Please Help New English Review
For our donors from the UK:
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications by New English Review Authors
As Far As The Eye Can See
by Moshe Dann
Threats of Pain and Ruin
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Oil Cringe of the West: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly Vol. 2
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Impact of Islam
by Emmet Scott
Sir Walter Scott's Crusades and Other Fantasies
by Ibn Warraq
Fighting the Retreat from Arabia and the Gulf: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly. Vol. 1
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky














The Iconoclast

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

Despite being 87, the part-Turkish and wholly secular Beji Caid Essebsi (note the "bey")  is the best hope for sane rule in Tunisia. And he says there are people who have "infiltrated" his party and want him dead.

He's not given to conspiracy-theories.

The story here.
 

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 8:48 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

Listen here.

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 7:30 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear
clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 7:27 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

A French article, asking this question some months ago (and it remained unanswered) here.

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 5:53 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

The Rassemblement took place last April. But the article about it does not date.

Here.

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 5:48 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

The article, and the enlightening comments to it, here.
 

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 2:06 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

From the Times of Israel:

BERLIN — A Jewish community-organized rally protesting the recent surge of anti-Semitism throughout Germany saw an eclectic 8,000-strong crowd at Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate Sunday.

Among the heterogeneous protesters at the rally, organized by the Central Council of Jews in Germany, were non-German minorities including Syrian Christians, Muslims, and Africans seeking recognition of their own struggles at home and abroad.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel headlined the event and unequivocally condemned the anti-Semitism that came to characterize this summer’s demonstrations against Israel and its offensive in Gaza. She said those who have used criticism of Israel to veil their anti-Semitism have “abused our dear fundamental right to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.”

The theme of lurking anti-Semitism in anti-Israelism was echoed by current Berlin Mayor Klaus Wowereit. He also called on the government to ban the far right nationalist party NPD (National Democratic Party of Germany).

Comments by Ron Lauder, the president of the World Jewish Congress, were greeted by roaring applause.

“Jews and non-Jews stand together as one people to say ‘No!’ to intolerance, ‘No!’ to bigotry, and ‘No!’ to anti-Semitism,’” said Lauder, speaking in both German and English....

 

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 11:56 AM by Geoffrey Clarfield
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear
clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 9:58 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

The Islamic State -- the state that has nothing to do with Islam (Cameron, Hammond, Kerry, Obama, a cast of thousands) -- has big plans for the next five years. Its quinquennium neronis includes the recovery of most of the lands of greatest immediate interest, that is those lands that, at some point, were ruled by Muslims: all of the Iberian peninsula, parts of both West and sub-Saharan Africa (on the theory of the grand but factitious empirate of Sokoto, the empire of Timbuktu, and so on and so fantastically forth), Sicily, Greece, the Balkans, much of central and eastern Europe, all of India, parts of what is now western China, all added to what is already, in their eyes, Dar al-Islam (but which will be a Dar al-Islam purged of the Shi'a and the insufficiently-Islamic "hypocrites" among the Sunnis).

Details in this article.

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 9:44 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

Here.

How many Arab air forces will participate in bombing ISIS? "A lot of them," we are told by American officials in Kerry's entourage. But which, exactly? Would it be, by any chance, a handful of planes (flown by whose pilots?) from the Emirates, just as in the Libyan campaign. Would Saudi planes -- they have 1,000 of the most advanced aircraft -- be flown? What about Egypt? Libya? Algeria? Morocco? No. What about Yemen? Oman? Qatar? If there are a "lot of them" why can't a half-dozen of them, or four, or two,or one, be publicly named?

And what about those "boots on the ground"? Which Arab boots will be on which ground, and delivered by which armed force?

Saudi Arabia will now grandly open an embassy in Baghdad, which is supposed to be a great concession on its part -- but why? why wouldn't Saudi Arabia now want to have an embassy, to protect its interests and those of other Sunnis, in the new and improved and inclusive Iraq that has suddenly appeared? What is Kuwait doing? What is Qatar doing? What are the other member states of the Gulf Cooperation Council - save for odd man out, the Emirates, prepared to do and not merely vaguely promise, so that Kerry can pretend they are "all on board"? 

And what about Turkey, a member of NATO? What will it do, if its government is going to honor its pledges of presumed solidarity with NATO members, with the West? How long will it keep maintaining it can do nothing at all, cease allowing Muslims from all over to use Turkey as a staging area from which to join ISIS or the Al-Qaeda branch in Syria, Al-Nusra Front, cannot even cease allowing ISIS to so easily smuggle in and sell oil in Turkey, just because some Turks taken prisoner some months ago by ISIS are still being held hostage?

The world's Muslims are not clamoring to join the fight against ISIS. What has been heard from Pakistan, with its giant army? Indonesia, the "world's most populous Muslim nation"? Malaysia, possibly hoping to win some points after its airline's troubles? And the world's Muslim Arabs are not clamoring to join the fight against ISIS. Oh, money -- that is certainly possible. Money can always be given, especially from states that have taken in, without doing a thing to deserve it, nearly thirty trillion dollars in oil and gas revenues since 1973 alone. What's a few hundred billion to preserve the ruling families in those Gulf states? But that can be done without the spectacle -- the very spectacle that is most needed -- of Muslims showing, with Muslims fighting, that they do indeed want to crush ISIS and are not afraid of what the Muslim masses, who are not quite as anti-ISIS as we are all expected to believe, because ISIS has the Qur'an, has the Hadith, has the Sira to explain and justify its every action, and the only thing that the world's Muslims can offer, as a truthful comment on ISIS, is that "it damages the image of Islam."

It does. And that's a reason not to be so quick to want to "destroy ISIS" rather than prevent it from harming non-Muslims (Christians, Yazidis) and non-Arab Muslims (Kurds). But ISIS, or the same kind of group with a different name, will always exist, as long as there are Muslims who take the texts of Islam fully to heart, and do not attempt to avert their eyes from those texts, or in other ways to dilute, so as to be able to live in a tolerable manner, the pure Islam of the original Muslims. There will always be an ISIS, as long as there are Muslims and, especially, the conditions that make Muslims take the most unyielding, pur et dur, version -- which is exactly what appeals most to  Western converts, those psychically and socially marginal souls who at last have found the Explanation of Everything, and their Reason For Being.

 

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 7:41 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

To mark its 50th anniversary last year, the National Theatre in London relayed its most recent production of Hamlet (2010) to cinemas around the country. The production, much praised, was bad in almost every conceivable way: its scenery, costumes, overall conception, and much of the acting. My wife, who is French, noticed that the diction of the younger actors, including that of Rory Kinnear, who played Hamlet, was much inferior to that of the older, and she was right. It was as if diction, being an undemocratic skill, were no longer taught in our drama schools.

There is no getting away from Hamlet in Hamlet: if Hamlet fails, the production fails. It did not help that Kinnear was balding. This was not his fault, of course, any more than it would be the fault of an actress playing Juliet that she were 65 or of a Falstaff that he were thin and asthenic. But casting has, or ought to have, a logic of its own; it cannot be an equal opportunity employer, any more than can a professional sports team.

Much worse, though, was Kinnear’s acting. It was as if he had taken the prince’s injunctions to the actors who came to Elsinore not as prohibitions but as recommendations. “Do not saw the air with your hand,” Hamlet tells them, and Kinnear proceeded to do that very thing: never was air so vigorously sawed. Hamlet says:

Oh, there be players that I have seen play and heard others praise (and that highly), not to speak it profanely, that, neither having th’ accent of Christians nor the gait of Christian, pagan, nor man, have so strutted and bellowed that I have thought some of nature’s journeymen had made men and not made them well, they imitated humanity so abominably.

This sums up Kinnear’s performance pretty well. He lay down on the stage and beat the boards, he punched the walls with his fists, so deep were his simulated feelings. It was acting for an age of emotional excess, without subtlety, in which nothing was left to the imagination. This was a histrionic Hamlet untouched by intellect.

The production, as is now more or less de rigueur, was done in modern dress. Kinnear appeared in a gray flannel tracksuit that made him look as if he had just emerged from an unmade bed at midday after a hard night’s drug-taking somewhere in a housing project. During the most famous soliloquy of all, he lit up a cigarette, and I almost hoped that the Health and Safety people would come and take him away for breach of the law against smoking in a public building.

The overall conception of the director, Nicholas Hytner, as he described it in an interview, was based on an interpretation that I found unconvincing to the point of absurdity: namely, that Hamlet was an allegory of totalitarianism—Elizabethan England having been a totalitarian state—and that its main theme was the omnipresence of surveillance. No interpretation can be definitive of a work such as Hamlet, of course, in proof of which whole libraries have been written about its meaning; but it does not follow from the fact that no interpretation is definitive that any interpretation is possible. Here, Osric is got up like a junior officer of a Communist police force—and, indeed, plays him as grim-visaged, making a mockery of Hamlet’s description of him as a water fly. Communist policemen were many things, but not water flies. In his determination to pursue an impossible interpretation, one had the impression, therefore, that Hytner was determined not so much to out-Herod Herod as to out-Shakespeare Shakespeare.

All productions of Hamlet cut the text: without such cuts, it takes five hours to perform, and indeed there are inessential passages that, if played, would reduce the dramatic tension. But one tiny change in the text revealed Hytner’s incompetence. Polonius, the king’s pompous and verbose adviser, tells the king and queen that Hamlet is mad—as usual, making ten words do the work of one. Exasperated, the queen asks him to speak with “More matter, with less art.”

Madam, I swear I use no art at all.
That he is mad, ’tis true. ’Tis true, ’tis pity,
And pity ’tis ’tis true—a foolish figure;
But farewell it, for I will use no art.

Hytner changed the word “figure” in this passage to “expression”—a foolish expression rather than a foolish figure. When I heard this, I experienced a shock, as if live wires had been built into my seat to wake me up from time to time. Not only is it insulting to an audience to suppose that it would not understand that the figure meant here was a figure of speech; but the substitution also ruins the rhythm of the lines. Worse still, it destroys the irony—for, of course, the alliteration in which Polonius clearly delights is part of the art that he swears that he does not use. Seldom can the substitution of a single word for another have wrought so much aesthetic havoc.

For all Hytner’s efforts, however, it is difficult to empty Hamlet entirely of its impact. It is like an unsinkable ship or an indestructible building: you could set it on the moon, among moon men, and it would still mean something. But what, exactly?

Trying to decide the meaning of Hamlet is something like trying to decide the meaning of life; everyone has his opinion. Ernest Jones, the Welsh doctor who was Freud’s disciple and apostle in the English-speaking world and who wrote a three-volume hagiography of his master, famously used Hamlet as grist for the mill of the Oedipus complex. (In the National Theatre production, Gertrude was played as an overripe slut running to plumpness who doesn’t quite fit into her female executive’s business suit and who pours herself Scotch at the drop of a metaphor.) As a doctor myself, I have long been fascinated by the minor question of the pharmacology of Hamlet, for quite a lot of poisoning goes on in the play, with three different poisons.

Most famously, of course, is the leprous distilment, the cursèd hebona, that Claudius pours fatally into the ear of Hamlet’s father as he sleeps in his garden. Hebona does not exist as a substance: What, then, is it? And can one, in fact, be poisoned to death by the aural route? These are the kinds of unessential but fascinating questions that preoccupy some aging doctors at the end of their careers.

I once attended a lecture on this subject by an ear, nose, and throat surgeon nearing retirement himself. First, he assured the audience that some unpleasant experiments on cats had established that it was possible to kill creatures, at least cats, in this way (Shakespeare was a remarkable physiologist for his time); but the poison with which the cats were killed would not have been available in Elizabethan England. I had supposed until going to this lecture that, because of the verbal similarity, hebona was henbane, a common poisonous plant in England that contains hyoscyamine and scopolamine; but experimental evidence (not from humans) suggests that it would be impossible to kill by this method. According to the surgeon, “distilment” of yew berries would be the most likely candidate; but the truth cannot be known.

There is also the less studied but equally intriguing question of the identity of the rapidly fatal poison that Laertes smears on the point of his rapier—with which he intends to kill Hamlet—as well as that of the poison that Claudius dissolves in the wine that he will give Hamlet if the rapier fails to kill him and that kills Gertrude quickly instead, when she drinks the wine in his place. In those days, there was neither cyanide nor ricin—the poison at the end of a pointed umbrella used by the Bulgarian secret service in 1979 to kill the Bulgarian dissident Georgi Markov in London (and which, in any case, did not kill him as quickly as Laertes’s “unction” bought “of a mountebank” killed both Hamlet and himself). Clearly, though, Shakespeare’s audience must have believed that such poisons existed, even if they did not exist: a superstition, perhaps, akin to our confidence that supposedly wonder-working psychotropic drugs will smooth over all the difficulties of life.

Yet questions about the poisons in Hamlet hardly go to the heart of the play’s meaning, which, of course, lies elsewhere. The mechanics of a machine are not its purpose, which can only be in the mind of its maker: and we cannot know what was in the mind of the maker of Hamlet, the most elusive and protean of all authors. We can only surmise.

A few lines, easily overlooked, may be crucial to the meaning of a Shakespearean tragedy, or so I find it useful to think. For example, in King Lear, Kent warns the king, who wants to retire and divide his kingdom among his three daughters, not to place too much weight upon their words and, in particular, not to be influenced by Cordelia’s refusal to proclaim her love in the grandiloquent manner of her two sisters:

Nor are those empty-hearted whose low sound
Reverbs no hollowness.

It is Lear’s naïve credence in words alone—his refusal to believe that they can be hollow, that they can conceal at least as much as they reveal—that leads to tragedy. (“Words,” wrote Hobbes, within living memory of Shakespeare, “are the money of fools.”) How many tragedies have resulted from Lear’s mistake! And Lear, though a fool, is far from unintelligent: foolishness is not the same as intellectual incapacity.

The lines that seem to me crucial in Hamlet are those that occur in act 3, scene 2, in which Rosencrantz and Guildenstern seek, at Claudius’s behest, to sound out the reasons for Hamlet’s strange behavior, so akin to madness. Hamlet asks Guildenstern to play upon a pipe. “I know no touch of it, my lord,” he replies, and when Hamlet insists, pointing out the stops, Guildenstern says, “But these cannot I command to any utterance of harmony; I have not the skill.” Hamlet then says:

Why, look you now, how unworthy a thing you make of me! You would play upon me. You would seem to know my stops; you would pluck out the heart of my mystery. You would sound me from my lowest note to the top of my compass; and there is much music, excellent voice, in this little organ, yet cannot you make it speak? ’Sblood, do you think I am easier to be played on than a pipe? Call me what instrument you will, though you can fret me, you cannot play upon me.

This passage is of enormous significance on many levels—personal, philosophical, psychological, and even political. For the mystery of Hamlet, that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern would “pluck out,” is the mystery of what it is to be a human being. If we could pluck out that mystery, then we should be able to play upon people as upon a pipe, treat them as objects rather than as subjects. Is such a thing conceivable? What are the consequences if we think that we can pluck out the heart of Man’s mystery? What are the consequences if we accept that we cannot? What is it to understand others, to understand oneself?

Hamlet tells Osric that “to know a man well were to know himself [i.e., oneself]”; but since it is impossible to know another man well, it is impossible to know oneself, either. Often, I have asked patients who have demanded an explanation of their conduct—always conduct that is problematical to them or to others—what would count as an explanation that would satisfy them completely, so that they now understood their behavior. Not one, from total illiterate to Ph.D., could answer. They wanted the illusion of understanding rather than understanding itself: for humankind cannot bear too much uncertainty.

Hamlet does not want to be understood because he fears that such understanding would confer power on him who possessed it, and he does not want to be played upon like a pipe. Polonius, a courtier by profession and a faithful servant of whoever is in power, is confident that he understands the cause of Hamlet’s mad, or madcap, behavior: it is the unrequited love of his daughter, Ophelia. “That hath made him mad,” he informs her. Later, he tells the king that “I have found / The very cause of Hamlet’s lunacy.” He tells Claudius, with all the certainty of a psychiatric formulation, that, because of Ophelia’s rejection, Hamlet

Fell into a sadness, then into a fast,
Thence to a watch, thence into a weakness,
Thence to a lightness, and, by this declension,
Into the madness wherein now he raves
And all we mourn for.

Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother, does not agree, but holds firmly to a theory of her own. She tells the king:

I doubt it is no other but the main:
His father’s death and our o’erhasty marriage.

Polonius devises a test of Hamlet’s unrequited love for Ophelia by arranging for them to meet, while he and the king hide to observe the scene. The test fails utterly. “Love! His affections do not that way tend,” the king concludes. But Polonius is unwilling to give up, as many of us are when our theories are disproved: “But yet do I believe / The origin and commencement of his grief / Sprung from neglected love.”

Does Hamlet love Ophelia, or did he ever? Trying to answer this question is like picking the petals off a daisy to find the answer: he loves her, he loves her not, he loves her. . . . In the first act, Ophelia tells her father: “He hath, my lord, of late made many tenders / Of his affection to me.” And: “My lord, he hath importun’d me with love / In honourable fashion.” And again: “And hath given countenance to his speech, my lord, / With almost all the holy vows of heaven.”

In act 3, Hamlet says to Ophelia that “I did love you once,” but a few lines later that “I loved you not.” Then he treats her almost as a prostitute:

I have heard of your paintings too, well enough. God hath given you one face, and you make yourselves another: You jig, you amble, and you lisp.

But in act 5, at Ophelia’s funeral, Hamlet, irritated by Laertes’s protestations of love for his sister, says:

I loved Ophelia. Forty thousand brothers
Could not with all their quantity of love,
Make up my sum.

Not only is it impossible to detect what Hamlet’s feelings for Ophelia really are or ever were, but it is also likely that Hamlet himself does not know what his feelings really are or were. And if he does not know, how could he, let alone Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, pluck out the heart of his mystery? This confusion of sentiments is not abnormal; on the contrary, it is frequent and even universal—indeed, inevitable—given man’s conflicting and irreconcilable desires. Thus, simple explanations of human conduct—economic interest, low levels of serotonin, the Oedipus complex—will always fail.

Hamlet is opaque to others—they cannot work out whether he is really mad or only faking madness (though a paper in The British Journal of Psychiatry once found that the majority of people who persistently faked madness wound up truly mad)—but he is no more transparent to himself. He does not understand his own delay in revenging his father on Claudius, the usurping king:

Now, whether it be
Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple
Of thinking too precisely on th’ event—
A thought which, quartered, hath but one part wisdom,
And ever three parts coward—I do not know
Why yet I live to say “This thing’s to do,”
Sith I have cause and will and strength and means
To do’t.

In other words, no exterior cause exists to prevent Hamlet from doing what he thinks he ought to do but only an interior one, and he cannot identify it. He knows neither the origin nor the nature of his own thoughts. As soon as an explanation occurs to him—moral scruple—he thinks, “But is it really that, is it not really cowardice?” Which came first and is the source of the other, scruple or cowardice? Such a question is not susceptible to a definite answer, and elsewhere Hamlet says:

Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.

Conscience here means not scruple but self-consciousness, too much of which serves as an obstacle to resolute action. Is, then, the answer to suppress “conscience”—self-consciousness—and press ahead regardless? By no means, for

What is a man,
If his chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more.
Sure he that made us with such large discourse,
Looking before and after, gave us not
That capability and godlike reason
To fust in us unused.

If man is to be distinguished from the lower animals, he must reflect upon the past and consider the future (“looking before and after”); and even on the evolutionary view, which sees man as the product of an impersonal and purposeless process, consciousness must serve some biological function and cannot merely “fust in us unused.” More succinctly, Hamlet says: “Give me that man that is not passion’s slave”—in other words, that man whose actions are the product of his thoughts as well as of his feelings.

Hamlet the character and Hamlet the play elucidate the inevitable and insoluble paradoxes of human existence, the very heart of our mystery, which no technical sophistication will ever pluck out: a mystery that explains why puzzlement at our own situation is the permanent condition of mankind.

Man is condemned by his nature to the task of understanding himself, but he can never do so fully. That inability is both good and bad: bad, because it condemns us, Sisyphus-like, to an impossible task destructive of our tranquillity; good, because if we were to understand ourselves, we should play upon one another as upon a pipe, or at least be played upon by some malevolent and omniscient political authority. (The impossibility of total understanding is what makes totalitarianism unviable in the long run. It makes Mao’s dictum, that the masses are like a blank sheet of paper on which the most beautiful characters and poems could be written, simultaneously fatuous and evil.) Our impatient and hubristic pretense, repeated throughout history, that we fully understand ourselves and others inevitably leads to nemesis.

All men must interact with others, and some must act politically—but always on an incomplete knowledge both of themselves and others. They always see as through a glass darkly. Too analytical, too reflective, and too scrupulous, Hamlet brings about the death of all the play’s main characters—Polonius, Ophelia, Laertes, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Gertrude, Claudius, himself—by his delay and irresolution. But precipitate and unreflective action is at least as disastrous. Hamlet meets Fortinbras, who is commanding an army to fight the Poles over a worthless patch of land. He reflects:

I see
The imminent death of twenty thousand men
That, for a fantasy and trick of fame,
Go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot
Whereon the numbers cannot try the cause,
Which is not tomb enough and continent
To hide the slain.

A little more of Hamlet’s irresolution, scruple, and reflection might prevent a hecatomb of pointless death.

What is the solution to the dilemma? None exists that can be laid down in advance of any particular situation. The best that can be hoped for is the person who can discipline his thoughts by his feelings and his feelings by his thoughts:

And blest are those
Whose blood and judgment are so well commingled
That they are not a pipe for Fortune’s finger
To sound what stop she please.

First published in City Journal.

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 7:13 AM by Theodore Dalrymple
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

From the Danish Edition of The Local

Millatu Ibrahim, which is reported to have "strong connections" with the Islamic State, is now active in Denmark and has released its first video aimed at recruiting other Danish Muslims to its cause. 

Ekstra Bladet reported on Sunday that the group’s members include some of Denmark’s most radical Islamists and takes its inspiration from the Islamic State, the terrorist organisation alternately known as Isis. According to the newspaper, several of the group’s members have fought in Syria and Iraq. 
 
Millatu Ibrahim posted its first Danish video to YouTube last week, filmed in Aarhus’s Gjellerupparken. . . The man speaks both Arabic and Danish in the video. The Islamist praises both Isis leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and former Al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed by the United State in 2006.

The man also condemns Danish democracy and those Danish Muslims who support it. “We condemn those who worship democracy. We condemn them for eternity,” the man says. 
 
According to Ekstra Bladet, the Danish branch of Millatu Ibrahim was established in Vejle and also includes known Islamists from Copenhagen, Aarhus, Odense and Aalborg. 

Nico Prucha, a jihadist expert at the University of Vienna’s Asutrain Institute for International Affairs, told the newspaper that “Many followers of Millatu are full-blooded members of the Islamic State and fight in the Middle East for their caliphate. Millatu Ibrahim is a part of the European Islamist network, which has connections in Austria, Germany, Belgium, France and the UK so I’m not at all surprised that they’ve now shown up in Denmark,” 
 
Millatu Ibrahim is a Salafist organisation that was banned by the German government in June 2012. 

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 6:42 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear

Monday, 15 September 2014
clear

From The Telegraph
The Briton threatened with execution
next by Islamic State militants in Syria is a Manchester taxi driver who drove a van full of aid to Syria to help children in the war-torn country. Alan Henning had taken time off from his job to deliver a van full of clothes and bedding he and friends had collected, when he was abducted on Boxing Day last year.

The 47-year-old father of two was part of a small aid group called Aid 4 Syria, friends told The Telegraph, and he was on his third convoy to the country when he was seized by masked men near the Turkish border. He is seen in the closing seconds of a horrific two-and-a-half minute video released on Saturday night showing the beheading of another British aid worker, David Haines.

Mr Henning appears kneeling in the desert wearing in orange, shapeless clothes, as the executioner stands behind him and threatens David Cameron "will have the blood of your people on your hands" if he joins an American military alliance to fight the militants. 

Mr Henning is believed to have been seized when fighters loyal to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil) overran the town of Ad Dana where he was working with refugees close to the Turkish border. He was thrown into a makeshift prison by the extremists, but initially thought his work for a Muslim charity would save him. 

I have no reason to believe that Mr Henning is anything other than a well-meaning but incredibily naive person who wanted to help and fancied a bit of adventure. The Daily Mail has a little more information about the people he was working with and the Charity organising them. 

Sources said the trip was organised by Worcester-based Muslim aid charity Al Fatiha Global.

A friend who accompanied him to Syria last year – but said he could not talk about the kidnapping – said Mr Henning was not Muslim but had ‘wanted to do his bit’.

‘He’s done more than anyone could possibly imagine for the children of Syria – it would take me a week to tell you about it if I was allowed to,’ he said. ‘The best of the best – that’s the only way I can describe him. This is the heartbreaking thing, the amount this guy has done. Half the people of Syria are grateful to him.’

Asked why he was targeted by kidnappers, the friend said: ‘That’s what terrorists do, they target people. It wasn’t because he’s white, it’s because he’s a non-Muslim. They’ve got their own perverted view of Islam.’

Asked if others in the convoy were also kidnapped, he said he could not ‘go into it’, but that ‘everyone else got back eventually’.

Al Fatiha Global isn't sqeaky clean. They are under investigation by the Charity Commission for their alleged links to jihadi terrorism in Syria. They are also feared to be working in Gaza with Hamas. 

This is from the Charity Commission's own website

The Charity Commission, the independent regulator of charities in England and Wales, has opened a statutory inquiry into Al-Fatiha Global (registered charity number 1056562). The inquiry is investigating serious concerns about the governance and financial management of the charity. The Commission had been monitoring the charity since 2013, and the inquiry, which is the most serious level of the regulator's investigatory work, opened on 21 March 2014.

The regulator says it is investigating:

  • Whether the trustees are effectively discharging their duties under charity law with particular regard to the proper accounting for the income and expenditure of the charity, and the management of the charity in accordance with its governing document and the law.
  • Regulatory issues in connection with reports in the public domain alleging inappropriate links between the charity and individuals purportedly involved in supporting armed or other inappropriate activities in Syria.

So the charity was being monitored long before Mr Henning set out at Christmas. If only he had known. Al Fatiha is appealing the investigation. Well they would, wouldn't they?

The Worcester News also reported on the charity earlier this year.

A CHARITY leader from Worcester has been pictured with his arms around two masked gunmen in Syria, according to The Sun. A photograph in the newspaper shows Adeel Ali of the charity Al-Fatiha Global sandwiched between two men with AK47 assault rifles, their faces obscured by a ski mask and scarf and both wearing military-style gear.

The charity has carried out aid work in Syria, Kashmir, Burma and Palestine but concerns were expressed in the tabloid about where donations were ending up. Meanwhile, the Charity Commission confirmed it is now monitoring the Worcester-based charity. 

A spokesman for Worcester City Council confirmed that staff from Worcestershire Regulatory Services had identified former taxi driver Adniel Mumtaz Ali as being the man in The Sun photographs described as 'Adeel Ali' in The Sun. Mr Ali was identified by regulatory service staff as the same man from his passport photograph. The city council spokesman said Mr Ali was a taxi driver for Commandery Cars but his licence expired on January 3 and he had not renewed it. 

Picture from the Mail captioned 

Humanitarian aid: Alan Henning, circled, with other volunteers before setting off for the Syrian border

Remember, these other volunteers got back from Syria eventually OK but won't go into how and what happened. 

clear
Posted on 09/15/2014 3:47 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear
clear
Posted on 09/14/2014 8:46 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear

Three totally predictable stories from Down Under, as Muslims attempt various kinds of damage control and even engage in dawa.

First, let's look at an attempt to play the victim card, from Muslims closest to where an Islamic bookshop was raided and Muslims arrested, one of whom has been charged with recruiting for the wholly-Islamically-orthodox Islamic State.  As unquestioningly reported by the ABC's Leonie Mellor.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-14/logan-mosque-targetted-by-anti-muslim-phamplets/5742726

"Logan Mosque Targeted With Anti-Muslim Pamphlets, Sparking Fears of Violence."

Not bombs. Not graffiti.  Not a screaming mob with iron bars trying to break down the doors. Pamphlets. And note that there is not the tiniest hint that just perhaps some of the non-Muslim persons living near that mosque might just have curiously opened up a Koran, or even bought some of the books from that bookshop - the ones in English - and found what they read there to be deeply disturbing, even threatening?  And maybe some of those non-Muslims have visited MEMRI, or sampled Islamic sermons - even by Aussie-background converts to Islam, of which there are not a few - on youtube, and heard there the most blood-curdling threats issued against all sorts and conditions of non-Muslims, qua non-Muslims?   - CM

"Islamic leaders in south-east Queensland say they are being targeted by an increase in hate crimes, following an increase in the terror threat level (that is: a warning that there is an increased probability that orthodox Muslims resident within Australia may murderously attack non-Muslim Australians - CM) and the arrests of two people allegedly linked with fighting in Syria.

Two devout Muslims who are in sympathy with the Muslims who are devoutly and scrupulously imitating warlord Mohammed in Syria and Iraq. - CM

'Logan mosque spokesman Ali Kabri said that overnight on Saturday, someone left pamphlets outside the mosque, filled with abusive language and photographs, saying Australian Muslims were not welcome in the country.

I observe that there is no photograph of these alleged pamphlets nor even a full transcript of what they said nor even of whether they had a byline identifying them as the product of a specific person or organisation.  In the absence of such information, it is impossible to judge what kind of thing they were, precisely.  Because it is perfectly possible that the Mosque may be indulging in a hoax, *faking* a "hate crime" in order to be able to play victim...even while the kidnappings, rapes, force-conversions and beheadings, carried out by persons who quote verses of the Quran day in and day out, and who are imitating Mohammed in every way, are piling up in Syria, Iraq, and northern Nigeria.  I would urge the police, when investigating, to bear in mind the real possibility that this and other claimed incidents may be fabricated, not real.  

A further thought is this: that what Muslims regard as "abusive language" is not necessarily what non-Muslims think of as abusive.  The mere refusal to praise Mohammed or to fawn upon and flatter Muslims and bow to their every demand may be construed as abusive.  Asia Bibi is on death in Pakistan, having been accused of "blasphemy!!" because she dared to say that she thought Jesus was preferable to Mohammed. Theo Van Gogh was murdered by a pious Muslim, who saw him as a "blasphemer", because he had dared to make a short film that exposed and criticised the abuse of women that is commanded or condoned by core Islamic texts.  Condemnation of Islamic practices - e.g. a condemnation of polygyny, of the FGM that is declared obligatory by the Shafiite school, of the wife-beating that is commanded in Surah 4:34, or of the child "marriage" that is sacralised by Mohammed's marital rape of 9 year old Aisha, or of the apostasy law, or of the cruelty and oppression of the dhimma system that is developed from principles established in Surah 9 - might also be seen as "abusive" by Muslims. For all we know, those "abusive" pamphlets, if real rather than faked, may simply have contained an accurate critique of the deplorable character of Mohammed and of assorted objectionable and evil mohammedan teachings and practices, followed by a statement of the logical conclusion: that persons who approve of and engage in or intend to engage in such practices, which are deemed illegal and immoral in Australia, ought not to continue to reside here. - CM

'In the past few days, officials also discovered a photo of the Mecca (of the Kaaba? - CM) and a photo of a pig's head close by.

No bomb. No arson. No graffiti.  No lynch mob. Two photographs.  Again, the police should not rule out possible fakery.  Question: does the mosque or any adjoining premises have security cameras in operation? And have the items in question been checked for fingerprints? - CM

"It followed an incident two months ago when body parts of a pig were found outside the mosque.

To repeat, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that this is all a ploy so that the Muslims can cry, "look, we are poor little persecuted victims!" I will also remark that, compared to videos of allahuakbaring thugs beheading real live Infidel people - three western hostages ritually murdered in the past month - and the ritual Islamic murders of Lee Rigby in London and of a rabbi, two little boys, and of 8 year old Miriam Monsonego in a schoolyard in Toulouse, and the news that Muslim gangs were targeting and sadistically raping and pimping more than a thousand under-age non-Muslim schoolgirls in the UK - the mere finding of a few pig parts outside a mosque in Logan is small potatoes. If it was left by non-Muslims rather than "planted" by Muslims in order to be "found" and theatrically decried, then it reads more as a clumsy attempt - by means of "pig pollution" - to make the site Islamically impure, in the hope that the (correctly perceived to be dangerous and threatening) Muslims will depart, rather than as a threat to do to the Muslims as was done to the pig. Human heads on spikes lining a main road, as ISIS has been doing, and beheadings, stonings and limb-choppings in Chop Chop Square in Saudi Arabia; now that's what I call offensive. - CM

"It's appalling...there's an emotional fear. There's emotion of disgust", Mr Kabri said.

Might not all those beheadings in Iraq and Syria, of late, not have something to do with that disgust and that fear, Mr Kabri? You and your local branch of the Allah Gang or Mohammedan Mob are, after all, wearing exactly the same badge and flying the same black flag as those - thoroughly orthodox and pious - Mohammedans in Iraq and Syria.  And it was pious Quran-quoting Mohammedans who kidnapped all those schoolgirls in Nigeria and proudly declared that they would be selling them on the open market - exactly as Mohammed and his merry men did to captive Infidel women and girls, back in the day; so might not that, too, be producing some entirely rational disgust and fear, among non-Muslims who are in possession of their commonsense and ability to reason?  Some of us, indeed more and more of us, are reading the Quran, and your other "sacred" texts, Mr Kabri, and we don't like what we find...to put it mildly. - CM

"There's emotion of threat to the Muslim community.  Because we're afraid that for now there are pamphlets, but it could lead to violence."

You're projecting, Mr Kabri.  Because even within Australia, it is Muslims who have plotted or attempted or in fact engaged in violence against non-Muslims much more than the reverse.  There were Muslim rape gangs deliberately targeting non-Muslim Aussie girls, targeting them for degrading and brutal treatment precisely because they were not Muslim and were therefore perceived as lawful prey; there has not been even one non-Muslim rape gang systematically and preferentially targeting Muslim girls.  And worldwide, wherever Muslims dominate, there are continual outbreaks of violence against the non-Muslim minorities, usually on the basis of deliberately-fabricated rumours and accusations.  So, Mr Kabri, are you really afraid that Aussies might do to you as Muslim mobs routinely do to the hapless Christian and Hindu communities in Pakistan?  The burning down of houses and shrines, the pillage, the beatings, the gang rapes of minor girls that go unpunished by the authorities? If you are trying to pretend that you think this sort of thing might be done to Muslims in Australia, by non-Muslims, then you are talking nonsense and you know you are talking nonsense. - CM

"We're afraid for our families and afraid for our children".

Reversal of reality. It is non-Muslim Australians who, if they have a gram of commonsense, observe the steady swelling of the Muslim presence in Australia, and observe how Muslims behave to non-Muslims everywhere on earth that Muslims dominate, and fear for their - the non-Muslims' - families and children. - CM

'Mr Kabri said the "silly actions" of a few showed Australia to be an intolerant society to the rest of the world.

Now that's a mind-bending twisting of the Tiny Minority of Extremists meme!   - CM

"But I don't believe we're an intolerant society, we're a tolerant society", he said.

Define "we". Define "tolerant".  Because tolerating the intolerant - that is, the Mohammedan Mobsters whose book teaches them to be "harsh" toward the unbelievers, and who fully intend to be as intolerant as they possibly can, as soon as they can achieve a position of dominance, which position they are busily pursuing, by fair means and foul, one of those means being the deployment of a pantomime of victimhood - is not a good idea. - CM

'Mr Kabri said they held their faith and their country very close to them.

You cannot pledge allegiance both to the Muslim Ummah and to the infidel nation-state of Australia which is part of the dar al Harb.  When Mr Kabri says Muslims in Australia regard Australia as "their" country he may not mean what uninformed infidel Australians think he means. He may have in mind the orthodox Muslim doctrine that every inch of ground on earth rightly belongs to Muslims, and that unbelievers qua unbelievers have no right to life, liberty or property anywhere on earth. - CM

"Whatever happens overseas...we don't have control in it. That goes for every single Australian", he said.

"We love Australia as much as any other Australian does".

He cannot - if he is in any sense a pious and fully-instructed Muslim - love the infidel nation-state full of dirty unbelievers. The territory, however, comprises a very nice piece of real estate that he and other Musims would surely like to see brought under Muslim control and subjected to the sharia of Islam. Lots of lovely loot, too. - CM

"For us, the message is one and only, we need to live in this country with peace and unity".

Define "peace", Mr Kabri.

Define "unity".  Do I hear the echo of the word "Tawheed"??  And - some of us, Mr Kabri, have found out about "loyalty and enmity", the enmity being the unremitting hostility and contempt Muslims are supposed to nurture in their hearts - and enact in their deeds - against us dirty unbelievers, and we have found out about Islam's grim division of the world into Dar al Harb, the region of war, and Dar al Islam, the region of 'submission' (I would call it, Enslavement), the latter being enjoined to wage war ceaselessly upon the former until "peace" is achieved, "peace" being the state of affairs that obtains when every part of dar al Harb has ceased to exist, its people being all dead, or reduced to the near-slave status of dhimmis, or mentally "broken" and "converted" to Islam, and subjected to the sharia (just as in the territories now controlled by the "Islamic State").   When you and other Mohammedan spinmeisters prattle of "peace" and "unity" these are the things I bear grimly in mind. - CM

"We need to condemn extremism in any way shape or form".

Define "extremism". Further question: what do you think of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Mr Kabri? Is she an extremist?  Oh, and Asia Bibi.  Is she an extremist?  Is Magdi Allam an extremist?  Is Geert Wilders, who earlier this month defined the Koran as a license to kill, and stated - correctly - that its pages drip with blood, an "extremist"? - CM

'The pamphlets have been reported to police.

I hope the police have their BS detectors switched to "high", and are not ruling out the possibility of a hoax. - CM

'Queensland Premier Campbell Newman said it was not about religion but about people involved in criminal acts'.

Have you ever read a truthful account of the career of Mohammed, dear Premier?  Wouldn't you say that robbing caravans was a criminal act?  Ordering assassinations of elderly poets who had mocked the Muslims?  Having a man murdered and then raping the man's 17 year old wife on the very same day that the murder took place?  Taking and using and trading in slaves?  And yet the heart and soul and core of Islam is the belief that whatever Mohammed did, was right, and that therefore Muslim men who do as Mohammed did  - including taking to bed a nine-year-old girl, or taking slaves, including sex slaves, or murdering or ordering the murder of a person who criticises Islam - are doing nothing wrong at all. - CM

"I know that the leaders of the Muslim community in this state and south-east Queensland in particular are outraged that some people, a minority, are using their religion as a justification for criminal acts or intentions", he said.

"Outraged".  Maybe.  All those horrendous beheading videos, and the rest of it, coming out of Islamic State, are awfully bad PR, after all, at a time when the mohammedan colony in Australia as a whole, and in particular, in Queensland, is as yet relatively small, and cannot afford to annoy or alarm the circumambient unbelievers too much...yet.  As for "minority"...dear Premier, reflect for a moment on just how many Muslims are flocking to join the Islamic State, not to mention all those who rush off to join Boko Haram, or Al Shabaab, and then ask yourself, is this really such a "tiny" minority after all?  But as for the "criminal acts"; every single thing that the Islamic State jihadis are doing, can be supported from the canonical Islamic texts, and is no different from things that Mohammed is believed to have done, and is admired for having done, by any pious Muslim.  

At some point, Premier Newman, you need to wake up and realize that the Islamic State is, well, Islamic.  Thoroughly, purely, classically Islamic.  Just because most Muslims in Australia are in "Mecca mode" at the moment, more or less, playing nice and keeping a low profile while they build their numbers and infiltrate our institutions, doesn't mean they'll stay that way; if they are permitted to grow more numerous and powerful, sooner or later they will flip to "Medina mode"...just as has happened in northern Nigeria, and as is happening in Iraq and Syria.  And then all hell will break loose.  Dear Premier Newman, you need to read Sam Solomon's book "Al Hijra: the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration", and with it Mark Durie's book "The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom", and get a clue. Fast. - CM

"This is a wonderful multicultural society we have".

It won't stay that way, if the mohammedan mob is allowed to grow, and grow, and grow. There are no Jews left in Iraq, today; soon there will be no Yazidis, and none left of the indigenous Assyrian Christians, and no Mandaeans;  and then Iraq will be a Muslim monoculture.  Wherever Islam dominates, it tends toward a bleak monoculture of Islam, Islam, Islam, nothing but Islam.  Bangladesh and Pakistan are heading in that direction rapidly, as the population of Hindus and of other minorities steadily falls in the face of Muslim mistreatment; and Malaysia, too, grows less multicultural by the day, as the Hindus and Christians and Buddhists leave, or give up and convert to Islam.  - CM

"What we're seeing is not about a religion.

Wrong, Premier Newman. It is all about a religion. Islam, the religion of blood and war, the religion of domination. - CM

"It's about a very small minority group (how small? - given the numbers of Muslims, from all over the world, flooding into Iraq to join Islamic State, it looks less "small" every day - CM) who are intent on undertaking criminal acts and we should see it for what it is and we should reject them and their intentions, just like we would any criminal group".

to repeat: Islamic State members are imitating Mohammed and following the sunnah to the letter.

And now for a little more on those eeevil pamphlets, plus information on the latest attempt at dawa, as reported by Channel Nine TV news.

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2014/09/14/17/30/queensland-mosque-opens-doors-to-community-after-vile-hate-attacks#JM17JszJeci2kU2Y.99

"Brisbane mosques open doors to ease community fears".

"Two Brisbane mosques will open their doors to the community after one was attacked with anti-Muslim pamphlets.

Or, after one claimed to have been attacked.  - CM

'Logan and Holland Park mosques will hold open sessions this Friday, from 3 to 4 pm, for people to come and ask questions about the Islamic faith and community.

And to be fed wall-to-wall nonsense and lies.  "Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly".  One hopes that a large contingent of thoroughly-well-informed Australian Infidels will turn up on the day, scope out the enemy bases from every angle, and ask all the really awkward questions that the mohammedans doing the dawa and deflection are hoping not to be asked.  - CM

"There will also be a full open day at Logan mosque on October 25.

I hope that Q Society will be able to organise a party to attend, so as to prevent other, less well-informed kuffar from being totally bamboozled. - CM

'The decision was made in response to an incident overnight were up to 40 pamphlets filled with abusive, anti-Muslim language, were left outside Logan mosque.

'The pamphlets read, "Terrorists born in Australia are not Australians. They're Muslims".

Is that all?  If so, all it did - if it was produced by non-Muslims and is not a hoax "planted" by the Muslims themselves to enable them to pretend to be victims - was draw attention to a fact: the fact of Muslim loyalty to the Ummah or Mohammedan Mob, which not only requires that they not give allegiance to a non-Islamic society and nation-state (such as Australia) but that they should actively work to overthrow and destroy it and replace it with a sharia-compliant Islamic state. - CM

'A spokesman for the mosque invited people to "come and see".

But will they see the faces of Muslim women wearing the slave mask? - CM

'Muslim leaders have been appalled at the recent anti-Islam attacks and worry that they could be a precursor to violence.

There have been no bombings, shootings, bashings, lynchings or arson or beheadings or kidnappings and rapes,  and I think I can confidently predict that there will not be any. (Though there have been, in the course of the past ten years, Muslim riots, Muslim plots - fortunately foiled - to kill lots of Aussie non-Muslims, and Muslim gang-rapes of Aussie girls).  

Trenchant, rational, fact-based public critique, on the other hand, including the pointing out of the many aspects of Muslim teaching and practice - including episodes in the life of Mohammed - that conflict with non-Muslim morality and law, does not constitute an "attack" in any real sense of the word and should not be complained of as such.  

And now to our third report - from the ABC's Allan Clarke, and his Muslim co-reporter or "minder", Mohammed Taha - which involves a lot more Muslim attempts at damage control and "spin", and more attempts to cry "victim!"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-14/is-fighter-father-warns-parents-vigilant-extremist-behaviour/5742858

"Father of Australian Islamic State Fighter Warns Parents to be Vigilant About Extremist Behaviour".

I suspect those warnings, so theatrically delivered, are largely intended for kuffar consumption. - CM

"The father of an Australian Islamic State fighter has told parents at a family picnic day to take their children's passports if they think their offspring plan on joining extremists.

'Thousands of people attended the community barbecue, Muslims Love Australia, in Lakemba in Sydney's south-west on Sunday.

Lakemba, which together with Auburn next door is now Australia's most heavily-Islamised area. And it didn't get that way by accident.  Paul Sheehan, in a classic article from 2006, describes some of the methods that Muslims used to drive out many of the resident kuffar, and to achieve a plurality, fast heading for a majority, here.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/paul-sheehan/ideals-become-casualties-of-war/2006/08/13/1155407666922.html

Excerpt:

"One of the edges of the global clash between Muslims and the rest is a bottle shop in a small and ratty shopping mall in western Sydney.

"The owner of the bottle shop is suffering low-level but steady harassment from his neighbours, who want him gone. He's a Christian who has been told repeatedly: "This is a Muslim area," and he is selling alcohol, which is proscribed by Islam.

"The one-hour parking zone outside the bottle shop is always occupied because local Muslims leave their cars there all day. The owner has written to the local council to complain, and nothing has been done. He does not want to be identified because he fears retribution. His reaction is sensible.

"A friend of mine, Jenny D, used to live in Lakemba. She began receiving insults from people in the street, usually Muslim women wearing headscarves, and sometimes Muslim men. If she wore a short skirt, she could expect abuse or comment. She left Lakemba..". END QUOTE

"Muslims Love Australia".  Sure they do. It's rich and full of plunder and the resident kuffar are, at present, all too foolishly accommodating. - CM

'The (PR and propaganda - CM) event was sponsored by Mamdouh Elomar, the father of Mohamed Elomar, who is wanted by Australia police after photos of him brandishing the severed heads of Syrian (that is: Syrian Alawite, deemed heretical by orthodox Sunni Muslims - CM) soldiers were posted on social media.

"I don't see my son, I just see him on the news", Mr Elomar said.  "I have no connection with him".

Damage control. Denial. - CM

'He said he wanted his son to stop what he was doing.

Fat chance of that. - CM

"Any parents of Muslim people that think that their kids, they try to think to go to overseas to fight up there, just stop them" he said. "Call the police to stop them, take their passports".

Time's not ripe for hot jihad, yet. It's alarming the kuffar.  Some of them are finding out about Islam, too soon, too fast.  Better to stay in Australia, lie low, help the Ummah to grow, rather than go to Syria and get killed. - CM

'He said the actions of the IS group had tarnished the Muslim faith.

Yeah, it's all about image.  I recall a poster at jihadwatch once remarking that Islam is about two things: thuggery, and image management.  Well, Mohamed Elomar is doing the thuggery; his dad, with this farcical "Muslims Love Australia" event, is doing the "image management".  But - "tarnished"?? They're merely showing the world what the Religion of Blood and War actually is all about. -  CM

"this is not the Islamic way. The way they take journalists and cut their heads, this is nonsense", he said.

The towers of skulls of beheaded non-Muslims that litter the 1400 year blood trail that Islam has left since its inception, tell me, O Mr Mamdouh Elomar, that you are a  liar, lying for Islam, lying to protect Islam, to protect the Ummah here from too much sceptical and wary scrutiny. - CM

"We don't believe in this and we don't support this".

Really? But the Quran tells you to "strike at their necks". - CM

'Event organiser Jamal Rifi said the gathering was organised to quell the pressure the local Muslim community was feeling, by inviting the wider community to break down misconceptions over food.

"We have different faiths, colours, and races all here to enjoy an Australian barbecue" Dr Rifi said.

Every morsel of the food was halal, I'll bet. - CM

"We know the heat is rising, the pressure is rising, we need [this barbecue} to be a valve to get all this pressure out.

To deflect. To distract. To bamboozle. To try to fool people into not seeing what their lying eyes are telling them every time they turn on the news and see yet another proudly- allahu-akbaring Muslim preparing to behead someone in the name of allah. - CM

"What better way to do it than to have a traditional Aussie barbecue, to see the best that Lakemba has to offer its people and food."

Lakemba that is becoming steadily more and more Islamic and less and less anything else.  Very instructive, that will have been, had any of the infidel attendees had their wits about them. - CM

'The attendees included Immigration Minister Scott Morrison, and race discrimination commissioner Dr Tim Southphommasane and New South Wales deputy police commissioner Catherine Burn.

I hope they had their BS detectors switched on to "high". - CM

'Dr Rifi said many young Australians were being drawn into the conflict by IS propagand on social media.

Don't look at the mosques, O infidel Aussies!! Whatever you do, don't look at the mosques!  Don't ask what's being taught in the home, the mosque, the Islamic school or Islamic bookshop. Blame the internets! - CM

"My message to our young people is "Imam Youtube" and "Shaykh YouTube" want your head", he said.

"They are attacking you to attract to a war that is non-islamic."

Really?  Looks awfully Islamic to me. Like every other jihad I've ever read about in the history books.  - CM

"What they are doing is barbaric - it has nothing to do with Islam".

And Mohammed never gave orders to cut off anybody's head or assassinate anybody, did he? He never killed a woman's male kin and then took her as a sex slave?   Pull the other leg, Dr Rifi, it plays "Waltzing Matilda". - CM

"Please seek the right religious knowledge from well-qualified people (here in Australia)".

In other words: Slow Jihad is where it's at, right now, in Australia. Don't alarm the kuffar prematurely. Too many of them are starting to wise up, already.   Better tone things down a bit. - CM

'Muslims Say Islamophobic Attacks Are Rising".

I'll bet that attacks on Jews in Australia have been more frequent, and of greater severity. - CM

'Dr Rifi said there had been a rise in Islamophobic attacks recently.

"We have seen a rise in mail sent to the Muslim community, and it's terrible mail" he said.

Examples, please.  Real ones.  And: is it anything like the hate mail that was sent - by a Muslim - to the family of an Aussie soldier killed in Afghanistan?  Anything like the hate mail that pours in to people like Robert Spencer of Jihadwatch, every single day? - CM

"There has been a spike in how our ladies have been treated on public transport and on the street".

They're not being kidnapped and raped and beaten up and forced to renounce their belief system, as is being done to non-Muslim women in quite a few Muslim countries I could name. - CM

"Racism elements within our society and extremist elements within our community are two faces of the same coin".

No.  Resisting or resenting Islamisation is not the same thing as the waging of murderous Jihad to impose Muslim dominance and the sharia.  Nor is it "racism"; it's commonsense. Some may express themselves clumsily and badly, but anyone who knows about the sharia of Islam, and what it enjoins, does not exactly feel happy - or safe - when they see yet another Muslim female parading down the street flaunting her sharia badge , the Slave Rag, and wearing a holier-than-thou expression. - CM

"Some members of the Muslim community at the barbecue said their friends had been verbally attacked.

I see no first-hand accounts here, interestingly enough, though I'll bet our two ABC reporters went looking for them.- CM

"I only heard of a story yesterday where a lady was verbally attacked in Surry Hills", attendee Nancy Rifaie said. "She's a business owner, and wears the headscarf.  She was told to leave the country, and they told her to watch out for her baby".

Really?  No interview with this nameless lady. - CM

'Another attendee Shadi Ghazal said, "There have been instances where Muslims have been attacked verbally and physically, especially those who wear the headscarf."

The Slave Rag. The Sharia Badge. The "rape-someone-else-she's-a dirty-kuffar-whore-and-I'm-a-pious-Muslimah" scarf.  In 1942, would someone have dared to complain that people were looking at them funny, saying nasty things, if they went out in Australian streets proudly displaying a Swastika armband or SS deathshead badge? -  CM

"My mum wears a headscarf.  Sometimes I do have a bit of concern for her going out especially to areas where there are not many Muslims".

Meanwhile: unislamically-dressed females, such as Paul Sheehan's personal friend who used to reside in Lakemba but left because of the constant, aggressive verbal harassment from male and female Muslims - including from headscarfed Muslimahs like this Shadi Ghazal's mum - tend to think twice before venturing into any area where there are mostly Muslims.  And I suspect that one would hesitate to don a Star of David before walking down any of the main streets in Islamised Lakemba.  

Personally, I think that the Muslims are exaggerating, and that the danger to non-Muslim females, and to visiblly identifiable Jews, is probably far greater, and more real, within the Islamised parts of our Australian cities, than any supposed danger faced by a Muslimah in the slave rag when she hops on a bus or train or walks down a street in a majority-Infidel area in Australia.

My advice to the Muslims: playing the victim card too loudly and too often - especially when it's quite clear that the claims of "persecution!" are grossly exaggerated and that anything you are suffering pales into insignficance compared to the atrocious and extreme abuse that your coreligionists are constantly inflicting on defenceless non-Muslims elsewhere in the world - is likely to backfire, in Australia. Because we really, really do not like whingers. - CM

 

clear
Posted on 09/14/2014 6:31 PM by Christina McIntosh
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear
clear
Posted on 09/14/2014 5:44 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear
clear
Posted on 09/14/2014 4:13 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear

Britain is set to impose curbs on Muslim Brotherhood-linked organisations and block activists moving to London after a report by a senior diplomat raised concerns over the group's links to extremists in the Middle East.

David Cameron asked Sir John Jenkins, the ambassador to Saudi Arabia, to compile a full report on the Muslim Brotherhood after Gulf allies put pressure on the government to curtail the movement's London-based operations.

Critics of the movement accuse it of links to jihadist groups and of pursuing divisive sectarian politics that infringe the freedom of other religions and Islamic interpretations. 

Officials privy to the drafting of Sir John's report said it had been handed over to Downing Street and a statement on its findings would be published before the end of the year.

While it stops short of proposing a ban on the Brotherhood, it accepts some of the movement's activity amounts to complicity with armed groups and extremists in the Middle East and elsewhere.

"We won't ban the Muslim Brotherhood," a Foreign Office diplomat told The Telegraph. "There are other things that can be done but not a ban."

A senior British official involved in the process said parts of the report are too sensitive to publish. "It's a very comprehensive look at the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in many countries. There have been submissions that have been given to us that are very sensitive. We couldn't go back to those places again if some of this information was put in the public domain."

The Muslim Brotherhood organisation was established in Egypt in 1928 and was ousted from government there last year. One of the main areas of concern raised with Sir John was Muslim Brotherhood charities that now face renewed scrutiny by the Charity Commission. It is known to have opened inquiries into alleged suspicions over funding to overseas terrorist organisations by at least three British-based Muslim Brotherhood charities.

A spokesman for the Commission told The Telegraph that Sir John had asked for its findings but would not discuss the nature of the information on the organisations under investigation. Broader political activities, including media and propaganda branches, also face tighter regulation. 

 

Egyptian officials believe much of its ongoing political activities have shifted to London, where the Brotherhood maintains an international office in Cricklewood. Where regular protests by British patriotic groups, including March for England take place. 

Ashraf Elkholy, Egypt's ambassador to Britain, said that the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood in his country had largely stopped functioning after senior figures were imprisoned.

He warned of the danger the group would use its London-based establishment to revive its influence in areas where it has come under pressure.

Speaking to Telegraph, Mr Elkholy said the ideological nature of the organisation and its financial links to a wide range of British groups was open to abuse. "The leadership here should be put under review by your side to be sure they have not incited things to be done in Egypt or in the Middle East," he said. "We take our own steps and our own plans to ensure our national security.

"London can be a hub. They are planning activities, such as opening a TV station and newspapers from here, that are part of their aims against us." 

clear
Posted on 09/14/2014 3:27 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014
clear

FEARS Muslim extremists could target serving Australian Defence Force members in a terrorist ­attack has sparked an official warning to the troops after a ­uniformed officer was abused in Sydney’s CBD. Just 48 hours before Australia increased the public terrorism alert to High, the Defence Security Authority underlined the risks of a Lee Rigby-style attack in an email obtained by The Sunday Telegraph.

Marked Security Intelligence Report, the memo details verbal threats made against a uniformed officer. It says the ADF member was approached by a group of young men and told to “go to the Middle East so we can blow your f ... in head off you c. t”. The incident was reportedly witnessed by a large group of ­people but the ADF member walked away from the scene.

Australian intelligence agencies have privately cited the Rigby case as one of their biggest fears because the brutal attack underlined that once intent was established the tools of a terrorist attack, in this case a car and knife, could be readily obtained.

Australia’s intelligence agencies have also cited the Rigby case to illustrate the risks of opportunistic, lone wolf attacks by homegrown terrorists. The warning underlines the three major risks intelligence chiefs have outlined: an opportunistic lone-wolf attack such as the Rigby case, the storming of a major shopping centre or building or a mass casualty event.

clear
Posted on 09/14/2014 5:45 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear

Sunday, 14 September 2014