Wednesday, 23 May 2012

- AT THE MOSQUE

Visitor:   I would like to speak to the Gangtapimp Witch Doctor.
Flunky:   Oh, you must mean the Imam! Certainly! Please step this way. 

Gangtapimp Witch Doctor
Safar al-Hawali
The go-to theologian of the late Osama bin Laden

Annihilate the BOFOD


Wednesday, 16 May 2012

- Breivik’s ideology


By Igor Slamoff

In an article published online in the Guardian , Nick Lowles, the director of Hope Not Hate, appears to deny the thesis propounded by what he calls the “counter-jihad movement”, to wit, that "Islam is a major threat to western civilisation.”

In my opinion, this issue does not belong in the realm of ideology, but can be rationally discussed on the basis of the broad historical knowledge available on Islam, Christianity and what not.

However, this question can be addressed at a later time.

For I believe there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the opinion "Islam is a major threat to western civilisation”, while open to question, cannot be dismissed out of hand. It is a reasonable belief that reflects rational fears and concerns, and must be accepted as a legitimate political opinion, not as a virus escaped from a chauvinist fantasy world.

Unlike Nick Lowles, I am harshly critical of Islam. Nonetheless, I share Lowle’s dismay at the fact that the Norwegian mass murderer and self-declared opponent of Islam, Anders Breivik drew “inspiration from the Serbian conflict and particularly the activities of the Serb paramilitary groups the White Eagles and the Tigers.” In the 1990s, Bosnian Moslems were perfectly justified in desiring to secede from Serbia, once the multi-culti guarantees offered by the Yugoslav federation vanished when Yugoslavia disintegrated in the early 1990s.

Serbia’s Fascistoid Miloševiċ régime made much of an alleged Moslem threat in order to justify its genocidal excesses. Serbia’s brutal reaction to Moslem demands for secession encouraged the Bosnian leader Izetbegoviċ to court the favor of Moslem ultras like Gadafi and others, in order to obtain weapons and treasure. Despite his membership in an Islamo-Fascist youth movement during the 2nd World War, Izetbegoviċ was by all accounts a moderate and conciliatory politician, and he led the secession movement only driven by the despair of his countrymen at the prospect of being oppressed by Serbian chauvinism.

No doubt Serbian resentment against Islam has deep historical roots that cannot be sniffed at. After all, Serbia suffered greatly under Ottoman despotism, with its terroristic Islamic gestures like building tall pyramids with the heads of slain Serbians, and its enslaving of Christian boys to serve as janissaries in the Sultan's armies. Nonetheless the ruthlessness that Serbs displayed toward Bosniaks in the 1990s was in no way justified by any real current threat.

European public opinion rightly condemned Serbia’s neo-Fascist expansionism and chauvinism. The US saw Serbia’s megalomaniac nationalism as a proxy for Russian expansionism into the Balkans, an opinion that seems quite reasonable in retrospect. Accordingly the US and NATO backed the Moslem secessionists in Kosovo and Bosnia and dealt Serbia a crushing blow.

I find it deeply troubling that Breivik, as an opponent of Islamic expansionism into Europe, should draw inspiration from paramilitary groups, especially ones with ominous Fascistoid names like “White Eagles” and “Tigers”, and which no doubt committed horrendous crimes. I believe that any group opposed to Islamic expansionism and totalitarianism should be inspired by the democratic, humanitarian and rationalist ideals of the European Enlightenment, instead of by some horrid gang of Fascist butchers.

Opposition to Islamic expansionism must not fall into the trap of imitating Islam’s militaristic and tyrannical attitude. Perhaps armed conflict will become inevitable at certain junctures in the forthcoming struggle against Moslem supremacy. But this should not be grounds for any militaristic, chauvinistic or despotic attitudes. The cause of Europe should be the cause of reason.

Europe’s struggle against Islam, if victorious, should not end with massive expulsions and conversions as did the Spanish Reconquista of the Middle Ages. Moslem minorities should be granted the opportunity of maintaining their cultural identity, while accepting the overarching mores of the various European cultures.

What is intolerable is Moslems’ current aggressive, supremacist fervor. No concession must be made on that score. But we must at all times uphold the values that we learned throughout centuries of struggle against European absolutism, namely those of tolerance, democracy and freedom.

And European Moslems should be fully entitled to them.


- Gangster Worship in Camel-Driver Death Cults

BOOK REVIEW
Adolph Guest-Tapow: Gangster Worship in Death Cults Founded by Illiterate Camel-Drivers: A Comparative Study

This fascinating ethnological study is based on a number of historical occurrences of death cults that were founded by illiterate camel drivers, and that promptly displayed symptoms of gangster worship. Most of the death cults analyzed are exceedingly obscure, with one prominent exception, which we shan’t name here principally out of tactfulness, and only in second place because the sect in question has a lethality coefficient exceeding 75%. The sect in question is currently trying to polish its image in order to facilitate its projected conquest of the entire planet.

- Moslem Settlers’ Power Grab



Pravda
FINAL EDITION

BRUSSELS PUTSCH
Moslem
Settlers’
Power
Grab 

SCATTERED FIGHTING IN  ROTTERDAM

BANITOU EL-MOUSLIMI proclaiming the Islamic Republic yesterday at Brussels Town Hall

Friday, 11 May 2012

IT WILL BE FAR TOO LATE FOR BY THEN ALL OF US WILL BE GANGSTAPIMPS


by Edward Says

1.    It will be far too late
2.    For by then all of us
3.    Will be Gangstapimps. 

MEMRI Critique 1


MEMRI critique
Traduction ou trahison ?
Désinformation à l’israélienne
par Mohammed El-OifiLe Monde diplomatique, septembre 2005,


Igor Slamoff’s reply to Mohammed El-Oifi:

MEMRI has accurately been characterized as an Israeli intelligence operation and politically very close to Likud. Accordingly MEMRI’s translations should be taken with a grain of salt. But that does not mean that MEMRI gravely distorts the overall picture.
Modern psychological warfare techniques stress the importance of telling the enemy the truth at whatever cost.
Accordingly the fact that MEMRI is merely a myrmidon of the Israeli espionage and propaganda apparat does not necessarily reduce MEMRI’s credibility. Sure they are Israeli spooks. So what? The important thing is how capable Israeli spooks are of diverging from truthfulness without becoming completely discredited.
I have been reading MEMRI for years.
This critique is riddled with inaccuracies. It is very close to a work of fiction. Regarding three specific points:
1. It is true that the selection of texts MEMRI offers stresses Mohammedan fanaticism. However there are numerous translations where Moslems are shown as reflective, understanding, nuanced, and reasonable. And not just one or two, but a bunch of them.
2. The translations themselves are almost always quite accurate. A handful of cases of intentional distortion have occurred, but they are not typical. In one case, i.e. a dispute over the correct translation of the Arabic noun wilaya when used by Osama bin Laden in 2004, the ground for the disagreement was that bin Laden often uses modern Arabic terms with archaic meanings, so legitimate differences of opinion can easily arise regarding the meaning of some of his statements.
3. If you are dissatisfied with the selection of material translated by MEMRI, there are by now several competing translation web sites for Near East media. If you don’t like them you can start your own. There are also web sites like Common Ground where you can read news about interfaith tolerance and harmony. It makes very pleasant reading. 

Monday, 7 May 2012

- Gotta watch them phobias


by Konstantinos Mokkosfritos

The great evil of our times is ISLAMOPHOBIA,  together with its auxiliary scourges, to wit:

1. Gangsterophobia
2. Naziphobia
3. Genocidophobia
4. Tortureophobia
5. Hatredophobia
6. Anti-Semiticophobia
7. Mafiaphobia & last but not least
8. Cavemanophobia



Sunday, 6 May 2012

JIHAD ONCE AGAIN


by Genghis Cohn
 
Tarek Mehanna: punished for speaking truth to power, guardian.co.uk, Monday 16 April 2012, by Ross Caputi.

Despite his evidently noble intentions, Ross Caputi is an ignorant buffoon who does not know what he is talking about. Nonetheless he is undeniably a mouthpiece for insidious, lying Mohammedan propaganda.

In his note, Ross Caputi states:

… jihad … is pitifully misunderstood in the US. … jihad is equated with terrorism.
Jihad is not synonymous with terrorism, …. Jihad, which literally means "struggle" or "effort", can describe an internal struggle to refrain from sin, an effort to promote Islamic values, or a duty to defend other Muslims when they are under attack. Jihad is not an aggressive war to convert others, nor does it condone terrorism. Yet, jihad is popularly understood in America to be a call for terrorism against infidels.

What Ross Caputi states is A STINKING LIE, because “JIHAD” MEANS KILLING PEOPLE, although not necessarily through terrorism --  jihad can also be conducted with regular armies. Caputi is parroting the standard peaceful-sounding spiel customarily propagated by Islamist fanatics in order to soothe infidels’ justified fears.

In fact, all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence agree that  

"Jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and the infidels refuse."

جليل التربية الجهادية في دو الكتاب و السنة
[Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa ' s-Sunna] p. 7.

The following passage from the revered authority on the Qur'ān, Sayyid Qutb, makes perfectly clear that “JIHAD” MEANS KILLING PEOPLE:

The assumption must never be made that jihād was only incidental to a particular situation in a particular place, and that that situation no longer exists. It is not that Islam loves to draw its sword and chop off people’s heads with it. The hard facts of life compel Islam to keep its sword drawn and be incessantly on its guard.

Sayyid Qutb: In the Shade of the Qur’an, volume 3 (surah 4) p. 243

In his usual sneaky way, Sayyid Qutb here pretends that jihad is all about self-defense, whereas the above-cited Islamic jurisprudence makes clear that jihad is not self-defense at all, but instead means war to  subjugate or subdue. unbelievers.

Furthermore Caputi’s spiel about “defend[ing] other Muslims when they are under attack” is ALSO A LIE, because this standard line of Mohammedan doubletalk always uses the term “attack” in an overbroad, typically Mohammedan sense.

Once again, Sayyid Qutb:

Enemies of Islam “… delude themselves into thinking that they are … able to deceive the ‘naive’ believers[1], but Allah uncovers the truth about their actions. They are trying to deceive not only believers, but Allah Himself: ‘They seek to deceive Allah and the believers.’ (Verse 9) … Allah always … protects [believers] and stands against their enemy, and repels any attacks directed at them.”

Sayyid Qutb: In the Shade of the Qur'ān, volume 1, p 39

In this passage we see that, for Sayyid Qutb, to criticize Islam is the same as attacking Moslems. DISPUTING MOHAMMEDAN MUMBO-JUMBO IS THE SAME AS KILLING MOSLEMS.  Accordingly, ISLAM JUSTIFIES KILLING PEACEFUL CRITICS OF ISLAM.

Igor Slamoff
SLAUGHTERFAITH


[1] “Deceiving believers” in standard Islamo-doubletalk means to tip Moslems off that Islam is actually just a bunch of crap.

Thursday, 3 May 2012

Hypocrisy and Double Talk


by Igor Slamoff

In Not Explaining the Why of Terrorism, published online at consortiumnews.com on May 2, 2012, Ray McGovern claims that the underlying problem … is that many Muslims have watched Washington’s behavior closely for many years and view U.S. declarations about peace, justice, democracy and human rights as infuriating examples of hypocrisy and double talk.”

Allow me to point out that, just as “many Muslims have watched Washington’s behavior closely for many years … and view [it]. ... as infuriating examples of hypocrisy and double talk,” likewise  many Germans, and many Australians, and many Venezuelans, and many Americans, and many Russians, and many Japanese have watched Washington’s behavior closely for many years … and view [it]. ... as infuriating examples of hypocrisy and double talk However THEY HAVE NOT TAKEN UP TERRORISM! AND WHY NOT?

Because THEY ARE NOT MOSLEMS!

And what does religion have to do with it? Perhaps it has something to do with the  fact that ISLAM WAS FOUNDED BY A MASS MURDERER AND SLAVE TRADER WHO CONSTANTLY ENCOURAGED HIS FOLLOWERS TO MURDER OUTSIDERS!
You mean to  say that  you haven't noticed all the exhortations to kill in the Koran?

WHAT ARE YOU, STUPID OR WHAT?

The TRUE hypocrisy and double talk consists in whitewashing Islam and pretending it's indistinguishable from Quakerism.

Islam is a religion that has always encouraged violence and terrorism and always will.

The following is from Wikipedia’s article on the noted Egyptian secularist Farag Foda, who was murdered in 1992 by hitmen dispatched by the Islamic Al Azhar University: 

Farag Foda

Based in Cairo, Farag Foda was noted for his critical articles and sharp satires about Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt. In many newspaper articles, he demonstrated weak points in Islamic ideology.[1]

In 1991–92, he worked with Sheikh Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour to establish a new political party in Egypt, Mostakbal ("The Future Party"), dedicated to a secular democratic state, and to defend the Christian Egyptians.[2]

Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman

Assassination 

He (Farag Foda) was shot to death in his office on 8 June 1992 by two Islamic fundamentalists from the Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya group. His son and other bystanders were seriously wounded in the attack.

Before his death, Foda was declared an apostate and foe of Islam. An Al-Azhar University scholar, Mohammed al-Ghazali, a witness before the court, declared it was not wrong to kill a foe of Islam. Al-Ghazali said: "The killing of Farag Foda was in fact the implementation of the punishment against an apostate which the imam (the Islamic leader) has failed to implement (undertake)."

It's suspected that his assassination was executed after a fatwā issued by both a Committee of scholars of al-Azhar and by the religious leaders of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, notably Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was sentenced to life in prison in the United States in 1996.
GET THE PICTURE NOW, WISE GUY?