In this instance, the suspect seems to have been motivated not by the jihad, but by anger at a New Zealand law regarding file sharing and intellectual property. That said, Judge Heather Simpson deserves applause for resisting pressure to give preferential treatment to a Muslim suspect.

Teen govt bomb threat accused named

By Matthew Theunissen
12:52 PM Wednesday Oct 12, 2011

A teenager who allegedly claimed explosives were hidden in government buildings has lost his bid for name suppression.

That’s despite his lawyer’s plea that publication could potentially mark the young Muslim as having links to international terrorism.

Ifraaz Joseph, 18, pleaded not guilty to one charge of threatening to harm people or property when he appeared in Manukau District Court this morning.

Defence lawyer Giles Harvey applied for interim suppression to be continued, arguing that his client’s Muslim background combined with what was being alleged could create a public backlash and put him and his family at risk.

There was the potential people could wrongly perceive links with international terrorism, he said.

Mr Harvey also argued that Joseph’s name was very similar to other male members of his family and publication could wrongly implicate them in the alleged crime.

Furthermore, “publication of his name might cause public stigma against the defendant regardless of whether he is acquitted or not”.

Judge Heather Simpson said she took into account Joseph’s young age: “he’s still at school and he should be protected, to some extent, from the foolishness of his own actions.”

However, she decided the seriousness of the charge, and the genuine public interest “in matters of this kind”, outweighed the potential harm publication could have on Joseph and his family.

She ordered that the defendant be referred to by his middle name, Ifraaz, to avoid possible confusion with other family members.

Mr Harvey also asked for a variation of Joseph’s bail conditions to allow him limited access to the internet to enable him to finish school assignments.

Judge Simpson postponed hearing this application until October 19 when further written material could be made available.

There will also be a case review hearing on November 22.

Joseph allegedly intended to cause significant disruption to the Government by suggesting there would be explosions in municipal buildings, court documents show.

The video, which was posted onto YouTube on September 6, also said Government and media websites would be hacked.

The threats were allegedly part of a protest against the new Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Act that came into effect earlier this month, police said.

Acting Detective Inspector Pete Jones of the Counties Manukau CIB said after the arrest that police took such threats very seriously.

Multiple areas of the police force worked together closely on the investigation, he said.

“Counties Manukau CIB and Wellington District were able to draw on the expertise of the National Cyber Crime Centre (NC3) and the Electronic Crime Laboratory to help us locate this individual.”

He said the investigation showed police could trace individuals who made serious threats on the internet.

From nzherald.co.nz

Gates of Vienna has the story:

Editor’s note: The following article was a response to a piece in Aftenposten that likened Fjordman to a Nazi. The paper denied him his statutory “right of reply”, so he is publishing his prepared response here and at other online locations instead.

We encourage as many blogs as possible to mirror these posts. Our goal is for more people to read this article than if it had been published in Aftenposten, as Fjordman originally intended. The Norwegian MSM will discover that they no longer control the flow of information to the public. We will demonstrate that the “new media” can do a better job of disseminating news than the newspapers can.

I sent them this essay a few days ago (as Peder Jensen, of course) for review. They rejected it. I’m not going to claim that it is the best text I have ever written, but I think it is at least as well-written, well-researched and logically coherent as the countless mediocre and easily-forgotten essays that very same newspaper has published about racist white Islamophobes and right-wing extremists.

I was first told that the text didn’t match the title. I think it does. I linked it to the Nazi sympathies of Islamic organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and showed how the authorities and the mainstream media have appeased the real Nazis of our time. However, they wanted me to remove the second part. I refused, and argued that the examples I had used were relevant. The same journalist then changed tactics and stated that my arguments were not new and had been used before. I suppose that means that Aftenposten will reject all future essays about Islamophobia or xenophobia, since most people have heard those arguments hundreds of times before, if not more. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.

Aftenposten asked me to remove the reference to my upcoming book The Curious Civilization from the text because this could be seen as a commercial of some kind. I admit that was indeed part of the reason why I put it there. That is the one change that I would have been willing to make to the text, to cut out that particular reference. Also note that they didn’t dispute a single factual claim that I wrote in the essay. I can easily document all of them.

The bottom line is that one has the “right to reply”, but apparently only as long as the journalists agree with your reply, which isn’t very helpful. I can accept being rejected if I simply don’t write well enough. I am not claiming that every single text I write is a masterpiece. Perhaps this one isn’t. But I cannot live with being turned down because of ideological censorship, and will not rewrite an essay to please those doing so. Perhaps I am wrong, but I personally sense an element of that motive here. If that is indeed the case then I will not accept it. That is why I started blogging in the first place. I therefore publish the text here to highlight censorship in the press.

by Peder Jensen, also known as the writer Fjordman on the Internet

On the 30th of July of this year, Aftenposten printed the article “They are the third wave,” in which they harassed people such as Bat Ye’or, Robert Spencer and myself. The illustrations in the printed edition were particularly appalling. One was shown a picture of Bat Ye’or, and on the next page a picture of the convicted Nazi traitor Vidkun Quisling. This is extremely tactless, especially considering that the Nazis were responsible for the genocide of about six million Jews and the fact that Bat Ye’or is Jewish. Besides, Aftenposten‘s own historical relationship with the Nazis is far from pretty.

The message that is now being presented in the mass media after the atrocities committed by Anders Behring Breivik is that critics of Islam like myself are the Nazis of our time. But is this true? The Nazis were national Socialists, even though many people would now like us to forget the second part of their ideology. I have personally never heard of a totalitarian movement that could not also be partially described as Socialist. Is it a coincidence that a disproportionate number of Western converts to Islam are neo-Nazis or Marxists? Do they share a common totalitarian DNA?

In 2008, Marte Michelet from Dagbladet startlingly enough made common cause with Islamic organizations, Communists and neo-Nazis in favour of a new, large mosque in Cologne. German neo-Nazis regard Islamic organizations as allies in the struggle against “Jewish-Zionist dominance.” This did not lead to critical remarks from other media in Norway. There is more inbreeding in the Norwegian press than amongst Pakistani cousins.

As I mention in my upcoming book on European culture, The Curious Civilization, Muslims have a choice between Mozart and Hitler, and often choose Hitler of their own free will. In sharp contrast to the East Asian passion for European Classical music, Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf was number two on the bestseller list in the allegedly moderate NATO member state Turkey as late as in 2005. The book is still popular in parts of the Arab world.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded by Hassan al-Banna in 1928, grew in parallel with the Nazi movement in Europe and was inspired by this in addition to Islam. Their leader Mahdi Akef has reassured his followers that Jihad “will smash Western civilization and replace it with Islam, which will dominate the world.” Akef stated in 2007 that if Muslims are not able to achieve this in the near future they are “obliged to continue Jihad [holy war to expand Islamic global rule], which will lead to the collapse of Western civilization.”

The Islamic Council of Norway, which is being funded by native Norwegian taxpayers, receives guidance from the European Council for Fatwa and Research about issues such as whether or not to support the death penalty for homosexuals. The Council is led by the powerful Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual guide of the Muslim Brotherhood. Qaradawi, who supports marriage with underage children, has openly boasted that Muslims will conquer Europe, spoken in positive terms of the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis, and suggested that the next mass murder of Jews will come at the hands of Muslims. As Walid al-Kubaisi points out, the Brotherhood has a big influence in many countries, the West included. Representatives of Jonas Gahr Støre’s Foreign Ministry have met members of the Muslim Brotherhood for talks in Oslo.

In 2007 under the government of Jens Stoltenberg, Norway was the only Western country to recognize the Palestinian government that was then led by Hamas. The ideology of Hamas has many similarities with Nazism. This move was widely applauded by the Norwegian press at the time. People within the governing parties and the political Left wanted to support such a government financially, which would imply that Norwegian taxpayers had to fund terrorists.

In September 2011 the Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) asked the cartoonist Kurt Westergaard to leave Norway because they feared that an assassination attempt would be made against him. According to Islamic sources, critics of Mohammed were killed by his followers. Given that his personal example, or Sunna, which along with the Koran constitutes the teachings of Islam, this remains a valid principle to this day. Those who want to kill Theo van Gogh or Geert Wilders are therefore acting in full compliance with traditional Islamic theology.

This is described in Halvor Tjønn’s surprisingly realistic Norwegian biography of Mohammed. Ibn Warraq, author of the book Why I Am Not a Muslim, is a man who was born in Pakistan but has to write under a pseudonym in order to avoid the death penalty for apostasy. Islam is the only religion on Earth that prescribes death to those who criticize or leave it.

Thomas Seltzer, a host on NRK3, has presented a caricature of me as a multi-handicapped writer in a wheelchair. I presume that this makes me the Norwegian equivalent of Stephen Hawking, which I take as a compliment. Alternatively, one could imagine it to be an insinuation that people in wheelchairs are drivelling fools, which is not particularly tasteful.

The difference between a humorist and a bully is that a true humorist makes fun of the powerful, not the weak. Seltzer can ridicule people like me because he knows that we will not assault him, but he does not dare to show a drooling Yusuf al-Qaradawi in a wheelchair explaining to Muslims that paedophilia is OK. By so doing he has himself indirectly admitted who the real successors to the Nazis in our time actually are. I can inform him that genuine neo-Nazis do not like me at all and have circulated rumours on the Internet for years about me being an Israeli agent because of my clear pro-Israeli line.

Some people might assert that I, who stretch the boundaries of freedom of speech, should put up with as much. Perhaps. The difference is that citizens do not have to pay for my writings. Through the TV license they have to pay for what is broadcast on NRK, whether they want to or not. In an age when a heavily left-leaning press looks like as a wall-to-wall carpet of Multicultural propaganda, one has to ask why. Hundreds of thousands of Norwegians are fed up with the fact that those who are deeply concerned for the future of their children because of a mass immigration that is unprecedented in human history are harassed by their own press corps and labelled as extremists, racists and Nazis.

Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg has spoken in favour of more openness and democracy after Breivik. One of the most important things one could do to get a democratic debate going in Norway is to remove press subsidies and to abolish NRK in its present form. The question is whether the Labour Party is willing to do this as long as NRK constitutes an integral part of the Left’s grip on power.

Er islamkritikere vår tids nazister?

Norwegian-language version of this article.

The following article was brought to my attention by Dymphna, at Gates of Vienna and, subsequently, used as an excuse to prohibit me from publishing any more articles about Islam at that forum. It is difficult not to imagine how Dymphna has handed Arab News author, Farha Khaled, a victory on a silver platter. Silencing my voice can only serve the ends of Islam.

Gates of Vienna Incites for Muslim Holocaust

Gates of Vienna the notorious white supremacist blog which published Fjordman and inspired Anders Brievik, recently published a three part essay which calls for the Holocaust of Muslims.

This is the same far right cesspool-of-bigotry-website notorious for publishing Pedar Jensen who vented his Islamophobia for many years under the pen name of Fjordman, and who has now gone into hiding after being interviewed by Norwegian police over the Anders Breivik massacre. Gates of Vienna is run by a couple in the USA, one Baron Bodissey whose real name is thought to be ‘Ned May’ and a woman calling herself Dymphna.

This is not first time Gates of Vienna has published screeds supposedly written by other anonymous contributors calling for the genocide of Muslims. A few years back a similar lovingly written piece inciting for the genocide of Muslims was published as Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs noted in Gates of Vienna Toys with Genocide:

‘If violence does erupt in European countries between natives and Muslims, I consider it highly likely that people who had never done anything more violent than beat eggs will prove incapable of managing the psychological transition to controlled violence and start killing anything that looks remotely Muslim. Our unspoken conviction that we, in 21st-century Europe, ‘

On 20th September 2011, Dymphna Of Gates of Vienna posted a three part series by one Zenster with the introduction:

This is the first of a three part essay dealing with Islamic terrorism and what can be expected regarding Islam’s ultimate fate.

Moving on to Part 1, titled ‘When Will It End?’ the essay begins by setting the tone with:

‘Short answer ― It will end when the tipping point is reached. This tipping point can be defined as follows:

When living with Muslims becomes more trouble than living without Muslims.‘

The only problem being is that Gates of Vienna never published any such line. Dymphna specifically edited it to read:

When living with Islam becomes more trouble than living without Islam

Clearly, Farha Khaled culled this line from the version published here, or at Patriot’s Corner, in order to increase her smearing power against Gates of Vienna. Chalk it up to the usual Islamic taqiyya.

A long rambling justification about the costs of policing airlines from terrorists, and how that money could be better spent on fighting aids and other social ills follows, in an obvious attempt to find some sort of moral justification as to why there is no other way.

Save for the fact that I do propose another far more moral way which Farha Khaled conveniently neglected to mention.

From “How Will it End?“: “Repulsive in the extreme is how truly avoidable this looming Muslim holocaust really is. A far less costly program of “wetwork” style targeted assassinations directed at the top echelons of Islam’s clerical, political, scholastic and financial aristocracy could see global jihad quickly screech to a grinding halt.

As can be seen, I do present a clear alternative to the Muslim holocaust. What’s more, in complete contradiction of Farha Khaled’s repeated accusations that I advocate the nuclear destruction of Islam, I make crystal clear about how: “Repulsive in the extreme is how truly avoidable this looming Muslim holocaust really is.” Moreover, Farha Khaled demonstrates the usual Muslim inability, or unwillingness, to discern between what is predictive and not normative.

It ends with the ominous warning ‘The tipping point is approaching swiftly’

Part two of the essay has the presumptuous title Why it will End? and answers the question by stating ‘Islam has “unhappy ending” written all over it’ before going on to elaborate with hyperbole and lies including one manufactured on Gates of Vienna by Fjordman:

‘Throughout Europe, Muslims are disproportionately represented in rape, violent crime and imprisonment statistics. The expense of this criminality reaches into extra billions of Euros per year and does not cover property damage, victim rehabilitation and other ancillary expenses. Nor does this speak to the same criminal practices and consequences resulting from ostensibly legal immigration into Europe by tens of millions of Muslims over the past few decades.’

The rapes statistics in Scandinavia that Fjordman published at Gates of Vienna which were then repeated on the Islamophobic blogosphere were proven to be lies.

I’m hoping someone more versed in European crime can examine the linked article, Pat Condell claims all rapists in Oslo are ‘Muslim immigrants’, to see if it fact-based.

Zenster continues his mental masturbation:

The reputation of Muslims as predatory criminals and intensely parasitic occupiers all combines into a damning indictment of Islam. Its presence on earth only promises increased conflict, more atrocities, new genocides and unwarranted diversions of wealth that could better serve far more deserving causes. Finally, Islam is assembling too many enemies too fast to where they cannot be expected to keep pursuing their own petty quarrels instead of addressing the overarching threat of jihad. The complete and total inability of Islam to coexist with any legitimate faith or other culture presages a day when its numerous victims will band together in pursuit of an ultimate victory.

That is why it will end.

Except that it is not “mental masturbation” to cite the well-documented and disproportionate representation of Muslims in European crime statistics.

In the concluding Part three, How it will End? Zenster sums it up briefly: ‘The Muslim holocaust.‘ He then continues exhibiting more megalomania and what clearly appears to be a projection of his own fantasies:

Again, Farha Khaled resorts to Islamic misdirection. It is not “megalomania” to assert that Islam intends to impose shari’a law upon the entire world. Actually, it’s right there in the Qur’an. Furthermore, it is an established fact that Muslim military forces are supremely incompetent. Both Israel and America have demonstrated this time and again with lots of help from our supposed ally, Pakistan.

Also, it certainly cannot be construed as “fantasies” that Islam is headed directly towards a nuclear confrontation with the West. Iran’s reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons is just one of many existing flashpoints that threaten to engulf the MME (Muslim Middle East) in a catastrophic conflict which gives little hope of being conventional in nature. Economics alone indicate this.

‘Suffused with delusions of adequacy, Muslims think nothing of constantly antagonizing Western powers who long ago perfected industrialized warfare to an extent that Islam can only dream of, despite its supremacist fantasies.’

This could explain why the far right white supremacists see Israel as an ally. They see Israel as doing their dirty work for them, and as if on cue Zenster trots out the Samson option:

‘Neither is this the end of it. Iran’s reckless pursuit of genocide against the Jews could precipitate the Muslim holocaust all by itself. Little known to most people is Israel’sSamson Option. If true, the Jewish state has quietly informed its Arab neighbours that a single WMD strike against Israel will result in the entire MME (Muslim Middle East) being incinerated in nuclear plasma. Hundreds of fusion warheads along with newly acquired Dolphin class submarines and cruise missiles back this up.’

Please notice where Farha Khaled has inserted the British spelling of “neighbours” into my work. It is difficult to imagine why she felt that was necessary.

Contradictions galore! Elsewhere in this three part essay the author talks of the plot to establish the world Caliphate, but here he says he is convinced it won’t come about. Freudian slip? :

How is it a “Freudian slip” to note Islam’s openly avowed pursuit of a global caliphate and subsequently dismiss any such possibility? Of far greater importance is how Farha Khaled seems to constantly dismiss any notion that Islam seeks global supremacy, despite it being a cornerstone of Islamic doctrine.

‘Now, consider how America rolled up Iraq’s sidewalks in two weeks. This is the “reality gap” confronting Islam and its delusory vision of world domination. No such thing will ever happen.’

More ramblings, perhaps to justify his own dreams of nuclear warfare

Again, Farha Khaled handily ignores my own personal revulsion at how “avoidable” the looming Muslim holocaust really is. Clearly, it would not serve her purposes of victimhood to relate my own distaste for such an outcome. Better to portray me as a bloodthirsty warmonger than one who seeks to prevent it. If anything, it is Islam that is driving this entire situation to the precipice of nuclear war. A simple thought experiment proves this.

Would there be anywhere near the potential for a Muslim holocaust if Islam stopped waging global jihad?

‘It is more than safe to say that an industrially and militarily unlettered Islam is notgoing to take over the world using such a feeble tool as terrorism. As was also noted in Part II, Islam is assembling too many enemies too fast and that pace far outstrips any ability of theirs to perfect the mass production of intricate nuclear weapons nor muster fighting forces of even marginal proficiency. Chronic overreach is a hallmark of Islam and its habit of poking at the Western nuclear dragon with its terrorist pointed wooden stick bodes especially unwell for Muslims everywhere.’

The essay is full of dire warnings, rants about liberals who are complicit in Islamising the planet, of the political establishment for being too weak, but more gravely, it even condemns the ‘counter jihad’ movement for not calling for a ‘solution’ and for being too soft.

The only problem being is that the word “solution” never once appears anywhere in all three parts of my essay. Using such a freighted word would be all that someone like Farha Khaled needed to screech about the exact accusations that she has manufactured in the absence of facts. That is specifically why the word was never used even once in my essay. This disingenuous attempt to plant it in my work proves my point beyond a doubt.

When you hear of so called ‘counter jihadis’ accused of being ‘soft’ and the whole of western civilization embroiled in a plot whose aim it is to – err- destroy themselves – it is safe to assume you are reading from someone not quite right in the head, to put it politely.

Note the ad hominem attack? When you cannot attack the argument, attack the person. This strategy is constantly used by the Left and Muslims due to how little evidence they can summon to support their own version of reality.

Someone who doesn’t deserve a second thought and should ordinarily be dismissed as a raving loon.

Again, with the ad hominem attack. It is a hallmark of intellectual bankruptcy and a breach of good manners as well. None of which seems to bother Farha Khaled.

Except that it was at this very website, where a writer with the same Islamophobic rhetoric inspired a loner to kill tens of children on a holiday island!

Farha Khaled is a columnist for the Saudi based Arab News.

Perish the thought that Farha Khaled might behave responsibly and note how Anders Breivik could have acted out of disgust at constant Islamic atrocities and the Liberal Norwegian politicians who knowingly harbor terrorists like Mullah Krekar. Islam is responsible for over 17,000 deadly terrorist attacks since the 9-11 atrocity and that is reason, all by itself, for people to harbor severe animosity towards Islam. I suppose that I should be honored at being placed in the company of Fjordman, but I am equally sure it was not Farha Khaled’s actual intent.

While there exist in Islam many lamentable violations of human rights, a primary issue continues to cast ultimate doubt upon its claim as a valid religion. The taking of innocent life through terrorism remains a fundamental deal-breaker with respect to any possible acceptance of Islam as a genuinely legitimate faith.

Clearly, the institutionalized misogyny of purdah ― the Islamic confinement of women ― shall always loom large in any such decision process but many aspects of that dubious practice can be debated on cultural grounds as compared to the indisputable abhorrence of mass murder through terrorism.

Regardless of the damage being done to modern Christianity by its misguided attempts at universalism, the manner in which it is capable of sincerely embracing such noble concepts as universality or the Golden Rule is far more to the credit of Christian faith than the way in which Islam deceitfully channels all advantage to Muslims ― through such religiously sanctioned shams as taqiyya, kitman and hudna ― even while feigning an outward appearance of universality.

At the apex of these questions regarding legitimacy resides one of Islam’s most repugnant practices. Islamic doctrine purports to share with Christianity a similar regard for the sanctity of human life:

Qur’an Surah 4:29 ― (Surat An-Nisā’)

O you who have believed, do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent. And do not kill yourselves [or one another]. Indeed, Allah is to you ever Merciful. [emphasis added]

Ostensibly, Islam condemns murder and suicide. However, a closer reading of its scripture makes clear that there are significant contingencies attached to this proscription. At its most basic, murder is only forbidden when it is committed against other Muslims. No better example of this exists than the original Bali atrocity of October 2002 that claimed over 200 lives. Many in the West welcomed how numerous Muslim religious authorities condemned the perpetrators for taking innocent human life.

What few people realized is that the preponderance of criticism leveled by Muslims at bombers Amrozi, Mukhlas and Samudra was based on how their terrorist act had claimed almost twenty Muslim lives. Throughout much of Islam, nowhere was there any concern or embarrassment over how the deaths of almost 200 non-Muslims went largely unnoticed, save unless they were joyously celebrated.

Further, it is indicative of how Islamic doctrine remains thoroughly imbued with war and hostility when one sees that the bombers themselves were referred to as “martyrs at the battle of Bali”. It requires a stunning degree of disconnection to call such one-sided and brutal mass murder a “battle”. Yet, this epitomizes just how pervasive the entire wartime mindset is throughout Islam.

In a similar manner to its professed condemnation of murder or suicide, Islam also decries any rejection of faith. However, once again, there emerges an essential divergence away from the tenets of Christianity. To this day Islam remains, essentially, a battlefield religion. An example being how, at its most basic level, Islam divides the world into dar al-Islam, “the house of Islam”, and dar al-harb, “the house of war”. Everywhere outside of dar al-Islam is a zone of conflict, struggle and, eventually, war. One need merely examine a map of global conflicts to see that most of them exist at Islam’s “bloody borders”.

Steeped in militancy, Islam extols the warrior spirit and rewards it with a sexual paradise. In diametric opposition is how Islam copes with apostasy. Departing the faith is a capital crime and punishable by death. There is no better analog than how a soldier’s desertion in time of war is an executable offense. The inescapable upshot of this being that Islam is in a perpetual state of war and all Muslims are soldiers. It is this element of death that permeates Islam which is so problematic for those who try and come to terms with it. That there are, in fact, no terms to be had with Islam, is another matter entirely and only cements this entire issue.

So we see that a Muslim’s rejection of Islam becomes an automatic death penalty. It strikes an odd and insincere note for any religion to coerce piousness out of its followers. Faithfulness under duress is hardly the definition of devout belief or even genuine allegiance, for that matter. Yet, this singular aspect of Islam goes largely unquestioned. No other large-scale creed in the world has a death penalty for apostasy.

A Comparison

In total contrast, Christianity’s own examples of believers who were encouraged to give up their faith tell an entirely different tale. Innumerable Christian Saints were cruelly tortured and slain even as they individually refused to abandon their belief. This concept of martyrdom lies at the very heart of a most glaring difference between Christianity and Islam.

It also returns us to the original question surrounding Islam’s legitimacy as a genuine faith. The Islamic definition of “martyrdom” is so diametrically opposed to everything implied by the Christian meaning of this word as to demand intense scrutiny.

Today’s modern Islamic “martyr” usually attains such status by donning a high-explosives laden vest whose charges are usually studded with ball bearings, bolts and other shrapnel that have often been coated with warfarin, a blood-thinning anticoagulant intended to enhance profuse bleeding in victims of the ensuing attack. The assailant typically seeks to enter into a crowded location, be it a disco, popular pizza parlor at mealtime or a commuter-packed city bus. The vest is then detonated in order to maximize loss of human life.

What follows is an excerpt from one of the several fatwan issued by Yusuf Qaradawi that sanction so-called “martyrdom operations”:

The martyr operation is the greatest of all sorts of jihad in the cause of Allah. A martyr operation is carried out by a person who sacrifices himself, deeming his life [of] less value than striving in the cause of Allah, in the cause of restoring the land and preserving the dignity. To such a valorous attitude applies the following Qur’anic verse: “And of mankind is he who would sell himself, seeking the pleasure of Allah; and Allah hath compassion on (His) bondmen.” (Qur’an, 2: 207)

But a clear distinction has to be made here between martyrdom and suicide. Suicide is an act or instance of killing oneself intentionally out of despair, and finding no outlet except putting an end to one’s life. On the other hand, martyrdom is a heroic act of choosing to suffer death in the cause of Allah, and that’s why it’s considered by most Muslim scholars as one of the greatest forms of jihad. [emphasis added]

Please keep in mind that Qaradawi is widely regarded both as the “Pope of Islam” and as a moderate Muslim despite validating “martyr operations” along with his open declarations that wives should be “beaten lightly” and all homosexuals be put to death.

There can be no doubt that such a vicious act flies in the face of traditional Christian martyrdom. It is a total affront to every characterization of those Christian Saints who voluntarily refused to renounce their faith and, alone, paid the ultimate price for it. As can be seen from the above excerpt, both Islam and Christianity forbid suicide. Yet, as is all too often the case with Islam, loopholes are created by which even the most heinous acts can find approbation and religious sanctioning.

Far more disturbing is the notion that Islamic “martyrdom operations” amount to nothing more or less than human sacrifice. The unimaginable hatred of life required to engage in such activities is predictably alien to those in the West who have not been brought up from childhood on such a steady diet of genocidal hatred. Again, in another bizarre inversion of Christian traditions where nuns are wed to Jesus, prior to bomb vest attacks the perpetrator is given a “martyr’s wedding” to one of the virgins that supposedly await him in paradise.

The degree of this hatred is difficult to convey. Imagine a woman expressing pride that more than one of her own sons had committed such horrible acts. That woman would be Umm Nidal Farhat. Known as “mother of the struggle”, she is now an elected legislator and a celebrity in Gaza for voluntarily sending three of her six sons to their terrorist deaths.

Umm Nidal: “Nothing has changed. The strength and honor have only increased. It doesn’t matter to me whether I have two or three Shahid [sons]. [As far as I'm concerned], let all my sons be Shahids. [emphasis added]

To those who respect the sanctity of human life, Fahrat’s mindset may as well be from a different planet. It exemplifies not just a “life is cheap” attitude found throughout the MME (Muslim Middle East), but also reflects upon just how meager Islam’s estimation of human worth continues to be. It may be argued that rewards of the afterlife outweigh any momentary losses but there is a lingering taint of literally cannibalizing intensely devout converts ― as supposed “martyrs” ― who might have peacefully convinced far more people to join Islam had they lived full, productive lives.

Nor is there any sense of embarrassment over the magnitude of this hatred. There are video interviews of Muslim children calmly discussing how they want to become bomb vest murderers. Despite every imaginable gesture of conciliation, Israel is subjected to constant terrorist attacks, in some cases attacks led by those individuals who owe their health to the Israelis. No better example exists than the case of Wafa Samir Ibrahim al-Biss

Wafa Samir Ibrahim al-Biss is a 21 year old Palestinian woman, who lives in the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza strip. In January 2005 she suffered burns in a cooking accident in her home. She was admitted for treatment to the Soroka hospital in the Israeli town of Beer Sheva. She became an outpatient and was issued by the Israeli authorities with a special pass entitling her to cross into Israel to receive medical treatment.

On 21 June 2005 she was arrested at the Erez crossing point, on her way out of Gaza and to Soroka, wearing 10 kgs of explosives in her underwear. On Israeli TV she admitted that she had planned to explode the bomb in the hospital where she was being treated. She stated that she had been recruited by the Fatah Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, and added that she had wanted to target as many children as possible. [emphasis added]

The depth of such ingratitude is beyond conception and remains largely incomprehensible to Western minds.

Military Contradictions

None of this even addresses other attacks by Palestinians — called “no-escape” attacks — as in how the chances of staying alive after, for example, firing on an army position or a settlement are next to zero. Intentionally using a soldier only once — for a martyrdom operation or “no-escape” attack — is not just inefficient but an obscene estimation of human worth. It betrays why Islamic militaries are so unsuccessful.

The level of indoctrination required to program a prospective Islamic “martyr” flies in the face of what a moral, free thinking — as in being able to refuse an order on conscientious grounds — competent soldier should be. It is strong evidence that Muslim terrorists are not fighting for freedom but, as they often will freely admit, abject slavery; in this case, to Allah. Again, it points to why Arabs lose wars.

It is also curious to note how few, if any, Muslims decried such “martyrdom operations” when they were only employed exclusively against Jews. By contrast, examine the Muslim outrage now that the use of bomb vests has been extended to the Sunni versus Shi’ia conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. This is exemplary of Islam’s narrow selectivity in conferring its graces upon Muslims only.

Concomitantly, it beggars the question of why isn’t there any significant outcry against Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi for his almost singlehanded role in sanctifying this ultimately rapacious form of terrorism. Why has there been no death fatwan sworn out by ostensibly “moderate” Muslims against the cleric who has inspired so much bloodshed and loss of Muslim life? One might ask the same question about Osama bin Laden during his last years but that is another matter. The fact remains that terrorism is so essential and irreplaceable in what is otherwise wholly ineffectual Islamic war-fighting capability, that even something so hideous and detrimental to Islam itself cannot be foresworn.

All of this makes it more than apparent that Islamic “martyrdom” is done in the name of political domination — jihad’s mission to impose global shari’a law — and, therefore, it is not a religious act but one that is strictly military in nature. While this is in total concordance with Islamic canon, it is wholly alien to most other religious doctrines, including the Christian Church militant.

Piety and Coercion

Perhaps most telling of all is how Islam remains satisfied with, and by, involuntary conversion. What then to make of its supposed martyrs, are they genuine or false? It makes torturing people for information, along with all the risks of inaccuracy that freight such a sordid practice, seem like some sort of minor ethical lapse compared to how Islam is naively willing to accept forced conversion even as it most cynically punishes even minor blasphemy, an oxymoron in Islamic terms, or other relatively innocuous, transgressions ― whose criminal behavior might be rehabilitated ― with irreversible amputation, or capital punishment.

Unless, of course, it is the case that many Islamic clerics know full well how most rational human beings cannot be persuaded to voluntarily adopt something so patently anti-life as Islamic doctrine and, therefore, they must be coerced and intimidated into accepting Islam rather than charismatically proselytized. Ultimately, this reliance upon coercion provides strong evidence that true love is a foreign concept in Islam. That Muslim women are often treated worse than animals bears this out. With its child brides, sanctioned spousal rape and physical abuse, Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and forced marriages, Islam continuously degrades human life and treats with contempt any sense of romantic love.

Another case involves an Iraqi woman named Samira Ahmed Jassim also known by the nickname Umm al-Mumineen or “the mother of believers”. This individual was responsible for enlisting some 80 young women to commit bomb vest attacks. Her method of recruitment involved having these young women gang raped. In Arabic culture they were “impure” and now effectively worthless as mates such that she then used their shattered self-esteem to persuade them how a sole path to “redemption” lay in carrying out so-called “martyrdom operations”.

This abject debasement of human life is a constant theme that permeates Islamic culture and drives out any notion of it being life-oriented. What’s more ― like Umm Nidal Farhat’s willing disposal of her own children ― Samira Ahmed Jassim betrayed her fellow women with brutal sexual assault and death. This is coercion of a most monstrous sort and bespeaks a heartless manipulation that could never succeed if left to stand on its own, admittedly nonexistent, merits.

This callous attitude is betrayed by another hideous practice that has recently come into play. It involves the use of retarded children, or young adults, in bomb vest terror attacks and represents an ultimately cynical method of disposal for all of the human detritus resulting from consanguineous Muslim marriages. If such heartlessness is disturbing, then how to describe the way that an Iraqi car bomber ― using two infants riding with him to get through a check point ― then left them strapped into their car seats to die in the subsequent explosion.

What sort of belief system could possibly accept such heinous acts as demonstrations of piety? Moreover, it demands an even harsher question of Islam. What Creator is worth worshiping that would reward with paradise the wanton destruction of his own creations? This is the sine qua non of any argument concerning Islam and its lack of respect for human life. For whatever shortcomings Christianity may have, it holds human life sacrosanct. No such thing can be said for Islam. It not only eliminates all discussion of moral relativism between these two ancient creeds but drags out into the disinfecting sunlight Islam’s true standing as a political ideology and no sort of legitimate religion.

This glaring and diametric opposition with respect to Christian and Islamic definitions of martyrdom must serve as a touchstone for Western minds as they learn to disassociate Islam from any genuinely religious context and relearn its more accurate status as a political ideology.

The Blaze has the story:

STOCKHOLM (The Blaze/AP) — Swedish police arrested four people on suspicion of preparing a terror attack and evacuated an arts center in the country’s second largest city, security officials said Sunday.

The four were arrested in the west coast city of Goteborg and were suspected of plotting terrorism, security service spokeswoman Sara Kvarnstrom said. She declined to give details on the arrests and wouldn’t say whether they were linked to the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
[…]
Swedish tabloid Expressen, citing an unnamed police source, said investigators suspect the men belong to a terror network with links to al-Qaida, and that they had acquired, or were trying to acquire, firearms, explosives and hand grenades. Security police declined to comment on the newspaper’s information.

Police in Goteborg said in a statement they had evacuated the Roda Sten arts center, located beneath the city’s landmark half-mile (930-meter) Alvsborg bridge, because of a threat deemed to pose “serious danger to life, health or substantial damage of property.”

Kvarnstrom declined to say if the arts center or the bridge were considered potential targets for a terror attack.

The Alvsborg bridge runs over Goteborg’s harbor to connect the mainland with the island of Hisingen. The six-lane passage is a vital link from the Norwegian capital Oslo to southern Sweden.

Goteborg police and Sweden’s Stockholm-based counterterrorism unit assisted security police with the arrests.
[…]
More here.

See update HERE.

I am not exaggerating.

It took five weeks of work, following the attacks in Norway, for Julia Gorin to write this tour de force of research and of personal courage. I could not have done as well in five years. She has given me permission to mirror this post here.

Julia Gorin: Norway Massacre Answered Prayers of Balkans-tinkering Scoundrels

August 30th 2011 04:32:38 PM

Culpable fiends forever trying to cover their bloody Balkans footprints predictably leapt at mass killer Anders Breivik’s “Serbian connection” that was predictably played up in news reports. (Still waiting for Timothy McVeigh’s Iraqi and al Qaeda connections to be “unearthed” and played down.) Breivik’s Serbian connection consisted not only of his having had internet contact with “cultural conservative” Serbs and having been set off in 1999 by NATO’s orgiastic bombing of civilians in furtherance of Albanian territorial ambitions, but of the fact that among the like-minded extremists from England, France, Germany, Holland, Greece, Russia, Sweden, Belgium, Norway and U.S. who were part of Breivik’s group, one had been a Serb in Liberia.

The day that the news broke I got the following two emails:

name = Besi
email = frankie@hotmail.com
comments = How do you feel that your propaganda and the “serbiana” propoganda inspired the Oslo murders.

name = Anders Behring Breivik
email = AndersBehring@Breivik.com

comments = Dumb bitch, you and your sick ilk killed 90 innocent people in Norway. I’m calling the FBI today

That’s one call the FBI would have had an easy time fielding that day and filing into the crackpot folder. But let me see if I have this straight, given that some more “respectable” crackpots weighed in, breathlessly pouncing on the rare morsel that could help their perpetual pursuit of retroactively justifying the West’s war against…Serbs (and of justifying the organized crime and jihad nest that our interventions on behalf of Bosnians and Albanians have turned the Balkans into):

Twenty years into our walloping of the Serbs, an indirect “connection” is managed to be assembled between an attack in Norway and a Serb.

Never mind that an Albanian was “connected” to the Frankfurt shooting of five American servicemen earlier this year — by actually being the shooter — killing two, wounding another, and partially blinding a fourth. (He “may have” been set off by “Islamism,” according to more-candid-than-usual authorities; an update on him popped up just weeks before the Norway massacre: “An immigrant from Kosovo was formally charged Thursday in Germany with the murder of two U.S. Air Force men at Frankfurt Airport.” There have been further updates this week.)

And just never mind the Bosnian connection to the Trolley Square shooting of nine Americans in Salt Lake City for Valentine’s 2007 — the “connection” being that the shooter was a Bosnian Muslim. Never mind the direct Albanian “connection” to the self-described “militant extremist” who was arrested in Maryland just days before his co-Kosovar opened fire in Frankfurt; he was angry at U.S. military involvement in Kosovo, was trained by Bosnian-Muslims (another Bosnian connection there), and also hoped to target Jews.

Just forget about the two Albanian brothers in Sweden who tried to burn down Muhammad artist Lars Vilks’ home. Certainly don’t busy yourself thinking about the Albanian connection to the London and Madrid attacks or the Bosnian connection to both.

Don’t start asking what investigators were doing in Bosnia and Kosovo in the wake of the 7/7 Tube bombings, or what took U.S. investigators to Albania, out of which bin Laden was operating in 1998, and to Bosnia after 9/11. On which subject, never mind any Bosnian officials‘ links to 9/11 or the Bosnia leg of the preparations for it. Ignore 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s connection to Bosnia (he was gifted citizenship), where he and Mohamed Atta lived prior to 9/11. (And where Hamas trained, incidentally.) Don’t try to deduce what it is about Bosnia which, according to the 9/11 Commission and others, globalized al Qaeda and which causes it to appear on almost every international report about terrorist threats.

Who cares why in October 2001 U.S. troops found, in a Kabul mansion hideout, Oklahoma City-style bomb instructions written by a Bosnian al Qaeda soldier. Or why at least one Bosnian passport was found in a Kabul house that had been used by fleeing Taliban. Shrug at why Bosnia is a thriving market for DVDs of American troops being killed in Iraq or why, according to Bosnian TV, “US Army members are threatened by local jihadists.” Ignore that Aussie al Qaeda terrorist David Hicks trained and fought with the KLA, and just never mind the Albanian “connection” to the Albanian terrorist whom the British bank NatWest gave a 100% mortgage to for a home he turned into a bomb factory. Or the Albanian “connection” to the Brooklyn Albanian who was arrested in Kosovo in 2009 (after his Bosniak would-be accomplice turned him in), for trying to travel to Afghanistan, Iraq and the Balkans to fight against U.S. armed forces and to attack NATO troops in Kosovo. (An update on him just two weeks before the Norway massacre: Misunderstander of Islam convicted of trying to join jihad group and kill U.S. troops: “Betim Kaziu faces life in prison for the jihadi adventure that took him to Saudi Arabia, Egypt and finally Kosovo.”)

Never mind the Bosnian connection to five of the 9/11 hijackers who had either trained or fought in Bosnia, or the Bosnia-hatched and Serb-disrupted plot to attack world leaders at the pope’s funeral in 2005. Never mind the Bosnian and two Albanians of the North Carolina Eight who were targeting a Marine base and countries including Israel, and just never mind that four of the six Ft. Dix plotters/facilitators were Albanian. Never mind the very direct Bosnian connection to a Georgia man convicted in 2009 of aiding terror groups, or the Bosnian arrested last year for his role in the plan to bomb NYC commuters. Never mind the Bosnian “connection” to an international Bosnia-based terror plot thwarted in 2008. Don’t ask how a program to recruit and train Muslims to kill Serbs in Bosnia could morph into a plan to blow up New York’s Lincoln and Holland tunnels and the UN and FBI buildings, “embroiling U.S. military veterans in a jihadist circle with links to al-Qaeda and to a stunningly ambitious homegrown plot to kill thousands of innocent victims in New York City.”

And why take it from a former al Qaeda officer that Bosnian Muslims “play a significant role” in al Qaeda cells? Don’t listen when he talks about how official Bosnia was giving out passports like candy during the war it started (including to bin Laden, enabling him to travel to other countries and organize 9/11 and other attacks), and advising the mujahideen to marry Bosnian women so they could stay after the war. (See the documentary “Sarajevo Ricochet” below.)

Never mind the Bosnian Muslim who made an apparent dry run into the U.S. embassy in Vienna in 2007, or the Bosnian Muslims arrested for plans to blow up Catholic churches and internationals in Bosnia (a suicide bomb belt was found along with guns and 20 kg of explosives), or the ones caught targeting European embassies to protest the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Don’t trouble yourself about the Kosovo connection to the missile fired at the U.S. embassy in Athens in 2007, or the foiled plots against Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, one disrupted by a polygraph administered to an Albanian terrorist and another with its nexus in Serbia’s Bosniak-inhabited Sandzak region.

Pay no attention to Austrian newspaper Kronen Zeitung pointing out that the man who was to detonate two bombs in Montenegro’s parliament in 2006 was an al Qaeda-connected Kosovo Albanian (17 other Albanians were indicted and/or convicted in connection). Don’t let that remind you of the KLA fighter whose application turned up in an al Qaeda office in Afghanistan in 2001. Block out the Albanian mafia-boss name Princ Dobrosi, who was helping one of the jihadists arrested for the 2006 Oslo synagogue attack — to plan attacks against Prague. And don’t worry about the 15 Bosnians and Albanians that Serbia charged in 2007 with a planned attack on the U.S. embassy in Belgrade — one of many collaborative efforts between Albanian and Bosnian Muslims to carve the Sandzak out of Montenegro and Serbia for Greater Islam.

And by all means, don’t look into the Hezbollah-made bomb used in the staged atrocity at the Sarajevo marketplace (like the one at the bread line), which we bombed the Serbs for. Pay no attention to the American veteran of the Bosnia war, who pled guilty to helping train fellow al Qaeda agents to carry out bombings at European tourist resorts frequented by Americans, as well as at US military bases, embassies and consular offices in Europe.

Nope, no real connections to be made anywhere there, apparently. Give the loudest play to that which the media and political establishments want to seep into the public consciousness, to keep them anchored to the Serb as villain. That way, who cares when NATO starts shooting them any day now to bring in line the last part of Kosovo resisting to live under the rule of Albanian terrorists.

And never mind that above are listed only the attacks and plots that come immediately to mind, or that every time one hears about any such attacks or arrests — for only a minute before the media blackout ensues — one is instructed to draw no conclusions about the “they’re not all like that” peoplehood the culprits hail from, even if they’re much more representative of those people than the wanted Serb in Liberia is of Serbs. Who himself is not known to have committed any terrorism so far. (A STRATFOR analysis noted, “It is interesting that [Breivik] did not contact the Serbian member of the PCCTS for assistance in making contact with Balkan arms dealers.”)

Indeed, after two decades of crying “nationalists” and “extremists” about Serbs, and warning of “Serbian terrorists,” look how excited everyone gets when we finally find a live one. One. Twenty years later. Who wasn’t behind the attack. But when it comes to Serbs, even the lesson of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” doesn’t apply. As blogger Nebojsa Malic put it in an email the day after the Norway attacks (links added):

Oh, they’ve already started bleating about the “evil Serbs” and the yellow media in Serbia are picking it up and amplifying the bleat. Thing is, [Breivik] was WRONG about what happened in Kosovo — Serbia did not try to expel the Albanians, it was Albanians who wanted to expel the Serbs…Correct me if I’m wrong but so far, despite being demonized and bombed (twice) and occupied and, frankly, mind-fucked like no one else in recent history, the Serbs have not committed ONE SINGLE ACT of terrorism, whether in self-defense or in impotent rage. Worth noting.

Malic noted it rather well in a piece titled “Oh No You Don’t” :

Furthermore, over the past two decades of vilest demonization in the Western media — worse by far than the cartoon depictions of Muslims over which there have been riots, death threats and even murders — as well as not one, but two bombing campaigns, there has not been a single Serbian terrorist attack in the West. Not one. As a result of Imperial meddling, Serb populations in today’s Croatia, large parts of Bosnia and Kosovo have become extinct, yet no Serb has ever resorted to terrorism against NATO countries. Let alone shot up a summer camp full of children.

A day after the news hit, an email arrived from retired NYC Police Lieutenant Bob Leifels, who served in Bosnia and Croatia with the International Police Task Force from 1997-1998: “Once while working in Croatia we were warned about Serbian terrorists…by Norwegians. I asked them to give me one example of a Serb terrorist attack. They just grumbled. As a matter of fact I think one of the first in the USA was by a Croat who bombed the Statue of Liberty.” (See here for that incident, and here are other examples of international Croatian terror. In 2008, Croatian terrorist Zvonko Busic — who hijacked a TWA flight in 1976 and planted a bomb at Grand Central Station that killed a NY policeman and wounded three others — was paroled and received a hero’s welcome and traditional fascist salute in Croatia. Whereupon a reader wrote, “[Bosnian-Muslim warlord Naser] Oric is set free, now Busic [not to mention Kosovo’s Agim Ceku and Ramush Haradinaj]…. But fear not, the Karadzic trial will give everyone renewed contempt for everything Serbian.”)

There certainly was a lot of talk in the ’90s about “Serbian terrorists,” including a federal investigator at the scene of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, quoted in a news magazine caption as “Yep, looks like the Serbs to me.” I can no longer find the item to recall which periodical carried the caption, but the assessment was repeated by radio legend Paul Harvey who never did give us “The Rest of the Story” on that one. The false rumor was helped by a bogus claim of responsibility by someone posing as a member of the “Serbian Liberation Front,” though there is no online record of such a group. Even then, Bosnian-Serb president Radovan Karadzic, while denying his people were behind the 1993 attack (another case of “Serbian propaganda” proving true), warned of possible terrorism by Serbs in response to Western involvement in the Balkans, according to an AP article scanned by this Bosniak propaganda site. (Speaking of which, pay no attention to the Bosnian-Muslim connection that the 1993 WTC attack did have.)

The Serb-caused WTC terror never materialized. “Serbian terrorism” was a manufactured but ubiquitous faux concern that author Diana Johnstone mentioned in a 1999 article:

A few liberals timidly criticized the NATO bombing on the imaginary grounds that it might provoke Serbian “terrorism”. In reality, throughout the air strikes there was never the slightest hint of any propensity on the part of Serbs to take up terrorism. On the contrary, Serbs were notably shocked by the flagrant violations of the legal order constructed primarily by the very Western powers who were now violating it, and a number of Yugoslavs both in Serbia and in the Diaspora, have tried to seek legal redress.

We so wanted Serbian terrorists. Western hunger for the so-far mythical Serbian terrorist to rear its head was so effective in creating the semblance of a real threat that even as late as 2007 comedian Bill Maher and the editor at Human Events referred to the Albanian-American plotters of the foiled massacre at Ft. Dix as “Serbs…or something.” Similarly, a British paper called a Kosovo Albanian who went on a killing spree at a mall in Finland last year — a “Kosovo Serb.” More intentionally, initial reports linked the London Tube attacks to “eastern Europe” and “Serbia” (the explosives came from Kosovo, and Bosnia served as a coordinating point). It was this hunger — never satiated — that nonetheless provided almost two decades of movies and TV shows capitalizing on the tall tale of Serbian villainy, causing the legend to grow ever larger even as the Serbs’ enemies have been the ones doing all the projected attacking. (In what may be the most egregious example of this kind of projection, a 2010 French horror film has Serbs kidnapping people to steal their organs — apparently timed to be released just weeks ahead of the Council of Europe’s revelations on the very real Albanian murder-for-organs scandal currently under investigation. According to Serbia’s Press, the film had been commissioned by Bernard Kouchner, UN mission chief in Kosovo at the time of the vivisections in which he is himself implicated, at the very least for depraved indifference and obstructing discovery of the operation.)

But the “Serbian connection” to the Utoya camp attack was to be milked for all it’s worth. What could be politically safer? As a reader named Justin wrote, “Once again, the Serbs are the bogeyman in the Western news media….They are going to use it to smear anyone who supports the Serbian cause against Islamic Fundamentalists and Croatian Nazi fascists in Yugoslavia…to silence all criticism of the wars in Yugoslavia [and] to suggest that people like us are obsessed nuts when in fact we just want the facts straight…God help us all. The movement to stop Sharia law from making us all Islamic will [suffer] because of this stupid clown….”

Another one of us “radicals” who were against the ’99 NATO bombing and Kosovo separatism, Andy Wilcoxson, wrote in an email:

This Norwegian guy is no friend of the Serbs…He’s also pro-Croat. I’ve looked at his manifesto and he totally misses the boat on the Balkans. Here’s what he says in his Manifesto about Radovan Karadzic:

“[Radovan Karadzic] even went as far as offering the Muslims certain enclaves. When they refused he wanted to deport them by force. When this was made impossible by NATO he gave the order to fight the people who refused which was his sovereign right and responsibility as one of the primary leaders of Serb forces. This was never about ethnicity but about ridding the country of the genocidal hate ideology known as Islam. I do condemn any atrocities committed against Croats and vice versa but for his efforts to rid Serbia of Islam he will always be considered and remembered as an honourable Crusader and a European war hero.”

The guy is off his nut. Radovan Karadzic wasn’t trying to rid Serbia of Islam, he just didn’t want his people to be governed by Islamic fundamentalists. The only reason he likes Karadzic is because he thinks the allegations against him are true…In addition to supporting Radovan Karadzic for all the wrong reasons, his manifesto characterizes Slobodan Milosevic’s “regime” as “brutal”…he thinks the allegations against the Serbs are actually points in their favor.

In that exchange, Malic added, “He’s also dead-wrong in most of his assertions…Izetbegovic’s faction of Muslims wanted to control Bosnia, while the Serbs wanted to control a PART of it, not the entirety. The other day I argued that Breivik admired an IMAGE of the Serbs — the one created by Western propaganda. THAT is why it is fuzzy and confused.” In that argument, Malic stated (some links added):

…If Breivik saw the 1999 war in the way described above [as directed against “our Serbian brothers (who) wanted to drive Islam out by deporting the Albanian Muslims back to Albania”], he was factually wrong. While Islam is a powerful factor that has shaped and driven Albanian chauvinism for over a century (and certainly underpins the destructive rage against the Serbian Orthodox churches), the Albanian regime controlling Kosovo today systematically oppresses not only the remaining Serbs, but also the Gorani – Muslims by faith, Serbs by language – which indicates that its bigotry is ethno-cultural as well as religious.

If anything, it was NATO – and the U.S. – who saw the war in terms of helping the “good Muslims” against the evil Orthodox Serbs.

The Serbian government fought to defeat a terrorist insurgency seeking to make Kosovo part of an enlarged Albanian state. There was no plan of persecution and deportation – unless one believes the sordid German fiction called “Operation Horseshoe“. Serbia is actually the most multi-ethnic Yugoslav successor state, and home to a substantial Muslim population. These days, Belgrade is entirely too tolerant of a militant Muslim cleric who seeks to foment a rebellion in its southwestern parts [Sandzak]. To argue that Serbia sought to expel the Albanians in 1999 due to their Muslim faith is to accept NATO’s excuse for the bombing. That claim was wrong then, and it is wrong now.

In the previous email exchange, reader Svetlana added that Breivik “exhibits a typical fascist mindset, where the Serbs are accepted into his Aryan clique only by the assumed ‘virtue’ of allegedly committing a genocide over Muslims, in an alleged effort to ‘ethnically cleanse’ that part of Europe of Muslims. When it comes to Balkans, he obviously bought all the propaganda and has no idea what really went on.”

An assessment that was echoed by reader Justin in a separate exchange (internal link added):

[He is] playing on the image of Serbs as violent, racist, genocidal Nazi “ethnic cleansers” and “deporting all Muslims,” which is totally incorrect because Serbia was always a multi-ethnic Balkan republic. Many Albanians escaped north into Serbia, with a large community living in Belgrade. This clown knows NOTHING about the Balkans or Serbia or the 1990s wars. He just believes what he heard from the media and uses media attention to further himself…I bet he doesn’t know that Serbs and Muslims lived side by side or that Milosevic only wanted to crack down on Albanian separatists in Kosovo…[His depiction of the Serbs] more resembles Ante Pavelic and his Ustase group [Croatian fascists] that were ‘chosen by God’ to be the ’saviors from foreign Serbian and Jewish influences’ as part of a crusade against non-Croats to establish a pure Croatian society.

In addition to being pro-Serb as he understands it, Breivik is also pro-Israel. STRATFOR noted, “Breivik did not express any anti-Semitism in his manifesto (something he has been heavily criticized for on U.S. anti-Semitic websites).” Just the opposite, in fact. A couple of Breivik’s passages:

It will be extremely hard to cooperate with anyone who views our primary ally (the Jews/Israel) as their primary enemy. Their Jew obsession and support to Islamic regimes will severely hinder any direct cooperation. They are blinded by their Jew hate to a degree where they fail to see the imminent threat to Europe represented by Islam…

Western Journalists again and again systematically ignore serious Muslim attacks and rather focus on the Jews…So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists…

Jerusalem Post reported that Breivik also “expressed his disgust at his government’s awarding of ‘the Nobel peace prize to an Islamic terrorist [Arafat] and appeasers of Islam.’”

So now is pro-Israelism to be discredited by the Breivik massacre? Not likely. Just as the media’s attempts to taint the entire conservative outlook with Breivik’s act flopped. Equally negligible, then, are attempts to discredit those who support the Serbian side in the Balkans and who oppose the West’s violently punitive attitude toward the region’s Orthodox Slavs in favor of its Islamic and Catholic Nazi heirs. (Notice, incidentally, that while Breivik is supposed to reflect on all conservatives and pro-Serbs, every time another Muslim adds to the 18,000 Muslim terror attacks since 9/11, “it has nothing to do with” Islam.) Fortunately, as with the character assassination attempted on conservatives, the attempt on Serbs and pro-Serbs hasn’t gotten much mileage either.

But one fanatical usual suspect really, really tried, devoting almost 2,000 rhapsodic words to a pathetically transparent attempt to use the Norway massacre to reinforce and recycle all the old conclusions about Serbs and our wars against Serbia in promotion of Islam and fascism in Europe. On cue, latching onto the above-mentioned Serbian extremist in Liberia, this die-hard who is buttressed by the institutional prestige of The Weakly Standard was among the loudest proponents of bombing Christians in Europe on behalf of Muslims, which of course unleashed jihadists throughout the region along with rampant organized crime and heroin- and slave-trafficking. He was an activist for getting us into the hole — which we’re digging deeper and deeper to his applause, even while he himself raises periodic alarm bells that Balkans Islam is under threat from more radical forms. (Of course when it was mere Christians who were under threat from those Balkan Muslims, he sided with the more radical side.)

His name is Stephen Schwartz — at least, that’s the name his Jewish mother gave him. In his preemptive surrender to the latest great threat, he became Stephen Suleyman Ahmad Schwartz, leading one to guess when his mother might have killed herself. This reinvention came after a previous reinvention in homage to the previous great threat — communism — to which he bowed by becoming “Comrade Sandalio.” This is his pattern: he identifies the threat, learns its language, changes his name, converts to the religion, buys a costume and becomes a spokesman.

And so now he runs an outfit called Center for Islamic Pluralism. But as we can see, there is no pluralistic thinking to be found when the targeted infidel is Serbian:

Norwegian Demons and the Serbian Connection

The source of Breivik’s horrific act is…intoxication with Serbian propaganda…While reporters and pundits have tried to identify its inspiration in American polemics against Islam or criticism of Islamist ideology, British anti-Muslim agitation, admiration for Israel, Hindu nationalism, and other “easy” explanations, it makes much more sense to look in the direction of Belgrade. [Of course!]

…Worldwide opinion still fails to grasp the political consequences of Serbian aggression [sic] in the former Yugoslavia…Breivik, with his apocalyptic visions and schemes, his fixations on long-vanished secret societies and uniforms, and his hatred of globalism [Note: the fascists were globalist], represents the same fascist politics that emerged in Europe during the similar economic downturn of the 1930s. Its reappearance was a logical and predictable effect of the deep anxieties and increase in conspiratorial beliefs that have accompanied the current global economic difficulties. But as Breivik himself repeatedly states, the seed of this new fascism was sown by Serbia. [ “The Serbs made him do it.” ™]

Breivik’s convoluted, bloated manifesto reveals that he hates the globalization represented by the U.S. and the EU…But Serbia remains the key to Breivik’s convoluted anxieties and plotting, and Serbia followed a similar path in cohabiting with Arab nationalism after its attacks on its Muslim and Catholic neighbors in Croatia, Bosnia-Hercegovina, and Kosovo. After the Kosovo war, Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic received an invitation from the Palestinian Authority to attend an Orthodox Christmas celebration in Bethlehem; the visit could not be made because Israel threatened to arrest Milosevic as a war criminal indicted by the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Serbia received military and energy assistance from the dictatorships of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Mu’ammar al-Qadhdhafi in Libya. Indeed, Serbian media defended the Libyan tyrant when the NATO powers commenced planning military intervention in earlier this year. And an Iranian delegation visited Belgrade, expressing Tehran’s support for Serbia’s refusal to recognize the independence of Kosovo, in July.

Serbia, Arab dictators, Iran. These factors have fascist ideology in common. And that explains the horror in Norway.

Actually, Serbia also received military assistance from Israel. And its presses weren’t the only ones opposing the intervention against Quadhafi on behalf of al Qaeda-connected “freedom fighters.” But shall we go into another isolated, desperate, demonized, de-legitimized state’s “dubious” deals and diplomacies when fighting for survival? Israel’s maintaining a relationship with apartheid South Africa, as well as its weapons deals with China — not to mention its little known request to accept an overture from Saddam Hussein to normalize relations during Bush I (we didn’t allow it) — don’t occur in a vacuum. Nor does the fact that Israel covertly aided Serbia during the NATO bombings. And we can certainly add to Iran a whole list of other Islamic or otherwise unholy states that support Serbia over the “Kosovars,” because they have their own restive separatists, some justified and some not. As if there is anything still holy to contrast them with in a world where America has sold its soul for Caliphate gold and an Islamic future, and where our prophesized betrayal of the Holy Land is upon us. But what fine standards we’ve set for future behavior by bad states with our uniquely criminal manipulation and circumvention of international laws and norms — all for a place that most Americans have never even heard of (Kosovo), despite having waged a recent war there. It is, however, entertaining that Schwartz compares the region’s Christians to Iran and Arab dictators instead of comparing the region’s Muslims to them, given that the latter were supplied with mujahideen, money, weapons and training against those Christians by Iran and several Arab countries. This strained, desperate comparison between Orthodox Slavs and Muslims rather than between Muslims and Muslims was attempted last year in an embarrassing piece by Commentary’s Jonathan Tobin.

Getting back to the point: After toiling through the ’90s to make Europe a more dangerous place than it needed to be, Stephen-Sandalio-Suleyman-Schwartz is one of those scoundrels most interested in covering his tracks. Notice that, unlike in the Norway massacre — where a Serbian connection can finally be wrenched — he offers no dissertations about the much more frequent and direct terrorism and criminal acts involving his beloved Albanian and Bosnian thugs. Like every last politician who filled his campaign coffers with KLA heroin money from the Albanian lobby, and like the very raison d’etre of the international tribunal at the Hague, Schwartz seeks to retroactively justify the West’s clearly unjustifiable — and increasingly questioned — actions. The typically Serb-fixated Schwartz piece above attests to his desperation.

If tenuous connections and inverted labeling of “fascists” are the order of the day, here is a less than tenuous connection: In 1991, six months before the Bosnian civil war started, the cover article of a glossy Bosnian-Muslim youth magazine named Novi VOX ( “New Voice”) was titled “The Handzar Division is Ready…The Fourth Reich is Coming; Wilkomen!” and showed a drawing of a Muslim in a Nazi SS uniform and a fez, with his boot on the blood-dripping, severed head of Karadzic, next to three other severed Serb-leaders’ heads:

The Bosnian-Muslim government apparently thought it was a good idea, and reconstituted this WWII Nazi unit to fight in the ’90s. (See “Reviving Nazism: Bosnian Muslim Government Reformed the Nazi SS Division Handzar in 1993” and “Albanians and Afghans fight for the heirs of Bosnia’s SS past.”)

No wonder Stephen Ahmad Schwartz still wants us to believe that the side fighting against fascists was the fascist one. And if one wants to seize on the Liberian-Serb “connection,” here’s another Liberian connection: Swede on trial for war crimes in Bosnia

STOCKHOLM — Proceedings opened against a Swedish national for war crimes committed when he served as a Bosnian army volunteer…In interviews on the eve of the trial, [Jackie] Arklov has admitted to many of the alleged crimes including threatening and assaulting victims when he served as a volunteer with Bosnian-Croatian forces in 1993.
…
Although Liberian-born — as a boy he was adopted by Swedish parents — he was part of a neo-Nazi group that [in] 1999 robbed a bank in southern Sweden, and shot two police officers who had set up a road block.
…
The war crimes probe was re-opened in May 2004 after one of his former victims who lives in Sweden approached authorities.

And still, we must thank Schwartz for bringing up fascism. Because in his Serb-Nazi fantasy, there’s another missing link: anti-Semitism. But it’s not missing from Stephen Sandalio Suleyman Schwartz’s beloved Bosniaks. Just look at the Serb-Bosniak contrast.

Anti-Semitism also happens to be a central feature of the Left, the international establishment, and the globalizing world — all those who point the finger at Serbia after blitzkrieging it. In contrast to the more tortured “common thread” that SS Schwartz pretends to discern in order to buttress his perpetual anti-Serb agenda, the real connection that is truly dangerous is: Nazism, jihad, and Europe (a measure of which is the very anti-Semitic Norway).

Nor should one leave out the U.S. establishment that idolizes such a Europe. (As SS Schwartz himself put it positively: “the globalization represented by the U.S. and EU.”) There’s a reason that when Joe Biden came to the Balkans in 2009, he was greeted by some in Serbia with signs calling him a fascist, or reading, “Biden, you Nazi scum, go home.” One didn’t have to be a “Serb hardliner” or “ultranationalist” to know that this is precisely what Biden — and the “new” Europe — represent. This is the case even if Biden had never called for placing the entire Serb population into concentration camps.

Indeed, the “fascist” inversion that Schwartz engages in is exactly the grand scheme of the international establishment. Rodney Atkinson — author and former British Ministerial Adviser who outlined the Fascist and Nazi foundations of the European Union — called out the inversion being made by the mainstream between itself and the conservative thinkers cited by Breivik: “What is Fascism? The Left’s (Deliberate?) Confusion”:

The totalitarian left (now very much part of the British political class) are trying to associate the lunatic Norwegian mass murderer with “the right” — which they term “fascist”. The history of Nazism and fascism tells a rather different story, where it is quite clear that it is the left which needs to hang its head in shame.

Nazism (the National Socialist German Workers Party) and Fascism are not right wing nationalist movements, although fascists and some extreme nationalists have some attitudes in common. But the right wing nationalist in France, Jean Marie Le Pen joined the resistance to French fascism and fought against the Nazis in the Second World War. The socialist Francois Mitterand on the other hand was a member of the Nazi-collaborating Vichy Government — and received an award “La Francisque” for his loyalty to the cause. Jacques Delors, that other founder of the present European Union and on the left of French politics was in the French equivalent of the Hitler Youth!

In Britain Oswald Mosley, who was at one time in the Conservative Party and became a Labour Minister was later to become the leader of the British Union of Fascists (invited by the young embryo euro-federalist Kenneth Clarke to speak at the Cambridge University Conservative Association!) The Fascist leader of Italy from 1925 to 1945, Benito Mussolini, had previously edited the newsletter of the Italian Socialist Party. “Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merging of state and corporate power,” wrote Mussolini, “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” He doesn’t exactly sound like Margaret Thatcher or Norman Tebbit, does he? But he does rather sound like the Advocate General of the left’s favourite empire, the European Union: “Criticism of the EU is akin to blasphemy and could be restrained without affecting freedom of speech”. [Opinion No. C6274/99 P issued by the Advocate-General at the European Court of Justice (The Telegraph, 18 October 2000)]

Fascism, whose principal enemies are communism and liberal democracy, is in fact of the left, the right and the centre, just as its opponents are also to be found on the left, right and centre. It is this very apolitical confusion and its ruthless desire for power and action, which makes Fascism so dangerous. Indeed, fascism appeals particularly to the so-called centre, the “third way” politicians, those who seek a half-baked mixture of left and right, of capitalism and socialism and who seek nothing more than to wield power through the State. No wonder that Tony Blair fits so well into the European fascist tradition — third way, supranationalist, eurofederalist and corporatist — sustained by the donations of big business and big unions. Having sacrificed so much British democracy on the altar of European corporatism Blair has, on retirement, obtained lucrative jobs in large supranational corporate institutions. It was of course the Liberal Lloyd George who said in 1936 that “Hitler is the greatest living German. It is a pity there are not more like him in England”.

[ “Supranationalism” is anti nation-state, Atkinson explains, “and because the large corporations which push such supranational aims to further their interests at the expense of democratic nationhood, supranationalism is the international version of corporatism and collectivism.”]

…
The opponents of Fascism include communism and democratic socialism and liberal conservatism — the latter promoting free trade and enterprise capitalism. Left-wing socialists (a minority in the Labour Party) share the liberal conservative support for popular sovereignty, the authority of Parliament, common law, democratic nationhood and, nearly always, Protestantism. Orthodox Christianity, with no Pope-like figure, is also based on pluralism and nation states — i.e. Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Serb Orthodox etc…

Serbs getting tagged as the Nazis becomes even richer when actual Nazi revivalists are entering the EU (Croatia), WWII Nazis are dying free men there, or being acquitted of war crimes in certified EU members such as Hungary:

Hungary Nazi war crimes suspect Sandor Kepiro acquitted (July 18)

Ex-police captain Sandor Kepiro, 97, was found not guilty of ordering the rounding up and execution of more than 30 Jews and Serbs in Serbia in 1942…Many of the dozens of people attending the court session cheered and clapped after Judge Bela Varga read out the verdict of the three-judge tribunal…More than 1,200 Jewish, Serb and Roma civilians were murdered over three days by Hungarian forces in a notorious massacre in the city of Novi Sad in 1942…[Kepiro] was convicted of involvement in the killings in Hungary in 1944 but his conviction was quashed by the fascist government…[Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Efraim Zuroff] said… “This is a joke.” Serbian chief prosecutor Vladimir Vukcevic said… “I was shocked at the behaviour in the court and the fact that the verdict was greeted with applause,” he said. “It was a nauseating scene.”

Serbia’s Jews undeterred by Kepiro acquittal (July 18)

…“It is not unexpected from a Hungarian society which is not yet mature enough to face its past,” said Ana Frenkel of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and a leader of the Novi Sad Jewish community…The defence had insisted there was no tangible evidence that Kepiro had carried out war crimes….

“The evidence went down the Danube to the Black Sea…The Hungarian army had to use dynamite to blow holes in the ice in order to drown the Jews and Serbs.” — John Peter Maher, Professor Emeritus

Acquittal of Kepiro in Novi Sad killings roils Jewish leaders (July 19)

…Applause and cheers broke out in the courtroom Monday as Judge Bela Varga announced the verdict…Kepiro also was suspected of being involved in and responsible for the death of about 30 other civilians who were executed on the banks of the Danube River in Novi Sad, shot through holes cut into the frozen river.

Kepiro had been found guilty of involvement in the massacre twice: once by the pre-Nazi Hungarian courts in 1944, and again after the war, in 1946. By then he allegedly had fled via Austria to Argentina. He returned to Budapest in 1996, where he was located by Efraim Zuroff, head of the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Israel office.
…
[Zuroff said,] “This verdict contradicts what we know about the events in Novi Sad on Jan. 23, 1942. It is an insult to the victims, an insult to the Jewish community, to the Serbian community, and it’s a very sad day for Hungary.”

Elan Steinberg, vice president of the American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants, said in a statement that “Holocaust survivors view this verdict as a betrayal by Hungarian judicial authorities of the demands of justice and memory. Hungary has turned its back on history in failing to come to grips with its collaborationist policies with the Nazi regime during World War II.

“At a time when extremist elements compromise present day Hungarian politics, this verdict is particularly unsettling.”

Closing with a note on Hungary, member in good standing of the Nazi-founded EU. First, an email I received from a reader earlier this year, who is a senior analyst at Hicks & Associates (parent company SAIC).

I was actually going to mention the ugly things going on in Hungary. Even though Hungary sacrificed hundreds of thousands of its citizens to German racist policies, because they were Jews, theHungarian government claims to be very concerned about ethnic Hungarian populations in Austria, Slovakia, Romania and Serbia. They have gone so far as to issue them Hungarian passports and documents.

Hungary is going to attempt to use these ethnic pretenses to reverse their territorial losses. With the Hungarian Prime Minister having successfully defended the press restrictions and other nationalistic, almost neo-fascist policies of his government, my guess is that Hungary is going to be making territorial claims at least against Serbia and Slovakia, and they are going to do it with the support of the German right-wing press — along with a lot of conservatives within the German government and military. In that case, Serbia will be facing a prospect of losing about another third — and a very valuable third at that [Vojvodina]. Serbia was granted certain territories after World War One, as reparations from the Central Powers. We have to make sure that this does not get reversed through more German, Hungarian and US propaganda. The Germans are strongly behind the Hungarian and Ukrainian demands for territorial restitution because they still have a gleam in their eye for Sudetenland, Pomerania and even East Prussia. The East Germans have slowly been building power in Germany and they want it all back. Even the aristocratic von und zu German Minister of Defence talks longingly about the extensive lands which his family once owned in Bohemia, Poland and German East Africa…

Why is it that the international media isn’t making any fuss at all about the fact that Hungary has effectively eliminated all of the short-lived freedoms of their press? … [T]here are a lot of Israelis buying up land in Hungary — in some cases it’s the same land that was taken from their grandparents. I guess a little insurance never hurts, but they are definitely getting their policies from the wrong insurer.

Another email this year in which Hungary came up, this time from a Russian-Jewish reader who moved to Hungary after 15 years in America (because his family roots are there): “I can’t say anything good about Hungary. It’s a complete mini-USSR. Though today they are all ‘businessmen’.”

Update:

Julia Gorin: At Least the Trial Killed Him

September 03rd 2011 05:30:42 PM

Hungarian Nazi Sandor Kepiro died today at age 97. To all the Hungarian courtroom’s Nazi sympathizers who cheered and applauded his acquittal in July: Today Jews and Serbs cheer and applaud. Because now he’s really in hot water.

by Hesperado

One of the analysts at Jihadica — an industrious think tank of experts on global Islamic terrorism (sorry — I meant to write “radical extremist fundamentalist Islamist” terrorism), Vahid Brown — can’t help himself. Whenever he adverts to the global problem he is analyzing, he must use Istist rhetoric.

He’s not alone in this: all his colleagues at Jihadica do this (as do most Western analysts, commentators and Joe Blows throughout the entire West).

Thus, to pluck one example out of thousands, I noted a typical quote from Vahid Brown two years ago, in which he analyzes a communique from some jihadist website called the “LIFG Revisions”. That site represented, so Vahid Brown wrote, not only a

“…sweeping repudiation not just salafi jihadism but of all forms of revolutionary Islamism in general. The text is remarkably broad in its scope, and strikes me as a 21st-century Sahwist renewal of the 1970s-era Muslim Brotherhood rejection of Qutbist Islamism.”

Wow, Vahid is sure giving the Istist terminological rhetoric a workout! Within those two brief introductory paragraphs, we have the following Istist terms:

salafi jihadism (I’m surprised Brown didn’t go further and refer to “salafist jihadism”)

revolutionary Islamism

Sahwist renewal

Qutbist Islamism.

All these “-ists” and “-isms” of the Istist terminological rhetoric (and there are more, such as “extremist” and “fundamentalist” as well as other words without that particular suffix which nevertheless provide the same function — such as “militant” and “restive” and the ridiculous “conservative”) are obviously calculated to continue to avoid the Camel in the Room — Islam itself.

The “-ist” du jour functions as an appendage that grows at a tangential angle off from a trunk deemed to be beyond reproach. It is only the gnarly twisted offshoot, denoted by the “-ist”, that is the problem: not the trunk or tree itself.

Islam thus is the good tree; all these “-ists” are “twistings” off of that good tree. That’s the dominant meme throughout the West whenever most Westerners bother to notice any of the dangerous and diseased data that pullulate out of the Muslim world (which of course over the past half century has been increasingly encroaching upon, and infiltrating, our own Western world).

The pressure of a logical question exerts itself — particularly with regard to intelligent people like Vahid Brown and his colleagues at “counter-terrorist” think tanks like Jihadica, whose job it is not merely to notice those mountains (or volcanos) of data about Muslims, but to assiduously monitor, collect, study, and analyze them:

Namely:

How many transnational Jihadists popping up in thousands of different places around the globe must Jihadica analysts notice and catalogue before they start wondering whether the implicit denial which their taxonomy assumes — the denial, that is, that Islam itself is the source of all these “Jihadists” and their “Jihadism” — is valid?

And, of course, the Islam in this question refers to Islam holistically — Islam sociologically, Islam politically, Islam geopolitically, Islam culturally, Islam theologically, Islam psychologically.

I.e.: plain old Islam. Islam straight no chaser. Islam, the whole Islam, and nothing but Islam.

Afterword:

On that note: I can’t wait for the year when “It’s the Islam, stupid!” becomes the central campaign slogan of a candidate for the U.S. Presidency — and I don’t care if that candidate is a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, a Socialist, a Libertarian Osteopath, or a Pro-Abortion Gay Mime with One Leg and Three Nipples: I’d vote for him. (I suppose there’s a line somewhere beyond which I would not vote for an anti-Islam candidate, if that candidate were really beyond the pale in his policies and private life: but I’d have to think long and hard and use plenty of imagination before I could think of such a strange creature.)

Further Reading:

The Camel in the Room: Prefixes, Suffixes, Qualifiers and Euphemisms

Jihadica: pullulating mosquitoes, the swamp, the camel, and no cigar.

Our incompetent analysts: Vahid Brown

Another asymptotic cacophemism to add to the “-ist” list

It seems the European Union has created a total mess.

Although Germany, France and Great Britain have declared multi-culturalism a total failure things have gone from bad to worse.

After the tragedy created by Anders Behring Breivik we now have riots and anarchy all over the place, and possibly spreading:

European model a wretched failure

by Greg Sheridan

IS this the way, then, that Europe will look from now?

Anarchy and chaos in Athens one week? Cars beyond number burned in Paris in another season? And now this terrible, senseless, causeless violence in London and many other British cities?

And everywhere across western Europe, governments bankrupt or nearly so, living beyond their means, unable or unwilling to tell their people the truth about their finances.

And beyond this the strange, undemocratic and illiberal mechanism, vast and inescapable, but also creaking and slipshod and unreliable, of the European super state, unable to help anything but always able to interfere, taking decisions without any irksome recourse to democracy or national sovereignty, adding a new layer of illegitimacy to societies robbed of trust.

London burning like the Blitz, and all of it inflicted by the pride of British youth.

There is nothing good in this for anyone. Surely even the angels weep to see that green and pleasant land so reduced.

There is no occasion here for schadenfreude. Europe’s tragedy is a setback for all mankind, and especially for that strange entity that we call the West.

To think coherently of the West, you must conceive of it being led by the US, embracing Canada, central and western Europe, Japan and Australia.

These nations are all meaningfully democratic. They are all rich, or relatively so. They all run mixed, capitalist economies. And they are linked in a common security network, NATO, or the US alliances with Japan and Australia.

They provide the lion’s share of international aid and, though hopelessly outnumbered at the UN, they still provide most of what pass for international norms.

But this is a very poor season in the West.

At no time since its core societies were stabilised after World War II has Europe looked so ratty, so impotent, so much at the end of its tether.

It still lectures the world on everything from the correct label for cheese to the urgent need to impose more taxes, carbon or otherwise. But it can no longer run its own still fabulously rich societies with even a modicum of efficiency or legitimacy.

The European model right now is a wretched failure.

There is hardly an economist in the world who does not believe European nations that are members of the eurozone would not be much better able to deal with their economic crises if they had their own currencies and their own central banks. But no one in power in Europe can face up to this.

Proponents of the European model can still be heard justifying this mad, anti-democratic centralisation of power on the basis that it helps European nations avoid wars with each other.

This argument, which no one seriously believes, perversely relies on the notion that Europeans are somehow inferior to all the other nations, which avoid war without surrendering their sovereignty to supranational bodies such as the EU.

Of course, Britain is not a part of the eurozone. It still has its own currency. But socially it is part of Europe and in many ways it lives out the European model very faithfully…

Read the rest in The Australian.

Also see:

Niall Ferguson: why the West is now in decline

From Gates of Vienna:

Update: The number of languages into which Fjordman’s writings have been translated now stands at eleven. I am told that extensive Spanish translations are available at Paz-digital.org.

“The European Union is the principal motor behind the Islamization of Europe. It is formally surrendering an entire continent to Islam while destroying established national cultures, and is prepared to harass those who disagree with this policy.

“This is the greatest organized betrayal in Western history.”

— Fjordman

But if you think the fury raging around Fjordman is due to his prominent place in Anders Behring Breivik’s manifesto, think again. The Oslo psychopath was the ostensible cause, but the real reason will be found in the quote featured at the top of this post, and in the hundreds of thousands of additional words that the “Dark Prophet of Norway” has written over the past five years about the destruction of European civilization and culture.

The Powers That Be want Fjordman out of the picture, and the killings in Norway provided a convenient pretext to take him down.

We’re fortunate that Fjordman has already written so much, and that his works have been mirrored in so many places, and translated into so many languages. At least eleven languages so far — Swedish, Finnish, German, Dutch, French, Italian, Spanish, Polish, Czech, Russian, and Croatian — and those are just the ones I know about. He may be the most widely-read writer of Counterjihad samizdat the world has ever seen.

Fjordman has been temporarily knocked off the air, but he hasn’t been silenced. He can’t be silenced — his voice is still out there, speaking to anyone who cares to listen. He will continue to speak to the anti-Islamization resistance as long as there are people willing to copy his works and pass them along.

Then, at about 9:40am EDT, Fjordman suddenly broke in and said, “There has just been a VERY powerful explosion in central Oslo. I heard it myself. Just outside of a central government building…” Later he told us, “I was many kilometers away at the time, and I thought lightning had struck somewhere in my local neighborhood.”

At that point we moved into live-blogging. Those who understood Norwegian monitored the news online or on TV, and I collected their reports, organized them, edited them, and posted the results at Gates of Vienna as quickly as possible.

From then on the news went up as it came in, according to our long-established habit when live-blogging a momentous event. Interested readers may want to look in the archives for that long and frequently-updated post to see how events unfolded throughout that dreadful day.

Given the nature of the explosion in central Oslo, it seemed that it must have been an Islamic terror attack, and this was apparently confirmed by a claim of responsibility by a Muslim jihad group. A couple of hours later this claim was withdrawn, however. At the same time, the shooter at Utøya was consistently described as blond and “Nordic-looking”. In the wee hours of the following morning, after Anders Behring Breivik had been apprehended and identified, the full horror of what had occurred sank in.

The Scandinavians on the team went to bed that night with only the sketchiest of ideas about what had happened. While they slept, a Swedish Nazi website put up a post identifying the killer as Fjordman, and linking to Gates of Vienna. Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs picked up that story — taking Nazis as a credible source, how typical! — and helped direct massive traffic to our blog. By the next morning the mainstream media in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden had picked up the lie and repeated it, and the deluge was upon us.

When Fjordman woke up that morning to discover that he was not only being associated with the killer, but had been identified as the killer, he was devastated. That’s when his nightmare began, and it hasn’t ended yet. To be initially identified as a mass murderer, and then later on as the inspiration for that murderer — how much greater suffering and injustice could a man endure?

Those who have actually read his writings know what a travesty this media frenzy has been. But the vast majority of Scandinavian progressives who are crying out for his blood have never read his writings.

With luck, however — if the Norwegian MSM continues to point people towards Fjordman’s archived works — all of that may begin to change.

Just a few weeks before the horrific events in Oslo, a confrontation took place in Italy between the proponents and opponents of a high-speed rail connection between Lyon and Turin. The line is commonly referred to as TAV, an acronym for the Italian phrase Treno Alta Velocità, or high-velocity train. The route is planned to run through the Susa Valley in Northwest Italy, but a coalition of environmental activists and local residents — who object to the spoiling of the valley’s traditional beauty — have joined forces to oppose it.

So far, so good. Those who object to a government project gather together to demonstrate against it. This is how European democracy works, right?

Work has resumed on the TAV, but demonstrators are still attempting to block the construction, and there have been further injuries.

Why is this relevant to Fjordman and the Oslo massacre?

Consider this: the “no-TAV” movement is a traditional progressive cause. There are no “right-wing extremists” involved. Some of the locals who object to it may be middle-of-the road, and some may even have voted for the Lega Nord. In general, however, opposing hi-tech transportation projects is a favorite lefty pastime.

It’s a good bet that there are many well-meaning liberals in Italy who oppose the TAV, but who also object to violence, abhor the violence committed by the protesters, and would never consider engaging in such violence themselves.

Some of those anti-TAV people have presumably repudiated the violence used against the police. But they did this of their own free will; nobody demanded that they do it.

Non-violent people who support lefty causes are not required to denounce or repudiate those who commit violence on behalf of causes they share. Nobody ever blames them for inspiring the violence. They are not described in the popular press as “indirectly responsible” for it.

And that’s because they aren’t. Nobody who sincerely opposes violence and works for change solely through peaceful means is responsible for violence committed in the name of a cause they otherwise support.

Only people who advocate, promote, incite, or commit violence are responsible for that violence. Period.

But saying it is necessary, because the rules are different for conservatives — or “right-wing extremists”, as we are more commonly known. Those rules are even more different for people who oppose Multiculturalism and mass immigration, and they are especially stringent for anyone who supports the preservation of traditional European cultures and national identities.

That’s why Fjordman is in the crosshairs. Anders Behring Breivik simply provided the opportunity to take down an advocate for European national cultures.

We all know the rules are different for us than they are for leftists. None of this is a surprise, and there’s no point in wailing about it or belaboring the point. The rules have been in place since long before most of us were born.

The iron fist is now out of the velvet glove because the wind has shifted in our favor, and those who promote the trans-national Multicultural political order realize it. They are losing control of events. Their carefully-constructed plan is coming undone, and overt repression is the only arrow they have left in their quiver.

As Al Stewart sang, “It’s only when the empire’s breaking/That you see their teeth.”

The trick is to refuse to play the game as laid down by the dominant culture. You cannot possibly win, so the only effective strategy is to refuse to enter the arena where the game is played.

It’s similar to what happens when you are accused of “racism”. Once the racism charge is hurled at you, you automatically lose. Insisting you are not a racist is of no avail. It doesn’t matter how many African or Samoan friends you have. The only way to prove you are not a racist is to accept the entire Progressive pantheon of ideas, from Multiculturalism through sustainable development all the way to the rights of transgendered people and animals.

Nothing else will help you. Just as in Islam, you are required to submit.

I decline to assemble on the tilted playing field where the “racism” game is played. I refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of any arguments framed around the issue of racism. All discussion ends when the race card is played.

The same is true of “repudiating” the violence of the Oslo psychopath, of “disassociating oneself” from his violence.

It’s a mug’s game. Don’t be tempted into playing it. By dancing to that tune, you are granting the legitimacy of arguments that depend on guilt by association. You are admitting that there is some sort of causal connection between those who act peacefully and refuse violence when supporting a cause, and those who commit violence while purporting to further the same cause.

This is a lie. Don’t support it by engaging it.

Progressives are playing Three Card Monty with conservatives, and the marks are too naïve and gullible to understand what is being done to them. It doesn’t matter how closely they watch the hands move: when the card is flipped over, it is never theirs.

Don’t play that game. Don’t acknowledge that the game exists, because you cannot possibly win it.

Many of you have been pointed to this “hate blog” by various media sources. Your newspapers and TV outlets have described what we are all about, and have told you what you must think of us. Then they sent you here so that you could gaze at the monster yourself.

But now that you are actually here, you don’t have to take their word for it. You can read it for yourself. Check out the links on the sidebar, or consult the Fjordman files for a full index.

Fjordman and I may be judged on the body of our work. What we stand for is well-attested in what we have written over the last five years. It may take a while, but do go through the archives and assess Fjordman’s arguments using your own powers of evaluation and ratiocination.

Then you can make up your own minds. The experience may be an unfamiliar one, but I can guarantee that you will find it exhilarating.

Independent thinking can be quite addictive.

by Hesperado

Today’s post will be an unusually personal one.

An old friend I’ve known many many years since high school, who is visiting this month from where he lives and works in Tokyo, Japan used to talk with me about the problem of Islam and he used to seem to be on the same page — then about three years ago, he just stopped talking about it with me, even when I raised the issue. I finally asked him why, and he evaded giving me a straight answer. I increasingly got the sense that he has gone towards the PC MC perspective, and thinks my concern has become an unhealthy “obsession”.

This morning, we were talking on the phone, having a lively friendly conversation. Then the I word came up, and after three years of not talking about it, he began to express his feelings, which amounted to the same crap (pardon my Arabic) which I’ve been hearing and reading from the PC MC mainstream. The more I tried to counter-argue (admittedly, unable to control my emotions adequately), the more he responded with the usual reflexive PC MC spasms of counter-reaction.

Then he brought up Breivik, and my frustration and fury were mounting to the breaking point. At that point, I said: “That’s just one atrocity! Muslims have been committing thousands of atrocities!”

“Thousands…!!!???” he retorted, incredulously.

I cited the beheadings and explosions in the Philippines, the arsons and shootings and stabbings in Thailand, the attacks in Indonesia, Malaysia, central Asia, India, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Syria, Algeria, Libya, the genocide in Sudan, the ongoing conflict in Nigeria, not to mention the countless successful and aborted planned attacks throughout the West. My friend remained stubbornly defensive.

My friend is intelligent, college-educated, reads the news daily, is a history buff: i.e., he has no excuse to be such a stupid ass (pardon my Arabic) as this.

I challenged him: “Name one other ‘right-wing’ fanatic who has massacred anyone, other than Breivik!”

He fumbled: “name another…?”

I said: “Yes. Name one other ‘right-wing’ fanatic who has massacred anyone in the last ten years.”

He said: “Why are you saying ‘in the last ten years’…?”

At that point, I hung up on my friend. I have never before hung up on him, in all the years I’ve known him. And I may never call him back again, or see him.

I am so sick and effing tired of people denying the problem of Islam: I don’t give a F if I lose my friend over this.

Indeed, about three years ago, I had a serious falling out with my sister over this same issue. Over the years, she has become stupidly enamored of Islamic culture (and she has always been anti-American, even though she was born and raised in the U.S.A. and is otherwise as American as apple pie); she even once had a Pakistani boyfriend. Over time, I learned to avoid raising the issue, because we would just get into wrangles and tussles over it, which tended to stress me out and infuriate me.

I’m done.

In fact, I was done five years ago.

I’m past done.

The recognition of the evil and danger of Islam and of all Muslims who enable Islam is a deal-breaker for me: you can’t be my friend or my family if you continue to deny that recognition — let alone add insult to injury and insinuate that I, because of my concern about it, am “obsessed” or worse yet, some kind of bigot.

While any reader of my blog will know (from my last few essays there) that I do not subscribe to the dire and excessive characterization of the West which seems more and more common in the Counterjihad — a characterization tending logically toward fomenting an attitude conducive to a pan-Western Civil War — nevertheless, I take this issue seriously enough to find resonance and relevance in the old tragic saying of the American Civil War: a conflict which resulted all too often in “Brother against Brother”.

Gates of Vienna: The Forced Resignation of Fjordman

Our regular readers know the writings of Fjordman, and are familiar with what has happened to him in the two weeks since Anders Behring Breivik murdered seventy-six people in Oslo and on the island of Utøya.

Our thousands of new readers also know who Fjordman is — or at least they know the media construct labeled “Fjordman”, which has little or nothing to do with the reality of the man who chose that pseudonym when writing about the ongoing destruction of European civilization.

Yesterday, after receiving legal advice, Fjordman chose to visit the police, reveal his identity, and answer any questions they posed. Contrary to media reports, the police did not “discover” him.

For the record: The Norwegian authorities had no idea who Fjordman was until he decided to reveal himself, of his own free will.

After his discussions with the police, he gave an interview to a media outlet, and then retired once again from public view.

An account of the police interview was published here. Then, later on this morning, the interview with Fjordman was published at VG (English version here). The same information was later published in Denmark. Almost immediately his real name was added to his Wikipedia entry, which had already been in existence for a number of years.

It’s no surprise to learn that he has gone into hiding — we’ve all seen what the “anti-fascists” do to people who hold opinions like ours, and Fjordman has to be one of their high-priority targets.

Now his “brand” has been forcibly retired. But this doesn’t mean that Fjordman’s work will come to an end. As his long-time readers know, Fjordman is completely dedicated to the cause of reclaiming and upholding European civilization — not through murder and destruction, as his supposed admirer Anders Behring Breivik chose to do, but rather by honest discussion and legitimate peaceful action through the political process.

This is what we all believe in here at Gates of Vienna. Our goal is to be outspoken enough to prevent what must otherwise surely come. If we who love our civilization and culture do not stand up now, then certain violence awaits us. Our enemies have declared this clearly over and over again, and we would be fools to disregard their stated intentions. By utilizing our current — and precarious — right to free speech, and by raising public awareness of what is being planned, we hope to avert the violence and degradation that the Islamization of the West will inevitably entail.

For the record: Fjordman is the best of us. He is not just a brilliant scholar and a fine writer, but also the most decent, gentle, and humane person I have ever met. He is a man of utmost integrity, and it shines through in his dealings with others as well as in the millions of words he has written.

His forced resignation from his position as “Fjordman” does not spell the end of his work.

Posted by Baron Bodissey at 8/05/2011 10:05:00 AM

Gates of Vienna: Fjordman: My Afternoon With The Police

The following message just came in from Fjordman, who adds that he intends to keep a low profile in the near future.

Lars Hedegaard heard my story and commented that he had never known of any witness who has been treated in this manner in any Western country, except for totalitarian societies such as the Third Reich.

My lawyer, who is experienced and has seen many tough cases before, did not expect anything like this to happen. He assumed this would be relatively easy, and even suggested that I might get by without a lawyer. I insisted on having one present just in case, which most likely helped a little bit. Things would have been even worse had that not been the case. My lawyer later said that in my case they operated at best at the very fringes of what could be considered legal.

I was never accused of doing anything criminal, obviously because I had nothing to do with the terror attacks and they know this. Yet without the slightest hint of proof of any lawbreaking, I was treated as a murder suspect.

To my total surprise I had to go to my flat, where for several hours half a dozen police officers went through all of my DVDs, searched through my old printed travel photographs from years back, searched through all of my (many) books, checked my kitchen equipment, went through all of my clothes, and confiscated a suitcase that contained nothing more than clothes and some books. They also confiscated several digital devices, including my camera and my laptop. It is quite clear that they wanted information about non-violent Islam-critical networks in Europe that they suspected might be contained in my PC, even though they denied this to me.

Please remember that the police and the Police Security Service (PST) apparently had no clue who I was until I literally knocked on their door of my own free will, even though I knew full well that I would have to give up my anonymity after doing so. I had very little information about Breivik since I have never met him, something which he himself has admitted, yet I still handed over what little information I had. I also answered their questions honestly, even though, technically speaking, I did not have to do so.

If you believe the mass media, the police were still not sure that I really was Fjordman until a couple of hours after I had turned up at the police station. As soon as they understood that this was indeed the case, they rushed through a quick decision to search my flat and confiscate my computer equipment immediately. They must have realized at this point that I had nothing at all to do with the terror attacks.

I personally suspect that this was mainly a political decision.

Posted by Baron Bodissey at 8/05/2011 05:51:00 PM

Gates of Vienna: Fjordman and Fairness? A Sick Joke…

Dr. Andrew Bostom writes:

Today my colleague, the perspicacious Norwegian essayist Fjordman (whose prolific writings can be read here), was compelled to surrender his anonymity after reluctantly granting an interview to Verdens Gang (published in English, here).

An hysterical, morally cretinous press and blogosphere — Norwegian, other European, and American — which had initially accused Fjordman, falsely and recklessly, of being the Breivik mass murderer, continues to persist that he was Breivik’s “main inspiration,” a charge akin to accusing the Beatles of “inspiring” Charles Manson, or Jody Foster “inspiring” John Hinckley.

Even the relatively fair and staid Verdens Gang interview labels the apolitical Fjordman as “far right.” When reading the interview, consider that the ongoing major “accusation” against Fjordman is that his reasoned critique of cultural relativism — echoed by mainstream Western European leaders Sarkozy, Cameron, and Merkel — “precipitated” the murderous insanity of Breivik. This is another absurd and slanderous allegation…

“Absurd and slanderous”? Indeed.

Maybe now that the far left extremist government mouthpiece press in Norway and Sweden will leave us alone. They have their scapegoat, even as they twist his story…

Read the rest of Dr. Bostom’s essay here.

Posted by Dymphna at 8/05/2011 07:46:00 PM

From Gates of Vienna:

If anyone was still wondering about the contours of post-Breivik Scandinavia, the following piece of nastiness should provide a hint of what lies ahead.

As I said last night, at this point it doesn’t really matter whether the atrocities in Norway were a “false flag” operation, or simply an opportune moment for the Socialist establishment to cripple the European resistance to Islamization — the outcome is the same. The Left has now found the longed-for albatross that it can hang around the neck of every politician or activist who has ever criticized Islam.

In Sweden the main target of opportunity is Sverigedemokraterna, the Sweden Democrats, who entered parliament for the first time in the most recent election. They are the only significant party in Sweden that opposes mass immigration, and they, like so many others, were mentioned in Anders Behring Breivik’s 1,500-page manifesto.

Long-time readers are familiar with the Ekeroth brothers, Ted and Kent, who are staunch in their resistance to Islamization, and have been involved in Counterjihad events all across Europe during the past four years. This makes them fair game for the guilt-by-association lynch mob that is now raging through the Swedish press.

A Swedish reader sent us this brief note, with a link to an appalling photo:

The witch-hunt is on. The Lund artist Dan Park has now presented this:

The text says “My name is Ted and I’m a representative of the municipal assembly in Lund and I like Anders”.

This targets both Ekeroth brothers, since the text refers to Ted but the picture is of Kent.

Stand up for the Ekeroths! Public figures who are being smeared need to be defended.

And indeed we will stand up for the Ekeroths. I know Ted and Kent, and this is a vile, demonic slander.

And it’s standard operating procedure for the Socialist Left. This is simply what they do. There is no behavior too low, no depth to which they will not sink, in an attempt to destroy their opponents. We all know that.

The massacre in Norway has presented them with an unprecedented opportunity to finish us off. They will have the help of the media and the government in their efforts, which makes our counteroffensive an uphill battle.

Yet it must be fought. The fact that our opponents are devious and totally unprincipled opportunists should not deter us from vigorous resistance.

Ted and Kent Ekeroth are not just men of peace. Nor are they simply advocates of peaceful change through democratic means.

They and other members of Sverigedemokraterna are in constant danger of physical attack from the “anti-fascists” of the anarchist left, who have mounted violent assaults on SD members in the past with knives and other deadly weapons. These thugs operate with impunity, with the tacit support — if not the outright collusion — of the Swedish government and the police.

Opposing the Islamization of Sweden is a serious business. It can even get you killed.

That’s what makes this smear-by-Breivik so deeply ironic and utterly sordid.

Stand up for the Ekeroth brothers. Stand with Sverigedemokraterna!

From Gates of Vienna:

For the last ten days commentators all over the world have been preoccupied with Anders Behring Breivik. The psychology of the killer, his “Christian” beliefs, his “right-wing extremist” political opinions, and the resulting necessity for a crackdown on “Islamophobia” throughout Europe — these have been the major topics of discussion.

Shortly after the atrocity occurred, it became clear that the EU and European national governments were not about to let the crisis go to waste. Less than twenty-four hours after the shootings, Europol was ready to go with its blueprint for a task force for Norway. Its plans to deal with “homegrown, non-Islamic terror threats” had obviously been in place for a while, ready to be pulled off the shelf and utilized at the first opportune moment.

Immediately after that the EU declared itself ready to fight “right-wing extremism”, saying that “this atmosphere of intolerance had abetted the attacks in Oslo and on the island of Utøya.” Needless to say, those who created the “atmosphere of intolerance” were people like you and me, people who have chosen to speak out against the Islamization of Europe.

The British press began to connect the murderer with the EDL. German Muslims called on their government to take legal action against websites that “provoke Islamophobia”, especially Politically Incorrect. The push was on.

Commentators focused on the ideology being promoted by “populists” — the lowest of the low in politics, those populists, people whose opinions actually appeal to ordinary citizens. The bien-pensants found it “worth wondering to what extent the proponents of the new right — an ideology that clearly influenced Breivik — have been implicated by his actions?” In this case the commentator was Dutch, and the “populist” in the crosshairs was Geert Wilders.

So the responsibility for Anders Breivik is being clearly laid out: “populists” created an “atmosphere of intolerance” which “implicates” them in the psychopath’s crime.

That is, we are in the process of being set up.

The machinery for all this has been in place for a long time. It just took a little bit of Breivik-gasoline in the tank to start it rumbling along. It doesn’t really matter whether this was a “false flag” operation or not . The killer could have been exactly what he seemed to be, and the state apparatus just decided to seize a golden opportunity the moment it presented itself. The end result is the same.

Let’s pull back a bit from the situation, rising through the troposphere to gaze down on the larger map, where Europe is just a small red-highlighted patch on the globe. There are several bright green nodes to look at: Saudi Arabia, Al-Azhar University in Cairo, and Istanbul, the European outpost of Turkey. These are, respectively, the petrodollars, the theological powerhouse, and the political muscle behind Sunni Islam and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

The plan is to find a way to implement UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18, which would require member states “to take concrete steps to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief”. Or, to put it in more straightforward language, they would have to outlaw the criticism of Islam.

There’s only impediment to Mrs. Clinton’s ambitious plans: a pesky little scrap of paper known as the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

However, now that Anders Breivik has demonstrated the full consequences of allowing “Islamophobia” to run unchecked, what right-minded person could ever object to a few restrictions on freedom of speech to make sure that nothing like the Oslo massacre ever happens again?

That’s the general set-up. The next stages of the operation, as outlined by co-chairmen OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, are explained in this article from Arab News. I’ve highlighted some of the more notable portions:

OIC: West Pledge to Combat Intolerance

ISTANBUL: In what can rightly be described as a seminal step in relations between the Muslim world and the Western world, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the leading nations of the Western world led by the United States and the European Union agreed Saturday to take concrete steps to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.

The high-level meeting was held at the historic Yildiz Palace in Istanbul. It was attended by EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Cathrine Ashton along with foreign ministers and officials from France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Japan, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Poland, Romania, Denmark, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Senegal, Sudan, the Vatican, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Arab League and African Union. The meeting was co-chaired by OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Ever since he took office, the OIC secretary-general has been working on formulating ways and means to stop acts of religious intolerance.

“It was during my address to the 15th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva that I outlined a new approach toward evolving a consensus against incitement to violence and intolerance on religious grounds that could endanger peaceful coexistence and must be viewed as a direct contrast to the very notion of a globalized world,” said Ihsanoglu. “I am glad that the eight points in the proposed approach found resonance with all the negotiating partners. They formed the basis of the consensus reflected in Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18. The importance of the consensual adoption of this resolution should be duly recognized.”

He said challenges remain.

“However, the test would lie in the implementation. Having been successful at consensus building, we must now act in concert to build on the consensus. The adoption of the resolution does not mark the end of the road. It rather signifies a beginning based on a new approach to deal with the whole set of interrelated issues,” said Ihsanoglu. “Resolution 16/18 provides a good basis for concerted action by states, at both national and international levels and must be utilized accordingly. Otherwise, we would be faced with the unaffordable risk of the agenda being hijacked and set by radicals and non-state actors.”

Ihsanoglu said there was a delicate balance between freedom of expression and incendiary speech.

“We continue to be particularly disturbed by attitudes of certain individuals or groups exploiting the freedom of expression to incite hatred by demonizing purposefully the religions and their followers. Though we respect their freedom of opinion and expression, we find these attitudes politically and ethically incorrect and insensitive.”

At the meeting, Clinton discussed how to build on a UN Human Rights Council resolution passed on March 24 that calls for promoting tolerance and respect for diversity of beliefs, without restricting legitimate free speech.

Clinton agreed to pursue a new religious tolerance agreement, which respects free expression of religious beliefs in order to resolve debates over religion between the West and the Islamic world.

“Together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of religion,” Clinton said. “We are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs.“

Speaking of the United States, Clinton said: “We have seen in the United States how the incendiary actions of just a very few people can create wide ripples of intolerance, so we are focused on promoting interfaith education and collaboration, enforcing anti-discrimination laws, protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.”

[…]

She commended the Organization of Islamic Cooperation for its work securing the passage of Resolution 16/18 at the Human Rights Council.

“Resolution 16/18 calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence. We will be looking to all countries to hold themselves accountable and to join us in reporting to the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights on their progress in taking these steps.”

The chain of causation has thus been fully established: when a blond blue-eyed psychopath kills scores of people, the websites he likes to read are partially responsible for his acts. By OIC standards and Resolution 16/18, these sites engage in “intolerance, negative stereotyping and… incitement to violence”.

By the way — it’s interesting to note that the same is not true of incendiary Islamic preachers — not even the ones who cry “Death to those who insult the prophet!”

No, this is a one-way street: only non-Muslims can be guilty of incitement to religious hatred. Even totally non-violent sentiments qualify as incitement, as long as they express a negative opinion about Islam. Them’s the rules.

And now Mrs. Clinton has identified a necessary intermediate step, which involves “peer pressure and shaming”. In other words, things that people like me think and say will be judged doubleplus ungood. Our sentiments will become so far beyond the pale that outlawing them will scarcely be necessary, a mere legislative afterthought.

Imagine a compliant Congress, mesmerized by our success in killing Osama bin Laden and ready to help our “democratic allies” in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, etc.

Imagine when President Obama appoints a replacement for a retiring conservative justice on the Supreme Court.

Imagine just one more incident involving a blond blue-eyed mass murderer whose ideology can at least nominally be identified as “conservative” or “anti-immigration”.

Where do you think we’ll be after that?

Do you really think it can’t happen here?

I’m telling you, the OIC is running the show.

Previous posts about Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and the OIC:

Utøya wasn’t only a leftist youth camp; it was also a camp for Muslim youth.

Ma’an News Agency: Fatah Youth condemns Norway attacks, over 90 killed

Published Saturday 23/07/2011 (updated) 25/07/2011 10:40

BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — Fatah Youth released a statement on Saturday condemning attacks in Norway which have reportedly killed over 90 people.

“It is with consternation that we have received the dramatic news of an awful terrorist attack against a summer camp ran by our comrades of Norwegian Labor Youth ‘AUF,’” the statement said.

The Fatah Youth group had taken part in the summer camp in the past on the Island of Utoya, near Oslo, where over 90 people were reportedly killed in a shooting spree on the Island and a bomb attack in Oslo on Friday, news reports said.

“Fatah Youth declares its consternation about the terror attack. There are no words to describe an attack against people that have been our comrades in our struggle for freedom and independence. Very few people have stood by our side as much as the Norwegian people, and particularly our AUF comrades.”

“We know those who have been cowardly assassinated. Those are people that have stood for the human and national rights of the Palestinian people both in Europe and while visiting Palestine.

“Fatah Youth has participated for almost 15 years in the same summer camp and our youth has benefited by learning and sharing experiences on democracy and advocacy for peace and justice.
[…]
More here.

Another Look at the Norwegian Labor Party Palestinian Affiliation

Labour Youth League summer camp at Utøya got the Labour Party’s young hopefuls a visit by Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store.

The Palestinians “must have their own state, the occupation must end, the wall must be demolished and it must happen now,” said the Norwegian Foreign Minister to cheers from the audience.

The main activity at the Utoya Island Meeting were mock “Break the Israel blockade” games.

One event was Palestinian aide boats would try to break the Israel blockage.

The sign says “defeat the blockade” (“opphev blokkaden” Gaza)

Utoya camp was not Islamist but it WAS something not much more wholesome (by our standards, at any rate).

It was a summer indoctrination camp run by Norway’s ruling Labor Party for up-and-coming children of the ruling elite.

Glenn Beck was not far off when he compared it to the Hitlerjungend or Young Pioneers.

It’s so the junior members of the aristocracy can be properly told what to think and can network with each other in preparation for their brilliant careers ruling over the peasants.

I saw at least one article that had photos of previous summers with the little dearies and their handlers assembling Israel-bashing displays.

We Americans had similar traditions further back in the twentieth-century. The likes of David Horowitz and Ronald Radosh have written of the red-diaper summer camps their parents sent them to.

There are still institutions such as the “Midwest Academy” where budding labor activists go get schooled in labor and community organizing over the summer.

Not to mention the many religiously-oriented summer camps that have long been a cultural staple.

Note the faces which are more Middle Eastern or mixed than pure Norwegian

The camp was run by the Youth Movement of the Labour Party and used to indoctrinate teens and young adults.

Breivik was targeting the future leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate, who commit major violence against Norwegian natives, including violent gang rapes, with impunity, and who live on the dole… all done without the consent of the Norwegians.

The day before the shooting, a pro-Palestinian rally was held. LINK

In an interesting article Breivik and totalitarian democrats in which Sevje, the Norwegian ambassador to Israel is quoted:  Totalitarian Democrats CLICK HERE 

“Ma’ariv asked Sevje whether in the wake of Breivik’s terrorist attack Norwegians would be more sympathetic to the victimization of innocent Israelis by Palestinian terrorists.

Sevje said no, and explained, “We Norwegians view the occupation as the reason for terror against Israel. Many Norwegians still see the occupation as the reason for attacks against Israel. Whoever thinks this way, will not change his mind as a result of the attack in Oslo.”

The author of the article notes:

“So in the mind of the illiberal Norwegians [the Labour Party], terrorism is justified if the ideology behind it is considered justified.

For them it is unacceptable for Breivik to murder Norwegian children, because his ideology is wrong. But it is acceptable for Palestinians to murder Israeli children, because their ideology is right.”

More here.

Also see:

• Blogmocracy: Something is Rotten in the Kingdom of Norway
• Kaffir Kanuck: Norway created Anders Behring Breivik

Answering Muslims: Is Anders Behring Breivik a Christian?

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by Acts17Apologetics on Jul 30, 2011

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/
Much has been made of the fact that Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik calls himself a Christian. However, in his Manifesto, Breivik explains what he means by the term “Christian,” and he admits that he does not have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Further discussion here.