Tipstack till Politiskt Inkorrekt och Kent Ekeroth

/Fröken Sverige

I am starting to archive some of the posts from my main blog, Bob From Brockley, so as not to have all of my eggs in one basket. Please got to the original if you have any comments.

Original post location: The lessons of the Lucozade plot

I have a strong personal stake in the so-called Lucozade plot, the plot to explode several trans-Atlantic flights using ingenious liquid explosive devices concealed in lucozade bottles. I was due to fly, with my family, on one of the target flights on the day in August 2006 when the plot was foiled. That long, gruelling day at the tense, chaotic airport, and the subsequent days of indecision about whether to catch another flight, and the day we actually flew, with the fear that it may well be our last day on earth, were extremely stressful – but as the details of the plot emerge I realise more and more how close to being killed I actually was.

Reading the details of the second trial which has finally concluded at Woolwich Crown Court, four lessons strike me – four myths are exposed as utterly wrong. In the writing that follows, I am referring to the eight men who were tried. Of these, Donald Stewart-Whyte was found not guilty. Some of the others were found not guilty of some of the more serious charges, and the jury was unable to reach a verdict on many of the charges. Although the innocence of some of them, particularly Stewart-Whyte, is conceivable, the fact that all were involved in jihadist groups means my observations about the jihadist ideology and milieu based on their examples would stand even if they were innocent of this specific plot. However, it seems clear that the jury’s verdict had to do with the technical quality of evidence, an issue that relates to one of the points I make below, and that the overwhelmingly likelihood is that they were all involved in a bomb plot.

1. “Terrorism as the voice of the voiceless“. There is a common view, especially on the left, that terrorism is a cry of despair, the voice of the utterly dispossessed, born out of grievance and poverty. Terrorism, the argument goes, will go away when we remove the grievances, grievances for which the West is largely to blame. However, looking at the biographies of the plotters, it is clear that most of them were from reasonably well off backgrounds, and reasonable life chances, were well educated and articulate, and had other opportunities to express their grievances. Wahid Zaman was a biomedical student at a top university, and, in his “martyrdom video”, said “I have not been brainwashed, I am educated to a very high standard.” He was articulate; he spoke at rallies and had articles published in his university’s student magazine. Donald Stewart-Whyte was an art student, a white boy, who went to the “prestigious” Dr Challoner’s Grammar School in Chesham. His father was a Conservative Party agent, his mother a teacher. Tanvir Hussein was also highly educated. In fact, terrorism, far from being the voice of the voiceless, seems to be a weapon of the relatively privileged, of intellectuals.

2. “Londonistan, Eurabia”. A familiar argument, particularly in North America and particularly on the right, is that Europe, with its official policies of multiculturalism, has sleep-walked into segregation, has created Islamified ghettos or no-go areas which breed terrorists. This is the Britain and Europe portrayed by Melanie Phillips, Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes and their ilk. The details of the plotters reveal this to be a myth. The plotters were in fact extremely westernised, assimilated even. Waheed Zaman’s favourite TV programme was Only Fools and Horses. Tanvir Hussein experimented with drink, drugs and girls at college. Stewart-Whyte, Umar Islam (from a Christian Caribbean background) and Ibrahim Savant (of Indian and English parentage) were all converts. It is true that one of the July 2005 bomb attempts was perpetrated mainly by young men from one of the areas (Beeston in Yorkshire) which is predominantly Pakistani Muslim. But it is also true that the Beeston bombers turned to radical Wahhabi Islamism as part of a rebellion against the traditionalist Sufi Islam of their parents; becoming Wahhabi meant they could, for example, marry white girls rather than the Mirpuri village girls chosen by their parents. In other words, jihadi violence is not something anachronistic imported to the West through immigration and breeding in multiculturalism’s ethnic enclaves; it is modern, Western and appealing to converts and the apparently most integrated of Muslims.

3. “The war on terror”. There seem to have been two approaches to the investigation and foiling of the plot. British intelligence and security services, reporting regularly to Tony Blair on the case, carefully infiltrated and watched the plotters, building up a slowly expanding picture of their networks, and gathering robust trial evidence. They let it run its course, confident they would know when they needed to act. American intelligence and security services, reporting regularly to George W Bush, seemed to want to make quick arrests to shut the network down. British stubbornness, resisting the pressure to swoop, seems to have enabled them to catch the High Wycombe branch of the conspiracy, which was not visible at first. It also seems that the Americans were obsessed with what they called “al Qaeda central”, rather than seeing the terrorists as an extremely dispersed and loose net. It seems that America pressured Pakistan into arresting Rashid Rauf, who connected the conspiracy to Al-Qaeda networks. This in turn forced the British to “scramble”, cracking down on the conspiracy earlier than they meant to. This scrambling, seems to have been a major factor in the poor quality of the evidence the prosecution has been able to present at trial, leading to an embarrassing failure to convict some of the plotters. In this instance, the American approach was mistaken, and the culture around the war on terror under Bush – conceived as a military war rather than as a strategy of investigation and prevention, and staged as a high profile public spectacle – proved counterproductive.

4. “The terrorists have already won”. There is a certain civil libertarian line – whose vulgar, common-sense, non-dogmatic version you often hear at airports when passengers are irked about having to hand over the over-sized perfume bottles they have in their carry-on – which says that defending us against terror is not worth the price of the curtailment of our “rights”. Our privacy, our freedom of movement, even our right to carry hair gel in our hand bags, are precious, and if we create a draconian security state which abrogates these, then the terrorists have effectively already won. This argument, which we can currently hear most loudly and articulately from those civil libertarians who are calling for an end to control orders, is disingenuous. If the 2006 bomb plot had succeeded, some dozen big long haul planes would have been downed over the sea, with few if any of the passengers surviving. The threat is real, and, as the old saying goes, the bombers only have to be lucky once, while the rest of us have to be lucky all the time. We have managed to be lucky now in Britain since July 2005, but it has not just been luck, and we should be grateful to the security services for the protection we have had.

Hans Christian Andersen

Claudio Magris, in un articolo sul Corriere Cultura di domenica 30 agosto, dà notizia di quanto avvenuto in Danimarca, circa una favola di Andersen, epurata dal “(..) finale cristiano o comunque degli elementi cristiani, per non offendere i fedeli di altre chiese. Nella sua timorata stupidaggine, questa è una tappa decisiva nella storia universale della censura”. Così Magris: che riesce a vedere, nonostante tutto, nella notizia del buono poichè, se l’iniziativa danese di diffondesse, molti altri testi, compresi Dante e Omero, andrebbero emendati, dando lavoro a schiere di letterati disoccupati. Ora, a prescindere dal fatto che, se fossi letterato, mi chiederei se la collaborazione ad un simile scenario orwelliano varrebbe la pena del lavoro, a me sembra che il problema non sia appena di censura, ma di censura dell’identità.

E, chiamando le cose con il loro nome, di identità cristiana.

Ciò di cui dà notizia Magris è preoccupante, come lo è la situazione dell’Olanda, dove l’assassinio di Theo Van Gogh rischia di essere dimenticato e dove si mandano in esilio coloro che hanno il coraggio di denunciare l’islamizzazione. Sempre per chiamare le cose con il loro nome.

L’illusione del multikulti, la cui applicazione in Olanda ha fatto sì che Rotterdam divenisse, de facto, una città araba e che, nella capitale inglese, si possa parlare ormai apertamente di Londonistan, con i cristiani timorosi e ghettizzati, con le corti islamiche sempre più alle prese con l’applicazione della sharia, parte da un’impostazione sbagliata alla radice. Ovvero che, per dialogare, si debba rinunciare alla propria identità, mentre solo chi è consapevole della propria identità è in grado di valorizzare quelle altrui, dialogando con esse a partire da un’ipotesi.

In Italia non siamo arrivati ancora a questo punto, e mi auguro che mai ci arriveremo. Ma ricordo bene quanto accadeva negli asili della meravigliosa Reggio Emilia, patria del comunismo realizzato in salsa emiliana, dove da molti anni la festa della  Nascita di Nostro Signore Gesù Cristo viene presentata, naturalmente per non offendere nessuno, come la festa di Babbo Gelo. Forse si dovrebbe riproporre l’idea, mi pare avanzata da Giuliano Ferrara qualche tempo fa, di evitare di offendere i seguaci di altri culti, per esempio obbligandoli a lavorare nel giorno di Natale, a Pasqua, per l’Epifania.

The conference was streamed live across the Internet and watched across the world.
The London Khilafah (Caliphate) conference followed a month long series of conferences in Lebanon, Kuwait, Gaza, Sudan, Tanzania, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, US and Australia including a landmark gathering in Indonesia of thousands of leading scholars supporting the re establishment of the Khilafah and addressed by the global leader, Ameer of Hizb ut Tahrir, Sheikh Ata abu Rashta.”

---

INFORMATION FOR THE POLITICALLY CHALLENGED
Hizb -ut-Tahrir was founded in Jerusalem in 1953, the year Tony Blair was born.

“Was born!” … NOT the year he gave birth to Islamic fundamentalism by going into Iraq.

HuT’s worldwide HQ is in London. Makes you proud to be British, doesn’t it? Well, doesn’t it?

---

No video yet of the Londonistan conference, but here’s one from last week at their USA jolly.

Hizb ut Tahrir – Spread Islam or Die Trying (please die)

In my recent post I felt the same response as the YouTube video uploader here.

---

From Ed West, Telegraph blogs - Extremists call for caliphate in Londonistan

Ed West (pictured)

Ed West is a journalist and social commentator who specialises in politics, religion and low culture. Embarrassingly, he once wrote a book entitled How To Pull Women.

Conference season starts a bit early for Islamists hoping to make Britain part of the Islamic caliphate (Khilafah), and Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain’s national Conference, “The Struggle for ISLAM and the call for Khilafah” in London today will certainly be one of the less tedious get-togethers this year (although less chance of a boozy one-night-stand, admittedly).

You may have heard of the group. They were built up by sponging radical cleric Omar Bakri Muhammad, who once called the 9/11 hijackers “magnificent” and spouted the cause of jihad against the West while scrounging £250,000 off the British taxpayer. Hizb have come close to being banned for their support of Islamic extremism, but our weak, enfeebled government, desperate not to upset anyone, worried it might drive them underground. Well, they sound like they’re really inside the big tent right now:

The conference was opened by Dr Abdul Wahid, Chairman of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain’s Executive Committee, who addressed the increasing anti-Islamic propaganda in the West and globally. Using the issue of terrorism and extremism Western governments have embarked on a campaign to prevent the Muslim world establishing an Islamic government, the Caliphate that will free the Muslim world from the terror and hegemony that has been brought upon it by the West. On a daily basis, Muslims are subjected to insults and attacks in the media on their Aqeeda, the hijab, Shariah and Khilafah. He argued that, in this critical time, Muslims needed to hold onto Islamic values living in the West, and resist the attempts to reform Islam, and to support the call for the Islamic Khilafah in the Muslim world – to end decades of oppression, colonisation and dependency.

The conference highlighted how the method to re-establish the Khilafah is based on the Life (Seerah) of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), which clearly laid out a non-violent intellectual and political struggle to bring about change. Hizb ut-Tahrir has continued with this method for over 50 years and calls Muslims all over the world to this path for change.

The conference concluded by emphasizing the key role the Muslim community in the West plays in terms of supporting the call for Khilafah in the Muslim world and carrying the Message of Islam to the wider non-muslim society, breaking the stereotypes and presenting Islam with sound argument and good example.

Right, so you want to support the establishment of a worldwide Islamic dictatorship, and at the same time “break the stereotypes” of Muslims.

There’s an argument that a group such as this, with its thinly veiled respectability, is more dangerous than an obvious barking mad organisation like al-Qaeda. Former member Ed Husain said: “Britain remains vital to the Hizb, for it gives the group access to the global media and provides a fertile recruiting ground at mosques and universities”.

There was a time when Hizb could have been laughed off, but the larger Britain’s Muslim population gets the more harshly we have to deal with people who talk about the caliphate, for the sake of British Muslims who prefer Christian Democracy as much as anyone.

A representative of the group once told the BBC: “I think Muslims in this country need to take a long, hard look at themselves and decide what is their identity. Are they British or are they Muslim? I am a Muslim. Where I live is irrelevant.” In that case, get out, for all our sakes, because anyone attending this conference or who is in sympathy with this group has no place in our country.

ENDS ARTICLE

Back to top

RELATED

Prison Planet – the Crowd of Conspiracy Creeps (aka Caliphate Clan) – dumps the blame on the Western Conspiracy.  That must be the reason Tony Blair tried to BAN this crowd of creeps after the London terror attacks of 7/7/2005. And, sadly, failed. His great conspiracy kind of backfired.

Oh, no, hang on … sorry I almost missed this convoluted consideration that conspirators contrive -

Blair only proposed banning it as part of the conspiracy to KEEP it.

R-i-g-h-t.

Back in your prison, dear inhabitants of planet ‘WHAT THE HELL?’

1. November 2006 – HuT posted videos on Youtube – Watch videos referred to here.

August 2005 – just after 7/7 terror attacks – “Blair accused of adding to the anger.” Excerpt:

“Tony Blair is fomenting anger and frustration in the Muslim communities by branding widely held Islamic ideas as extremist, a (Hizb ut-Tahrir) conference was told yesterday.

Organised by the Islamic political party Hizb ut-Tahrir, the conference in a central London hotel attracted nearly 1,000 people including 100 women.

Awwwww… bless!

2. Daniel Pipes on Islamist infiltration in Britain (at Westminter Journal)

Fitna The Movie: Geert Wilders documentary about Islam – Watch more
La página de Front Page Magazine nos aporta un mensaje de gran interés , no solamente por la posible semejanza del caso londinense con España y algunas de sus comunidades islamicas que van en el mismo rumbo que menciona el comentarista de Front Page
Prohibir la visita del autor de la película FITNA,Geert Wilders,(COMENTARIO SOBRE FITNA: A documentary by Dutchman Geert Wilders. It has caused quite a stir in the the Netherlands, and due to pressure from muslim groups, the Dutch government has chose to censor his film and prosecute him with hate crimes. Decide for yourself if this film promotes hate, or is simply a educational film about islam. «A documentary by Dutchman Geert Wilders. It has caused quite a stir in the the Netherlands, and due to pressure from muslim groups, the Dutch government has chose to censor his fil…) es considerada como una auténtica vía favorecedora de los radicales en Inglaterra cuyas comunidades están dando apoyo no solamente de captación y formación de fundamentalistas sino incluso apoyo militar enviando componentes de bombas a Afganistán,interviniendo en la islamización radical en Sudán . Defender elmodelo de justicia instalado en el Corán vía la Shariya en las comunidades muslmanas de Inglaterra (y/o el Reino Unido )
está dando alas a la segregación respecto de las comunidades cristianas en Europa para provocar precisamente la guerra al infiel…
El enlace arriba conecta con una interesante entrada del blog izquierda hispánica publicado hace casi ya un año.En el diario asturiano La Nuevaa España se publicaba una entrevista a Gustavo Bueno sobre estos asuntos que sugerimos releer

Londonistan Rising
By Ryan Mauro
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, March 12, 2009

Last month, the British government controversially refused entry to Geert Wilders, enforcing a ban it had placed on the Dutch parliamentarian for his anti-Islam film, Fitna. While Britain works to eliminate the “threat” from the critics of Islam, however, the British government is facing a far greater peril from the spread of radical Islam on its own territory.

The CIA reportedly has warned President Obama that Islamic extremists living in the United Kingdom are now viewed as the greatest threat to the United States. “Around 40 per cent of CIA activity on homeland threats is now in the UK. This is quite unprecedented,” one British official was quoted as saying in The Telegraph.

Further heightening the threat, these extremists are becoming ever more connected with overseas terrorist networks. Dozens of British citizens are believed to have traveled to Somalia, to fight alongside Al-Qaeda-linked Islamic militants seeking to seize the country from the current government. The Somali militants are reportedly receiving funding from the large Somali community in the United Kingdom. British Muslims have also been providing Taliban forces in Afghanistan with bomb parts, while others are thought to have joined the battlefield and fought against the British military.

Britain’s terrorist networks are vast. According to a joint intelligence report by Britain’s Defense Ministry, MI5 and Special Branch, there are thousands of terrorism supporters in the country. These findings echo an earlier warning from the director of MI-5 that there were at least 2,000 people in the country identified as posing a threat to national security. “It is also estimated that there are some 200 terrorist networks functioning in Britain today who are involved in at least 30 plots,” The Telegraph reported in November 2008.

The pool of potential terrorist recruits appears to be growing. In 2008, the non-partisan Center for Social Cohesion released a poll of 1,400 Muslim students in the United Kingdom and found some frightening results. While there was strong support for some moderate beliefs – including the notion that Islam is compatible with democracy and support for gender equality – some 24 percent felt that Allah did not view males and females equally, and 33 percent favored the construction of “a worldwide Caliphate based on Sharia law.”

Sharia law, indeed, already has found purchase on British soil. For example, the British judicial system must now enforce the decisions of Sharia-based courts. Although participation in the Sharia system is voluntary, similar to accommodations made for orthodox Jews, such parallel courts are bound to conflict with the values of the Western system of justice. They also serve as the infrastructure necessary for Islamist leaders to institute Sharia law in Britain’s Muslim communities. Hence there is understandable concern that some Muslim citizens, particularly women, will be forced “voluntarily” to submit to this form of justice, lest they be labeled apostates.

Younger generations of Muslims make up another concern. The websites of some Muslim schools have been found to be promoting extremist thinking and have pushed children to isolate themselves from the surrounding culture and society. Some websites denounced Harry Potter, chess, Monopoly, Ludo, draughts and even cricket as un-Islamic and one even linked to a website that promoted jihad. Another website claimed that women should remain indoors and that rape victims shared partial blame for their attack. This type of teaching contributes to the lack of assimilation that fuels radicalism and leads to creation of “No-Go Zones” – essentially, Muslim states within states shut off from mainstream British society.

The British government’s reaction to the Islamist offensive has largely been to placate the most radical voices in the Islamic community. Thus, the government has gone to great lengths to make sure that “those who want to spread extremism” by criticizing Islam, like Geert Wilders, don’t set foot inside Britain. By refusing entry to Wilders, the British government won the praise of the Muslim Council of Britain, which was co-founded by Muslim Brotherhood member Kamal Helbawy, a supporter of Hamas who said in 1992, “Do not take Jews and Christians as allies, for they are allies to each other.” Ironically, Helbawy himself was denied entry into the United States in 2006.

While standing up to Western “extremists” like Wilders, UK authorities have not been nearly so strident in stopping those who preach hatred in the name of Islam. A Lebanese journalist named Ibrahim Moussawi, who has acted as a spokesperson for Hezbollah and worked for their Al-Manar television station, is now being given permission to visit the United Kingdom – this despite the fact that, in 2002, he was quoted in The New Yorker decrying Jews as “a lesion on the forehead of history.”

In a dark twist, the government’s accommodationist policy has undermined the very Islamic moderates it is intended to empower. The Quilliam Foundation, a moderate Muslim group dedicated to fighting extremism, opposed the decision to ban Wilders, saying that “freedom of speech should be protected” and challenging Wilders to a debate on Islam. Yet these moderate Muslims, whose own lives serve as rebuttals to Wilders’ arguments, have found themselves on the opposite side of the British government. As a result, they were robbed of a chance to air their version of Islam, which might have countered the Islamic extremism espoused by the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk.

Thanks to its current outreach, the British government has only encouraged the more extreme elements in the Muslim community. The long-term consequences of that approach are likely to be the continued radicalization of the UK’s Muslim population and the rise of sectarian voices who will one day seek far more than the banning of a prominent critic of Islam.

——————————————————————————–
Ryan Mauro is a geopolitical analyst and the author of Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq. He is the founder of WorldThreats.com and was a panelist for the 2006 Intelligence Summit. He can be contacted at TDCAnalyst@aol.com.

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA
SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMO
LA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA
LA VIDA

No se pierdan este video de una manifestación anti-israelí en Londres en la cual la policía retrocede ante el gran grupo de manifestantes que con odio gritan “Allahu Akbar” (Alá es grande) y “Free Palestine”. ¿Las mejores partes? Los buenos musulmanes gritándoles a los policías cosas como “cobardes” o “huyan, cerdos de mierda”.

Los 10 minutos del video constan de: los manifestantes insultan, rompen cosas, las arrojan y van constantemente en busca del choque mientras la valiente policía inglesa (“Britain’s finest” ???) retrocede cuadra tras cuadra…. ah, Londonistán está cada vez peor!!

OBVIAMENTE, la BBC no mostró la noticia ni el video porque… bueno, porque son unos cagones de mierda, por eso!!

Ah, the British – stalwart upholders of the gentlemanly ways of chivalry, noble blue-blooded values, self-sacrifice, the stiff upper lip, and bulldogged determination.

Once upon a time.

In stark and shocking contrast to the selfless heroics of the World War II British, who fought the Axis forces tooth and nail in Europe, Asia, and even in the death camps…

Today’s British are forbidden from even upholding the most basic moral and civil acts.

Did I say British? At the rate they’re going to ban their own cultural, legal and religious heritage in favour of everyone else’s, soon there won’t be anything British left about Britain.

Observe:

• Volunteer coastguards punished for rescuing drowning teenager

• Mayor of London tells people not to help when they see a crime beign committed

• Grandmother arrested for telling off noisy late-night drunken hooligans

• 64-year old man in trouble with police for taking photo evidence of vandals

• Woman convicted and fined for defending WWII memorial from vandals who assault her

• Pruning the hedges is deemed discriminatory against homosexuals who indulge (illegal) in public sex

• Convicted criminals should no longer be jailed

• Toddlers who do not automatically like foreign food are condemned as racists

• Royal Navy veteran who lost a leg arrested for rescuing his neighbor from two harassers

• English flag banned from being displayed

• St. George, Patron Saint of England, no longer allowed to be celebrated because he is ‘offensive’ to Muslims

• Down Syndrome child charged with racism for schoolyard spat

• Royal Navy commanded not to arrest murderous pirates because it would infringe on their ‘human rights’

• Middle aged man severely beaten by youth, other bus passengers don’t dare intervene

• Fire extinguishers are banned for being potentially dangerous

• Two fathers arrested for stopping gang attack on youth

• More and more attacks on firefighters who cannot defend themselves

• Criminals treated to regular £250-a-night bed and breakfast ‘punishment’

• Prisoners given rights to sex visits and even in-vitro fertilization procedures

• Labour Party demands that ‘God Save the Queen’ be rewritten

• Labour Party wants Christmas out and every other religion’s celebration in

• Serial sex criminal cannot be deported because it would ‘infringe on his human rights’

• Christian forbidden from displaying image of Jesus because Muslim find it offensive

• 35-year-old woman beats 10-year-old boy with an iron bar, the boy gets investigated for racist hate crime

• Foreign murderer ruled to have ‘human right’ to stay in Britain

• Homeowner arrested, may be charged with murder after burglar falls to death by himself

• Schools no longer teach about the Holocaust because some Muslims don’t believe it happened

• Top judge wants murderers to no longer be jailed

• Woman arrested for chasing down and stopping a thief who stole someone’s bicycle

• Muslim school textbooks teaches that Christians are apes and Jews are pigs

• Soldier banned from entering Harrod’s on Remembrance Day in case his uniform makes some people upset

• Christian charity Samaritan’s Purse bans Christian symbols

• Palestinian terrorist sues Britain for letting Israel catch him

• English flag banned in England because its cross is offensive to some Muslims

• WWII memorial converted into toilet for immigrants

If that doesn’t make you righteously outraged enough, look here where convicted terrorists and lazy, jobless bums are paid thousands of taxpayer Pound Sterling by the British government.

And if you want an even more comprehensive list which includes such sickening truths as how its hospitals starve and kill patients and its leaders surrender British culture to sharia and riot threats, then head on over to Moonbattery’s coverage list.

If World War II had only taken place in modern times, the cowering and quivering British wimps would have accepted Hitler’s offer of peace in exchange for letting the rest of Europe be crushed under the Nazi boot.

And if any stalwart Englishman tried to rescue bedraggled French refugees, he’d be hauled up to court and charged for breaking some Moonbatty law or other.

Winston Churchill would not be proud – that is, if any Briton still remembers who he, since he has been removed from British schoolbooks, 1/4 of Britons think he was a fictioal character, and 1/3 of youths think he was merely the first man on the moon.

No wonder 200,000 British are abandoning the country while 574,000 immigrants take their places.

Formerly Great Britian – we miss you.

London Bombing Mastermind Alleged to Be British Informer

The 9/11 Timeline has recently added a category about a radical Islamist named Haroon Rashid Aswat. Aswat was a prominent mover in Londonistan from the late 1990s, when he became a key aide to radical imam and British informer Abu Hamza. What interested us about Aswat is that he is often referred to as the mastermind of the 7/7 London bombings, but is also said to have worked for British intelligence, which sometimes displayed a striking lack of interest in him.

Kosovo and Oregon

Aswat first came to prominence during the late 1990s, when he recruited Muslims to fight in Kosovo; despite having him under surveillance already, the British authorities did nothing to impede him. Aswat then moved to the US, where he attempted to open a terrorist training camp in Oregon, and bragged of being Osama bin Laden’s “hit man.” His activities were uncovered by the FBI, but the Justice Department initially blocked a prosecution of him.

Under Surveillance

Aswat, who may have met the 7/7 bombers at Abu Hamza’s Finsbury Park mosque, was falsely considered to have been killed in early 2003, when his passport was found on the body of a Taliban fighter. His apparent demise no impediment, in February 2004, he met two participants in a fertiliser bomb plot that was later broken up. The US then found Aswat living in South Africa, but Britain thwarted an attempt to have him rendered, allowing him to return to Britain shortly before the attacks. Once there, he called the bombers repeatedly–the calls apparently being monitored–then fled the country shortly before the attacks.

Alleged to Be Informer

Ten days after the bombings, Aswat was reported to have been arrested in Pakistan. There is some dispute about whether this really happened, but, if it did, he must have been released shortly after, as he was arrested in Zambia around 21 July 2005. About a week later, counterterrorism expert John Loftus said, “[W]hat’s really embarrassing is that the entire British police are out chasing [Aswat], and one wing of the British government, MI6 or the British Secret Service, has been hiding him. And this has been a real source of contention between the CIA, the Justice Department, and Britain.… He’s a double agent.” As if to support Loftus’ statement, British authorities investigating the murder of over fifty people in London seemed ambivalent about the fate of the alleged mastermind, although an associate of the bombers was linked to him.

Not Mentioned in Government Report

Even when Aswat was extradited to Britain, the local authorities showed a marked lack of interest in him, and his extradition to the US to stand trial in the Oregon case was approved in late 2006. All this and more prompted The Independent to publish a critical article about the government’s response to the bombing pointing out, amongst other things, that a report into the bombings failed to mention Aswat at all, despite his allegedly being the mastermind.

Thus, some definitions (from Wikipedia and Professor Olivier Roy)

Islamism: the building of an Islamic state. Phillips: “the term given to the extreme form of politicized Islam that has become dominant in much of the Muslim world and is the ideological source of global Islamic terrorism (pg 4).

Islamic: a monotheistic Abrahamic religion originating with the teachings of the prophet Muhammad

Islamist: “The usage of the term is controversial. Those labeled Islamists often, if not always, oppose use of the term, maintaining that they are simply Muslims, and that their beliefs are a straightforward expression of Islam as a way of life. Similarly, at least one famous scholar argues the correct term for what is called Islamism is “activist Islam”^[8] or “political Islam”.^[9] Some people find it troublesome that a word derived from “Islam” is applied to organisations (sic) they consider radical and extreme.” – Wikipedia. Phillip uses the term extensively without modifiers (example – page 187).

Jihad: ‘strive’ or ‘struggle’. It is not one of the five pillars of Islam. A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid, the plural is mujahideen.

Jihadi: A coined word referring to an individual who participates in advancing Jihad

Fanatical: Fanaticism is an emotion of being filled with excessive, uncritical zeal, particularly for an extreme religious or political cause

Discussion Questions

1. On page xvii, Phillips states “Britain has become a decadent society, weakened by alarming tendencies towards social and cultural suicide. Turning upon itself, it has progressively attacked or undermined the values, laws and traditions that make it a nation, creating a space that in turn has been exploited by radical Islamism.” Have we created such a space in the US that makes us vulnerable to radicals of all stripes? If so, how has it manifested its self? What are the links between our cultural break down and our vulnerabilities? What can we personally do about it?

2. Does Phillips establish that the driving force for jihad against the West is Muslim fundamentalist beliefs? If so, what does she make the case for what the Koran says that drives Islamic extremism? If not, what does she think the driving force is? Do you think past and present territorial and economic colonialism and the hegemony of the West and our support for tyrants in Muslim countries has anything to do with it?

3. Phillips seems to paint Islam with a universal ideology that is false and hateful. Do you think she establishes this adequately?

4. On page 197 she refers to an “Islamic takeover of the West”. Has she shown any proof at all in the book that the Muslim world acts in unison on anything? (Professor Olivier Roy, an actual expert on the subject thinks otherwise.)

5. What are the similarities between Melanie Phillips, the Old Testament Prophets and Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.? Without getting into the specific issues, can you describe the fundamentally different approaches, objectives and underlying assumptions?

6. Do you think Phillips laments that Britain is no longer a ‘Christian Nation’? Do you think it ever was? What about the US?

7. What should be the role of the Church in society?

Dale’s Rating: D-

Dale’s Category: Pop Bigotry

There can hardly be a more graphic illustration of Britain’s helter-skelter slide into dhimmitude that this story:

Two Christian preachers were stopped from handing out Bible extracts by police because they were in a Muslim area, it was claimed yesterday. They say they were told by a Muslim police community support officer that they could not preach there and that attempting to convert Muslims to Christianity was a hate crime.

The community officer is also said to have told the two men: ‘You have been warned. If you come back here and get beat up, well, you have been warned.’ A police constable who was present during the incident in the Alum Rock area of Birmingham is also alleged to have told the preachers not to return to the district.

The noteworthy point about this incident is that it was a Muslim police ancillary officer who was involved. He did not uphold the law of the land, which gives people the freedom to say in public whatever they want within the law. Instead he upheld the Islamist principle that this particular area of an English city was a Muslim area, within which it was not permissible to do anything contrary to Muslim principles such as preach Christianity.

When the Bishop of Rochester recently warned that Britain was developing Muslim no-go areas, he was denounced the length and breadth of the establishment, with government ministers and bishops falling over each other to declare that they did not recognise the country he was describing. ‘There are no no-go areas in Britain’ they all declared. Well, here it is, in glowing technicolour and flashing lights, in Alum Rock Birmingham. What are they all saying now, those government ministers and bishops of the Church of England, to a situation where in the heart of England a British police support officer, employed by the British state to enforce the law of England, aggressively prevents Christians from preaching the established faith of England on the grounds that this is now a ‘hate crime’?

This is not a one-off. Alert readers will note that it was the West Midlands police force which tried to prosecute the Dispatches TV programme for revealing the true ‘hate crime’ in Britain’s so-called moderate mosques which preach hatred of the west and sedition. This in turn is only the tip of a much bigger iceberg. Up and down the country, police forces led by politically correct imbeciles are recruiting large numbers of Muslims, mainly as police community support officers like the officer in Alum Rock, in order to ‘build bridges’ with the Muslim community, and with minimal or non-existent security vetting in case they upset or offend the said Muslim community. The result is, among other things, the development of Muslim no-go areas enforced by British police officers.