Please Help New English Review
For our donors from the UK:
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications from New English Review Press
Islam Through the Looking Glass: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J. B. Kelly, Vol. 3
edited by S. B. Kelly
The Real Nature of Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
As Far As The Eye Can See
by Moshe Dann
Threats of Pain and Ruin
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Oil Cringe of the West: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly Vol. 2
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Impact of Islam
by Emmet Scott
Sir Walter Scott's Crusades and Other Fantasies
by Ibn Warraq
Fighting the Retreat from Arabia and the Gulf: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly. Vol. 1
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum


















Sunday, 29 March 2015
Union invites banned anti-Islam activist
clear

With the news that the Oxford Union had invited Anjem Choudary to speak (closely followed by Trinity College Dublin putting such restrictions on Maryam Namazie that she was effectively barred) I know certain people wrote letters and e-mails of protest to the University. This is not the most obvious effect - but I think it is a brave and intelligent one. 

From The Cherwell 

In one of her first acts as President of the Oxford Union, Olivia Merrett has invited American author and leader of the group ‘Jihadi Watch’ Robert Spencer to take part in next term’s ‘This House Believes Radicalisation is Born at Home’ debate, along with the radical Islamist preacher Anjem Choudary.

Robert Spencer, who also co-founded the group ‘Stop Islamization of America’ (SIOA), is banned from entering the UK, following the Home Office’s 2013 decision that his visit would not be “conducive to the public good”, and that his views would be likely to “foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence”.

The ban was issued after he was invited to speak at an EDL rally in Woolwich, where drummer Lee Rigby was killed. At around the same time, Anjem Choudary infamously declared himself “proud” of Michael Adebolajo, one of Rigby’s killers, and insisted that Rigby would “burn in hellfire”.

In the invitation, seen by Cherwell and reproduced in full below, Merrett told Spencer, “Your knowledge and experience will be of huge interest to many in the University.

Though projects such as SIOA may be appear [sic] somewhat questionable, we would like to hear your reasons behind it.”

Merrett also intimated that Spencer would have control over which media outlets would be allowed to cover the debate, telling him, “The level of media coverage is, of course, entirely at your discretion.”

In a post on the Jihadi Watch website, which was taken down almost instantly, Spencer commended the Oxford Union for extending the invitation, and called for it to appeal to the Home Office to get the ban lifted.

But Tommy Robinson, founder of the English Defence League (EDL), and sometime associate of Robert Spencer, defended the Oxford Union for the invitations to Spencer and Choudary, and called for the Home Office ban to be lifted, telling Cherwell, “I think it’s about time we heard some people who were honest. Anjem Choudary’s very honest, and so is Robert Spencer.

“Robert Spencer tells the truth; that’s all he does, he tells the truth. He’s never called for violence, never incited any hate, he’s just told the truth about an ideology. And the only reason he was banned was because they were fearful that it could provoke terrorism.

“So what they’re doing is limiting not just his freedoms but they’re limiting what freedoms we have to listen to people in this country, because of what the violent reaction could be from Muslims. It’s absurd, he should never have been banned in the first place. . . "

Neither Robert Spencer nor the Oxford Union could be reached for comment, while the Home Office told Cherwell that since the pre-election period had started, it could not provide a comment either.

clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 2:51 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Sunday, 29 March 2015
No International Amnesty for the Palestinians
clear

A senior White House official, who had perhaps recently seen the film The Godfather, was heard to remark "It's not personal; it's strictly business" when commenting on the attitude of the U.S. administration toward the Israeli prime minister. 

One might accept the administration position if President Barack Obama had taken "yes" for an answer when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu retracted his statement that a Palestinian state would not be established during his tenure.  Using imperial language, Obama said in an interview with the Huffington Post on March 25, 2015, "We believe that  Netanyahu meant it[.] … Instead, 'we' need to reconsider the options available to us to ensure that we do not see further deterioration in the region."

Those options might involve United States approval of the Palestinian Authority's intention to bring charges of war crimes against Israel to the International Criminal Court.  This is indeed a moment to review the situation, with all its trials and tribulations. 

After the Israeli election, Netanyahu issued the statement that he favored a two-state solution, but "circumstances have to change."  The Obama administration might be helped in its "reconsideration" of the need for circumstances to change by the publication of a crucially important objective report by Amnesty International (AI) documenting the hostility against Israel.

AI has never been positive in its attitude toward the State of Israel or its political figures.  Last year, it issued two reports critical of Israeli actions during the fifty-day fighting in Gaza, and it has long been critical of the Israel Defense Force.  Every mainstream media has covered stories of alleged violations of international law by Israel.  Therefore, the report, "Unlawful Deadly: Rocket and Mortar Attacks by Palestinian Armed Groups during the 2014 Gaza/Israel Conflict," which AI issued on March 25, 2015, comes as a surprise. 

The report is devastating in its precise account of Palestinian violation of humanitarian law.  Its basic accusation is that Palestinian "militant" armed groups have killed both Israeli and Palestinian civilians in an indiscriminate manner.  The Palestinians' flagrant disregard for international humanitarian law during the conflict is evident from the routine firing of rockets toward Israeli towns and cities.  Specific assaults included direct attacks on civilians, including civilian property, residential homes, public buildings, and educational institutions.  

AI boldly asserts that Palestinians are guilty of war crimes as a result of their direct attacks on civilians; their use of prohibited weapons that are inherently indiscriminate, such as unguided rockets and imprecise mortars; and indiscriminate attacks that kill or injure civilians.

The Palestinians have long shown a reckless disregard for the lives of civilians in Israel.  They have deliberately targeted civilian centers in Israel in the hope of killing civilians.  Between 2001 and July 7, 2014, the start of the Israeli Operation Protective Edge, Palestinian groups fired 15,200 rockets and mortars against Israeli civilians.  From July 8 until August 26, they fired 4,881 rockets and 1,753 mortars from Gaza, and struck 224 Israeli residential areas.

The danger to Israel has intensified because of the increase in range of weapons – namely, medium- and long-range rockets.  From 2001 to 2004, the Palestinians fired homemade Qassam rockets.  In 2014, they fired long-range ones, such as the Iranian Fajr 5, the R-160 rocket, M-75s, and the M-302, weapons that can hit the major Israeli cities.

Though it does not refer to them as "terrorists," the report states that the Palestinian organizations involved have committed war crimes.  The fact that they launched unguided rockets and mortars that could not be aimed at a specific target is a breach of international law.  Those who have claimed responsibility are the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades (the armed wing of Hamas), the al-Quds Brigades (the armed wing of Islamic Jihad), al-Nasser Salah a-Din (the armed wing of the Popular Resistance Committees), the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades (the armed wing of Fatah), and the National Resistance Brigades (the armed wing of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine).

Palestinian attacks on August 22 killed six Israeli civilians, including a four-year-old boy in a family car near his home.  But their killings were not limited to Israelis.  On July 28, 2014, they killed 28 Palestinian civilians when a Hamas projectile from Gaza landed in the al-Shati Gaza refugee camp.  Hamas had falsely claimed, and mainstream media reported it to be the case, that Israel was responsible for those murders, but AI concludes that all evidence shows that it was a Palestinian rocket that killed their own civilians.

In fact, Palestinians killed more civilians in Gaza than in Israel. The report notes that it was Israel's effective system for civilian defense, including bomb shelters and advanced warning systems, and particularly the Iron Dome anti-missile system, that helped limit Israeli civilian casualties.

The report shows that Palestinians are guilty of other violations of international humanitarian law in addition to those above.  Those violations include the storing by Palestinians of munitions in civilian buildings, UNRWA facilities, and United Nations schools, as Israel has long reported.  AI also criticizes the launching by Hamas of attacks in or near locations such as hospitals and religious sites, where civilians were taking shelter.

Rockets and mortars were launched from civilian facilities, such as hospitals including the al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City and the Greek Orthodox Church, where more than 2,000 people took shelter, in Gaza City  

AI continues to investigate the charges that rockets were launched from within schools in the Gaza strip.  Those launchings include rockets from the UNRWA elementary school in Jabalia on July 13 and 14, the Abu Nur school in the al-Shati refugee camp on July 20, the UNRWA girls' school in Beit Lahiya on August 1, and the boys' school in the UNRWA Shahada al-Manar in Shuja'iyyeh on August 21, 22, and 25.

The report, commenting on the imprecise nature of the massive firing of Hamas mortars, emphasizes that indiscriminate attacks that kill or wound civilians constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law and constitute war crimes.  The July 28 attack was an egregious example of the indiscriminate nature of the rockets fired by armed Palestinian groups.

The White House should note that neither the Palestinian authorities nor the Hamas authorities in the Gaza Strip have been willing to open investigations into their violations of international humanitarian law.  Nor has AI received any response from the Palestinian authorities about the cases it has been investigating.  AI indicates that Palestinians have not investigated similar violations on previous occasions.  It also points out that Palestinians have long claimed impunity for abuses inflicted by their security forces, such as arbitrary detention, torture, and the use of unlawful force against protestors in both the West Bank and the Gaza strip.

The Amnesty International report is an important contribution to the accurate history of the activities of Palestinians.  It is incumbent on senior officials in the White House to read it and to consider the circumstances Prime Minister Netanyahu says must change if a Palestinian state is to be established.

First published in the American Thinker.

clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 8:52 AM by Michael Curtis
clear
Sunday, 29 March 2015
To Make Men Thin
clear

‘Men,’ said Marx in his 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, ‘make their own history, but they do not make just it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances already existing, given and transmitted from the past.’ This is true, despite its provenance; indeed so obviously true that it is virtually a truism. For if it were otherwise, men would find themselves behaving in no circumstances at all, which is literally inconceivable. Circumstances are like the poor, only even more so: ye have circumstances with you always.

But it does not follow from the fact that men don’t make their history just as they please because they inherit particular circumstances (in part self-created, as our past always is) that they have no choice but to act as they do, any more than grammatical rules determine what people say. Those rules prohibit, or rather make meaningless, certain utterances, but there remain an infinite number of possible meaningful utterances.  

The degree of duress exerted by circumstance varies, of course. A man under torture can still choose not to divulge the information wanted by his torturer, but it would be a harsh judgment indeed to blame him for giving way in the face of continued pain or death. The law, as usual, defines duress more precisely than any phenomenon on a continuum allows, for fear that any circumstance whatever will count as duress if there is not a clear demarcation. But in extra-legal thought, the idea of duress has been so far extended that almost all circumstances, economic, sociological, political or psychological, are deemed by some intellectuals, particularly but not exclusively left-leaning, to count as such.

Recently, in Britain at least, there has been a lot of attention paid to the problem of obesity which (no pun intended) is growing. Since the human world is infused with meaning, the question on every commentator’s lips is, ‘Who is to blame?’ Even the most thoroughgoing determinist needs to blame someone, if it is only his parents.

Some people, mainly conservatives, blame the conduct of the fat themselves: their greed, lack of self-control, laziness, bad habits and so forth. They eat too much, especially of the wrong foods, and watch too much television instead of exercising as they should, or as they are told that they should.

Others, mainly liberals, blame society in general and the food companies in particular. Obesity, which was once a sign of prosperity, is now statistically associated with poverty, that is to say with those who have relatively low incomes in rich countries, as these incomes might be considered rich in poor countries. Moreover, the food that the poor in rich countries are constrained to eat is deliberately and knowingly manufactured in such a way as to result in the obesity of those who eat it – what the French, succinctly, call malbouffe. Obesity is not, then, a pathology of choice, but a pathology of society and a manifestation of injustice and exploitation.

That there are cultural aspects to obesity and slenderness as ideals no one could deny. I once witnessed a startling change in those ideals as they were happening: in Zululand, where I worked briefly as a doctor, modern, educated and urbanised young women would ask for something to make them thinner, while more traditional, unschooled and still-rural young women would ask for something to make them fatter: and interestingly, from my point of view, those who wanted to be made thin were already thin, while those who wanted to be made fatter were already fat. Social pressure of one kind or another obviously had an effect on these young women’s aesthetic ideal.

But a rising rate of burglary, for example, does not mean that the burglars whose activities contribute to that rising rate are not acting voluntarily, and therefore excuse burglary. Each individual act of burglary remains a matter of choice and deliberation. (Except in vanishingly rare cases of automatism, you cannot break into a house and steal its contents without wanting to do it.)

It is true that the content of much prepared food is appalling; and it is also true that food companies deliberately lace that food with fats and sugars that they know are attractive to people with a poor culinary culture and a disposition to easy and quick gratification. But it is not true that people eat such food because it is cheap. With reasonably careful shopping, and a knowledge of how to cook, it is possible to eat much more economically than by buying prepared food.

Liberals take very easily to Professor Lustig’s argument that the epidemic of obesity, which is particularly serious in Anglo-Saxon countries no doubt because of our relatively impoverished culinary traditions, has been caused by the lacing of so many prepared foods with sugars, chemicals which are addictive. Once you have been fed with them, goes the argument, you are inclined to seek them out more and more. It is as if your food had been surreptitiously laced by a drug-dealer, and therefore you are not to blame for how or what you eat; like Luther at Wittenberg, you can do no other. You are a plaything of your neurotransmitters that have been re-set without your knowledge or consent.

It seems to follow from this that the solution to the problem of obesity is to regulate what is put into food. You cannot expect a population of addicts to give up its addiction just by itself – at least not if you think of addiction as a kind of neurological or neurochemical slavery. The only answer, therefore, is to cut off the supply of the addictive substance by regulatory legislation.

I happen to dislike prepared foods, though more on aesthetic than on health grounds; I see what people choose and am appalled by their choices, which seem to me to be those of overindulged children who have never matured in their tastes. And I have no cast-iron, unbending objection to regulatory action, either; none of us is really deeply opposed to requirements for requirements for drinking water to be uncontaminated, or wants our only protection against the supply of contaminated water to be ex post facto legal action under tort law against the suppliers once we have fallen ill from contamination.

Of course harm results when regulators get things wrong. It so happens that one of the reasons manufacturers add sugars so plentifully to our prepared foods is that regulators told them years back to avoid the alternative to sugars, namely fats. Furthermore, it is manipulation by agricultural policies that makes sugars so cheap and convenient for manufacturers.

But we always have to start out from where we are, not from where we should have been if our predecessors had been wiser or more prescient than they were; and we can act only on the best information that we have at the time we act. Regulation of the sugar content of prepared foods might produce unforeseen harmful consequences: but we have always to act with incomplete knowledge, and can only do our best according to the information that we have.

I would have no real objection, then, to regulation of the sugar content of prepared foods, provided it was done on intellectually honest grounds. Those grounds would not be that people are incapable of acting other than as they do, but that they are too idle to cook, their tastes and pleasures are too brutish, their habits too gross, for them to be left free to choose for themselves. Someone who knows better must guide them.

Of course, one could just leave everything as it is, without any intervention. It is quite likely, though not certain, that people will one day bethink themselves and eschew the malbouffe to which they have grown accustomed and has made them so fat. There is already a suggestion of reduced levels of obesity among children. A solution without anyone enforcing it is the best of solutions.

First published in the Library of Law and Liberty.

clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 8:25 AM by Theodore Dalrymple
clear
Sunday, 29 March 2015
Friends of Iran in the United States
clear

On February 19, 2015, a full-page ad was published in the New York Times by the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) opposing the invitation given to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak before Congress.  It asked the question: “Will Congress side with our President or a Foreign Leader?”

The ad did not disclose that the founder and president of the organization, Trita Parsi, was an Iranian-Swedish citizen who holds a Green Card and has had links with Iranian authorities, especially the Iranian defense minister, Javad Zarif.  Those links were held to be extremely close by a critic, Hassan Daioleslam, an Iranian-American journalist and human rights activist who left Iran in 1981 and lives in Arizona.  He wrote that NIAC, and its leader Parsi, are an organization engaged in lobbying Congress on behalf of a foreign government – namely, that of Iran.

The invitation to Netanyahu and his speech to Congress became the occasion for dramatic political theater by Team Obama and its supporters, who disliked the Israeli’s criticism of the Obama administration’s attitude toward Iran.  Nothing was said by that team or in the mainstream media on the question of whether the NIAC had lobbied or tried to lobby Congress or had any impact on the current policy of the Obama administration in negotiating with Iran.

In his articles, Daioleslam (Dia) claimed that the NIAC, and former Congressman Bob Ney, who was associated with it, were helping Iran to manipulate U.S. policy on Iran’s behalf.  Among other issues, in 2007, the organization had lobbied to prevent U.S. funds going to democratic elements in Iran. The NIAC brought a lawsuit in May 2008 in the attempt to halt Daioleslam’s further criticism of the Iranian regime.  But it delayed producing, and sometimes failed to produce, necessary information on its computers, calendar entries, and e-mails.  In addition, the assistant director of the NIAC changed some files from references to “lobbying” to “legislative direct.”

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judge John Bates) in September 2012 dismissed the lawsuit.  The Court found that the NIAC had given false information to it, and it ordered the NIAC to pay Daioleslam’s legal expenses – about $184,000.  It held that the work of the NIAC and its founder, Trita Parsi, was not inconsistent with the idea that it was “first and foremost an advocate for the regime.”  Consequently, Daioleslam’s statement could not be considered defamatory.

The court in July 2010 had ordered NIAC three times to submit its server for inspection to determine if all documents had been given to it, and complained that additional computers in the network of the NIAC had not been produced.  The court found that the NIAC had withheld 5,500 e-mails written by its senior officials.  It is unclear whether this refusal or inability to produce documents was deliberate or result or incompetence.

The decision of the District Court was upheld by the opinion of two circuit judges and a senior circuit judge in the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in a decision on February 10, 2015.  The Court of Appeals approved the opinion of the District Court that the NIAC was involved in systematic abuse of the legal discovery process and made false declarations to the court.

The court held that the NIAC had “flouted multiple court orders” and taken “inexcusable” action in delaying delivery of documents to during the lawsuit that it had itself brought, and therefore had driven up the costs imposed on the Daioleslam.  It referred to the NAIC’s conduct as “dilatory, dishonest, and intransigent.”

Ironically, this case is somewhat similar to other events current in Washington where individuals have refused to provide or have misplaced official documents or have given incomplete records after requests by members of Congress for full documentation.

The Court did not finally decide if the NIAC had violated the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).  The statute, enacted in 1938, requires that persons acting as agents of foreign authorities in a political or quasi-political capacity make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with a foreign entity.  Action of this kind is legally different from advocating better ties with a foreign entity, because this would be in the interests of the U.S.

The NIAC was founded in 2002 by Trita Parsi, who said it would enable Iranian-Americans to condemn the 9/11 attacks.  It is organized as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and states that it is non-partisan and does not receive funds from the Iranian government or from the United States government.  It says it is dedicated to advancing the interests of the Iranian-American community on civic, cultural, and political issues.  It speaks on behalf of that community to which it refers as “one of the most highly educated minority groups in the U.S.”

The founder and president of the NIAC has been invited to the White House, has arranged meetings between the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations and members of Congress, and given talks at the CIA.  He has done so without registering as an agent of a foreign power.

The NIAC also expresses its “vision” to work to ensure that human rights are upheld in Iran and that civil rights are protected in the U.S.  It received funds, almost $200,000, from the National  Endowment for Democracy.

More significantly, the NIAC has pressed for an end to international sanctions on Iran.  The NIAC has also played a partisan role in U.S. and international politics.  It lobbied against the appointment of Dennis Ross to the National Security Council.  The documents revealed to the Court that Parsi had helped prepare reports about Iran and helped send them to Atieh Company in Tehran, which paid Parsi for his work.

One can only hope that the NIAC was not consulted in the current negotiations with Iran on nuclear issues.

First published in the American Thinker.

clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 8:18 AM by Michael Curtis
clear
Sunday, 29 March 2015
American Negotiators Frantic For A Deal With Iran
clear
clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 7:32 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Sunday, 29 March 2015
On Palm Sunday, Pope Francis Talks Of Martyrs
clear

And the Muslims who are killing them.

Here.

clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 7:26 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Sunday, 29 March 2015
Fifth Isil runaway held on take-off
clear

It turns out that one of the girls from Bethnal Green Academy who was made a Ward of Court to stop her defecting to ISIS/ISIL last week was stopped in her earlier attempt. She was following girl(s) from the private Muslim School(s) in the borough run by the East London Mosque. Also more about papa's connection with the jihadist underworld.

From the Sunday Telegraph. 

A fifth girl from Bethnal Green Academy travelled to join Islamic State (Isil) and was only stopped after her plane was halted on the runway, it can be revealed. . . Her case is particularly concerning, however, since it took place in December, more than two months before the other girls left. 

It had been thought that four girls from the school – Kadiza, Shamima and Amira, plus another teenager who succeeded in reaching Syria in December, Sharmeena Begum – were the only Bethnal Green pupils to have tried to travel to Isil.

However, the 15-year-old is the fifth. All five children were friends. The 15-year-old who was taken off the plane is one of five girls remaining at Bethnal Green Academy who have been made wards of court and handed travel bans to prevent them from going to Syria.

Tower Hamlets council attempted to prevent journalists from revealing the further links to the academy, but a judge ruled that it was in the public interest to report it.

Amira Abase’s father, Abase Hussen, blamed police for his daughter’s disappearance, saying they had “terrified” his daughter and should have done more to warn him after Sharmeena Begum left for Syria. 

 emerged yesterday that a man appearing to be Mr Hussen and bearing a close resemblance to him attended an extremist rally with Anjem Choudary, former head of the al-Muhajiroun group which has radicalised dozens of convicted terrorists. Also present was Michael Adebowale, one of those who would later murder the soldier Lee Rigby.

Pictures of the event, in 2012, appear to show Mr Hussen chanting “Burn, burn USA” and attempting to hold a blazing US flag. Behind him, hundreds of jihadi sympathisers chant provocative slogans while holding black terrorist banners.Mr Hussen had claimed to the committee that he did not even know what Islamic radicalisation was.

As the Telegraph revealed two weeks ago, Mr Hussen’s lawyer, Tasnime Akunjee – who also gave evidence to the committee blaming the police – is an extremist with links to both al-Muhajiroun and Cage, the pro-terrorist lobby group which defended Mohammed Emwazi, “Jihadi John,” as a “gentle” and “beautiful” man who had been “radicalised by MI5.”

Mr Akunjee, also known as Mohammed Akunjee, attacked the Met for making a “cacophony of error” over the girls, saying: "One would hope the Met would have expended greater resources checking their facts and getting it right.” However, he has previously said that no Muslim should co-operate with anti-terror police, saying that Prevent, the government’s counter-terror policy, is “straightforward, paid-for spying on the community.” 

Mr Akunjee is based in Brentford, on the other side of London. The revelation of Mr Hussen’s apparent al-Muhajiroun links may help explain how he came to be representing families from Tower Hamlets.

One source involved in the investigation of the three girls said: “We are desperate to get Akunjee off the case but it doesn’t look like it is going to happen.”

Another London teenager who has travelled to join Isil attended a private Muslim school in Tower Hamlets run by the East London Mosque, an institution controlled by an extremist group, the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE), and which has regularly hosted hate preachers.

Zubair Nur, 19, went to London East Academy, one of six private Muslim schools identified by Ofsted in November as leaving children “vulnerable to extremist influences and radicalisation.” Nur was also a lead volunteer for the IFE’s youth wing, the Young Muslim Organisation (YMO), and attended private study classes with the mosque’s imam, Abdul Qayyum.

clear
Posted on 03/29/2015 2:10 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Sunni And Shi'a Representatives Exchange Views On Iraqi Television
clear
clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 11:59 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
An Interview With Geert Wilders
clear
clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 11:01 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
A Musical Interlude: A Little White House At The End Of Honeymoon Lane (Al Bowlly)
clear

Listen here.

clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 10:46 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Real Estate Notes From All Over
clear

The king, or emir, or sultan, or ruler, or whatever he calls himself, of nasty little Qatar has just bought his second, and possibly favorite, wife, a little seaside place, 64 rms w/vu, tout confort.

Details here.

clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 10:43 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Iranian Defector Motaghi On The American Negotiators Making The Iranian Case
clear
clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 10:16 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Geert Wilders In Vienna
clear

His speech at a press conference, here.

clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 7:53 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Some Bostonians Not To Be Found In Henry James
clear
clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 6:51 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Millions vote in Nigeria elections hit by Islamist attacks and technology issues
clear

The long-awaited election in the continent’s biggest democracy, with 60 million potential voters, did not descend into the chaos or violence that the doomsayers had predicted, but it was hardly plain sailing. From the moment that President Goodluck Jonathan himself was rejected by a malfunctioning voter registration machine there were glitches until, by late afternoon, beleaguered officials had been forced to announce that polling in some areas would spill over into a second day.

In the embattled north-east, the Islamist extremist group Boko Haram carried out its threat to disrupt polling day. Fourteen were killed, including an opposition politician, in three separate raids on polling stations. 

“We could hear the gunmen shouting: ‘Didn’t we warn you about staying away from [the] election?’” one official told Agence France-Presse after three died in Gombe state. “They set fire to all the election materials we abandoned as we escaped.”

Residents of the town of Miringa say Boko Haram militants torched people's homes early Saturday and then shot them as they tried to escape. Twenty-five reportedly died.

Abubakar Shekau, warned in a video message last month: “This election will not be held even if we are dead. Even if we are not alive, Allah will not allow you to do it.”

But many voters in Boko Haram’s heartland defied the threat. Volunteers swept voters with handheld metal detectors in Maiduguri as a precaution after a string of suicide attacks in recent weeks. At a school in Yola, Abbas Mohammed, a university lecturer, cast his vote in one of the centres set up especially for the 1.5 million people displaced by the violence. “If we don’t vote, it will be as if Boko Haram has battered us twice,” he said.

 

clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 5:25 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Al-Shebaab, and Mosques And Madrasas, Even In Uganda
clear

Boko Haram on one side of sub-Sarahan Africa, Al-Shebaab on the other. Black Africans persecuted, pillaged, enslaved, murdered by Muslims who think of themselves as Arabs, in what is now Southern Sudan. Arab slavemasters, black African slaves, in Mauritania and, informally, all over the Maghreb, slave-like conditions for black African workers and domestics.

Did you know, or did you know but then forget, about the Al-Shebaab bombs in Uganda? Did you know about the measures of self-defense taken in that country, the shutting down of some madrasas, and the Muslim reaction to it? Read here.

clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 10:17 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Revealed: Jihadist Lessons at the Boston Marathon Bombers’ Mosque
clear

From Breitbart

The Boston Marathon bombers’ mosque, the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), employs an intensive radicalizing program aimed at Boston’s historically moderate Muslim community, especially at its youth. It’s called “Tarbiya,” which is Arabic for “growth and refinement.” It is not something that is practiced as part of classical mainstream Islam.

APT has obtained several curriculum documents created by ISB-affiliated groups, which describe exactly what is taught and when, with assignments detailed down to book and page number. We are making the most detailed and traceable of these documents available here and here. We will focus in this article on a particular Tarbiya program called “Young Muslims,” which was explicitly endorsed by Suhaib Webb, the Imam of the ISB’s mega-mosque in the Roxbury neighborhood of Boston.

Read it all - they are playing a VERY long game. 

clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 5:03 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Saturday, 28 March 2015
A Musical Interlude: Mama, I Love A Crook (Tatyana Kabanova)
clear

Listen here.

 

Мама, я жулика люблю
(из репертуара А. Димитриевича)

Фраер топает за мной,
А мне нравится блатной -
Мама, я жулика люблю!
Жулик будет воровать,
А я буду продавать -
Мама, я жулика люблю!

Менты ходят, жулик спит,
А мое сердце так болит -
Мама, я жулика люблю!
Жулик будет воровать,
А я буду продавать -
Мама, я жулика люблю!

Где блатные, там и я,
Все блатные — боль моя -
Мама, я жулика люблю!
Жулик будет воровать,
А я буду продавать -
Мама, я жулика люблю!

Жулик ходит в кандалах,
А я с фраером в шелках -
Мама, я жулика люблю!
Жулик будет воровать,
А я буду продавать -
Мама, я жулика люблю!

Фраер будет мой страдать,
А я буду пропивать -
Мама, я жулика люблю!
Жулик будет воровать,
А я буду продавать -
Мама, я жулика люблю!
clear
Posted on 03/28/2015 12:42 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Former Gang Leader Becomes Even More Dangerous Muslim Gang Leader
clear

Even more dangerous, that is, when he went from being Marcus Dwayne Robertson, notorious gang leader in New York City, to being  Abu Taubah, Muslim gang leader in Florida, a change which, you see, gave meaning and structure and justification to his existence, which otherwise did not change.

Here.

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 11:51 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Five grounded girls are from same London school as 3 'Jihadi brides
clear

From The Telegraph

Five teenage girls barred from travelling abroad by a judge after showing an interest in going to Syria are pupils at the same London school as three girls already thought to have fled there to join the Islamic State, the High Court has been told.

In mid-February police raised concerns following the disappearance of Kadiza Sultana, 16, Shamima Begum, 15, and Amira Abase, 15, from their homes in east London.

On March 20 Mr Justice Hayden barred five girls - three 16 and two 15 - from leaving the jurisdiction of England and Wales following a hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London.

The judge had made an order saying the five girls could not be identified.

But on Friday he said it could be revealed that all eight teenagers were pupils at Bethnal Green Academy in Bethnal Green, east London. 

Mr Justice Hayden made the move following an application from social services bosses at the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. He was told that social workers had raised concerns that the girls might flee to areas controlled by the Islamic State and he said sometimes the law had to intervene to protect young people from themselves

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 4:52 PM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Unconfirmed Report: Co-pilot of the Germanwings Airbus was a Convert to Islam
clear

This is from Speisa:

According to Michael Mannheimer, a writer for German PI-News, Germany now has its own 9/11, thanks to the convert to Islam, Andreas Lubitz.

Translation from German:

All evidence indicates that the copilot of Airbus machine in his six-months break during his training as a pilot in Germanwings, converted to Islam and subsequently either by the order of "radical", ie. devout Muslims , or received the order from the book of terror, the Quran, on his own accord decided to carry out this mass murder. As a radical mosque in Bremen is in the center of the investigation, in which the convert was staying often, it can be assumed that he - as Mohammed Atta, in the attack against New York - received his instructions directly from the immediate vicinity of the mosque.

Converts are the most important weapon of Islam. Because their resume do not suggests that they often are particularly violent Muslims. Thus Germany now has its own 9/11, but in a reduced form. And so it is clear that Islam is a terrorist organization that are in accordance with §129a of the Criminal Code to prohibit it and to investigate its followers. But nothing will happen. One can bet that the apologists (media, politics, "Islamic Scholars") will agree to assign this an act of a "mentally unstable" man, and you can bet that now, once again the mantra of how supposedly peaceful Islam is will continue. And worse still, the attacks by the left against those who have always warned against Islam, will be angrier and merciless.

For now the German Islam supporters like never before have their backs against the wall.

Michael Mannheimer, 26.3.2015


The Daily Mail today writes:

Police investigating the Germanwings crash said tonight they had made a 'significant discovery' at the home of pilot Andreas Lubitz, who deliberately ploughed the Airbus A320 into the French Alps.

Officers refused to reveal details of the potential breakthrough but said it was not a suicide note.


Hopefully we'll know in a few days if this article is accurate.

The Mannheimer article seems to have been removed. This may be innacurate.

UPDATE: Megyn Kelly of Fox News is confirming it is true.
 

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 2:33 PM by Rebecca Bynum
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Actress Agnès Soral Analyzes Her Brother Alain's Descent Into Lunatic Antisemitism
clear

Here.

Alain Soral is the real "far-right" in France, and because that "far right" is characterized by one thing -- fanatical antisemitism -- he can and does make common cause with M'bala M'bala Dieudonne. Neither, of course, has anything bad to say about Islam. For the crazed antisemites, Islam  is not to be examined, analysed, criticised, worried about, because that would get in the way, you see, of the continued demonization of Jews, in and out of Israel. As in the late 1930s, antisemites are a security threat all over the Westen world. Then, they minimized or ignored the threat -- clear to Wiinston Churchill but not only to him -- of Hitler's Germany sometimes deriding it as merely a matter of "Jewish propaganda."  See, for more, John Roy Carlson's report on his descent into that world, which he compiled as his contribution to the American war effort, in his book Under Cover. It went through two dozen reprintings in 1943. It's worth reprinting now. And his Cairo To Damascus, about the attempt to smother at birth the nascent state of Israel, though last reprinted in 2008, needs to be reprinted again.

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 8:35 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Amnesty International's Singular Explosion Of Candor On The Gaza Campaign
clear

The "Palestinian" rockets were responsible for the deaths of their own civilians, in two ways.

One we know about -- the deliberate firing of rockets right  from the middle of civilian areas, including schools, hotels, hospitals, and so on.

The second is what this report from Amnstey International discusses -- the number of Arabs killed by misfired rockets from their own bezonians.

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 8:26 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Turkish Muslims In Germany: Those Gastarbeiter Now Neither Guests Nor Working
clear

The figures here.
 

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 8:16 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
Friday, 27 March 2015
Saudi Researcher Ali Al-Ahmed On Yemen, And The Fate Of The Al-Saud
clear

Described as a "Saudi researcher" -- an ambiguous description, because it does not make clear if he does research on Saudi Arabia or, more likely, is a native of Saudi Arabia, Ali al-Ahmed is, to judge by his name, Shi'a. But even if he is not, he does not favor the Al-Saud regime and rightly says that the Saudi bombing of the Houthis is done not to defend free elections and the constitution in Yemen, but simply to keep Yemen from becoming too dangerously independent and more of a danger to the Saudis..

Here.

clear
Posted on 03/27/2015 7:44 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear
clear
Showing 1-26 of 441 [Next 25]


Guns, Germs and Steel in Tanzania
The Thinking Person's Safari
Led by Geoffrey Clarfield
Most Recent Posts at The Iconoclast
Search The Iconoclast
Enter text, Go to search:
clear

 

The Iconoclast Posts by Author
The Iconoclast Archives
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31     
clear

Subscribe