing. Sadly, people are giving up their opportunities for blessings, in exchange for things. But things can’t love you back.

So many of our decisions in modern society are made for the pleasure things will bring us immediately. We seem to have lost an understanding of the fact that we have a future, and that one day in that future we will be lying on our death bed making up an account of our lives.

We've heard it said so many times that no man looks back on his life and thinks to himself, "I wish I would have worked more." But instead we all think about our families. The truth of the matter is, the more children we have, the more love is in our lives.

Children bring with them frightening prospects of responisibilty, and there is always the possibility that they will have a sad, unhappy life for one reason or another. No parent wants to watch a child suffer through disappoints. And as such is the case, it is hard to say to ones self in the midst of responsibility, "Yes, more children, more blessing." But, when we step back, we know it to be true.

Now, let's talk about another subject. Why is it that modern women want so few children? The yearning for Motherhood is inborn in woman. If you are caught up in political correctness, and do not believe me on this, then just think about how little girls mother their dolls, and dream of one day having babies. Little boys do not do this ... EVER.

I have not ever, not even once in my life, dreamed about having a baby. Not even on the night that my wife and I had our first child.

I dream of adventure, of protecting and killing. I dream of my fears and enemies, and I dream about women and sex. I dream of scaling heights, and I dream of running long distances. But, I never dream about babies, or even children for that matter.

Here's the thing. I am 42 years old. My wife and I made our decision a couple years ago to have no more children. The first two years with each of our children aged both of us tremendously. And there have been the stresses of making a living, and the disappointments of watching retirement money disappear in the stock market, and seeing business dry up after 9/11.

My wife married a risk taker. And I'm sure there is never a dull moment in her life. But now, let us be honest about something here; my wife married a sensitive risk taker. I am an artist by nature, and I am given to all the operatics and flights of fancy you'd expect from an artist. And here lies the rub, I believe.

Why would a woman want to have child after child with a man upon whom she can not count for stability? And while I have always been a good-to-excellent provider, and while I am responsibile to the point where friends laugh at me about my overblown sense of responsibility, there is always the truth behind it all, that we just never quite know what Pastorius is going to do next.

And, this is the problem for the modern woman in my opinion. They never know what their men are going to do next. Divorce, affairs, substance abuse, anger, all these plague the modern man. If a woman hasn't seen it up close and personal in her own life, then she has experienced with friends, and is reminded of it daily by the media.

Add to these instabilities, the fact of the feminization of the modern man. The pussification of men; because let's face it (and I will probably find more immediate agreement among women on this point, then I will get from men) that's what it is. Men are being taught to be pussies in our modern culture. Shaving our body hair, having our nails done, talking about our feelings. Hey, I'm guilty of this stuff as well (well, I don't have my nails done, and by modern standards I am a hairy beast, but I have shaved on occasion), so it's not like I'm just pointing a finger here.

But, the thing is, this is not what women want from us, even when they tell us it is. Sorry, women, now, I am going to point a finger. Women don't always tell the truth about what they want and don't want. (This has been one of the hardest won lessons of my life) Women only want to look at pretty boys on the idealized light of the silver screen. They only like sensitive men who cry in the theoretical world of self-help books and talk shows.

In reality, women like men who are fearless brutes. Men who know what they want and go about taking it from the world. Men whose intelligence and conviction knows little compromise.

So now, let us go back to the dreams of children. I noted that little girls dream of being mommies, and I noted the fact boys never dream of babies. Well, what do we dream of? I said it already, didn't I? I don't think I am alone in this, am I guys?

We dream of adventure. Of scaling heights. Of running great distances. Of vanquishing the enemy, and occasionally tearing him limb from limb. We dream about sex, and we dream about our loved ones. These dreams are all metaphors for the part we play in life, which is protecting, and providing for our families. These are the things that women want from us, and lo and behold, these are also the things we want from ourselves.

But, while we may dream of these ideal selves, we are faced with the reality that we are who we are. We are products of how we were raised, of the culture in which we were raised.

I believe this reality is slowly beginning to change. We are seeing the beginnings of a second sexual revolution stirring in our society. Only this time, it is men who are making the demands. The media phenomena of shows like the Howard Stern Show, The Man Show, and Maxim Magazine, all these point to the fact that men are beginning to say to women, "Sorry ladies, you're just going to have to accept us for who we are; and you know you like it."

But, the reality is, our revolution can't all be about sex, beer and farting. It has to reach beyond that, or else we're just going to be a bunch of pussifed metrosexuals who sit on our couches drinking beer, watching porn, and farting for the ironic effect of it.

I, for one, am resolving this year, to make twice as much money, and tell my wife half as much how I feel about it. I am going to put my wife on a time limit for how long she is allowed to take to have an orgasm. (Just kidding.) And I may go to some chick flicks with her, and I may even shed a tear during the sappy parts, but when she asks me, I'm going to just tell her I got a piece of my popcorn stuck in my eye.

Well, at least one of those ideas would be a good start anyway.

You've Got To See This

Click here to watch an Egyptian music video which explains how the U.S. is in league with Israel to control the whole world.

"The Rules of the Game Are Changing"
England Gets Serious About Terrorism

Tony Blair is getting serious about fighting terrorism. From the Washington Post, via Jihad Watch:

LONDON, Aug. 5 -- Prime Minister Tony Blair outlined fundamental changes in British policy and law Friday aimed at reining in what he called the "fanatical fringe" of the country's 2 million Muslims following last month's deadly train and bus bombings.

The measures, some of them effective immediately and others requiring approval by Parliament, include deporting people involved with radical Web sites, shutting down places of worship seen as "fomenting extremism," and criminalizing speech deemed to justify or incite terrorism.

"Let no one be in any doubt," Blair said in a nationally televised news conference. "The rules of the game are changing."

His program comes in response to growing public sentiment here that Britain has allowed itself to become a breeding ground for extremist Muslims from around the world, putting not only Britain at risk, but other nations as well.

"We're angry about them abusing our good nature and our toleration," Blair said. "Coming to Britain is not a right. And even when people have come here, staying here carries with it a duty. That duty is to share and support the values that sustain the British way of life."

His plan seemed set to win approval in Parliament, where the three major parties lined themselves up behind Blair after the attacks and rejected claims that Britain had brought the violence on itself by sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.

But his plan drew strong criticism from people who said he was sacrificing civil liberties in the name of security. In their view, Britain is echoing the United States' response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

I agree with Tony Blair's new policy ideas. And, I must add, these are much more serious than anything we do in the United States.

Gee, I wonder who will be the first to be deported:

LONDON - As London braces for another feared attack, two prominent British Islamic militants say British civilians are fair targets.

“We don’t live in peace with you anymore,” said Abu Uzair in an interview on BBC Newsnight.

Really? Ok, bye bye.

Abu Uzair and Abu Izzadeen — both British citizens — justified and even praised the attacks, which killed 52 people. “What I would say about those who do suicide operations or martyrdom operations — ‘suicide’ is a phrase coined by the media, they’re completely praise-worthy,” said Abu Izzadeen.

Both men previously were associated with a militant group in London that celebrated the 9/11 attacks, calling the hijackers “The Magnificent 19.” For years, the group’s leader has advocated violent attacks outside Britain.

British authorities now are investigating whether some of London’s radical imams played a role in inciting or indoctrinating the bombers. Many attended the most radical mosques.

NBC News found the cousin of suicide bomber Shahzad Tanweer in Pakistan. Ishfaq Ahmad says Tanweer admired Osama bin Laden. “At times he used to praise him [bin Laden] — that he is good man,” said Ahmad.

Italian officials say Osman Hussain, one of the men suspected of the July 21 aborted bombings, claims he was shown videos of Muslim women and children being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan to stoke his anger.

On Wednesday, Dr. Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, a leading British Muslim, said it’s time to crack down on those who preach hate. "They have to be kept behind bars, in prisons," says Siddiqui.

The incendiary comments by militants only add to the anxiety in London: Thursday marks four weeks since the first bombings.

As I've been saying, Europe is to be feared. When Europeans get angry, the whole world can go up in flames. Can you imagine what would have happened if the Islamofascists had targeted four of their most beloved buildings, as they did here on 9/11 (WTC, Pentagon, White House)?

Can you imagine what the Brits would be doing now if 3000 of their citizens had died instead of fifty?

Can you imagine the policies they might enact and the actions they might take if they had been forced to watch the spectre of two 110 story building crashing to the ground in the middle of one of their most crowded cities?

Friday, August 05, 2005

No Cleavage?
One More Reason The West Is Doomed

Once again, the Left shows us how they are down with the Taliban crowd. From the Anchoress:

Bavarian bar keepers have been told that the dirndl, generally rather revealing, will have to be replaced as it offers no protection against what the directive calls “natural sources of radiation”, meaning sunlight.

Employers now face heavy fines if they fail to protect their workers from the threat of sunburn or skin cancer.

“This is European law-making at its most pedantic,” said Munich’s mayor, Christian Ude. “A waitress is no longer allowed to wander round a beer garden with a plunging neckline. I would not want to enter a beer garden under these conditions.”

Given that Bavaria is known for it's overcast weather, many are speculating that this new concern with modesty has more to do with fear of mad Muslims, than it has to do with malaised mammaries.

The Stark Contrasts

From Little Green Footballs:

When a Jewish terrorist kills Arabs - and let’s be clear, this one’s a terrorist - Jews condemn him for it. When an Arab terrorist kills Jews, Arabs celebrate.

When an Arab mob savagely lynches a Jew for killing Arabs, the world yawns. When highly trained and disciplined Israeli operatives target a Palestinian terrorist who is literally in the act of terrorism, it’s highly “controversial”.

After a horrific terrorist attack committed by a Jew, it’s just kind of expected that Arabs will violently riot. When Arabs commit the most unthinkable crimes, bombing civilians and then the medical personnel who come to help them, Israelis are urged to consider the day after.

Mired in their own victim-hood, Israeli Arab organizations are of course calling for a full strike. In far more serious situations - with civilian murders sanctioned at the highest Palestinian levels - Israelis were always urged to make one more painful concession for peace.

And of course, the biggest difference is that when a Jewish terrorist kills Arabs, Jews call him a terrorist. When an Arab terrorist kills Jews, he’s something else.

And, of course, when an Arab terrorist blows people up, we need to understand their grievances, because they are somewhat justified in their actions. They are freedom fighters. But, when a Jew commits an act of terrorism, then the Left recognizes that it is terrorism, and that it is evil.

Isn't it funny how the Left's tactic is always to conflate terrorism with defensive military action when the Palestinians are the evildoers, but when a Jew is the evildoer, suddenly they can see the difference?

The Left are like the Pharisees of the Bible; they know every jot and tittle of the Law, but they know not the spirit.

They are like tombs filled with dead mens bones.

Wow, Congratulations American Investors
You Really Know How To Invest Your Money

From Associated Press:

SAN FRANCISCO - Inc., the maker of China's leading Internet search engine, mesmerized Wall Street Friday as its stock more than quadrupled — a dazzling debut driven by the company's connections to Google Inc. as much as its own tantalizing potential.

The Beijing-based company's shares closed at $122.54 on the Nasdaq Stock Market, a 354 percent gain from its initial public offering price of $27. That represented the biggest one-day gain since the final days of the dot-com when IPOs regularly soared.

No IPO has climbed as high on the first day of trading as Baidu's did Friday since the shares of software maker Selectica Inc. soared 371 percent during their March 2000 debut, according to Selectica's shares closed unchanged Friday at $3.15 on the Nasdaq.

The rapid run-up gave Baidu a market value of $4 billion — a lofty appraisal of a 5 1/2 year-old company that only recently became profitable. Baidu earned $1.8 million on revenue of $13.6 million during the first half of this year.

The company's management expects much bigger things as more of China's vast population surf the Internet. More than 100 million of China's residents currently surf the Web. Baidu has been able to pluck enough visitors from that audience to emerge as the world's sixth-most trafficked Web site.

Yes, that's right, investors around the world, including many in America, have just poured money into a company that provides internet searching in China - a country whose government has a complete lockdown on the internet.

So, in other words, you invested in a company that is forced to facilitate Chinese propaganda.

But, hey, it was a good investment. You'll make money, and that's all that matters, right?

I remember that for a few days after 9/11, the Stock Market was closed in America. The day before it was to reopen, Courtney Love went on the Howard Stern Show and encouraged everyone to leave their money in market by pledging to personally invest $2 million in the market the very next day. And she did.

Meanwhile, many other chickenshit American investors pulled money out by the truckload, and Ms. Love lost a ton of money.

Whatever you think of Courtney Love, she is to be forever lauded for her display of Patriotism. I will always love her for that.

Anyway, back to the subject at hand. Investing in Chinese companies which specialize in the dissemination of information, is like investing in the obliteration of free speech. But, if that's what it takes to make a buck, we'll find that there are many Americans who are willing to put their money where their belief system is; Capitalism Uber Alles.

If the business of America is business, and nothing else, then America is doomed. Business is the collaborative effort of the people to put bread on their table. It is truly a holy endeavor. Sure, there is a jungle-like quality to business, but we all know that we must limit that aspect of it, and recognize that we are in it together. That if we allow the system to fall apart that all of us will suffer.

I am willing to tolerate a lot of abuse in business, because I know that there are a lot of gray areas, and I recognize that many of them are the ponds of innovation. But, I am sickened by people who would invest in the suppression of free speech.

Speech is the process by which we order our thoughts. It is the locus of human creativity. It is the prerequisite of freedom of choice. Without speech, our work upon the earth would be chaos. When free speech is denied, the human being flounders amidst a jumble of information and, overwhelmed, he submits to the forces around him.

Congratulations, all you great investors, you have invested in the further dispersal of the human will.

BBC Shills For The Muslim Terrorist Crowd

The BBC ran a show on terrorism and delibately stocked the audience full of Muslims. BBC viewers are angry. From Little Green Footballs:

The BBC has explained why there was a deliberately disproportionate number of Muslims in a studio audience for a news special on terrorism, in the wake of audience complaints.

Dozens of viewers emailed or called to complain that the audience for Questions of Security: A BBC News Special, did not reflect UK society as a whole.

The complainants, more than 50 of who got in touch, also said the audience seemed too critical of the police and security services with no obvious counter viewpoints.

Some viewers felt that the audience selection for the show, broadcast on BBC One on 28 July and hosted by Huw Edwards, did not meet the rigid guidelines usually followed by Question Time.


One viewer said: "I felt that the audience for this programme was not representative of the British public.

"What methodology was used to recruit the audience? And why were the views and concerns of the victims of the bombings, as well as the wider public, commuters, etc, so downplayed?"

Another said: "I assumed that this programme was for serious consumption by the whole UK, but yet again the BBC made up a studio audience with an ethnic mix reflecting that of south east London rather than the UK as a whole."

A third added: "I do not pay my licence fee to watch a unrepresentative Muslim audience like this."

Here's the BBC's explanation:

In response, BBC Head of Political Programmes Sue Inglish said: "As Huw Edwards explained at the start of the programme, the studio audience was made up of a variety of people from a range of communities, particularly those most affected by the questions we were discussing in the wake of the bombings of 7 July and the incidents on 21 July.

"The audience was selected to ensure that there would be a wide-ranging discussion on the key issues like police powers, the role of Muslim leaders in condemning the attacks and preventing more terror, the effect of the Iraq war, asylum procedures and so on.

"In order to ensure a range of voices on these issues, the studio audience contained a higher proportion of Muslims in the audience than in the population as a whole - around 15% of the audience as opposed to 2.7% in the country as a whole and 8.4% in London according to the 2001 census.

Charles comment:

Interesting that the ones the BBC sees as “most affected by the bombings” ... are not the targets.

It really would be a good idea for Muslims to stop complaining about the way they are being treated, and instead focus on helping us route out the terrorists who live in their communities. If Muslims don't stop complaining and start helping they are going to lose the trust of the societies in which they live.

Here are some suggestions of some concrete steps

1) start by contacting Christian churches, Jewish Synagogues, and Mormon Temples down to their mosques for a day of gathering up the hate material, and carting it to the recycling plant.

2) call the FBI every time they hear of Islamist terrorists recruiting people on campus or in a Mosque.

3) eject Imams and other speakers from Mosques when you hear them say things like this and this.

When mainstream Muslims start taking strong action against such hatred, then they can expect the level of respect for their community to rise dramatically. Until then, they can expect suspicion.

Israel Shows How To Condemn Terrorism

From the Jerusalem Post, via LGF:

In what police are calling an incident of Jewish terrorism, a Jewish man dressed in IDF uniform opened fire on a bus in the northern town of Shfaram Thursday evening, killing at least 4 people and wounding nearly a dozen more.

The shooter, Eden Tzuberi, 19, was also killed when he was assaulted by a mob of furious bystanders and witnesses. A crowd of thousands gathered around the site of the attack and surrounded the bus, where the attacker’s body still lay until police removed it nearly five hours after the incident.

During the rescue of the body, several policemen were wounded moderately to lightly from objects thrown at them by Shfaram residents.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon issued a statement calling the attack “a criminal act of a bloodthirsty terrorist targeting innocent Israeli civilians.” He said that he instructed security officials to make the investigation of the incident a top priority.

“This terrorist incident is a purposeful attempt to harm relations between Israeli citizens,” Sharon said. “Terror of one citizen against others is the greatest danger to the future of Israel as a democracy. All of Israel, without regard to religion, race, or gender condemns this attack. The Israeli government is determined to defend its citizens of every sector.”

It turns out this Israeli terrorist was an AWOL member of the Israeli military. However, the Israeli government has made it clear that he will receive no honored military burial:

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz decided to prevent Eden Natan Zada (also known as Eden Tzuberi) from being buried in any military cemetery, saying he is "not worthy of being buried next to fallen soldiers."

The security establishment was debating where to bury Zada on Friday afternoon.

The shooter in Thursday's deadly attack in Shfaram, Cpl. Zada, had been listed as AWOL since mid-June. He was to be buried in the military section of Rishon Lezion's cemetery on Friday.
Zada's family was given the option of holding such a funeral, or a regular civilian one, and opted for the low-key military burial.

Bereaved families of soldiers buried in the military section of the Rishon Lezion cemetery expressed vehement opposition to the planned burial.

However, the mayor of Rishon Lezion on Friday afternoon announced that the city would not permit Zada to be buried in its cemetery, even in a civilian ceremony.

A statement issued by the Tapuah settlement, where Zada had spent much of his time recently, said "there is no reason to bury someone who is not a resident" in the settlement, thereby preempting any attempts to bury Zada there.

After consultations with Maj.-Gen. Yair Naveh, the settler leadership decided not to allow Zada to be buried in Tapuah.

Unconfirmed reports stated that Zada would be buried in the Kirya Arba cemetery.
Zada's father, Yitzchak Natan Zada, responded angrily to the security establishment. He said that in any case, his son would be buried on Friday.

You've got to feel for the father, because it is hard to lose a child no matter what, but this is how a terrorist should be treated.

Compare and contrast the treatment this Jewish terrorist is receiving from Israelis, with the treatment Palestinian terrorist receive. Palestinian terrorists are honored as Shaheed (Martyrs for God), there are schools named after them, martyr trading cards for children, posters hung around the city, and their families are rewarded with huge payouts.

Which society would you rather live in? Which society would you rather have continue on into the future?

Grand Mufti Al-Husseini Giving Nazi Salute As He Inspects Muslim Nazi Troops

Posted by Picasa

Hizbollah's Nazi Salute Contemporary Posted by Picasa

Grand Mufti Al-Husseini Meeting With Hitler Posted by Picasa

A History of The Relationship Between Nazism
And Jihadi Islamofascism

In light of the post below, about Neo-Nazis and Jihadists joining forces in Europe, why don't we look at an article about the history of Nazism in the Arab World:

Anti-Semitism based on the notion of a Jewish world conspiracy is not rooted in Islamic tradition but, rather, in European ideological models. The decisive transfer of this ideology to the Muslim world took place between 1937 and 1945 under the impact of Nazi propaganda. Important to this process were the Arabic-language service broadcast by the German shortwave transmitter in Zeesen between 1939 and 1945, and the role of Haj Amin el-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, who was the first to translate European anti-Semitism into an Islamic context. Although Islamism is an independent, anti-Semitic, antimodern mass movement, its main early promoters - the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Mufti and the Qassamites in Palestine - were supported financially and ideologically by agencies of the German National Socialist government.

Apparently, the Arabs learned the lesson well. Look at this description of a TV show recently run on the Hizbollah network:

"Listen!" says a rabbi to a young Jew. "We have received an order from above. We need the blood of a Christian child for the unleavened bread for the Passover feast." In the following shot, a terrified youngster is seized from the neighborhood. Then the camera zooms in on the child for a close-up of his throat being cut. The blood spurts from the wound and pours into a metal basin.

The Al-Manar satellite channel that broadcast this episode is run by the Islamist Hizbollah ("Party of God"). The scene is part of a twenty-nine-part series entitled Al-Shatat ("Diaspora"), produced by Al-Manar with Syrian government backing and broadcast for the first time during Ramadan in 2003. Episode by episode, the series peddles the fantasy of the Jewish world conspiracy: Jews have brought death and destruction upon humanity, Jews unleashed both world wars, Jews discovered chemical weapons and destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear bombs.

Here's a bit about the history of the Nazi shortwave radio broadcasts into the Arab World:

In Zeesen, a town with some four thousand inhabitants to the south of Berlin, once stood one of the world's most powerful shortwave transmitters. From 1939 onward, it broadcast its daily Arabic-language program. Of all the foreign-language services, the Oriental Service had "absolute priority. It reached out to Arabs, Turks, Persians, and Indians and had an eighty-strong staff, including freelance announcers and translators."4 Between 1939 and 1945, at a time when, in the Arab world, listening to the radio took place primarily in public squares or bazaars and coffee houses, no other station was more popular than the Zeesen service, which skillfully mingled anti-Semitic propaganda with quotations from the Koran and Arabic music. The Allies in the Second World War were presented as lackeys of the Jews and the notion of the "United Jewish Nations" drummed into the audience. At the same time, the Jews were attacked as the worst enemies of Islam. "The Jew since the time of Mohammed has never been a friend of the Muslim, the Jew is the enemy and it pleases Allah to kill him."5 Today, this same message is being put out on satellite by Hizbollah's Al- Manar TV channel. So what are the historical connections between the shortwave transmitter in Zeesen and the Beirut satellite channel?

A highlight of Radio Zeesen's output was the demand for jihad by the most popular figure in the Arab-Islamic world of the time, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini (1895-1974). From 1941 onward he lived in Berlin, supervising Arabic radio broadcasting out of Zeesen, Athens, and Rome.6 Nobody promoted hatred of Jews among Muslims more effectively than the Mufti. The European responsibility for this is clear: el-Husseini had after all been appointed to and promoted in office by European powers.

It was the British who, having first sentenced him to ten years in jail for anti-Jewish incitement in 1920, then amnestied him in 1921 and made him Mufti against the will of the majority of Palestinians. It was the Germans who paid him for his services between 1937 and 1945. And it was the French who in 1946, when the Mufti was being pursued internationally as a war criminal, helped him escape to Egypt and continue his activities.7

Nobody had a greater influence on the early history of the Middle East conflict than the Mufti, who as president of the Supreme Muslim Council was not only the supreme religious authority but also the central figure in Palestinian nationalism. In the 1930s, there were countless Arab nationalists who viewed Germany as an ally against the British without concerning themselves with the nature of the Hitler regime. Things were different where the Mufti was concerned: he knew what the regime was about and was attracted to it for that very reason.

As early as spring 1933, he assured the German consul in Jerusalem that "the Muslims inside and outside Palestine welcome the new regime of Germany and hope for the extension of the fascist, anti-democratic governmental system to other countries."8 The youth organization of the party established by the Mufti operated for a time under the name Nazi Scouts and adopted Hitler Youth-style shorts and leather belts. During the 1936-1939 Palestinian revolt, the swastika was used as a mark of identity: Arabic leaflets and graffiti were liberally decorated with it, Arab children welcomed each other with the Hitler salute, and vast numbers of German flags and pictures of Hitler were displayed even at celebrations of Mohammed's birthday. Anyone obliged to travel through areas involved in the Palestinian revolt would attach a swastika to their vehicle to ward off attacks by Arab snipers.9

However, until the summer of 1937, this support was awkward for the German government. Berlin politely but firmly rejected the Arab officers of cooperation. While, on the one hand, Hitler had already stated his belief in the "racial inferiority" of the Arabs in Mein Kampf and contemptuously rejected their "Holy War,"10 on the other, the Auswärtige Amt (German Foreign Office) was extremely anxious not to jeopardize British appeasement of Berlin prematurely by activities in the Middle East, especially since the Mediterranean fell within the sphere of responsibility of Germany's Italian ally.

Berlin revised this approach for the first time in June 1937. The trigger was the proposal from the British Peel Commission for the division of the Palestine Mandate territory into a smaller Jewish and a larger Muslim-Arab state. The formation of a Jewish state "is not in Germany's interest," was the instant response of Foreign Minister Konstantin von Neurath, since such a state "would create an additional position of power under international law for international Jewry. Germany therefore has an interest in strengthening the Arab world as a counterweight against such a possible increase in power for world Jewry."11

In September 1937, two members of the Jewish Department of the SS' secret service (Sicherheitsdienst - SD), one of them Adolf Eichmann, carried out an exploratory mission in the Middle East lasting several weeks. Extended visits by the leader of Hitler Youth, Baldur von Schirach, and the head of the Abwehr (counterintelligence service), Wilhelm Canaris, followed. Finally, in April 1939 the head of the Foreign Office's Oriental Department, Otto von Hentig, also spent time in Palestine and Egypt. This activism was not without results: von Schirach donated the money for the establishment of an "Arab Club" in Damascus in which German officials trained recruits for the Mufti's insurgents and Canaris covered the region with a spy network.13

The most effective tool, however, was the Arabic-language broadcasting out of Zeesen, "our long-range gun in the ether" as Goebbels dubbed it. It began regular service on 25 April 1939, transmitting daily at 17.45 hours Berlin time.14 It ridiculed any Arab wishing to negotiate with the Zionists.

Go read the rest. For more photos of Muslim/Nazi Activity click here.

Are Jihadists And Neo-Nazis Combining Forces

From World Net Daily:

WASHINGTON – Neo-Nazi skinheads are working with radical Islamists in a growing unholy alliance that has European law enforcement officials concerned about a new front in the war on terrorism, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium, online intelligence newsletter published by the founder of WND.

Sources in the UK, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Italy, Switzerland and in the Middle East are warning that the world should not be surprised to see young, white males involved in terrorism and in league with Osama bin Laden.
Just a few years ago, Muslims represented one of the biggest harassment targets of neo-Nazi skinheads in Europe. But anti-Muslim hate crimes by skinheads have seen a dramatic drop-off – even as their movement takes on more visibility and bigger numbers.

"In business they ignore the race," said an Italian official.

Law enforcement officials fear skinheads and neo-Nazis could provide not just additional numbers to the Islamic terrorist cause but also some operatives who would defy profiling efforts.

Skinheads can easily cover their tattoos and wear respectable clothing to deceive police and immigration authorities, say police officials. An Italian police expert on gang activities said it is known skinheads travel as far as Australia, South Africa and the Indian sub-continent "at times looking like the boy next door or a student on vacation." He also revealed Italian agents are aware of a number of meetings between gang leaders, radical Islamic students and organized crime bosses.

The chilling possibility that Muslim terrorists and neo-Nazis may combine forces was raised as a distinct possibility by Israel's president last month.

On a visit to commemorate the 40th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Israel and Germany, Moshe Katsav declared, "Let us not be surprised if one day terror organizations use neo-Nazis to carry out terrorist attacks."

The majority of Muslims in Europe are law-abiding citizens, he added. But Muslim extremists may form alliances with neo-Nazis, he said.

What brings the groups together is a common enemy – Jews – and business interests, say law enforcement officials. Neo-Nazi skinheads are deeply involved in drug-running and human smuggling gangs – two areas of common interest with Islamists.

Long before Katsav warned about the links between the neo-Nazis and the jihadists, Germany's minister of the interior, Otto Schily, the Muslim Hizb ut-Tahir, or Party of Liberation, which had ties with the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party. Hizb ut-Tahir, an organization with acolytes in many European countries, wants to unite the Muslim world in a single theocratic state under a caliph, or supreme Muslim leader.

Schily banned the group in 2002 after accusing it of "spreading violent propaganda and anti-Jewish agitation" and after receiving reports its representatives had met with members of the National Democratic Party in 2001. Schily is now considering a ban on activities by Hezbollah members in Germany.

Three million or more Muslims live in Germany, comprising about 4 percent of its population.
There is also a community of 100,000 ethnic German converts to Islam. One of them, Steven Smyrek, was arrested and imprisoned in Israel some years ago on charges of being a Hezbollah agent. He was released in 2004 in an Israel-Hezbollah prisoner swap, and now lives in Germany as a free man.

The mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, Mohammed Atta, lived and studied in Hamburg, a major port in northern Germany.

Twenty-five thousand to 30,000 Muslims in Germany are members of radical Islamic organizations, according to a ministry of interior official.

Meanwhile, neo-Nazi skinhead numbers are swelling throughout Europe.

As Swiss President Samuel Schmid stood on the Rutli Meadow last week commemorating the Swiss Federation, he was shocked by more than 700 skinheads and neo-Nazis wearing black T-shirts who stood facing him, waving their fists in a Nazi salute.

The number of militants amounted to more than one third of the people attending the event, twice the number registered in the 2004 celebrations. The skinheads, waving the Swiss national flag, were not shy about chanting slogans such as "Schmid is a traitor," and other slurs aimed at minorities, especially against refugees from the third world. As is their common routine they also voiced hate expressions against the U.S. and the Jews.

Schmid was openly shaken as he realized he would not be able to finish his speech. He later expressed his anger and suggested that radical changes in future public celebrations of national day events should be seriously considered.

G2 Bulletin reports it has learned from a reliable source the stunned president did not waste any time contacting members of cabinet and other officials, telling them to get their act together and put an end to what he described as "hoodlums taking over a national holiday."

In reality it was the 10th year in a row that the extremists have made the journey to the legendary meadow on the shores of Lake Lucerne, and their numbers have increased each year.

An analysis of the overall proliferation of skinhead movements that originated in the UK, where they first appeared as gangs in the '60s, shows the Swiss numbers probably represent only a small fraction of the total number. Overall figures of those directly involved with skinheads, who later also joined neo-Nazi and fascist movements is well over 150,000 worldwide.

An Interpol source said the skinheads are well-organized, citing a number of events this year including a mass gathering during a concert near Germany. At that event, French and German police tried to stop hundreds of French and Italian skinheads and neo-Nazis from crossing the border into Germany.

Other notable events this year were neo-Nazi gatherings in Germany including Berlin and neo-Nazi and skinheads’ demonstrations in the Baltic States and Scandinavia. Skinheads and neo-Nazis are a growing menace in Poland and in parts of Russia where they are accused of having committed murders, arson attacks, robberies and of cooperating with organized crime elements.
Russian law enforcement agencies are witnessing constant clashes between skinhead gangs and the police and murders of foreigners.
A Swiss official with the federal police, reacting on the Rutli Meadow event, bitterly emphasized agents have to divert attention from pressing issues related to the global war on terrorism to monitor skinheads, neo-Nazis, bikers and other street gangs.

They need to recognize who is who in these radical movements and to prevent gangs from becoming hired guns or suppliers of forged documents, weapons and explosives later used against governments at war with jihadi Islam.

The danger posed by the skinhead-Islamist alliance is being compared with the fast-growing menace of Central American street gangs, such as the Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, who are now the largest and most dangerous criminal group in several Latin American countries and in the U.S. MS-13, too, has been known to meet with al-Qaida operatives and is believed to be involved in smuggling some into the U.S. across the Mexican border.

Take note of that part about the 700 Swiss Nazis giving the Hitler salute to the Swiss President. They were chanting racist slogans, oh yes, and anti-American slogans too. How is it that America has become an object of hatred for Neo-Nazis? Could it be that the Left and the Nazis have also combined forces?


After all, they also share a hatred of Israel, right?

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Jews Leave Gaza
Palestinians Make More Demands

Israel, of course, made the decision to disengage from the Gaza Strip. They are forcibly removing all the Jews from their "settlement" housing and leaving the Gaza Strip entirely to the Palestinians, who apparently want their land to be Judenrein (Nazi term meaning Jew free).

So, are the Palestinians happy? No, Hamas is threatening to shoot at them on the way out, and the Palestinian Authority is now expressing more demands. From the New York Times:

The Palestinian Authority has commissioned tens of thousands of national flags as well as mugs, bumper stickers and posters with the slogan ''Today Gaza, tomorrow the West Bank and Jerusalem'' -- props for planned mass celebrations meant to portray the pullout as an achievement of the Abbas government.

The Palestinian Authority is spending $1.7 million on withdrawal celebrations. It has ordered tens of thousands of Palestinian flags, from small pennants to two-story banners, that are being sewn in small workshops across Gaza.

A Gaza City flag shop is sewing about 200,000 Palestinian flags. ''They want the whole country to be carrying Palestinian flags,'' said the owner, Tareq Abu Daya.

It is not surprising that withdrawal from one area would be immediately followed by demands for withdrawal from more areas, because the truth of the matter is, the Palestinians want the Jews out of the Middle East entirely.

The official charters of both main Palestinian ruling parties, Hamas and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, both call for the destruction of Israel.

Monday, August 01, 2005

Muslim Schools In Australia Teach
That Jews Poison Bananas and
How to Stab Pictures of Jesus

From the Australian paper The Age, via LGF:

The teacher could not believe what he overheard. The "visiting" imam was launching into a tirade against the Jews and Americans that bordered on the ludicrous.

But then came the clincher, he recalled. "The imam told the students that the Jews were putting poison in the bananas and they should not eat them."

The imam was told to ease up on the inflammatory language after staff objected.

Werribee College is from all accounts an Islamic school with a difference. According to former staff it was a longstanding practice of the school principal, Omar Hallak, to have Muslim staff sleep on the premises after big international terror attacks such as those in Bali and the London tube bombings to prevent retributive attacks.

The Sunday Age has been told that Werribee College appears intent on exporting its particular brand of Islam to Indonesia, an achievement made possible by generous commonwealth and state grants — estimated to be in excess of $3 million a year.

Last week, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils warned that young Muslims were prey to visiting imams and religious scholars. Council president Ameer Ali said Muslim extremists were posing a problem for "vulnerable and impressionable youth". Visiting imams were being brought to Australia by new and emerging groups unknown to the community, he said. His words were endorsed by outspoken Sydney cleric Sheikh Taj al-Din al-Hilali, who said the Muslim community had not done enough to confront extremists.

The treatment of female staff and students has become an issue over recent years, with attempts to pay female teachers less, prevent them from sharing offices with male teachers and the imposition of strict dress codes.

While such practices have alarmed education professionals, teacher unions and the broader Muslim community, there is a reluctance to deal with them and regulatory hurdles that make this difficult. Cultural and religious sensitivities make investigations tricky unless there has been an official complaint. "Without somebody making a sworn statement, it is hard to act without being accused of racial or cultural bias," said a prominent education professional who declined to be identified.

... Muslim schools are free to shape and direct students in a religious environment of their choosing. And there is nothing illegal about teaching students about the Taliban, Osama bin Laden or extreme interpretations of Islam.

Keysar Trad, the founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, says the proliferation of Islamic schools is causing concern in the Muslim community. "This proliferation means that small groups can go and set up schools and run them in the name if Islam. They are accountable to nobody but themselves."

Prejudice in a class of its own

The teacher was alarmed by what she discovered in the school library. An image of Christ in a book on comparative religion had been defaced.

When she asked students to explain, they told her that another teacher, a devout Muslim, had asked them to demonstrate that Islam was the one true faith by striking the picture with sharpened pencils.

"They told me they had been made to line up and one by one stab the picture," the teacher told The Sunday Age. "As far as I know, the book is still in the library."

It was not the first incident or the last that would disturb this teacher — and several others — during her two years at one of Melbourne's lesser-known Islamic schools.

At the same school, the teacher said, complaints by the science co-ordinator about an incompetent year 12 physics teacher were dismissed by the principal on the grounds that the teacher "was hired to teach about Islam, which he was very good at". At other Muslim schools, The Sunday Age has been told, administrators banned all overt signs of other faiths.

In one case a non-Muslim member of staff was told to remove a crucifix from the dashboard of a car parked in view of the students and a female Hindu teacher was ordered to remove marriage jewellery.

The teacher, who was dismissed from the school because she was "over qualified", is now employed at a Christian faith-based school.

She says she has no regrets about leaving. "The atmosphere at the school was unhealthy," she said. "When you asked children to write about their favourite hero, they nearly always wrote about Osama bin Laden."

The one silver lining in this very, very dark cloud is that it was mostly Muslim Australians who were reporting these ideological atrocities.

What's Up With The Pope?

As longtime readers of this blog would know, I have been a fan of the new Pope. In his days as Cardinal Ratzinger he was instrumental in helping shape Vatican II, particularly on the subject of the Vatican's relationship with the Jews. He has written papers on the part played by Jews in Gods Plan which are illuminating and, I would even say, visionary.

In other words, Pope Benedict has been a friend to the Jews. And that's why I have included the Ratzinger Fan Club on my blogroll.

Recently however, a statement went out in the name of the Pope, condemning terrorism in a number of countries. Conspicuously absent from the long list of countries mentioned, was Israel. When Israeli officials called him on his omission, he made the following statement:

"It's not always possible to immediately follow every attack against Israel with a public statement of condemnation," a statement from the Vatican press office said Thursday night, "and (that is) for various reasons, among them the fact that the attacks against Israel sometimes were followed by immediate Israeli reactions not always compatible with the rules of international law."

"It would thus be impossible to condemn the first (the terror strikes) and let the second (Israeli retaliation) pass in silence," said the statement, which had an unusually blistering tone for the Holy See.

Here is an excerpt from an article by Alan Dershowitz, wherein he takes the Pope to task over this statement:

Let us now try to understand the Vatican’s bizarre policy on terrorism. Recently Pope Benedict XVI condemned terrorist attacks against civilians in Great Britain, Egypt, Iraq, and Turkey. In a pregnant omission – very pregnant in light of the Vatican’s long history of silence in the face of attacks against Jews – the Pope omitted any mention of the country that has suffered the largest number of terrorist attacks against civilians since 9/11, namely, Israel.

When the Israeli government understandably protested the omission, the Vatican’s position became even more troubling. It singled out Israel for criticism, saying that that beleaguered nation’s responses to attacks against its civilians was “not always compatible with the rules of international law.” It then went on to say that the Vatican could not protest every Palestinian attack against Jewish civilians if Israel did not always follow international law.

Let’s try to understand what this means. Unless a country is absolutely flawless in its response to terrorism, the Vatican will not condemn terrorism against its civilian citizens. This seems to justify the killing of civilians as a protest against violation of international law.

If that “moral” position is not bizarre enough, let us turn to the actual facts. Egypt’s response to terrorism is far, far more violative of international law than Israel’s. Egypt routinely tortures – I mean really tortures to death – suspected terrorists, to say nothing of mere dissidents. Turkey’s record is not all that much better.

The U.S. and Great Britain have killed many more civilians in responding to terrorism in Iraq than Israel has done. So even if the Vatican’s statement of principle were morally acceptable – which it surely is not – that principle would in no way justify leaving Israel off a list that includes many worse violators of international law.

Moreover, the Vatican’s snippy condemnation of Israel for its reprisals is particularly untimely. Israel, unique among nations victimized by terrorism, has refrained from any significant reprisals over the past several months, despite the facts that terrorist attacks against its civilians continue. It has made a point of withholding its right to respond in the interests of facilitating peace.

Why, then, did the Vatican deliberately refuse to condemn terrorist attacks against Jewish civilians in Israel? The truth is that the Vatican has always had a Jewish problem. Today that problem focuses more on the Jewish state than on the Jewish religion. But the Vatican’s perverse refusal to condemn attacks against Jewish civilians in Israel raises even broader questions of discrimination.

I agree with Dershowitz that there is something very wrong with Pope Benedicts statement. However, with his track record, I am willing to wait and find a pattern before concluding that there is a problem with the Pope himself.

I have to wonder if this statement could be more reflective of Vatican politics, than of the position of Pope Benedict. Could it be that the Pope just doesn't have enough power to turn the massive Vatican on a dime?

We shall see, as over time more statements are released. Unfortunately, in the meantime, Israel has to suffer for it.

Seems like that's the way of the world.

Sunday, July 31, 2005

A New Front In The War On Terror?

From the Financial Times, via Belgravia Dispatch:

The US is working with Britain and France to undermine the appeal of Muslim extremism by reaching out to moderate groups, in a sign that its counter-terrorism strategy is moving beyond the “war on terror”.

US and European officials say the Bush administration's review--expected to lead to a formal declaration of a new national strategy--represents not just a shift to a more multilateralist approach towards foreign policy but also an important development in thinking away from the emphasis on the military.

Already a shift in language has emerged that reflects the new approach. GWOT “the global war on terror” is being replaced in pronouncements by senior US officials by SAVE: the “struggle [or some say “strategy”] against violent extremism”.

Philip Zelikow, special adviser to Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, is leading the effort at the head of a 10-member US committee. Talks began in London and Paris in June with the blessing of the White House.

Mr Zelikow's goal, according to a US official who asked not to be named, was to “develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to discredit and demystify extremists' ideology and promote moderate Islamic voices”.

We've known from the beginning that the War on Terror has poltical, ideological and diplomatic fronts, as well as military fronts. So, this is not a surprise. However, it seems some are surprised by the new moves being made by the Bush Administration.

The truth is, we've been using behind-the-scenes diplomacy with countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, France, Italy, England, etc. since the beginning of the war. We've shared intelligence, helped with extraditions, and consulted on security tactics. Are those military in nature? No.

The only thing that is new about this is that Europe is finally beginning to get serious about Islamofascism, so when we come to them with an initiative, it seems important all of the sudden.

The other thing is, had we moved to begin to forge ties with Islamic "moderates" any sooner, we would not have had nearly the success we will probably have at this stage. It is becoming clear, now, that Muslims are starting to worry that they will become ostracized, if they don't begin to help out.

Palestinian Summer Camp For Boys

Posted by Picasa

A Palestinian boy learns important
lessons of "respect" at Hamas Summer Camp

From the San Francisco Chronicle, via Little Green Footballs:

Seventeen-year-old Osama Abu Asi knows what Hamas stands for: swimming lessons, horseback riding, potato sack races and other summertime fun -- including religious education and paramilitary training.

This is summer camp in the Gaza Strip, as organized by Harakat al-Moqawama al-Islamiyah, the Islamic Resistance Movement, better known as Hamas -- which is officially regarded by the United States and many other countries as a terrorist organization that has killed hundreds of Israelis.

"In this camp we learn the important things of life -- good behavior, respect," said Osama, who was spending the summer at a Hamas-run camp on the beach outside Gaza City.

They also learn how to sing "intifada songs," including one urging them to "kill Zionists wherever they are, in the name of God."

At one beach camp, attended by approximately 100 kids, an instructor wore a heavy flannel shirt under which a webbed belt could be seen strapped to his stomach. Asked by a reporter what it was, he answered, with a broad smile, “Boom!”

The instructor led a group of young teenagers through marching drills on the sand — facing movements, close quarter drill. With a smile at the reporter, he put a megaphone to his lips.

“What are you?” he called.

“Monsters!” the kids replied.

“What are you?!”


As the instructor, Sa’eb Dormush, stepped aside for an interview, a youth in the group shouted out “moqawama!” — resistance.

“That is the first word they learn when they are born,” Dormush said with a laugh. “This is the next generation.”

Across camp, a group of younger children — most between 10 and 12 — sat in a circle in the sand singing one of the “intifada songs” they learn at camp. One boy sang verses in a rolling soprano as the others joined in on the one-word chorus.

“We don’t want to sleep.


We want revenge.


Raise it up.


Rifle fire.


If it will take a thousand martyrs.


Kill Zionists.


Wherever they are.


In the name of God.


Looks like people at the Islamic Society of Britain website are trying to do the same thing. From the London Independent, via Jihad Watch:

Children as young as 11 are being targeted by radical Muslims who appear to have infiltrated a mainstream Muslim website, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. Literature aimed at children between 11 and 18 on the youth section of the Islamic Society of Britain (ISB) website calls on them to "boycott those who openly wage war against Allah".

The article containing that quote, entitled "Imam Hassan al-Banna on jihad", goes on to say:
"Jihad is a powerful invigorating yearning for Islam's might and glory ... which makes you cry when looking at the weakness of Muslims today and the humiliating tragedies crushing him to death everywhere. "

Jihad is to be a soldier for Allah. When the bugle calls ... you should be the first to answer the call to join the ranks for jihad."

Other articles on atheism and secularism appear to be against integration. One article is entitled "Zionism, a black historical record", and another, "Israel simply has no right to exist". The ISB immediately disowned this content after being informed of it by the IoS, and promised to remove it.

Hitler Youth, anyone?

Posted by Picasa

Nuclear Stalemate:
Iran and the EU Hit a Little Snag In Talks

The Astute Blogger quotes from a BBC article regarding Iran's ultimatum to the EU concerning it's nuclear program:

Iran says the three European states which are trying to resolve the dispute over Tehran's nuclear programme must submit their proposals by Monday. An Iranian government spokesman said a European request for the date to be put back had been rejected. But diplomats from the UK, France and Germany say they never promised to have the proposals ready by 1 August. Iran has repeatedly said that it will resume some of its nuclear activities regardless of EU proposals.

Earlier this week outgoing President Mohammad Khatami said he hoped EU diplomats would allow for a resumption of enrichment activities, but Iran would begin again in any case.

Europe has made it clear that a resumption of nuclear work will mean an end to the talks.

Sounds like the two sides are at a stalemate, huh? The Astute Blogger comments:

Iran is a growing menace. If they get the bomb they will be untouchable. The time is VERY near when SOMEONE with balls MUST take pre-emptive action and bomb ALL of Iran's nuclear facitlties - REGARDLESS of how many civilian casualties result because Iran DELIBERATELY put these facitlities in civilian locations - IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS!

Sometimes You Just Gotta Love Your Enemy

In this article we meet Hassan Butt, a Jihadi who is not afraid to tell us exactly what he is thinking. From the London Telegraph, via Jihad Watch:

A Muslim who helped recruit young men to fight for the Taliban says that those willing to plant bombs in London were guilty of tactical errors but were not immoral.

Hassan Butt, 25, earned notoriety in January 2002 when he told the BBC's Today programme that Britons who went to fight the West in Afghanistan would return home to launch terror attacks.

Three years on, in an interview given to Prospect magazine some months before the bombings and published this week, he predicted that "a lot of killing" is unavoidable if the world is to come under the banner of Islam.

Formerly the self-styled spokesman for al-Muhajiroun, an Islamic fundamentalist group, he split from the faction over the issue of the "covenant of security", which forbade Muslims living in Britain from engaging in military action within the country.

While al-Muhajiroun supported the concept, Butt said he did not. His opposition to committing acts of violence was, he said, a matter of tactics rather than principle.

"Now, I am not in favour of military action in Britain but if somebody did do it who was British, I would not have any trouble with that either. . . It wouldn't necessarily be the wisest thing to do but it wouldn't be un-Islamic."

Anyone who was involved in such attacks would be a "completely and utterly loose cannon", said Butt, who now lives in the Leeds suburb of Beeston. Such "military action" would be unwise because "a bomb in London would be strategically damaging to Muslims here. Immigration is lax in Britain. . . London has more radical Muslims than anywhere in the Muslim world. A bomb would jeopardise everyone's position. There has to be a place we can come."

But he drew a distinction between Muslims who sought refuge in Britain - who would be bound by the covenant - and those who were born here, who would not.

"Most of our people, especially the youth, are British citizens," he said. "They owe nothing to the Government. They did not ask to be born here; neither did they ask to be protected by Britain."

You gotta love your enemies when they tell the truth. Thanks, Hassan.

So, what we see here is the labyrinthine workings of Islamofascist reasoning. A Muslim who sought refuge in Britain can't attack, but a Muslim British citizen can, because he owes his government nothing. Why is that? Well, because it isn't governed by the Koran.

And why can they use suicide bombers to kill innocent British people on the subway? Well, because they aren't innocent. They are citizens of a country who has attacked Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Even Giving The Palestinians
What They Want Is Hard

Israel is giving the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians, so that they can govern themselves. This is what the Palestinians have been asking for for years.

So, how do they respond? Well, the second leading Palestinian political party threatens to attack the Jews as they leave. What sense does that make?

From Associated Press:

JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel will launch a massive ground operation if Palestinian militants fire on Israeli soldiers and settlers during next month's Gaza pullout, the deputy defense minister said Sunday.

In such a scenario, the evacuation of settlers would be halted for 10-14 days while Israeli forces occupy Palestinian towns near the Jewish settlements, Zeev Boim said.

Israel is set to evacuate all 21 Gaza Strip settlements and four more in the West Bank in mid-August. The pullout is set to last four weeks.

Boim told Israel Radio the ground operation would be massive, on the scale of the Defensive Shield offensive of 2002, in which Israel reoccupied West Bank towns after a series of suicide bombings.

Israeli leaders have warned repeatedly in recent days that the military would respond harshly to Palestinian fire during the withdrawal. However, Boim's comments marked the first time the scope of a military offensive was outlined.

If the militants attack, "we would stop the withdrawal, we would deliver a harsh strike, a large-scale operation," Boim told the radio.

Such an operation would be "about the size of Defensive Shield, meaning about 10 days to two weeks of a heavy strike against terror, to uproot it," Boim said.

The focus of the strike, by a force of about 12,000-15,000 troops, probably would be the southern Gaza town of Khan Younis, which lies next to the main bloc of settlements, Boim said.

Israel is coordinating the security aspect of the pullout with the Palestinians, hoping Palestinian security will be able to prevent militants from firing on the thousands of soldiers and settlers who will be involved in the pullout.

But the Palestinians have warned that their forces are woefully ill-equipped in all major areas, including arms, ammunition, transportation and communications.

Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Sunday that Israel should consider giving the Palestinian police arms and ammunition to fight militant groups and ensure quiet during the withdrawal.

"If we tell the Palestinians to combat Hamas, we have to hear what their needs are," Peres told Israel Radio.

Israel fears the weapons will fall into the hands of the militant groups and be used to attack Israelis.

Yeah, that seems like a distinct possibility. Especially when you consider the fact that many members of the Palestinian security forces are also members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.