One of the Joys of been an Australian is without doubt the following… Enjoy!!!!
Now watch it again.
Having said all of the above, well done England, worthy finalists.
Tiger Down Under
Religion of Peace
Sun
An American, Australian ,Israeli, British "Judeo Christian Friendly " blog.
Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM
Monday, November 16, 2009
How do we know that the attack at Fort Hood was an act of Islamist terrorism?….Major Nidal Hassan told us so.
Why I Murdered 13 American Soldiers at Fort Hood: Nidal Hassan Explains It All to You
November 14, 2009
How do we know that the attack at Fort Hood was an act of Islamist terrorism? Simple, Major Nidal Hassan told us so. You’ve seen reports of a long list of things he did and said along these lines. But what’s most amazing of all is this:
Hassan is the first terrorist in history to give an academic lecture explaining why he was about to attack. Yet that still isn’t enough for too many people—including the president of the United States--to understand that the murderous assault at Fort Hood was a Jihad attack.
It was reported that the audience was shocked and frightened by his lecture. He was supposed to speak on some medical topic yet instead talked on the topic: “The Koranic World View as it Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military.” All you have to do is look at the 50 Power Point slides and they tell you everything you need to know.
It is quite a good talk. He’s logical and presents his evidence. This is clearly not the work of a mad man or a fool, though there’s still a note of ambiguity in it. He's still working out what to do in his own mind and is trying to figure out if he has a way out other than in effect deserting the U.S. army and becoming a Jihad warrior. Ultimately, he concluded that he could not be a proper Muslim without killing American soldiers. Obviously, other Muslims could reach different conclusions but Hassan strongly grounds himself in Islamic texts.
In a sense, Hassan's lecture was a cry for help: Can anyone show me another way out? Can anyone refute my interpretation of Islam? One Muslim in the audience reportedly tried to do so. But unless these issues are openly discussed and debated--rather than swept under the rug--more people will die.
In fact, I’d recommend that teachers use this lecture in teaching classes on both Islam and Islamist politics. .
Follow along with me and you’ll understand everything.
Hassan deals with three topics: What Islam teaches Muslims, how Muslims view the wars in Afghanistan and Iran, how this might affect Muslims in the U.S. military. [Slide 2] Hassan defines Jihad, showing how silly are the claims that it only means a personal struggle to behave better. It also signifies holy war, of course. [Slide 5].
Now here’s Hassan’s central theme. Muslims cannot fight in an infidel army against other Muslims. And Hassan himself says that it’s getting hard for Muslims in the U.S. military to justify doing so. [Slide 11] Obviously, Hassan was deciding that he couldn’t do so.
He then quotes the Koran extensively to prove the point. Allah will punish anyone who kills a Muslim [Slide 12]. Hassan then gives four examples of Muslim soldiers who broke under the strain. One who killed fellow American soldiers (which Hassan would himself do), one accused of espionage (but was acquitted), one who deserted, and one who refused deployment to Iraq. [Slide 13]
Quoting the Koran, Hassan next provides a number of quotations to show that the believer must obey Allah. If they do, they will enjoy great delights (though he left out the 72 virgins, there’s one quote hinting at pederasty), and if they don’t they will suffer torments of Hell.
Finally, he gets into the heavy stuff. Hassan introduces the concept of “defensive Jihad” which is a core element in radical Islamist thinking and has especially been promoted by Usama bin Ladin and al-Qaida. [Slides 37-39]. If others attack and oppress Muslims, then it is the duty of all Muslims to fight them. September 11 was justified by its perpetrators by saying that the United States had attacked Muslims and therefore it was mandatory to kill Americans in return.
And here is the crux of the matter: Verse 60:08, “Allah forbids you…from dealing kindly and justly” with those who fight Muslims.” [Slide 40]
If Nidal Hassan believed this and would follow it, he must—to be a proper Muslim in his eyes—pick up a gun and join the Jihad, Muslim side. He was not shooting Americans because he caught battle fatigue from American soldiers he treated. Think about it. To have done so, Hassan would have had to sympathize with them, thinking about what it would be like for him if he’d been fighting…Muslims in Iraq or Afghanistan. But that was precisely his problem. He sympathized with the other side.
Being ordered to ship out to one of these countries, Hassan now had to decide: which side are you on? Would he choose the side of Allah and the Muslims, to be rewarded in Heaven? Or would he join with the infidels, to be punished with Hell and to betray his religion? He made his decision.
It is interesting that no Muslim debate has developed over a very simple issue: What if two groups of Muslims are fighting, cannot one side with one group, even if it has non-Muslim allies? After all, Americans are not going to Iraq or Afghanistan simply to “kill Muslims” but to defend Muslims from being killed. The Saudis, Kuwaitis, and Egyptians had no problem with using Western troops to save them from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 1991, for example. The Iraqi and Afghan governments, made up of pious Muslims, do the same thing.
Arab nationalists who are Muslims can take this position more easily. But for Islamists the problem is not some abstraction but knowledge that they are fighting a battle to seize control of all Muslim-majority states and indeed perhaps of the entire world.
The true problem, then, is not that some Muslims help infidels kill Muslims, but that some Muslims help infidels kill Islamists. But Hassan never considered this point, which could be quite persuasive to other Muslims in Western militaries.
So, in his thinking, how might Hassan have escaped from that stark choice? Hassan answers that question. Quoting the Koran, he indicated that if the Americans ended the wars, then that would be okay and no killing would be necessary. [Slide 42]
Another alternative is if the Americans accepted Islam or agreed to become subservient to Muslim rulers (dhimmis) and paid a special tax [Slide 43-44].
The third alternative would be if the Muslim Messiah came, destroyed Christianity as a false religion and set off the post-history utopia. [Slide 45]. He didn’t mention another part of this description, which was the murder of all Jews.
A digression is appropriate here. Hassan, although a Palestinian, has never been quoted as attacking Israel or the Jews. This is one more reminder that this struggle isn’t all just about Israel. But it also tells something important about Hassan which also applies to many Muslim radicals in Europe. Hassan is an American. As such he has no other nationality, neither Palestinian nor Arab. He doesn’t support Hamas or Fatah. But he has a religion that directs his thinking. That’s why he is an Islamist and why he supports a generalized Islamist revolutionary movement, al-Qaida.
As one moderate Muslim from Canada pointed out, the clothes he wore the day before committing his Jihad attack was not (as some sources put it in a silly manner) some martyr or even Arab garb but the clothing of Pakistan and Afghanistan. He is an al-Qaida Jihadi, having changed sides in the War on Terror.
Hassan was no fool or blind fanatic. Indeed, he presents a sophisticated view. For example, he quotes contradictory Quranic verses, one suggesting that all religions can enter Heaven; another that all non-Muslims will go to Hell [Slide 47].
His conclusion takes on tremendous significance in light of what would happen at Fort Hood. He writes:
“If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the `infidels’; i.e., the enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc.”
And of course, these groups did so convince Hassan. [Slide 48]
Why? Hassan tells us:
“God expects full loyalty. Promises heaven and threatens with Hell. Muslims may seem moderate (compromising) but God is not.” [Slide 49]
And at the very end, he proposes what might have been his own escape route:
"Recommendation: Department of Defense should allow Muslim soldiers the option of being released as `Conscientious objectors’ to increase troop morale and decrease adverse events.” [Slide 50]
If that had existed for Hassan, I think, he would not have killed people. This proposal is worth debating, though it has negative implications too, of course. But then he had other options. He could have resigned his commission, deserted, or refused deployment as a conscientious objector and gone to prison. In fact, Hassan himself cited individuals who had done the last two.
Consequently, Hassan's lecture also tells us why Muslims can choose not to be Jihadists, though this requires ignoring or rationalizing clear, religiously binding commandments in their religion or by being basically secular people of Muslim background. This is the kind of solution found in Christianity and Judaism, of course.
Hassan was too pious and consistent to take this way out. The answer to his personal behavior must be found in a mix of psychological factors and political-religious beliefs. The fact is, however, that he clearly did see himself as a Jihad warrior in the end. The existence of psycological factors in no way negates the importance of religious considerations.
All terrorists have some psychological forces working to make them follow such a path. Yet if not for ideological--and in the case of Islamists, religious--beliefs they never would have become terrorists. In contrast, criminals have psychological factors plus material goals, while mentally ill people who commit crimes are compelled by purely psychogical factors. Hassan does not fit either of those two categories.
Equally, his action cannot be attributed to a "misreading" or "heretical" interpretation of Islam. To read this lecture is to understand how carefully and self-critically he approached the issues. Anything so obviously false or deviant from mainstream Islam would simply not appeal to so many Muslims. Hassan was looking for a way out in the texts and listed the "loopholes" he did find: either the United States must not fight anyone who was a Muslim or it must let him out of the military.
What Hassan neglected was an explanation that lay outside what his strict reading of the Muslim texts would allow him to say: the United States must fight, in general, because the Islamists have been the aggressors. And the United States is actually fighting as allies with one group of (more moderate) Muslims against another (of radical Islamists). Yet the texts always deal with the Muslim community as a united whole (the umma), an interpretation that just doesn't correspond with reality. Indeed and ironically, this view enables Islamists to themselves kill thousands of Muslims all over the world!
The fact that Hassan’s lecture has not been the centerpiece of the whole post-massacre debate is a true example of how impoverished are the “experts,” journalists, and politicians at dealing with these issues. Of course, without exploring the Islamic factor, they're wasting everyone's time. They're also going to be wasting quite a few lives.
*Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal.
Many thanks to Barry for forwarding me the above article, I urge ANV readers to go to his web site GLORIA (Global Research in International Affairs Center) for some of the BEST commentary on world events and most particularly the activities of the members of the “ Religion of Peace” aka. Islam.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Devolution is possible,Britain is ever ready to prove it, just ask Baroness Valerie Amos, just who’s idea was it to send this LOON here ?
Envoy surprised by climate of scepticism
SMH
JONATHAN PEARLMAN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT
November 14, 2009
BRITAIN'S new high commissioner,
has expressed surprise that Australians are still debating whether humans cause climate change and says other nations have long since ''moved on''.
In her first public comments since arriving in Canberra three weeks ago, Baroness Amos, a former leader of the House of Lords, said Australia was well-positioned to lead the international community on climate change but the public debate should move beyond scepticism and negativity to finding solutions.
Her comments come days after a senior Liberal, Nick Minchin, said he and most of his party colleagues believed man-made climate change was a myth.
''I have been surprised that the science itself is being questioned,'' she said. ''These are things where there have been debates over a long period of time in other countries and where we have reached conclusions and moved on.
''In the UK, there is a degree of political consensus about what in broad terms needs to be done. There is a lot of debate about how we do it. You would certainly not see on a daily basis … the kind of negative reporting that you have here.''
British envoys tend to be among the most influential of the foreign diplomats in Canberra and usually have a direct line to senior political and business leaders. When she first met Kevin Rudd, on her third day in the country, Baroness Amos presented the Prime Minister with a world map showing the potentially horrific global consequences of rising temperatures, including the risk of more dangerous bushfires.
''Australia as a country has seen the impact of some of this, in terms of drought and what is happening with annual fires,'' she said.
''I was a bit surprised at the negativity of some of the debate … It would be great for Australia to be out there and leading the way. Being a resource-rich country does not mean that, in putting in place measures that lead to clean-coal technology and lower emissions, economically you need to fall behind.''
Baroness Amos, who was born in Guyana in South America, said relations between Britain and Australia were evolving and should focus on future common goals - such as promoting human rights or dealing with cultural diversity - rather than dwelling on their shared past.
''We did go through a period where we took the relationship for granted. We just assumed we had strong historical ties and a very strong legacy and it would just go on and on.
''We should look at what we can do together as nations, particularly how we can take the partnership between our young people from being about travel and working holidays to … looking forward in the world.''
Baroness Amos said a decision on whether to become a republic was ''definitely an issue for Australia'' and would not affect relations with Britain.
The baroness, who first visited Australia for a Commonwealth leaders' meeting in 2002, is a keen cricket, tennis and soccer fan but is still ''getting the hang'' of Australian rules. ''It's a sport-mad nation. It seems to have got the balance right between working hard and enjoying life.''
Baroness Amos, who was a political appointment rather than a career diplomat, was posted for a year but said she hoped to stay on if the Labour Government loses next year's election.
Dear Baroness Amos, GO HOME NOW or STFUP, you like the majority of your socialist ideologues have nothing to contribute to Australia,as a matter of fact you sound STUPID and ignorant in the extreme to say the least.
The European Parliaments “England” would be a far more suitable environment for you and your cabal of like thinkers to wank in.
May I ask just how many times you and your personally selected pampered Socialist “pooches” have FARTED since you arrived in Australia, just how much C0 2 you have expelled and how much tax you have paid to Kevin 07,Penny Wong and Peter Garrett for engaging in such anti environmentally sensitive activities?
How about you just shut the Fuck UP and pretend you are ascending the ladder of evolution, collect your pay packet and chill out, and when your contract expires just fuck off back to Guyana and share the wealth that you have been able to extract from the social and political system you claim you are so determined to destroy, before you are deported,in chains back to whence from where you came, our jails are full, we don’t need any more snake oil sales “persons”
Friday, November 13, 2009
Nicolas Sarkozy,shows Guts and Leadership, something the west no longer can or has the will to.
Nicolas Sarkozy pushes for burqa ban in France
Telegraph
12 Nov 2009
President Nicolas Sarkozy has reiterated his belief that the burqa, the head-to-toe veil worn by some Muslim women, has no place in secular France.
"France is a country where there is no place for the burqa, where there is no place for the subservience of women," he said in a speech on French national identity.
France, home to Europe's biggest Muslim minority, has set up a special panel of 32 lawmakers to consider whether a law should be enacted to bar Muslim women from wearing the full veil.
The country has had a long-running debate on how far it is willing to go to accommodate Islam without undermining the tradition of separating church and state, enshrined in a flagship 1905 law.
In 2004, it passed a law banning headscarves or any other "conspicuous" religious symbols in state schools to defend secularism.
Mr Sarkozy in June said the burqa was not a symbol of religious faith but a sign of women's "subservience" and declared that the full veil was "not welcome" in France.
He was speaking on Thursday in the Alpine town of La Chapelle en Vercors in his first intervention in a country-wide debate begun last month on what it means to be French.
Public meetings are due to take place in some 450 government offices around the country, involving campaigners, students, parents and teachers, unions, business leaders and French and European lawmakers.
The debate will end with a conference early next year on the twin questions of "what it means to be French today" and "what immigration contributes to our national identity."
The Socialist opposition has accused the government of pandering to anti-immigrant sentiment to shore up support on the Right ahead of regional elections in March.
It has said the debate risks alienating France's large immigrant communities.
But Mr Sarkozy on Thursday defended the "noble debate" and said: "Those who do not want this debate are afraid of it."
Is France, the “western” European nation,most infected with the scourge of Islam, declaring enough is enough ? or is this it’s death rattle?
Either way, well done Sarkozy and God Bless.
Australian schoolboy bashed for refusing to follow dictates of Ramadan: Life in Australia’s schools inside the “Occupied Territories” of SW Sydney.
Muslim kids bullied my son over salami sandwich during Ramadan, family claims
By Bruce McDougall
The Daily Telegraph
November 13, 2009 6:42AM
A SYDNEY couple has withdrawn their two children from a public primary school, claiming their 11-year-old son was bullied by Muslim students because he ate a salami sandwich during Ramadan.
Andrew Grigoriou said yesterday he complained to the school and to police after his son Antonios was chased and later assaulted by Muslim students after a confrontation over the contents of his lunch.
Antonios, a Year 5 student of Greek-Australian background at Punchbowl Public School in Sydney's southwest, said he and a friend had to be locked inside the library for an hour after being chased by a group of Muslim boys offended by his choice of food while they were fasting.
The Grigoriou family said the following exchange took place:
Muslim student to Antonios: "Why are you eating ham, it's Ramadan?"
Antonios: "My mum packed this for lunch today."
Muslim student: "Don't eat that. How can you eat pig, it's disgusting."
During the confrontation a Muslim boy allegedly accused Antonios of saying: "F. . . the Muslims" but Antonios denied swearing.
Mr Grigoriou said he removed his son and a younger child from the school on Tuesday after the boy was punched in the eye and kicked in the legs by a Muslim student.
"It has broken my heart to see this happening to my boy," he said. Antonios, who wrote about his experiences in words and drawings, still has nightmares.
The Department of Education and Training said it had a zero tolerance policy towards racism.
"Claims of bullying or racial intolerance are taken very seriously and looked into," a spokeswoman said. "The School Education Director is looking into the matter and called the father concerned.
"As a result . . . the school will work with all families and students involved to ensure that the values promoted by Punchbowl Public School and the department are understood and supported."
After the salami sandwich incident a student described as "the ringleader of the group" was suspended from the school. The department said that the school had "ongoing cultural and interfaith awareness programs to improve understanding among students of events like Ramadan and Christmas".
Other parents also complained to The Daily Telegraph about bullying at the school and claimed victims received too little protection.
One said her 12-year-old son was scared to open his lunch box at school because he was harassed about what is in it. "He has been bullied from day one . . . about being a Christian and about the hot salami in his lunch," she said.
"My boy has a Greek background . . . the bullying is extreme.
"He has been called a fat pig and hit on the back with a stick."
Another mother said her young son refused to go on school excursions for fear he would be bashed.
These apprentice Assassin’s, Rapist’s, Drug dealers, Car re birthers and common criminals are simply doing what they do because they CAN, they enabled and facilitated by the same socialist arse clowns who are reported above :"As a result . . . the school will work with all families and students involved to ensure that the values promoted by Punchbowl Public School and the department are understood and supported." talk about the arsonist’s arriving at the fire dressed as Firemen.
Australia’s SAS should be recalled from Afghanistan immediately and let lose in South Western Sydney aka. Sydney’s Occupied Territories.
capture + disarmament + internment + repatriation = a return to Labor’s pre Muslim / Multiculturalist’s chaos in Australia.
Islam IS what Islam DOES
Thursday, November 12, 2009
13 Good Americans Dead, 38 wounded,to ensure the Left’s Cult of “Diversity” rules the US Military.
Nov 11, 2009 10:51 am | Robert
Yesterday I was asked to participate in a Symposium at National Review about the Fort Hood massacre and the role political correctness played in it. Here is my entry: The Fort Hood massacre wouldn't have happened were it not for political correctness. Nidal Hasan lectured on the Koran's punishments for...
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Hasan the Muslim … the Ft. Hood mass murderer
Fox News talking heads are asking how……..
Hasan was able to do what he did.
Why would he and his co religionists in the US Military,NOT feel free to engage in their Religions Satanic manifesto ?, when the commander in chief of the worlds most powerful military force on earth, dictates that Non Muslim Americans,follow his example and bow, roll over, SUBMITT to Islam,rather than reject it,in fact the “Community Organizer in Chief” demands non Muslims Americans RESPECT Islam and what it’s followers have given the world in the name of this thing they, Islamist’s call “allah”.
Hussein Obowma has made it clear by his words and actions as to what “Religion”, “Ideology” “Medievil Cult” he expects Americans to obey and follow.
Americans VOTED for “Change they can believe in” …… now I believe that you can get a FREE koran from CAIR upon request, until you get your copy of same, just remember SATAN Good,God Bad and you too might avoid getting shot to death by one of the President of the United States of America’s ideologues that he DEMANDS that YOU RESPECT….. spsssss I know, I know don’t ask why, just respect it you might live a lot longer if you do……
Or do ya wanna Fight? for not only YOUR life but for that of your Wife,Children,Parents,Brothers, Sisters and Loved ones.
Internment of Muslims, and their facilitators / apologists in the West, combined with Repatriation to an Islamic (cesspool) of their choice is the ONLY answer to the continuation of Judeo /Christian Democracies.
Hussein Obowma’s friends can believe in anything he, and they want to, so long as they are unable, and are prevented from killing “Americans” (Judeo Christian Western Democracies citizens) who do not.
Islam IS what Islam DOES
Hussein Obama IS what Hussein Obama DOES
The American Commander in Chief,Hussein Obama, bows to the CULT who’s followers are dancing in the streets every time an American is slaughtered by HIS “Religion of Peace” that he Decrees Americans RESPECT.
A Muslim is in the White House.. God Damn Hussein Obama.
Saturday, November 07, 2009
Muslim KILLER
What part of Ralph Peters comments on the Fort Hood Muslim Killer does Hussein Obama and his cabal of US taxpayer funded Muslim apologists not understand?
Whilst the Wives,Husbands,Mothers and Fathers,Brothers and Sisters and Children of the victims, of the latest Islamic Terrorist attack upon civilization,wrestle with their indescribable pain and suffering, make plans to bury their loved ones all the MSM and the Islamic Terrorist apologists on the left can do is rush to be the first with the best excuse for this piece of SHITS murderous behaviour.
As Ralph Peters says in the above interview, where is the coverage of VICTIMS of this Islamist savage’s MASS MURDER Spree?
Hussein Obama has previously decreed that there is no war on terror nor are there any Islamic Terrorists.
Saying it so don’t make it so Hussein, just ask the victims and their families.
Islam IS what Islam DOES
Call this horror by its name: Islamist terror
By RALPH PETERS
NYPost
November 7, 2009
On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting, "Allahu akbar!" ("God is great!") committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.
What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Fort Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of nondenominational shoplifting.
This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it's an act of terror.
Period.
When the terrorist posts anti-American hate speech on the Web; apparently praises suicide bombers and uses his own name; loudly criticizes US policies; argues (as a psychiatrist, no less) with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices; refuses, in the name of Islam, to be photographed with female colleagues; lists his nationality as "Palestinian" in a Muslim spouse-matching program and parades around central Texas in a fundamentalist playsuit -- well, it only seems fair to call this terrorist an "Islamist terrorist."
But the president won't. Despite his promise to get to all the facts. Because there's no such thing as "Islamist terrorism" in ObamaWorld.
And the Army won't. Because its senior leaders are so sick with political correctness that pandering to America haters is safer than calling terrorism "terrorism."
And the media won't. Because they have more interest in the shooter than in our troops -- despite their crocodile tears.
Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan planned this terrorist attack and executed it in cold blood. The resulting massacre was the first tragedy. The second was that he wasn't killed on the spot.
Hasan survived. Now the rest of us will have to foot his massive medical bills. Activist lawyers will get involved, claiming "harassment" drove him temporarily insane. There'll be no end of trial delays. At best, taxpayer dollars will fund his prison lifestyle for decades to come, since our politically correct Army leadership wouldn't dare pursue or carry out the death penalty.
Maj. Hasan will be a hero to Islamist terrorists abroad and their sympathizers here. While US Muslim organizations decry his acts publicly, Hasan will be praised privately. And he'll have the last laugh.
But Hasan isn't the sole guilty party. The US Army's unforgivable political correctness is also to blame for the casualties at Fort Hood.
Given the myriad warning signs, it's appalling that no action was taken against a man apparently known to praise suicide bombers and openly damn US policy. But no officer in his
chain of command, either at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or at Fort Hood, had the guts to take meaningful action against a dysfunctional soldier and an incompetent doctor.
Had Hasan been a Lutheran or a Methodist, he would've been gone with the simoom. But officers fear charges of discrimination when faced with misconduct among protected minorities.
Now 12 soldiers and a security guard lie dead. At least 38 people were wounded, 28 of them seriously. If heads don't roll in this maggot's chain of command, the Army will have shamed itself beyond moral redemption.
There's another important issue, too. How could the Army allow an obviously incompetent and dysfunctional psychiatrist to treat our troubled soldiers returning from war? An Islamist wacko is counseled for arguing with veterans who've been assigned to his care? And he's not removed
from duty? What planet does the Army live on?
For the first time since I joined the Army in 1976, I'm ashamed of its dereliction of duty. The chain of command protected a budding terrorist who was waving one red flag after another.
Because it was safer for careers than doing something about him.
Get ready for the apologias. We've already heard from the terrorist's family that "he's a good American." In their world, maybe he is.
But when do we, the American public, knock off the PC nonsense?
A disgruntled Muslim soldier murdered his officers way back in 2003, in Kuwait, on the eve of
Operation Iraqi Freedom. Recently? An American mullah shoots it out with the feds in Detroit.
A Muslim fanatic attacks an Arkansas recruiting station. A Muslim media owner, after playing the peace card, beheads his wife. A Muslim father runs over his daughter because she's becoming too Westernized.
Muslim terrorist wannabes are busted again and again. And we're assured that "Islam's a religion of peace."
I guarantee you that the Obama administration's nonresponse to the Fort Hood attack will mock the memory of our dead.
Ralph Peters' latest novel is "The War After Armageddon."
Australia’s Rupert Murdoch gives Comrade Kevin 07 a reality check “Rudd delusional”
Rupert Murdoch speaks out on recovery and opportunity missed
By Terry McCrann
The Daily Telegraph
November 07, 2009
A YEAR ago I spoke to Rupert Murdoch at the very darkest point of the global financial meltdown. What a difference a year makes. Then, the News Corporation chairman and chief executive was gobsmacked at the wealth destruction. Now he apologises for being "bearish" - I'd call it instead cautious and realistic.
He's not taking the US recovery for granted; he recognises only too well the deep structural problems America faces and has added to over the past year; he has some fundamental question marks over President (Barack) Obama and, even more, the US Congress.
While he emphasises the fundamental entrepreneurial strengths of America, and the driving spirit of the people, he thinks all the negative factors will ensure a very, very slow recovery in the world's biggest economy.
"I think the danger of a double dip (back into recession) is unlikely; and there's a case that can be made that it has turned the corner and will recover strongly," he said.
But the Fed has poured money into the banking system - the $US700 billion bailout was wrong in principle, in practice a necessity - and the banks were sitting tight on credit. Cutting it back even to their best customers. Officially the jobless rate was 10 per cent, in reality it was probably more than 15 per cent. There was as yet no sign of a jobs pick-up and the key driver of recovery - capital formation by small business - was not happening, he added.
A critical issue was political leadership.
OBAMA OF THE three choices for President in last year's election, did the US get the right one, I ask? He pauses, then says: "No. I think Hillary (Clinton) would have been a lot tougher.
"I wouldn't have liked everything she did. (John) McCain (the Republican candidate who stood against Obama) would have had policies more to my approval.
"Albeit he would also have been unpredictable," he adds.
Obama has very, very enormous charm and a great way with words. But there's his total inexperience of the real world, the commercial world. And the same goes for the whole White House, Murdoch says.
Further he doesn't listen. And like Rudd he wants to micro-manage everything.
He faces huge geo-political challenges. Take Afghanistan: he doesn't know what he should do. I do, Murdoch adds with emphasis. He should send the extra troops.
The core problem was indecisive leadership. Last month he came out with a speech on education, with which I agreed 100 per cent. And then he concluded with: "I look to Congress to send me a bill. They'll never send him a bill!" Murdoch thunders.
The question still to be answered is whether he was an ideologue.
How many times had you been to the Obama White House, I asked?
Never, he responds. Followed by "I only went once when Bush was there."
RUDD HE'S very intelligent, he's very interesting, Murdoch starts. But then moves quickly to "but he's kidding himself with the G20", the grouping of the top 20 countries which includes Australia and which Rudd has been pushing to replace the G8 - of only the top eight countries which does not include Australia - as the main global negotiating forum.
Obama had no interest in the G20. He even wanted to cut the G8 to the G4 and really to a G2 - just the US and China - to agree to all the big decisions.
Rudd was kidding himself that we could use the G20 to lead the world. Or that we could strike out alone with a cap- and-trade system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions - our ETS or Emissions Trading Scheme.
That we'd lead and the rest would follow. All it would do would be to push up the cost of living in Australia, and the rest of the world would laugh at us.
His efforts to "lead the world" were delusional. But was it hurting Australia? Not yet, Murdoch asks and answers his own question.
THE NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK THE Government had to decide whether the national broadband network should be built as a great national asset. To go to every school, to every hospital, to every business, to every home, Murdoch says striking his hand for emphasis at each destination.
But then it had to decide whether to hold it as a public utility or whether to sell it to private enterprise.
If the latter, it could only happen if the Government was prepared to write off half the cost openly upfront.
To spend $40 billion to build it; to be prepared to sell it for $20 billion, so that the investors buying it could have a chance of a return.
In all this would Telstra be the major shareholder in such an NBN? Its biggest shareholder, the Future Fund, would not want it to go there unless it could see an acceptable return.
MURDOCH AND THE MEDIA COULD he be tempted back into free-to-air television in Australia?
He pauses before responding with a yes. But then immediately adds "If I had my choice of buying Telstra out of Foxtel or FTA, I would take the former".
So the future is Foxtel rather than FTA, I respond?
"Absolutely," he comes back, and then immediately details the continual, slow but inexorable drop in the network audience in the US. And he digresses into musing about the future of NBC - one of the major networks, put up for sale by its parent GE.
"In its present condition , it's unsaleable," he says.
And while we couldn't buy a second network, we would be interested in NBC's Universal movie studio. We'd be allowed to own two studios, he says.
Interestingly while he would like to buy Telstra out of its 50 per cent stake in Foxtel, he has no interest in the 25 per cent owned by James Packer's CMH group.
Asked to comment on Packer, he says he has no comment. Then adds, he had made his bed with his decision to became a major global player in gaming. But he'd kept the two media assets - the 25 per cent of Foxtel and the half share of Fox Sports (NewsCorp has the other 50 per cent).
"I'd certainly be interested in Fox Sports, but not another 25 per cent of Foxtel. There'd be no point unless you were going to get the whole thing."
THE LOST CHANCE ASKED about the challenges and opportunities in media going forward, Murdoch comes up with a surprising nomination: the great opportunity missed. The Food Network.
No, it wasn't a simple "MasterChef moment", but a textbook example of building hugely profitable media business, which in classic Murdoch style, he thinks he should have done.
It takes years for a new station/network to get on the cable channels in the US, Murdoch says with the knowledge of exactly his own struggles over two decades. New channels generally ask for 15-20c per customer per month.
"The Food Network went in at 2c and achieved total distribution." That delivered all the food advertisers. With very cheap programming, it's now a $US350 million revenue business that throws off an incredible $US250 million profit! It's a business that's gone from nothing to a value of at least $US3 billion. And all that's still only charging the 2c! Murdoch adds with emphatic undisguised admiration. But they are about to renegotiate that.
Technorati Tags: Rupert Murdoch,Kevin Rudd's Australia 2009,Kevin 07 Rudd,Hussein Obama,ETS,Copenhagen
Hussein Obama’s Socialist agenda IS WORKING!!!
US unemployment highest for 26 years
Alexandra Frean AMERICA'S unemployment rate pushed through the 10 per cent mark in October for the first time in 26 years.
Friday, November 06, 2009
Al Sumud warns Australian’s to submit to Muslim Asia or else
Join Muslim Asia or perish: Taliban
Abraham Rabinovich
The Australian
November 06, 2009 1:54AM
AN official Taliban publication warns Australia that it will have to assimilate into a dominant Asia or face the prospect of being overpowered and forced to take population overspill from Asia.
The choice is spelled out in the latest issue of the online Taliban monthly magazine, Al Sumud (Steadfastness), whose lead article offers a sweeping view of a post-war order in which a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan becomes a moral pivot for a pan-Asian renaissance that will coincide with the decline of Western power.
Pakistani Taliban chief Hakimullah Mehsud (left) seen here in a tender moment holding hands with his Boy / Girlfriend Wali-ur Rehman (right)
"The end of European leadership in the world will place the white settler diaspora in Australia before two choices," writes the author, Mustafa Hamid, a former senior al-Qa'ida member who in 2001 married Australian Rabiah Hutchinson, a Sydney mother with links to Islamic extremists.
"It can either return to its motherland in Europe or reconcile with its Asian surroundings and assimilate into it as a wealthy and active member."
Otherwise, he warns, a lengthy conflict will ensue in which Australia will be overpowered "by Asian waves that are better armed and more numerous".
"There is no doubt that the huge growth in the population of Asia, together with its economic and military development, will make Australia into lebensraum -- to use the European term," writes Mr Hamid. Lebensraum, meaning living space, was a term used by Nazi Germany as a motivation for territorial conquest.
Asia, Mr Hamid writes, is facing a population explosion "while Australia is nearly empty of people, apart from scattered groups of white residents".
Residents of "the Israeli outpost" at the other end of Asia are likewise warned to return to their countries of origin or face an "unequal conflict".
These warnings, however, are marginal to the central vision offered in the article -- the emergence of a vibrant pan-Asian identity in which Islam, and the Taliban in particular, constitutes a powerful moral and cultural force but not an exclusive one. Its emphasis on pan-Asian political identity rather than pan-Islamic sets it apart from al-Qa'ida ideology. The Taliban article does not call for jihad, although it hints at the possibility of "peaceful Islamic expansion" and the linchpin role in the "Asian Age", as the author terms it, is ceded to non-Islamic China.
Western power is fading fast, he writes, "to the benefit of Asian giants, and first and foremost among them the colossal economic and human power of China".
Even Russia, whose invasion of Afghanistan 30 years ago would prove a milestone in the emergence of militant Islam, is depicted as an ally arraigned with Asia against the "arrogance" of the West.
"Today, Russia is taking a defensive position against the Western advance which aims to break (Russia) up into statelets and to cross it on the way to China to break it up as well. Russia desires a coalition with China, with India, with Iran if possible, and even more so with Afghanistan, and even more so with the Taliban movement (which) is a serious, realistic and victorious leadership in that vital country (Afghanistan)."
In the article, ": A vision of Afghanistan's role in the coming international order", Mr Hamid depicts a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan having a fundamental leadership role in the new Asian order -- "not in the field of finance, industry and interest-bearing banks" but as a moral force.
"This was demonstrated by the ability of Islam to inspire a small, poor people to resist and defeat five military campaigns of the largest armies on earth."
This article was obtained as an exclusive from the Middle East Media Research Institute’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor Project (www.memrijttm.org ) which monitors and translates the 100 most important Islamist sites and blogs around the clock.
Technorati Tags: The Return of the Islamic Emirate,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.Mustafa Hamid,Nut Jobs on the loose,Religion of Peace.
Yeah sure Nancy anything you say.
Sharia By Stealth, Daniel Pipes.
Islamists impose sharia by stealth
Daniel Pipes
The Australian
November 05, 2009 9:51PM
TO borrow a computer term, if Ayatollah Khomeini and Osama bin Laden represent Islamism 1.0, the Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and the French intellectual, Tariq Ramadan, represent Islamism 2.0. The former are more deadly but the latter will likely do greater long-term damage.
The 1.0 version presents a potentially mortal danger to those unfortunate enough to get in its way. From totalitarian rule to mega-terrorism, Islamism's original tactics present a potential for unlimited brutality. Three thousand dead in one attack? Bin Laden's search for atomic weaponry suggests the murderous toll could be a hundred or even a thousand times larger.
But Islamist violence, a review of the past six decades suggests, proves generally unsuccessful in attaining the goal of a society fully regulated by the sharia (Islamic law), much less does it help establish a global caliphate.
Survivors of mass murder tend not to capitulate to radical Islam. Victims did not raise the white flag after the assassination of Anwar Sadat in Egypt in 1981, the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bali bombings of 2002, the Madrid bombings of 2004, the Amman bombing of 2005, or the latest bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Extrapolating from these and other failures suggests terrorism does damage and causes human suffering but rarely changes the existing order. Imagine the devastation done by Hurricane Katrina or the tsunami of 2004 had been caused by Islamists: what could they have lastingly achieved?
Non-terrorist attempts from the outside to apply the sharia are hardly easier to accomplish. Revolution (meaning, a wide-scale social revolt) took Islamists to power in just one place at one time: Iran in 1978-79. Coup d'etat (a military overthrow) also carried them to power in just one place at one time: Sudan in 1989. Same for civil war: Afghanistan in 1996.
If Islamism 1.0's violence rarely overthrows governments, Islamism 2.0's working through the system serves significantly better. Islamists, adept at winning public opinion, have enjoyed electoral success in various Muslim-majority countries, including Algeria in 1992, Bangladesh in 2001, Turkey in 2002 and Iraq in 2005. In many other countries, such as Morocco, Egypt, Lebanon and Kuwait, Islamist political parties represent the main opposition force.
(What one might call Islamism 1.5 also works, that being a combination of hard and soft means, of the external and internal approaches. In it, Islamists soften up the enemy with lawful means and then use violence to seize power. The Hamas takeover of Gaza offers one case of such a combination, first winning the elections in 2006, then staging a violent insurrection against Fatah in 2007, and similar processes may be under way in Pakistan.)
At least one leading Islamist thinker with close ties to al-Qa'ida has publicly repudiated terrorism and adopted political means. Sayyid Imam al-Sharif (also known by the nom de guerre Dr Fadl) was born in Egypt in 1950 and trained as a medical doctor. He emerged as a leader of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad group in the 1980s and came to public attention with the 1988 publication of his book, Al-'Umda fi I'dad al-'Udda (The Essentials of Preparation), in which he argued for perpetual violent jihad against the West.
With time, however, Sharif shifted gears: observing that violent attacks are counterproductive he instead advocated a strategy of infiltrating the state and influencing society.
In a recent book, At-Ta'riya li-Kitab at-Tabri'a (Exposing the Exoneration), he condemned the use of force against Muslims ("Every drop of blood that was shed or is being shed in Afghanistan and Iraq is the responsibility of bin Laden and Zawahiri and their followers") and against non-Muslims (9/11 was immoral and counterproductive, for "what good is it if you destroy one of your enemy's buildings, and he destroys one of your countries? What good is it if you kill one of his people, and he kills a thousand of yours?").
Sharif's evolution from al-Qa'ida theorist to advocate of lawful transformation echoes a broader shift as Islamists notice that while bin Laden, for all his notoriety, cowers in a cave, Erdogan remakes the Republic of Turkey.
In conclusion, fascists never developed a 2.0 version, nor did communists; only Islamists have done so. Because it threatens our values and our civilisation, this evolution represents perhaps an aspect of their movement no less frightening than their brutality.
Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Australia’s Shame,Scott Zirus.
Aussie 'predator' admits assaulting two boys at US camp: prosecutor
November 3, 2009
Accused Australian child predator Scott Zirus has confessed in video-taped interviews to sexually assaulting two boys at a camp in Texas, US authorities confirmed.
The Texas district attorney prosecuting the case, Amos Barton, said he was hellbent on ensuring the 25-year-old West Australian camp counsellor was punished with the maximum sentence - life in a Texan jail.
"We will be firing with both barrels at this defendant," Barton told AAP.
"I don't want him to ever be able to victimise another kid."
Zirus, from Pinjarra, south of Perth, appeared in the District Court in Kerr County Texas on Monday local time for arraignment.
Zirus is accused of assaulting three boys while working at the Camp Stewart for Boys in Hunt, Texas, as part of an international exchange program.
Family members of the alleged victims were in court for the arraignment.
"They want justice," Barton said.
Zirus is charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child, indecency with a child and continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14.
He entered not guilty pleas to all charges during the court appearance, did not seek bail and a trial was set for March 9.
Since Zirus' arrest in August three other potential victims at the camp have contacted Texan authorities, but charges have not yet been laid.
"We are aware of the possibility of more victims, but no charges have been filed yet and investigations are continuing," Barton said.
US authorities believe Zirus, who had links with Australian scout groups and is believed to have run his own camp for children in Australia, likely assaulted boys in Australia.
A computer confiscated by US authorities revealed evidence pointing to Australian assaults, Kerr County Sheriff Rusty Hierholzer, who has labelled Zirus a "predator", said.
West Australian police have opened an investigation and asked the public to come forward with any information.
Barton said Zirus admitted in the video-taped confessions to assaulting two of his alleged victims.
"As to two of the victims, we have a full confession," the prosecutor said.
"He has confessed to aggravated sexual assault of a child and sexual assault of a child by contact."
Zirus was arrested at San Antonio international airport on August 20 as he was about to fly back to Australia.
He has remained in jail since his arrest and Barton said he would fight to keep Zirus behind bars if he applied to have his $US100,000 ($110,500) bail lowered in an attempt to gain release from jail before his trial.
Barton said Zirus was a flight risk and a danger to children.
"I would oppose any reductions because of his ability to travel and for him being such a danger," Barton said.
"We have so many victims."
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Obama’s “Religion of Peace” Demands Two Million Dollars for the life of Catholic Priest
Video shows kidnapped priest in Philippines
October 31, 2009
KIDNAPPERS holding an elderly Irish Catholic priest hostage in the southern Philippines have released a video of their captive in which he says two million dollars must be paid for his release.
The video, a copy of which was seen by a local journalist in Pagadian city on Saturday, showed 79-year-old Father Michael Sinnott holding a copy of the October 22 issue of a Manila newspaper.
”My kidnappers are led by commander Abu Jayad. They are asking two million US dollars as ransom money,” the priest said while standing in front of what appeared to be a bed sheet or table cloth in a forested area.
”We are living in the open, in difficult circumstances. I am still in good health even if I do not have the full medicines.”
It was the first time any proof had been made public that Sinnott, who needs medication for a
heart condition, was alive since gunmen seized him from his mission office in Pagadian on Mindanao island on October 11.
Father Patrick O'Donoghue, the Philippine head of the Missionary Society of Saint Columban, who saw photographs taken from the video, confirmed that it was Sinnott and expressed relief that he was looking relatively healthy.
However he stressed that no money would be paid to secure Sinnott's freedom.
”The Columban fathers do not pay ransom and we never have and I don't think we ever would,” O'Donoghue said.
He said Sinnott would not want a ransom to be paid.
”I could see him wanting that money to be used in ways rather than ransom. That two million should rather be used for education, for the care of people with disabilities,” he said.
O'Donoghue said he had no previous knowledge of the video and that he immediately relayed the news to a government commission that is in charge of recovering Sinnott.
The pictures from the video showed an unshaven Sinnott smiling slightly, while someone else's hand from outside the frame helped in holding up the newspaper. Regional military chief Major
General Benjamin Dolorfino said he was not aware of the video.
”I know nothing about the video. We have not seen the video,” he said.
There have been conflicting reports about who is holding Sinnott, with the military initially saying he was kidnapped by a Muslim pirate active in the area.
However Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro has also said he believes Sinnott is being held by rogue elements of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), a separatist Muslim rebel group engaged in peace talks with the government.
The MILF has repeatedly denied any involvement. MILF spokesman Eid Kabalu said he did not know of any Abu Jayad, and had not been aware of the video before it was released to the media.
”We don't know anything about a video that came out as proof of life,” said MILF spokesman Eid Kabalu.
However he said the MILF leadership was aware of Sinnott's general location and the likely identity of his kidnappers. But he said he would not reveal the details while the MILF pursued its own efforts to recover Sinnott.
The area of the southern Philippines where Sinnott is believed to be being held is a known stronghold of the MILF, while armed gangs and the Muslim Abu Sayyaf militant group are also known to operate in the often lawless region.
The Abu Sayyaf and other gangs have kidnapped priests and other foreigners in the region previously, then demanded ransoms for their release.
Sinnott has spent about 40 years in the Philippines, and is well-known in Pagadian for helping disabled children and other charity work.
How long before Catholic Priests and Rabbi’s or any other “non believer” start disappearing from the streets of Chicago, New York, and other American Streets,and an offer of buying their lives back is made by Hussein Obama’s new best friends, aka the “Religion of Peace” ?
How much money is 75% of the American population prepared to pay for the LIFE of THEIR Religious leader when the “Religion of Peace” makes a demand for payment for same?
Thursday, October 29, 2009
75 % of the Worlds population reject outright, the teachings of the worlds most infamous Paedophile, Mohammad, so just why is it so important for Hussein Obama that 75 % of the worlds population “respect Islam” and why does he bow (curtsy) to it?
1 in 4 people in world are Muslim
News.com.au
October 09, 2009 7:33AM
THE global Muslim population stands at 1.57 billion, meaning that nearly 1 in 4 people in the world practise Islam, a landmark study has claimed.
The Pew Forum report also revealed that Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon - or North and South America combined.
It claimed that about five per cent of Europe's population practises Islam - and that there are more Muslims living in Asia than in the Middle East.
Until now, experts have largely been guessing at the precise number of Muslims in the world, with estimates from one billion to 1.8 billion.
But the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life report, released today, finally pinpoints the number of those practising the world's second largest religion, behind Christianity.
The three-year-long project also provided some surprising statistics. For instance, Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon, China has more Muslims than Syria, Russia has more Muslims than Jordan and Libya combined, and Ethiopia has nearly as many Muslims as Afghanistan.
'This whole idea that Muslims are Arabs and Arabs are Muslims is really just obliterated by this report,' said Amaney Jamal, an assistant professor of politics at Princeton University who reviewed an advance copy.
The report provides further evidence that while the heart of Islam might beat in the Middle
East, its greatest numbers lie in Asia: More than 60 per cent of the world's Muslims live in Asia.
About 20 per cent live in the Middle East and North Africa, 15 per cent live in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2.4 per cent are in Europe and 0.3 per cent are in the Americas.
While the Middle East and North Africa have fewer Muslims overall than Asia, the region easily claims the most Muslim-majority countries.
While those population trends are well established, the large numbers of Muslims who live as minorities in countries aren't as scrutinized.
The report identified about 317 million Muslims - or one-fifth of the world's Muslim population - living in countries where Islam is not the majority religion.
About three-quarters of Muslims living as minorities are concentrated in five countries: India (161 million), Ethiopia (28 million), China (22 million), Russia (16 million) and Tanzania (13 million).
In several of these countries - from India to Nigeria and China to France - divisions featuring a volatile mix of religion, class and politics have contributed to tension and bloodshed among groups.
The immense size of majority-Hindu India is underscored by the fact that it boasts the third-largest Muslim population of any nation - yet Muslims account for just 13 per cent of India's population.
'Most people think of the Muslim world being Muslims living mostly in Muslim-majority countries,' Grim said. 'But with India ... that sort of turns that on its head a bit.'
The report also revealed that:
Europe is home to about 38 million Muslims, or about five per cent of its population. Germany appears to have more than 4 million Muslims - almost as many as North and South America combined.
In France, where tensions have run high over an influx of Muslim immigrant laborers, the overall numbers were lower but a larger percentage of the population is Muslim.
Two-thirds of all Muslims live in 10 countries. Six are in Asia (Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Iran and Turkey), three are in North Africa (Egypt, Algeria and Morocco) and one is in sub-Saharan Africa (Nigeria).
Indonesia, which has a tradition of a more tolerant Islam, has the world's largest Muslim population (203 million, or 13 per cent of the world's total). Religious extremists have been involved in several high-profile bombings there in recent years.
In China, the highest concentrations of Muslims were in western provinces. The country experienced its worst outbreak of ethnic violence in decades when rioting broke out this summer between minority Muslim Uighurs and majority Han Chinese.
Of roughly 4.6 million Muslims in the Americas, more than half live in the United States although they only make up 0.8 percent of the population there. About 700,000 people in Canada are Muslim, or about two percent of the total population.
Whilst these statistics are probably legit, I feel it would have been prudent for the authors to note the number of Islamic countries where it is not possible to deny been a Muslim,a believer in the Koran.
A believer in the syphilis induced ranting’s of the Paedophile Pirate and slave trader, Mohammed, the “Religion of Peace” is compulsory under threat of DEATH, according to the Islamic Terror Manual,the Koran,so the 25% claimed to follow the teachings of the said Paedophile, Mohammed are greatly embellished to say the least.
Like Communism (Socialism) Nazism,the victims of Islamism have no choice but to claim they are supporters of the Godless despots that rule their lives lest they are killed.
Why do western Judeo Christian democratic leaders, Australia, America, Canada, England, kneel to this demonic minority cabal of confused and befuddled of mind,misfits and criminals?
Technorati Tags: 75% Reject Islam,Islam rejected by 75%
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)