Police in Britain have arrested 7 men with connections to terrorist activities in Iraq. The stories coming out of Britain seem to suggest that the men arrested are probably terrorist supporters, rather than those actually involved in acts of violence.

Britain is home to dozens of websites run by Muslim immigrants that support terrorist activities in Iraq (example). Of course, they deny supporting terrorism, but only do so on definitional grounds: i.e., that Islamists in Iraq who routinely take hostages, bomb civilians, and behead people with ties to the elected government of Iraq are really "freedom fighters" and not terrorists at all.

I have personally tracked, literally, hundreds of jihadi supporters and located their countries of origin. The vast majority of Islamists living in Western countries, that I have located, come from Britain.

Reuters:

Police said they arrested seven people in Manchester, one in the area around Liverpool and one in London in early morning raids on 18 addresses. Around 500 officers took part in the operation, which also focused on the West Midlands and the northeastern city of Middlesbrough.

Two of the nine arrested were later released without charge in what police described as a fluid situation.

"This is a major anti-terrorist operation," chief constable Michael Todd of Greater Manchester police told reporters.

"Searching addresses under the terrorism act can often take two, three or more days ... it will take some time to resolve."

Sources told Reuters the operation was designed primarily to crack down on terrorist activities in Iraq, although police officers said they could not confirm this.

One local man, an ethnic Pakistani Muslim, ridiculed the idea that terrorists might be living in the area. "What terrorists?" he said. "This is just a drama they have done to annoy the Muslims. They can't be Muslims and be terrorists."

The Guardian adds that the suspects were all from Libya:

All the people arrested are believed to be of Libyan nationality....

Greater Manchester Police's anti-terrorism unit, which led this morning's raids, said the operation was targeted at individuals suspected of "facilitating terrorism abroad".

There was no suggestion that any were suspected of planning an attack in the UK.

Chief constable Michael Todd said the long-running investigation, led by his force and MI5, was into alleged terrorist activity overseas, including the funding of terrorism.

Mr Todd said there was no threat of an attack on this country. Instead, the operation is believed to be focused on terrorist activity in Iraq.

My gut feeling? Ms. Ali would do well to stay out of that particular neighborhood.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:50 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 531 words, total size 4 kb.

Taqiya is an idea which justifies deceiving the enemy for the sake of Islam. Hamid Ali, an imam from West Yorkshire, is clearly practicing it.

Via Tel-Chai Nation this from the Times:

A week after the attack [London transit bombings] he had told newspapers that the perpetrators ought to be punished. But in a secretly taped conversation, he said: “What they [the bombers] did was good. They have warned that we are here, we Muslims. People have taken notice that we are here. They died so that people would take notice . . . big meetings and conferences make no change at all. With this, at least people’s ears have pricked up.”...

He also praised the bombers as the “children” of Abdullah al-Faisal, a firebrand Muslim cleric, who was convicted of inciting murder and racial hatred in 2003.

Ali revealed that the leader of the London suicide bombers had attended sermons in Yorkshire by al-Faisal and tapes of al-FaisalÂ’s teachings were still circulating within his mosque.

Al-Faisal, who has branded non-Muslims as “cockroaches” ripe for extermination, is serving a seven-year prison sentence but is eligible for early release next week.

Posted by: Rusty at 04:26 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 206 words, total size 2 kb.

As if promising to 'slay' and 'behead' the blasphemers wasn't enough. Now calls for 'extermination'. Since Muslims are holding the entire country of Denmark responsible for a single brave newspaper's actions, are we to surmise that only the Danes should be sent to the gas chambers or all of in the West who support them too?

Photo grab of BBC via fellow Jawa reporter Tim at Opinion Bug.

And just in case you don't understand what they mean by 'extermination'.

Above AP image via Michelle Malkin who has more.

Check out our expose on the terror supporters behind this demonstration and their ties to the City of Birmingham here.

UPDATE: Related and funny.

Posted by: Rusty at 02:30 PM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 2 kb.

1 That religion of peace (TM), always showing the world what peace really is to them.

Posted by: indolene at February 03, 2006 02:35 PM (YHcxM)

2 Reason #412 to keep Iran from acquiring Nuclear weapons.

Posted by: MarcoPolo at February 03, 2006 02:46 PM (dH8aR)

3 I propose we call this what it is: Islamic Totalitarianism. THis is not about religion.

Posted by: Patty at February 03, 2006 02:58 PM (aH6Zf)

4 Yes, but it's an "internal" holocaust.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 03, 2006 03:04 PM (8e/V4)

5 Of course they mean "exterminate" in a peaceful, introspective sort of way. This just keeps getting better and better. I'm like a kid waiting for Christmas morning.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 03, 2006 03:05 PM (0yYS2)

6 At what point does the rest of the world declare that it's had enough and will no longer respond to the daily threats and acts of violence by advocating free speech and claiming that Islam has been hijacked? At what point is it okay for us to take back our world?

Posted by: Graeme at February 03, 2006 03:13 PM (jepkE)

7 Every one of these pictures is further proof that: Islam was not Hijacked

Posted by: Fred Fry at February 03, 2006 03:13 PM (JXdhy)

8 Yes, female jihadist, I am ready for you. My Socom is cleaned, locked and loaded. Any more questions?

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 03, 2006 03:25 PM (rUyw4)

9 Come on Progressive Europeans! Let even more immigrate in! Should prove interesting! With your declining aging populations - you'll need them to support and care for you in your declining years! And think about your children - the few you are having. Whose lil' Hans, Dag & Michelle gonna play with in school! Why, they would all be alone in empty classrooms - if not for the new muslims surrounding them. Interesting isn't it. Take France - muslims constitute 10% of the population - growing just with out imigration at 3x the rate of others - and in some young age groups already account for 30+%. Its gonna be really interesting in another generation.

Posted by: hondo at February 03, 2006 03:28 PM (3aakz)

10 "Be Prepared for the REAL Holocaust." Somehow, I don't think it'll be pointed in the direction she's thinking it should be...

Posted by: John at February 03, 2006 03:57 PM (wg4FW)

11 The subtle implication being that the Holocaust wasn't REAL....

Posted by: Rusty at February 03, 2006 04:15 PM (JQjhA)

12 Prepare for another Heroshema and Nagasaki, or should I say, Mecca and Medina. DESTROY THOSE CITIES WITH NUKES!

Posted by: Andre at February 03, 2006 04:25 PM (bQ3vG)

13 ...and the subtle threat to kill all the unbelievers. I'm sure many of them will not mind me taking issue with their threat. And you know what is truly unbelievable. That a few cartoons could elicit such a reation from these people. The barbarians are truly at the gate.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 03, 2006 04:26 PM (rUyw4)

14 While looking at pictures of various "protests" in various countries, I can't help but wonder why there are so many signs written in English being utilized in countries other than England. Many of them use the same verbage as those in England. Rather than being frightened by these persons who seem to want to point the finger at us no matter what their actual agenda, I suppose we should feel flattered we're so special and popular. And why no protests in the U.S.? I guess they've heard the phrase "don't sh*t where you eat".

Posted by: scarletbegonia at February 03, 2006 04:27 PM (z77r4)

15 I'd like to see the Moose limbs try holding signs like that in Alaska. I doubt they'd last 5 minutes before they got the crap beaten out of 'em. Male or female.

Posted by: REMF at February 03, 2006 04:46 PM (7RMSi)

16 Clearly woman in burka is a jooooooish agent trying make mooooslims look bad. This entire crisis smells like a zionist plot!

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 03, 2006 04:52 PM (8e/V4)

17 The pictures are available throughout the western world - notice how all the protests and threats of violence are in a handful of Western European (Progressive) countries. They can smell the stench of weakness. The signs are predominately in English cause the mullahs & boys back home can't read Danish or Dutch etc - most Western Europeans have a working handle on English - and they can send their threats of violence to Bush and America from the safety of 3000+ miles away.

Posted by: hondo at February 03, 2006 04:56 PM (3aakz)

18 Nope wont see it REMF the only thing you'll see is the glow of a burning churches in AL.

Posted by: Howie at February 03, 2006 04:57 PM (D3+20)

19 Was reading where the US is actually backing MUSLIMS in this little cartoon fracas. I'm really disappointed in our leaders who, even when faced with the obvious, continue to deny the truth about islam.

Posted by: Richard at February 03, 2006 11:31 PM (W8EsU)

20 Uh, don't the Brits have strict "hate speech" laws for this sort of thing?? I am pretty darn sure if a sign read "Exterminate those who slander Christianity," the makers of that sign would land themselves in jail PDQ

Posted by: Jan at February 04, 2006 10:46 AM (bcz28)

21 I didn't think of it before. This muslim woman is a white girl. All the more reason to find out who is beneath the veil, as these converts are often more radical than the rest, and she is probably even a traitor to her own.....

Posted by: fred fry at February 06, 2006 12:09 PM (BmQNv)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

What the news is not reporting about these people is that they are followers of Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad and that their website has called for death to all those who blaspheme mohammed. They openly preach this hate on the streets of London. A related group, The Saved Sect, operates in Birmingham.

Intelligence gathered from Jawa Report operatives indicated that radical Islamists linked to Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad are using The Birmingham Grid for Learning webservers to spread jihadi propaganda and recruit terrorists. These webservers are owned and operated by the Birmingham City Council. The webserver also seems to be related to various schools in Birmingham.

What we want to know is who has access to these webservers? Is an employee of the City of Birmingham, or a related school, a jihadi? I believe the people of Birmingham might be interested to know that there is a terrorist in their midst. Especially if that terrorst is teaching their children.

More pics at LGF.

Posted by: Rusty at 12:27 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Go Get em Rusty!

Posted by: Filthy Allah at February 03, 2006 12:30 PM (5ceWd)

2 I hope nobody alienates these peaceful, misunderstood people, so we can dialogue with them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 03, 2006 12:33 PM (0yYS2)

3 So where are all the moderate muslims who should be counter-protesting this crap? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 03, 2006 12:54 PM (8e/V4)

4 Whoa there they are all in one place calling for murder. Hmm I hate to take IM's gig but what an opportunity missed.

Posted by: Howie at February 03, 2006 12:54 PM (D3+20)

5 I guess the problem for the European's is the fact they have no way to enforce their freedom of speech, or protect themselves from assault due to the restriction of Firearm's. You cannot kill, or maim an intruder in your house in the U.K without going to jail yourself. At the same time the Police force is imploding with increasing wait time for responses and the fear of officers themselves, of entering an armed conflict without anything but a baton. It's open season as far as the "radicals" are concerned, how can anyone defend themselves in a society that handguns are illegal, and rifle registration is given to those that have a need. If you want to see an example of that, the day of my Grandfathers funeral, the Police came and seized his rifles until the licenses could be transferred to my Father.

Posted by: dave at February 03, 2006 01:34 PM (CcXvt)

6 We must all of us stand up against the bullying and censorship of Muslim nations and domestic Muslims. No one should feel threatened for poking a finger in the eye of Islam, any more than they should for doing so to Christianity, Judaism or Hinduism. Shutting off humorous jabs is the first step to foreclosing critical analysis. Islam desperately requires this criticism - from both within and without. Its adherents are murdering thousands around the world in its name. The rank and hysterical behaviour of the Muslims and their governments that raged against the cartoons only confirms this need. Here in Britain, television regularly shows programs critical of Christianity that often are nothing more than ridicule and debasement of our faith. Why is this taken with annoyance, but not violence and threats?

Posted by: Paul at February 03, 2006 01:52 PM (PM/BC)

7 LGF's server must be getting hammered. Can't get on the site at all.

Posted by: Oyster at February 03, 2006 02:53 PM (YudAC)

8 These are good days my friends, good days.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 03, 2006 03:07 PM (0yYS2)

9 I can only imagine the grin on Maxie's face.

Posted by: Oyster at February 03, 2006 03:30 PM (YudAC)

10 Dave and Paul, I feel for you. I don't know what I would do myself if I were disarmed, and what is happening right now has steeled my resolve to become more polically active. I have been a member of the NRA for several years, but I have decided today that I will divie up the cash and become a life member. I will also put some more cash into buying ammunition for my firearms as they are useless without it, and my daughter is about to have some shooting lessons. My two sons are already prolific shooters and hunters. Everyone here in the US should do the same. The situation in Britain looks bad to me, but the media does have a tendency to exagerate. Maybe it isn't as bad as it looks.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 03, 2006 04:00 PM (rUyw4)

11 Joe: Don't feel bad, I left the UK 9 years ago for the U.S. Two weeks ago bought a Winchester Model 94 Ranger, a rifle I have admired for years, but could probably never own in the U.K

Posted by: dave at February 03, 2006 04:14 PM (CcXvt)

12 Yeah, yeah, yeah. Behead the infidel for this. Behead the infidel for that. Friggin one trick ponies

Posted by: REMF at February 03, 2006 04:32 PM (7RMSi)

13 Enjoy shooting that Winchester, dave, as I have spent many a day on a makeshift shooting range. And I recently obtained a Socom II(ouch on the price), but I had dreamed of owning one ever since Springfield came out with the M1A, I just never had the cash.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 03, 2006 04:32 PM (rUyw4)

14 Boy did my blood boil when I saw these images of the rag heads publicly displaying their absolute hatred. There is nothing wrong with the infidels when they are paying up the money left and right though eh?. I´m not surprised that there was no police intervention - despite it being illeagal in he uk (lower case used purposely to indicate disrespect)to incite racial hatred. Or maybe this isn´t?¿? The ´british muslims´ can shit all over the uk quite openly as thats the way it is nowadays.....thats why I left.

Posted by: Eat his lamb at February 04, 2006 06:10 AM (bUxRY)

15 Is this the religion of peace? whats with the liberals whya re they not condeming this?

Posted by: sandpiper at February 06, 2006 03:31 PM (as4nC)

16 Fuck Islam, that pre-medieval death cult! If the jihadis come for me, they can talk to Mr. Benelli, who will speak on my behalf.

Posted by: Russell Whitaker at February 12, 2006 11:54 PM (bWAWp)

17 There's a lot of violence in the Qu'ran, and a lot of violence in the Bible (particularily the OT). But one thing that seems unique about the Qu'ran is that it demands the killing of "unbelievers" (e.g. Surah 4:89). So, in effect, the picture shows a rather moderate muslim, who demands that only those unbelievers that "insult Islam" should be killed. I for my part will surely refrain from calling Islam a violent religion, lest gentle and peace-loving muslims cut my unbelieving head off!

Posted by: Aragorn at February 26, 2006 02:46 PM (OXXW/)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

British Muslims honest enough to tell us what Muhammed and his followers did to those who blasphemed: killed them. Funny, I don't recall reading any stories of the Buddha killing the Hindu Brahmans who scorned him, nor do I recall stories of Jesus murdering the Pharasees. I thought all religions were basically the same?

Via the Blogfather Charles Johnson who got it from HNN, this interesting post by British Jihadis. It is appropriately titled Kill those who insult the Prophet Muhammad:

At the time of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) there were individuals like these who dishonoured and insulted him upon whom the Islamic judgement was executed. Such people were not tolerated in the past and throughout the history of Islam were dealt with according to the Shariah. KaÂ’ab ibn Ashraf was assassinated by Muhammad ibn Maslamah for harming the Messenger Muhammad (saw) by his words, Abu RaafiÂ’ was killed by Abu Ateeq as the Messenger ordered in the most evil of ways for swearing at the prophet, Khalid bin Sufyaan was killed by Abdullah bin Anees who cut off his head and brought it to the prophet for harming the Messenger Muhammad (saw) by his insults, Al-Asmaa bintu Marwaan was killed by Umayr bin AdiÂ’ al-Khatmi, a blind man, for writing poetry against the prophet and insulting him in it, Al-Aswad al-Ansi was killed by Fairuz al-Daylami and his family for insulting the Messenger Muhammad (saw) and claiming to be a prophet himself. This is the judgement of Islam upon those who violate, dishonour and insult the Messenger Muhammad

Shortly after these incidents the people began to realise that insulting the Messenger of Allah (saw) was not something to be taken lightly and that by doing so would mean that you would be killed for it, a concept that many have seem to forgotten today

The insulting of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) is something that the Muslims cannot and will not tolerate and the punishment in Islam for the one who does so is death. This is the sunnah of the prophet and the verdict of Islam upon such people, one that any Muslim is able execute. The response of the Muslims all over the world shows us the inability to deal with such people, the kuffar are attacking our Messenger and are allowed to get away with it whilst the Muslims have no power to do anything about it. The leaders of the Muslim world have no care for the deen of Islam as they are busy cementing their seats content with their power and wealth. Where are the Muhammad ibn MaslamahÂ’s of our ummah who will defend the honour of our beloved Messenger and rise the banner of Tawheed high?

But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight (you) the leaders of disbelief - for surely their oaths are nothing to them - so that they may stop (evil actions). [9:12]

And just in case they try to deny that they wrote this when the British authorities come knocking at the door, I've backed up the original webpage here. Simply click on the screen shot below of al Ghurabaa's home page to see the archived original:

more...

Posted by: Rusty at 11:21 AM | Comments (33) | Add Comment
Post contains 775 words, total size 6 kb.

1 The fine fellow you speak of Rusty says horrid things about me Gran and how he wants to "gasp" put something in her Batty hole what ever that means. So I found out where this goat shaving pimp actually sends out his hate filled spew and it is in Birmingham UK at a learning center for Kids.(with a program for adults) I would like to punish this ass like we did Wasim. Any ideas?

Posted by: Filthy Allah at February 02, 2006 12:05 PM (5ceWd)

2 Let me think about it for a bit. Any British readers in Birmingham would be welcome to go down and check out the premises, though.

Posted by: Rusty at February 02, 2006 12:18 PM (JQjhA)

3 Good Lord.

Posted by: Oyster at February 02, 2006 12:36 PM (5pqct)

4 Holy crap. To think we are allowing such folks to immigrate to our countries in such large numbers. Frightening. WAK UP WHITE PEOPLE!!!

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 02, 2006 12:57 PM (8e/V4)

5 And *I'm* the one accused of having inflammatory views.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 02, 2006 01:00 PM (f289O)

6 OT: Is anyone able to get to LGF?

Posted by: Ariya at February 02, 2006 01:41 PM (uxW3N)

7 "...I don't recall reading any stories of the Buddha killing the Hindu Brahmans who scorned him, nor do I recall stories of Jesus murdering the Pharasees. I thought all religions were basically the same?" No, you didn't One of the distinguishing things about Islam as practiced today is that it demands respect. Dr. Shackleford's remarks reveal moral values that even religions are subject to in the West. Man judges God, and if God demands unniceness, God is shown the door. And that's how I like it. It's been many years (and happy ones at that) since any church in these parts managed to evoke serious killings for Jesus from the congregation. Even hinting at it is mighty fringe. Nobody sings "Onward Christian Soldiers" if he ever intends to hold public office in the U.S. While I like this, I wonder if the modern unwillingness to kill heretics, heathens and witches for the Church reflects a decline in zeal that will end in unwillingness to kill for the right to *go to* church. For whatever faults they may have, this isn't going on with the Muslim. Quite the contrary. They demand respect for their religion, and they get it. Just ask our recently unemployed French newspaper editor. They get respect from me too. I respect Islam, the power of nature, rattlesnakes, and a big, drunk trucker whose wife I bumped into. A wise man might make jokes about these things, but only from a safe distance. It doesn't look like Europe will be safe enough.

Posted by: ShannonKW at February 02, 2006 01:42 PM (dT1MB)

8 Several websites I visit have been flakey all day. LGF also off and on

Posted by: Howie at February 02, 2006 01:47 PM (D3+20)

9 Great article. Anyone care to discuss what they think is the difference between free speech and hate speech? As a firm believer in free speech and an incredulous observer of recent events regarding those very unexciting cartoons, this seems very important. Brad Pitt poses as Jesus Christ without much comment, and yet handdrawn silly cartoons of you-know-who causes riots and death threats?????? And the "accepted" rationale (by some) is that the cartoons are somehow "hate speech?" --something is seriously out of whack. In the West, I think we work under the assumption that you shouldn't engage in hate speech. SO this hate speech rationale is currently being used by some to justify the censorship of free speech. So, it is important to decide: when does something become hate speech? Is it in the eye of the beholder? or is it the intent of the speaker? Or, is it the norm of the day which sets the standard? Are there different norms for different groups? (OK to satirize Christians, not ok to satirize Muslims) etc.

Posted by: Patty at February 02, 2006 01:51 PM (aH6Zf)

10 I started to get worried when the tree I was hiding behind started to shout "THERE IS A JEW HIDING BEHIND ME!" *yawn* My second amendment rights are there to protect my first amendment rights.

Posted by: Laurence Simon at February 02, 2006 02:05 PM (uBCxH)

11 Actually Shannon, the muslims aren't demanding respect for their religion, they're demanding FEAR of their religion, there's a difference. Respect is a two way street. If that's what they were looking for, they would seek to achieve it by showing tolerance and co-operation with other religions and the laws of their adopted countries. When violence is used or even merely threatened, debilitating fear is the goal. If that rattlesnake, or even the big, drunk trucker moved onto your property and started restricting your movement and activities, would your "respect" keep you from doing anything about it, or would you make a stand?

Posted by: Graeme at February 02, 2006 02:10 PM (CQyra)

12 "...when does something become hate speech?" Maybe classifying hostile talk as "hate speech" and banning it is a bad idea in the first place. You can't keep people from hating each other. We should encourage them to announce their hatred and whom they hate. Wouldn't you rather know who your enemies are? Besides, it's a big help to the boys at Homicide. The concept of hate speech has mommy-thinking written all over it. There is a certain kind of domesticated, overcivilized person who thinks that if you force everyone to talk nice to each other that means we're all friends. It probably explains why hate speech has caught on among the Euros more than the Americans.

Posted by: ShannonKW at February 02, 2006 02:13 PM (dT1MB)

13 This is the MSM elite liberals fault, and Clinton! Just wanted to get that of the way to clear up the discussion. Carry on.

Posted by: Human-Animal-Hybrid at February 02, 2006 02:34 PM (YClF7)

14 No, it's clearly "Bush's" fault, and "Pat Robertson's" fault. Islam is coming out of the closet. If Libtards still can't see it, it's because they don't want to see it. Because they see the world as they wish it were, not as it is.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 02, 2006 02:37 PM (8e/V4)

15 Graeme, Of course not, but then again I'm wierd. I'm trying to keep alive the ancient tradition of respecting my enemies. So, the interloping big, drunk trucker on my property would get not mockery and insulting jokes from me, but a shotgun blast to the chest. That's my idea of respect. It's interesting that you should point out the distinction between fear and respect. In religious context they traditionally mean the same thing. The last passage in the Old Testament (if memory serves) "Fear God and keep the commandments" is a fine example. I think modern Christians are prone to distinguish fear from respect in this case, but I suspect the cartoon-raging crowd does not.

Posted by: ShannonKW at February 02, 2006 02:37 PM (dT1MB)

16 Sounds like if cartoonists kill Muslims it should be considered self-defense now. As far as Hate Speech goes, I find it funny that the only people who practice hate are only in White Face, never in a turbin with a koran or anyone else. How odd that liberals would conjure up such a phrase and only use it against one group to berate them. How very odd for them to call themselves tolerant too. Also how odd they call for toleration of everything that is intolerable, least you be called a "hater." Sounds like this "tolerance" they prattle about is really a clarion call for being a sniveling coward in the face of an enemy that has openly said they'll kill you. Time for the balls to drop and become men again.

Posted by: Andre at February 02, 2006 02:40 PM (bQ3vG)

17 Don't be dissin' Mo n' his homies or day be bustin' caps on yo ass n' all over da place! PEACE V Violence and fear of violence - that's Islam's answer - to cartoons. Respect us and don't do anything to offend us in our home (or your home for that matter) or we will hurt you! Some answer - says a lot about them. Anyone want to dance around this - the violence and threat of - IS REAL! Interesting part is whether it works or not. I think it will with the Euros and other similars around the world. And the next issue that comes to the surface - say like honor killings - then what? Violence and the threat of violence does work and is an effective tool in dealing with the weak of knee and spirit.

Posted by: hondo at February 02, 2006 02:41 PM (3aakz)

18 I hope the local 'slamotards get uppity, but this is the South, so they probably know better.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 02, 2006 02:51 PM (0yYS2)

19 Well, I'm only asking us to clarify "hate" speech versus "free" speech because Clinton is getting press and he is basically claiming that the publication of the cartoons constitutes "hate" speech. He's the only politician I see saying anything about this and he's on the wrong side - watch this become the topic of MSM discussion rather than the reality that there are a group of madmen afoot who terrorize for submission.

Posted by: Patty at February 02, 2006 03:09 PM (aH6Zf)

20 Like beauty - it is in the eye of the beholder - or in his particular case - the opportunist.

Posted by: hondo at February 02, 2006 03:14 PM (3aakz)

21 I feel a "No, I am Spartacus" moment coming on. Been reading about alot of other papers now publishing the cartoons. Maybe I'll make a few copies myself for distribution here and there.

Posted by: Patty at February 02, 2006 03:24 PM (aH6Zf)

22 This website has been called a 'hate' site because we hate the religious fascism of Sharia. Just thought I'd throw that in there.

Posted by: Rusty at February 02, 2006 03:25 PM (JQjhA)

23 Gawd, calling this a hate site. The people who do that should get off their soapbox and the dole, get out experience life, get a job and a life too.

Posted by: Andre at February 02, 2006 03:28 PM (bQ3vG)

24 I understand what Shannon is saying about "respect". He means respect in same manner I do; having a healthy respect for what they are capable of rather than they themselves or the ideology. And keeping an equalizer close at hand. Meet Señor Glock!

Posted by: Oyster at February 02, 2006 03:40 PM (5pqct)

25 Ah, Senor Glock, meet Socom. He is your daddy! And perhaps we now know why no radical Muslims in the US are making death threats. They are used to making every kind of threat in Britain with nothing being done, but threats here in the US will land them in jail or on the virgin train.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 02, 2006 03:45 PM (rUyw4)

26 Give hate a chance Sad day when an anti-Sharia site is considered a "hate" site. Under Sharia, I would have no freedom at all. In fact, I believe I would be chattel. That's a very frightening and humbling thought which is why i thank you for this site.

Posted by: Patty at February 02, 2006 03:48 PM (aH6Zf)

27 oh, Patty, you're just being ethnocentric. Try not to be so close-minded and intolerant about it. It's their "culture", which means it's all good.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 02, 2006 04:13 PM (8e/V4)

28 Hate is an emotion that keeps us from being suckered by liberals.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 02, 2006 05:47 PM (0yYS2)

29 I prefer common sense and faith Maxie - hate doesn't do anything for me.

Posted by: hondo at February 02, 2006 07:23 PM (3aakz)

30 They are an entire race of sociopaths. Islam represents the last holdout of the caveman. The world would be so much better off without it and muhammad and allah.

Posted by: antimuhammad at February 03, 2006 12:27 AM (ifHl0)

31 Common sense and faith are what keeps civilized people from doing what they desperately need to do. Hate is the safety valve to keep everyone from being slaughtered like sheep by the barbarians of the world. Islam is a plague, and if more decent people don't embrace a healthy hatred of islam, we will keep allowing the plague rats to scurry amongst us.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 03, 2006 09:32 AM (0yYS2)

32 03FEB06 I came across the news item about "the world's 1.2 billion Muslims" being enraged by the cartoon depicting Allah in a Danish news paper back in September. (Interestingly, I can't find it anywhere so as to take a look at what all the fuss is about.) It appears many of these (Muslims) now feel justified in calling for the perpetrators of said affront to Islam to be hunted down and killed. What we increasingly seem to be dealing with is - an issue of soverignty. Does Islamic law supercede the laws of the West and those of other cultures? If I'm not mistaken, they (the Muslims) seem to think so. They do not make the distinction between politics and religion and believe it is their Manifest Destiny (sound familiar to you Americans?) to impose their grotesquely violent, hypocritical, pious, medieval Islam on Allah's Allah-Forsaken Earth. Can they dissuaded from following their jihaddist path? Can they be persuaded to be tolerant of others and their beliefs? Can they be persuaded to integrate their culture with the other cultures of the world community? What have we seen since Usama declared jihad on America? What have we seen in Iraq, in Afghanistan, Iran, Palestine, and Syria? Should we continue to sit on our thumbs? Most hormonally imbalanced, ignorant male Muslim jihaddists don't live long enough to see their 40th birthday, they are always eager to go out and kill where they think the odds are in their favor. Like all people their age they think they are indestructable because they are both stupid and ignorant. Eventually, they wake up dead. Interstingly, when the old Islamic degenerates pulling the puppet strings survive an attempt on their lives they are more than willing to adopt the enlightened philosophy of negotiation and compromise or at least affect to do so. They'll do anything to keep things exactly so that they can continue to be in charge and alive. Either Islam will have to change or it will have to be eradicated like Islam has attempted to eradicate Zoroastrianism. The change will have to come from the top down, like everything else in a medieval society, and will have to be enforced upon the Islamic elite with the very methodology used in imposing Islam upon others: violence and death.

Posted by: Don R. d V. at February 03, 2006 09:42 AM (DHx5e)

33 Graeme put it right: Respect needs to be earned. Respect to me means sensing an essential goodness in a person, e.g. love, compassion, generosity and truthfulness. Jesus Christ, Buddha or Ghandi, for instance, command my respect. Fear, on the other hand, is much easier to obtain, any school bully with a baseball bat can do the trick. No matter how much fear threats against "kuffar" will be able to incite, they will not bring forth even one grain of respect. Quite the contrary.

Posted by: No to Sharia at February 26, 2006 03:31 PM (OXXW/)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Just another misunderstanderer of the true meaning of jihad, I guess. Notice the progression from collector of beheading videos and terror propaganda to a terrorist set on killing a fellow Briton because the man was a soldier who had fought bravely in Iraq. A Muslim with a collection of beheading videos is like a child who tortures animals: a sociopath in the making.

Not satisfied with stalking a decorated war hero, the misunderstanderer also was collecting information about prominent Hindus and Jews in the community.

Perhaps the most troubling part in all of this is that the would-be jihadi only gets 6 years for his treason.

Bexley Times:

A TERRORIST who planned to 'hunt down' and kill a decorated British soldier was jailed for six years last Thursday.

Abu Baker Mansha, 21, of Harold Wilson House, Arnott Close, Thamesmead, obtained the address of Corporal Mark Byles, 34, after reading a newspaper report on his killing of at least three insurgents in Iraq.
...

Mansha had amassed a collection of 'virulent' anti-west propaganda with stacks of DVDs, including one of the hostage Kenneth Bigley, pleading for his life before being beheaded.

Others featured Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader. Police also found a blank-firing pistol which somebody had attempted to convert into a lethal working weapon.

Last month, Mansha was convicted by a Southwark Crown Court jury of possessing a document containing information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.

He denied the offence under the Terrorism Act 2000 which carries the maximum term of up to 10 years in jail....

"Also found were requests by you about information on prominent members of the Jewish and Hindu communities.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.

A man was arrested today at the Manchester, U.K., airport under Britain's new tougher anti-terrorism laws. Reports are conflicting at this point as to the exact circumstances of his arrest. This report claims the man was 'Asian', which in England usually indicates some one from the subcontinent--Pakistan or Indian.

[Image: AP]

Fox News reports that the man was arrested for acting suspiciously and apparently resisting the quesioning--a stun gun had to be used to subdue the man (hat tip Confederate Yankee for e-mailing me):

According to SKY News, a man was seen acting suspiciously at the airport, and was subsequently approached by authorities, who used a stun gun to arrest him after he resisted.

Army bomb units were then called in to investigate the suitcase, and the BBC reported that a controlled explosion was carried out.

Greater Manchester Police said the man had been seen acting suspiciously in the area where aircraft were parked.

The British Broadcasting Corporation reported that a man with a suitcase had been seen walking under an aircraft.

A man was arrested by police today after he ran through a security post at Manchester Airport and got within 60 metres of an aircraft.

Posted by: Rusty at 11:57 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

An Italian court has upheld the extradition of Hamdi Issac, also known as Osman Hussein, to Britain. Issac is suspected of involvement in the botched July 21st London transportation bombings and was arrested in Rome a week later. No one was hurt in the failed terror plot.

Isaac has admitted to involvement in the 7/21 plot, but has said the bombs were meant to 'scare people' and 'not kill'.

However, evidence suggests that Isaac and his fellow conspirators did mean to kill. The reason no one was injured in the attempt was that all four bombs failed to detonate. The one minor explosion was caused when a detonator failed to ignite one of the bombs. One person suffered symptoms of asthma because of the smoke, but no other injuries were reported.

Isaac is expected to return to Britain within the next 10 days. Unfortunately, the U.K. does not have a death penalty. (Sources: AP, Reuters, AFP)

Posted by: Rusty at 08:05 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 166 words, total size 1 kb.

Al Jazeera has a new tape of Ayman al-Zawahiri and Mohammed Siddiq Khan claiming the July 7th London bombings.

On the video, Mohammed Siddiq Khan, one the men responsible for the bombings, gives his testimony and explains the reasons behind his action and blames Western citizens and holds them responsible for the bombings in London, Madrid and 9/11, because they elect governments that commit crimes against humanity."

See here

and here.

As if there was ever any doubt.

Updated: BBC has the one of the Videos here.

Here is what one Muslim had to say about it.

I just want to go on national television myself and expose their lies.

"It's all brainwashing by some wacko scholar who believes his own version of the Koran and has made it his own battle. There is no holy war.

"They have so much coverage it's damaging, yet the voices of the innocent victims are not being heard." Speaking at an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Newport, Mr Straw told reporters there was "no excuse, no justification for terrorism of any kind". He added: "And it happens those who entirely wrongly claim to speak in the name of Islam are mainly killing their fellow Muslims."

Posted by: Howie at 04:58 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 2 kb.

Bird escapes cage to rejoin flock? Tim from Opinion Bug e-mails me this from the BBC:

A controversial Islamic cleric has left the UK for the Middle East amid speculation he would be investigated for treason, said his spokesman.

Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed - former head of radical group Al Muhajiroun - left on Saturday for Lebanon, his colleague Anjem Choudary told the BBC....

Mr Choudary said the cleric believed "Britain had declared war on Muslims".

UPDATE: Good discussion by Megan McArdle on this over at he-who-will-not-be-named's blog and by Gene Volokh. I would only add that speech laws must be context oriented. What one can say in a time of peace must be different than in a time of war. Those that think otherwise must share a different value system than myself. Personally, I think human life is much more valuable than speech. If killing the enemy is legitimate, then stifling his speech must also be.

UPDATE II: From the vast Jawa archives comes this quote from Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed. Traitor? You be the judge:

If an Iraqi Muslim carried out an attack like that in Britain, it would be justified because Britain has carried out acts of terrorism in Iraq.

Posted by: Rusty at 01:57 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.