Wednesday, May 22, 2013

British Soldier Beheaded and Mutilated by Muslims . . . in London

The Qur'an is perfectly clear on the penalty for soldiers who "make mischief" in Muslim lands:

Qur'an 5:33—The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.

Can we start having an honest discussion about Islam yet?

London—A man believed to be a soldier has been beheaded in an attack on a street near the Woolwich barracks in London, witnesses report.

Metropolitan Police Commander Simon Letchford confirmed tonight that two men were shot by armed officers.

According to ITV footage, one man was filmed wielding a bloodied meat cleaver and saying: "We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you."

Prime Minister David Cameron has described the killing as "truly shocking" and has asked the Home Secretary Theresa May to chair a meeting of Cobra, the Government's emergency committee dealing with incidents that have implications for national security. He is returning to London early from an EU meeting.

The Government is reported to be treating it as a suspected terrorist incident.

Mrs May tonight confirmed she has been briefed by the Director General of the Security Service MI5 and the Met commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe on the "sickening and barbaric'' incident in Woolwich.

She said: ""It has been confirmed to me that a man has been brutally murdered this afternoon in south-east London. Two other men were shot by armed police and they are currently receiving treatment for their injuries."

The Press Association is reporting that one Whitehall source said the attackers were heard to shout 'Allah Akbar'. (Continue Reading.)

If you'd like to understand why these attacks are so common, watch this video:



Although it is very shocking for world, but it was all accepted, Britain has to pay the price for mass immigration of Muslims.
West learn the lesson, they are living next door to you for waging jihad (Islamic Holy War). With your money, by claiming JSA (Jihad Seeker Allowance).

akairey said...

news quick! Great! As far as Great Britain is concerned, it's almost a lost now. Why you ask? another article, the decline of Christians while the rise of Islamists are occuring at the same time. Sharia law is implemented in ghettoa throughout that country. Believe you me will see more of this backward ideology unless you ban Islam all together!

hugh watt said...

You have got to read this one.

Here's some quotes by this journalist.

"The militant anti-Islamic today ordered the march toward Woolwich, exactly three months after he was released from prison for possessing a fake passport following the killing of an alleged British soldier in a suspected jihadist attack - note the words ‘suspected’, the motives of the attack have not been confirmed at this time.

I’m sorry, Mr Robinson, but I think you’ll find the problem isn’t with Islam. You see, the real issue here is with extremism and you pointing at every news story involving a Muslim and shouting “SEE! I TOLD YOU” isn’t going to cut it."

"Islamic terrorist attacks account for fewer than 100 deaths in the UK – which, of course, is too many. But, in recent years, we've seen the IRA apologise for the death of 1,800 “non-combatants” alone, I can guarantee the knuckle-draggers won’t be chasing Paddy down the road on St Patrick’s day."

Then there's this.

"Lest we forget that Anders Breivik, a Christian, killed 69 people – mostly teenagers – on and around the island of Utøya, Norway and the many, many school shootings by mostly white, non-Muslim people in the United States."

Anonymous said...

Hopefully Jay Smith will be at Speaker's Corner on Sunday and I pray that there is a large crowd who will pay attention to what he says.

hugh watt said...

It gets worse. This journalist then shows poor wisdom by jumping to conclusion with this.

"At the time of writing this column, too few details exist to write a well-rounded opinion piece on the Woolwich situation, but the furor the EDL is creating on Twitter is unsettling."

At the time of writing there was this one comment.

"Excuse me, but which part of 'Allahu akbar!' don't you understand? What matters is not whether this butchery has anything to do with Islam or not. What's important is that these vermin are not lying when they affirm that God has told them as Muslims to fight and kill unbelievers. That's their threat doctrine, so why don't we believe them when they announce it? By the way, I'm not a supporter of EDL. Not at the price they charge for electricity."

What an encouragement for the jihadists.

My Life said...

The version I read on Fox News had all the references to Allah, the Qu'ran and Allu Akbar removed. Even Fox has to be politically correct, I guess.

rowland said...

Killing people and proud of it, with blood soaked hands.
When we tell muslims they worship an idol who incidentally is the devil himself, they say we are being insulting.
This is pure offering of human sacrifice to a pagan god Allah. Period.

Anonymous said...

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the two Jihadists actually knew Anjam Choudary personally. Choudary is extremely vocal when it comes to condemnation British soldiers.

Modern Nigerian Visual Artist said...

They kill a man and didn't run... No citizen attempted to 'deal' with them. It took the police 20mins to arrive. Wow!

Excalibur said...

Why Muslims are violent, the answer lies in their roots. Islam is a religion founded by Arabian uncivilized people. Muhammad was a gang leader of just around 50 violent and uncivilized people of Medina. Saudi Arabia (SA) was never a populated place before 1938 (before oil discovery in SA, before 1938 the only source of income of SA was from pilgrimage to Kaaba temple of Kaabeswari Devi of Mecca confined by Muslims by masjid al-haram). Whatever population it had, they were mainly pirates spread in its vast desert, and few nomadic tribes in Mecca and Medina (even in today's date Somalia, who is neck to neck close to SA, is full of pirates, and even the current SA is founded in 1932 by Al-Saud after massacre of Al-Rashid family, initiated by just 40 men). Islam is nothing but a result of a brutal massacre of 500 meccans by 50 mainly bloody Medinans led by Muhammad. The big surrender to Islam was due to the next generation warlords' brutal conquests, and not due to Muhammad, although Muhammad was responsible for several massacres. When a gangdom is founded by deadly pirates, which ordinary kingdom will be able to stop them? Islam in a very short span of time conquered almost whole of the middle east. The only contribution of Muhammad to Islam is that he founded this cult of violence and institutionalized the evil. Then residents of saudi arabia, who were anyways professional wrong-doers and criminals for generations, got skewed justification and morale boost-up from Islam. The kind of evil we find in Islam and Quran, it is fully compatible with the founders and initial followers of Islam. The kind of evil we find in Islam and Quran, it will always remain a favourite way of life of inferior people of the world, who are at the lower end of the human evolution, even if the name of the religion is changed. It is the way of life that matters, the way of life of inferior people who hate success because they are incompetent and of low character, they hate interest on money because they are not intelligent enough to avoid exploitation and don't see its crucial importance in businesses, they hate alcohol as they don't know where to stop, they hate music, dance and everything that are intelligent attributes of superior people and non-attributes of inferior people. Superior people will always have to fight with inferiorness, which is currently known as Islam, in order to evolve the human civilization in a natural positive direction. Considering the roots of Islam, world has no option but to ruthlessly deal with its fundamental nature. From a religion founded by mainly pirates and criminals having no saint whatsoever (the only religion who has zero saint and all warlords), world should not expect a saintly behavior.

Excalibur said...

Why are the British amazed that this sort of thing is going on in your country? Just look at the terror being inflicted on religious minorities in Muslim dominated Northern Nigeria. (my home country). Here are some Quran verses that can be used to justify this inhumane massacre:

Quran 5:33 The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

Quran 8:12 (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.

Wake up Britain!! Wake up world!! Islam is here to dominate not to assimilate. Islam is a cult-like ideology founded by a warlord. Many people are unaware that the earliest followers of MUHAMMAD used to drink his urine and blood. Muhammad also said "WHOEVER WHO CHANGES HIS (ISLAMIC) RELIGION, KILL HIM.

Joe Bradley said...

At least Prime Minister Cameron rightly called this an act of terrorism. The Hodge-podge of dopes, bimbos and bozos we have in the White house still insist that Major Nidal Hasan's terrorist slaughter of military personnel at Fort Hood was an act of "workplace violence".


The Qur'an Explained [Click Here]

Excalibur said...

David, here is a comment I got from a "moderate" Muslim board. This is the mentality of the people we are up against:
"This is the sort of stuff that irritates me. What possible strategic advantage did muslims gain from this? if these guys really think they are fighting a jihad they need to ask themselves, if jihad is to raise the banner la ilaha ilAllah then have the actually done that? Has islam gained from their attacks?"

Radical Moderate said...

I guess that Muslim did not get the memo that Islam is peacefull

Zack_Tiang said...

A man with bloodied hands, going around claiming to have killed a man in the eyes of plenty of witnesses and whose body is plainly visible still after the murder.... and he is still free to roam around with no one trying to subdue him.

What a Jihadist' paradise on earth.

Christian A. said...

Wake up Britain!

Unknown said...

What a sad day indeed for Britain. Since it has invited the devil, protected it, now the time has come to dine with it.
I can still recall in my mind hearing George Bush and Obama vociferously claiming that Islam is a religion of peace. What total Bunkum!
No matter how the Liberal journalists try to whitewash this, the truth is out in the open. These same liberals will be consumed by the adherents of islam "the religion of peace"
Shame on all of you cowardly Britain for not speaking the truth about Islam much earlier. Lets see what you will do now!

Alcaff said...

Meanwhile in other parts of the world, muslims continue to practice the legacy of their prophet:

GreekAsianPanda said...

Thousands of Mexicans have been killed and over a million displaced due to the drug war fueled mainly by American consumption of illegal drugs. America is clearly warring against Catholics. It's so surprising that we don't have Catholic militias constantly murdering random people as retribution for this American war on Catholicism.

Jokes aside, it's so annoying, in light of how many non-Muslims America wrongs, when Muslims frame the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as anti-Islamic wars and claim victimhood status for all Muslims. The only problem they have with the wars is that it happens to harm Muslims--damn all the poor, dead Christians, Buddhists, atheists, and other non-Muslims affected by America.

Joe Bradley said...

Ife ka Terry,

Don't be too hard on the British subjects for not intervening. They were neutered a long time ago by the gun grabbers and their infernal gun control, just like the liberals are trying to do to the U.S. Citizens right now.

The only thing stupider than bringing a knife to a gun fight is bringing bare knuckles to a knife and cleaver fight.

Radical Moderate said...

Guys and gals check this out

Muslim organisations have failed to teach young people that there is a democratic route to express discontent, according to the Muslim Public Affairs Committee.

Alan Ireland said...

And how many pictures have we seen of Western soldiers grinning and gesticulating beside the bodies of dead Afghans and Iraqis? Oh, sorry, I forgot. They're just a few "bad apples" - good, keen boys who got a bit carried away. No reflection on Western "values".

David Wood said...

Yeah, that's just like hacking someone to death with a meat cleaver on the streets of London.

Anonymous said...

Notice the Muslim said " OUR lands..." yet he is living in England.

So England is NOT his land? So why are Muslims leaving THEIR LANDS.


Hazakim1 said...


Old irrelevant, decrepit, self-hating Western white liberals like you have a mental disease.

kiwimac said...

Alan Ireland- What an amazingly ignorant remark? Those soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq are there fighting for OUR freedoms. Not too dissimilar to the Soldiers who fought for our freedoms in WW1 AND WW2. Go and read about Islam and educate yourself on what motivated these guys to behead someone in the middle of the day in downtown London- because it is coming to our shores as well!

Angel said...

Alan, you said the magic word "soldiers" not innocent citizens not involved in the war. There IS a difference.

Unknown said...

If the law on letting them into are country was stricter rather than housing them giving them goverment payments they are harsh with the youth of britain its allways a race subject put them in a british army jail or in a room with the edl.

TAREK said...

To Alan Ireland
The difference you are failing to make is that quotations from the quran are brought forward to justify the acts not the actions of soldiers in Afghanistan and other places. Does that make sense to you?

Luke said...

Thank you for documenting the growing threat of Islamic terror attacks; what you think the Christian response is to it?

In the Bible, New Testament, Paul's letter to the Ephesians, he says, "Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."

Not merely confronting Islam violence in the physical but the spiritual. By proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Word of God to them, we are able to access a power that is mighty for "pulling down strongholds".

May our eyes be open to the reality of sin and it's consequences. People who think that killing us would be doing God a favor.


Babs said...

It was only a matter of time. Not for nothing has London been nicknamed "Londonistan" thanks to the persistent and wilful blindness of successive UK governments.

I am a proud UK citizen who is ashamed of my government's ignorance of the agenda of Islam and leaves people like me to pay the price for that ignorance.

Babs said...

I am shocked but not surprised. I am a proud citizen of the UK who is sick to the back teeth of successive governments' wilful blindness to/ignorance of the agenda of Islam here.

John said...

One of the murderers was a convert to Islam; conclusive proof if every there was that Islamic terrorism is not rooted in the Muslim culture, or or UK Muslim cultural links with Muslims killed in Muslim lands etc. its err... rooted in Islam.
Crikey! I thought I was making a profound point, but looking are what I've written it's merely a statement of the obvious.
However I must be wrong, missing something somewhere because our dear Prime Minister says it's nothing to do with Islam.
Any Muslims out there please can you help and explain where I've gone wrong?

goethechosemercy said...

Wonderful video. Muslims had the concept of total war understood long before we in the West ever consciously waged it.
The next world war is indeed on the horizon.

goethechosemercy said...

Notice the Muslim said " OUR lands..." yet he is living in England.

England is indeed Muslim land.
The Christian church there is in active decline, doctrine has become heterodox, and the Christian clergy are non-confrontational.
Sharia courts operate.
English common law is FORGOTTEN.
The monarchy and nobility have been castrated-- so there will be no armies raised to defend the indigenous people.
Yes, England, all of the British archipelago is MUSLIM because the British allowed themselves to be conquered.

goethechosemercy said...

If you desire to have a nation, you will have to take it back, Babs.
Resistance is not enough.
A reconquista is in order. In Spain, it took 700 years.
Are you willing to struggle from generation to generation for such a period?

Radical Moderate said...

Here's a shocker

"According to BBC sources, Mr Adebolajo, a Briton of Nigerian descent, comes from a devout Christian family but took up Islam after leaving college in 2001."

Unknown said...

Check this link.

Joe Bradley said...

Alan Ireland,

How many pictures have we seen of children of the '60s with their liberal "Live and let live" mentality that has become so irrelevant in these times, primarily due to the fact that this philosophy is not universal among all people. If you would put your "Jerry Garcia" blunt down for a short moment and focus on your Qur'an you would see that the Islamic philosophy of "Live and let die." has been reflected in the actions of these, literal, hatchet men, in accordance with "The Book Of Hate". This was NOT a political statement as you intimate, it is a religious commandment of Islam.

I'm really surprised that you have not heeded the warning of your mentor Mao Tse Tung (an individual fashionable among Hippies) when, on November 6, 1938 he stated, "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun."* He was merely restating a philosophy that the "Book Of Hate" has espoused for the past 1400 years.

Perhaps it is time for you to shed your hatred of all things Western, which was fashionable in the '60s, for a more relevant and realistic view of world events.

*Superior force and violence


The Qur'an Explained [Click Here]

Nicky said...

My only consolation is that YHWH is still in control. Let us pray and not lose heart. Yes, Luke, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is mighty to pull down these strongholds.

Estudantes Mocambicanos na Argelia said...

Did you guys heard what David Cameron said!? He was like there is nothing in Islam that justify what this guy. Did! Seriously!? What abouy 5:33, why are this guys defending Islam all the time, if they are scared to say this they may as well shut up, instead of coming here and lie to us, I don't understand how can a grownup like that can stand on the podium and lie to the whole world! Islam is yes the problem! Good job Brother David keep doing the good job

Unknown said...

Ife ka Terry...would u go near an angry Muslim with bloody hands carrying a meat cleaver? I think not.
I'm from the north of England and I can say we are awake but like the Obama administration our government is in denile of what islam is truly about. I go to university in a place called Middlesbrough and so farI'm aware of four mosques within a 2 mile radius of the university. That's why I'm so thankful for David Wood and the crew actually telling the truth about islam so if my Muslim colleagues start criticising me for being a Christian. I can quickly silence them.

Sorry for my grammar I did this on my phone and some keys arnt working in this text box.

Thanks again David.

Seam_on_Us said...

This smacks of a conspiracy imo. A SOLDIER killed in CLOSE proximity to a BARRACKS and help (of any sort) arrives 20 MINUTES AFTER?!

Notwhithstanding, it shames the memory of Lee Rigby that David Cameron calls his murder, "...a betrayal of Islam." I think it's high time these politicians confess their paid involvement in the fostering of the criminal ideology that is killing their soldiers because even a monkey could understand the link between Islam and the actions of its adherents.

BTW, I turned 25 yesterday (May 22), and the fact that Lee was 25 brings this tragedy closer to heart. It really sucks.

Craig said...

Typical Muslim:" Lie lie Lie that's a Lie islam doesn't teach that here watch this video that makes Islam look peaceful."dont read the quran it's miss leading. Lol my Muslim friend that is going to school to learn Islam and "just went threw" bukhari says Muhammad never ordered the burning of those who did not go to prayer. When I told him I have a picture of the Hadith and I can send it to him he just keep telling me that it wasn't in there. Lol come on Muslims the truth will set you free even the truth about Islam.

akairey said...

Now they're linking the idiot to the hate preaching imam:

who clearly states that Islam is NOT a religion of peace:

Anonymous said...

It appears my instincts were right regarding Anjam Choudary's connection to the Woolwich jihadist.

Click Here

Baron Eddie said...

This blood thirsty criminal forgot to say
that they killed/killing and terrorized/terrorizing in lands
does not belong to them like in Armenia/Iraq/Egypt/Sudan and the
list goes on and on ...

I just pray for the innocent people that getting killed and the
blood of those innocent peoples are on the hands of British Prime
Minister and every one how support him ...

Yes, Mr. Prime Minister of England
Islam justify this murder

Alcaff said...

Unknown said...

Deport the poisonous rotten imbeciles while you are still the majority, or get stainless steel collars for your women and children.

goethechosemercy said...

"This is the sort of stuff that irritates me.

We will be safe when the moderate Muslim says:
This sort of thing scares me to death.

What possible strategic advantage did muslims gain from this?

Already talking about conquest and how it will be done.
It's refreshing.

if these guys really think they are fighting a jihad they need to ask themselves, if jihad is to raise the banner la ilaha ilAllah then have the actually done that?

In their estimation and in that of many others, they have.

Has islam gained from their attacks?"

Your religion and community feed on fear, not faith.
Of course it has gained.
You are of Satan.
Dance your little dance!

Unknown said...

You say that verse 5:32 only applies to jews, this is where you are wrong, because if this is the case, then God also taught monotheism to the jews, should we then become polytheists? Moreover, the qur'an gives the condition for fighting in surah 4:75-And what is [the matter] with you that you fight not in the cause of Allah and [for] the oppressed among men, women, and children who say, "Our Lord, take us out of this city of oppressive people and appoint for us from Yourself a protector and appoint for us from Yourself a helper?"
So muslims are not allowed to fight unless it is to help the oppressed against the oppressors.
Moreover, if u go to surah 22:39-40 it says: Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory. (40). [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, "Our Lord is Allah." And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned. And Allah will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might.

From this we can clearly see that without muslims fighting, there would be no synagogues, monasteries/churches or mosques, so this clearly goes against everything you said. Do not misrepresent Islam.

Hazakim1 said...

Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Wahhāb was RIGHT! Muhammad was a Champion of minority rights. If it weren't for muslims fighting, there would be no churches, synagogues, or ice cream shops for that matter. Muhammad also invented ice cream, btw.

Anonymous said...

@Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Wahhāb

"From this we can clearly see that without muslims fighting, there would be no synagogues, monasteries/churches or mosques, so this clearly goes against everything you said. Do not misrepresent Islam."

Interesting, perhaps you could explain why no synagogue, monastery or church has ever been built in Saudi Arabia? The very ground you claim your prophet supposedly 'fought' to establish such diverse institutions? The Champion of minority rights that he was....

Elaborate please?

Anonymous said...

" Muhammad also invented ice cream, btw."

We have Halal lipsticks here in UK, but I've yet to see any halal Ice cream.

Alan Ireland said...

If kiwimac thinks the soldiers in Afghanistan are fighting for our freedoms, he has been brainwashed. In reality, they are fighting to help the American empire to achieve its geopolitical objectives.

Alan Ireland said...

goethechosemercy wants a "reconquista" of Britain, to rid it of Muslims. Yes, let's go the whole hog, and have an Inquisition, too.

Joe Bradley said...

Gee Alan, an Inquisition, what great ideas you have! Another Crusade would also be a nice touch since equivalent conditions exist today in Europe that spawned the last crusades. The only difference is that Europe now supports the terrorists, under the guise of political correctness, through the welfare state. YOU could lead the charge! What a dashing figure you would make, mounted on a gleaming white stallion, sword raised, "Jerry Garcia" Blunt clenched tightly in your teeth. Sort of a cross between General George Patton and T.E. Lawrence (of Arabia).

A Star Is Born!

Joe Bradley said...

@Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Wahhāb

Perhaps you can explain, through the prism of your misconceptions about Islam, why the Muslim world is not rallying against Boko Haram in Nigeria as they freely burn down churches and commit genocide against Christians. This fact seems to contradict your statements.

kiwimac said...

Alan Ireland- Not only our freedoms but the freedoms of the general population in Afghanistan. Have you heard of the Taleban or Al Qaeda or the horrific oppression women have to live in every day? If the Western troops were not there now,the Taleban would take over again and the beheadings, torture's, child abuses,Murders,rapes and Sharia law would be much,much worse. I salute the Western troops and Kiwi troops who are serving over there.

Joe Bradley said...

Well said kiwimac!

I think that attempts to draw a moral equivalency between the actions and motives of of the West and the Taliban/Al Qaeda is as obscene as it is imbecilic.

Deleting said...

@ Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Wahhāb

and the Woolwich killer was a muslim citing Surah 9.
I don't see any oppressed people there except the disbelievers.

really. You guys need to go crawl back under your rocks.

Alan Ireland said...

The US is happy to support extremists, including al-Qaeda, when their respective interests coincide. It supported extremist elements in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and has supported them more recently in Libya and Syria. As Tony Cartalucci has pointed out, such extremist elements are, to the US, both useful mercenary forces and "a perpetual casus belli". If people like kiwimac and Joe Bradley think all these wars are to promote freedom and democracy, they are naive. One of their aims is to secure a number of crucial geographic areas for the US empire, as it seeks "full-spectrum dominance". Another is to protect the status of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency. (Both Saddam and Gadaffi had planned to stop dealing in dollars, which was one of the real reasons they had to go.) Yet another aim is to create a climate of fear at home, so that people will willingly, even eagerly, surrender their civil liberties - as they did in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Sorry, folks, but the "War on Terror" is a fraud. You've all been conned.

Dk said...

Alan you are taking notes from the conservative note book obviously. Many of us anti-Islamists have long pointed out both Bush and Obama were highly selective in who they "liberated from terror". Why didn't Obama liberate Iran or Egypt or Tunisua? The list goes on and on. Why did Obama violate his congress and invade Libya with the aid and training of Al Queda? and now Syria? Clearly America is no angel. Nor do we as anti-Islamists represent it that way. Maybe a few patriotic neo-conservatives have that feeling, but that's not the case.

So there is no question that the "War on Terror" is nonsense. But the idea behind it is completely legit. There is a clash of civilizations and there should be a war on Islamic countries who oppress human rights. Either human morality is universal or we will let inferior regressive, backward cultures continue to suppress their people in the name of "choosing their own religion and democracy", which is a highly dubious claim in itself, as someone who is born into a society and resists or is a victim of that process is not free.

As for the false analogy at the beginning of American and British soldiers participating in vile actions, of course that kind of behavior is condemned in the West, because it is PUNISHED.

What is the punishment for killing critics of Mohammed in Islam? Oh that's right, there is no punishment, because it's part of Islam to kill those who criticize the prophet. And that list is endless. So first of all start actually learning what Islam is before commenting with clueless dribble.

Joe Bradley said...

Alan, You state:

"If people like kiwimac and Joe Bradley think all these wars are to promote freedom and democracy, they are naive."

Fortunately you use the exit strategy of prefacing your statement with the escape word "If". You should take this opportunity to find a back door because I never stated or implied that "these wars are to promote freedom and democracy".

As Derek Adams pointed out, the odious stench of secular politics has entered into a religious war.

One question that looms, oftentimes unasked, is why Christians are being slaughtered and their churches burned in Muslim lands while the West sits back and does nothing?

The West seems perfectly fine with involving themselves in Islamic affairs, why don't they rise up and defend the Christians against Islam?

No Alan, your attempt to intimate that I am oversimplifying this issue by inferring that mine is a "freedom and democracy" issue just does not pass the "Red Herring Smell Test".

Better luck next time.

Joe Bradley said...

"Kerry pushes Nigeria to protect human rights during Africa trip"

On behalf of his boss, Caliph Obama, Herman Munster Kerry tells Nigeria to go easy on Boko Haram yet nothing is said about the genocide that Boko Haram is committing against Christians.

Clearly, as with intolerant Islam, this Administration is a one-way street caring only about the treatment of and justice for terrorists and thinking nothing about their victims.

Alan Ireland said...

"There is a clash of civilizations and there should be a war on Islamic countries who oppress human rights." - Derek Adams

Derek clearly hasn't noticed that the US has declared the whole world a battlefield - a battlefield in which one can be spied on without warrant, arrested without charge, detained indefinitely without trial, rendered to a secret prison for torture, or simply killed if one happens to find oneself on the President's extermination list (or happens to be too close to a targeted individual).

Where is the respect for human rights in all this? And where is the justice in a system that punishes only a handful of foot soldiers for their crimes against humanity, and ignores the responsibility of those higher up the chain of command? I have just finished reading Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, by Seymour Hersh, who shows that senior US officers and officials were well aware of the abuses at Abu Ghraib and tacitly condoned many of them. It's also worth remembering that, after World War II, we hanged German and Japanese generals and politicians for the crimes of their subordinates, after loftily dismissing their claims of ignorance or inability to exercise effective control. (Note, in particular, the case of General Tomoyuki Yamashita, who really didn't have control of the Japanese troops in Manila during the closing days of WWII.)

Finally, I am a former writer for The Muslim World Book Review - an academic publication of The Islamic Foundation in Leicester, England. Although I wouldn't claim to be an authority on Islam, I'm far from "clueless" on the subject.

Alcaff said...

This is refreshingly honest tell it like it is article.

Dk said...


Clearly you tried to compare Western Secular Law with Islam and you got handed. So your familiarity with the topic is under suspicion.

Most of your criticisms of the United States are valid, but to try to equate that with Islam is why most of us objected.

The implication you made is the terrorist was a bad apple and not following Islamic values, just like we shouldn't judge western values by this bad apple.

I'll ask again. In Islamic jurisprudence what is the punishment for Muslims who happen to kill critics of Mohammed?

In Islamic jurisprudence what is the punishment for a Muslim(s) who beheads an infidel solider in the context of defensive jihad?

Apples and oranges, my friend.

What you should be doing is supporting this website, since there is nothing in this website that says the West is above criticism, yet the same cannot be said about Islam. In fact the West is so overly self-critical that it has affected the minds of millions transforming themselves into self-hating Westerners.

Can the same be said for Muslims?

Imagine if Muslims with the same fervor you have against the West decided to concentrate on criticizing the Taliban, Pakistan, Muslim Brotherhood, or even treacherous domestic organizations like CAIR, MSA etc.

In other words, would the world be a better place if Muslims despised Sharia Law as much as they despised the West?

What is with the imbalance on the Islamist side. Here it is in a nutshell: Islam is above criticism, Sharia Law is perfect. The real criticism of Muslim countries by Muslims is that they don't FULLY exhaust Sharia Law! Hah!

In addition Alan, since many of your criticisms of the West are valid, perhaps you can show us which of our criticisms of Islam are valid seeing that you are familiar with the subject or at least claim to be.

Joe Bradley said...

Alan, you state:

"And where is the justice in a system that punishes only a handful of foot soldiers for their crimes against humanity, and ignores the responsibility of those higher up the chain of command?" Then you go on to discuss MILITARY subordinates taking the rap for the decisions and actions of higher-ups in the chain of command, the operative word here being MILITARY.

While I agree with the acceptance of responsibility, you have irrevocably poisoned your position.

What you fail to reveal in your abortive attempt at deception is the fact that the cowardly Islamic terrorists target innocent civilians (soft targets) and, according to Mr. Bloodyhands, they have no intention of ceasing this practice. Now that you have revealed what was obvious, that you are a Muslim, you will justify these acts against civilians by asserting that there are no innocent civilians in Islamic Jihad - this is predictable. While you don't seem like the kind of guy who would condone the My Lai Massacre, you would seem to be able to justify it if William Calley and his men were Muslims instead of U.S. Troops.

Your continuing attempts to construct a moral superiority for Islamic Jihad over the actions of the West fail because you are building on the basically flawed and rotten foundation of Islam with just a hint of Taqiyya thrown in for good measure. While Imams justify violent Jihad through dogmatic Quranic verse, Muslims such as yourself, attempt to justify it through pseudo-academia.

hugh watt said...


Alan Ireland said:

"Derek clearly hasn't noticed that the US has declared the whole world a battlefield - a battlefield in which one can be spied on without warrant, arrested without charge, detained indefinitely without trial, rendered to a secret prison for torture, or simply killed if one happens to find oneself on the President's extermination list (or happens to be too close to a targeted individual)."

Sounds like the Mabahith in Saudi Arabia.

Wikipedia describes them so:

"According to Human Rights Watch, the Mabahith "monitors suspected political opponents and others, targets individuals for arrest, and interrogates detainees. Mabahith agents operate with impunity and have been responsible for a wide range of human rights abuses, including arbitrary arrest, incommunicado detention, and torture."

"Mabahith runs the `Ulaysha Prison in Riyadh, where it holds prisoners under arbitrary detention. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has objected to arbitrary detention at Mabahith's prison. As of June 2011, arbitrarily detained prisoners apparently include five founding members of a would-be political party, the Umma Islamic Party, and Khaled al-Johani, who publicly protested in Riyadh on the 11 March "Day of Rage" during the 2011 Saudi Arabian protests."

How about the SAVAK in Iran and the imprisonment and torture of political opponents and converts to Christianity? Would you protest against the bad treatment of such people in Iran's notorious Evin prison?

Indeed, "Where is the respect for human rights in all this?"

Islamic justice demands the death penalty for apostates. This does not make what happened at Abu Ghraib right but if you're going to condemn the one will you condemn the other?

hugh watt said...


It must also be pointed out what Muhammad was commanded to do by Allah.

"The Messenger of Allah said: "I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer and pay zakat."

The whole world has been declared a battlefield for Muslims until all are in submission to Allah.

Do you object?

Alan Ireland said...

I have no objection to Western secular law. It's a fine achievement - the fruit of centuries of struggle that began with Magna Carta. Indeed, as Paul Craig Roberts has pointed out, the subordination of government to the rule of law is humanity's greatest achievement. No, my objection, like that of many commentators today, is to the disregard for the rule of law, including the US Constitution and the various international conventions (which are part of US law), by successive administrations in recent times.

As I have said, I have some knowledge of Islam, and of Islamic law, but no authority to speak on the subject. My personal opinion is that there is much in Islamic jurisprudence that is not, or should not be, applicable today. Many strictures date from a time when the ummah constituted the state, and when apostasy was tantamount to treason. Insistence on their enforcement today is anachronistic - but understandable in view of the pressure that many Muslims feel themselves under. (In response to such pressure, the natural response of all human beings is to hunker down and become more intransigent and dogmatic.)

There are several references, in the replies to my last post, to "terrorists". I think we have to remember that all parties have been guilty of terrorism. In the West, the secret services, acting under the auspices of Operation Gladio, staged a series of "false-flag" attacks, in an attempt to discredit the Left, during the Cold War era. I suspect they are doing the same thing today, in an attempt to discredit Islam, and that someday 9/11 and 7/7 will be revealed as examples of their handiwork. (If you have any doubts on this score, I suggest you watch Barbara Honegger's presentation on 9/11 in Seattle Town Hall.)

In Muslim society, there are also many terrorists diligently at work. Most of them seem to be Salafists, who have this demented idea that they are doing God's work by blowing up busloads of Shia pilgrims in Iraq and Pakistan. I'm not sure how many genuine Muslim terrorists there are in the West, as many of those described as terrorists are naive and/or unbalanced people who are recruited by the secret services in sting operations - or in training exercises that mysteriously "go live" (as on 7/7). The whole situation is incredibly complex, with fantasy and reality so tightly interwoven that it is almost impossible to tease them apart.

Foolster41 said...

@Alan Ireland:
"As I have said, I have some knowledge of Islam, and of Islamic law, but no authority to speak on the subject."
You either do or you don't. I suspect you don't really from your post. I've read the Quoran and I've heard it quted by Muslims, and I've read books on Islam. I *can* say with authority that Islam is violent.

"My personal opinion is that there is much in Islamic jurisprudence that is not, or should not be, applicable today."
That's not just "opinion" that's common sense!

"There are several references, in the replies to my last post, to "terrorists". I think we have to remember that all parties have been guilty of terrorism."
WHY is this RELEVENT? SO WHAT? Why does this need to be said when someone speaks of Muslims commiting terorrism? Even if it's true (which seems at least slightly dubious to me since 1 group would refute), it's like at a murderer's trial saying "we must remember we are all have parking or speeding tickets at one time.". This argument is called Tu Quo Que, a logical fallacy.

"I suspect they are doing the same thing today, in an attempt to discredit Islam, and that someday 9/11 and 7/7 will be revealed as examples of their handiwork."
Oh good, a conspirecy theorist. If you knew anything about Islam you'd know it calls for the murder and subjegation of non-beleivers, so then why would it be hard to believe they actually did theses things? i've reviewed arguments about 9/11 being an inside job, and I didn't find it very convincing.

" but understandable in view of the pressure that many Muslims feel themselves under. "
This is called the Ouroboros argument. Muslims violently supress infidels, and so there is a backlash in the enlightened west, so under the preasure (i.e the pesky insistence by the west that Muslims stop murdering infidels) they "hunker down" and supress infidels, and so there is backlash....

Joe Bradley said...

Alan, your Islamic bias is showing again. While you are quick to expose the "warts" of Western civilization by inferring the evil intent of some of their clandestine operations, with equal dispatch you dismiss and excuse Islamic terrorists as either "demented" as in the case of the Salafists or "naive and/or unbalanced" who are merely puppets of evil Western governments.

What you are concealing, in the truest spirit of Taqiyya, is that these are NOT a random assemblage of demented, naive and unbalanced souls, they are Orthodox Muslims following their puppet-master Muhammad, nothing more and nothing less. Your conspiracy theories are clearly engineered to displace culpability for their actions and, while prefacing your comments with a disclaimer that you lack authority to speak on the subject of Islam, you seem to do rather well when excusing and ascribing motivation for Islamic terrorist acts and displacing motivation far away from Islam.

It appears as if your justification has devolved into a discussion of the true puppet-masters of Muslims.

Alan Ireland said...

People here seem to have forgotten that this discussion began - for me, at any rate - with the statement "there should be a war on Islamic countries who oppress human rights".

This implies the West is not an oppressor of human rights, or that its record, in the defense of human rights, has a superiority that gives it a moral obligation to go to war against these "Islamic countries". It is therefore entirely relevant to draw attention to (a) the West's violations of the international law it established, with much sermonizing, after World War II, (b) the fact, now acknowledged by all, that criminal elements in the Western security services have staged terrorist attacks on their own citizens, and (c) the crimes against humanity, and gross violations of human rights, committed by Western forces in their invasions and occupations of Muslim lands between the 19th and 21st centuries.

In the case of (c), we are not talking about a few hundred, or even a few thousand, people being killed. We are talking about millions of people being killed in some of the most horrible ways imaginable - by DU, by white phosphorus, and by sanctions that cut off essential medical supplies.

There is a word to describe the action of a habitual criminal who points an accusing finger at the transgressions of others. It's "hypocrisy".

There is only one other point I would like to make: The FBI's entrapment of young Muslims in sting operations, so that they can be arrested as "terrorists", is well documented in The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI's Manufactured War on Terrorism, by Trevor Aaronson. Given all the skullduggery that has gone on, and the yearning for a "new Pearl Harbor" expressed by Project for the New American Century, why is the suggestion that 9/11 might be an inside job so far-fetched?

Dk said...

I don't think Alan is impervious to reason or argument on Islam as far as I can tell. I believe Alan is aware of his own bias but is able to ignore that for the sake of examination. What he says about the West I have little disagreement with.

Re: 9/11

Watch this video:

It's clear the inside view is not as overwhelming as I once thought. I've always had seen some loopholes, but I think overall the mainstream explanation fits better, and the inside explanation I believe won't be long before this is done and dusted.

Alan, I also recommend checking out sites like and just to keep up to date with the Islamic atrocities, and by no means are they on the fringe, lunatics or merely Salafis. The problem of Islam is quite universal, Spencer is a machine on this topic, I believe an honest investigation of his research will help you.

Even some of his best critics can't actually deal with the substance of his arguments, although they do seem to make interesting criticisms of Spencer, the research is just irrefutable.

Foolster41 said...

Unless I'm misunderstanding what Alan's saying, he seems to be making the assumption one cannot be opposed to both Islamic terrorism AND past misdeeds by western nations. I would agree that the US should not be the world's police, and that the wars in the middle east have been a waste, of money and lives. There is no hypocrisy there in this position. Indeed, this is the positions of many people opposed to Islam such as Robert Spencer.

Alan seems to be also making the assumption that Islamic terror is grown out of reaction to the west (which is false, since as I already pointed out Islam teaches in the Quoran the subjegation and slaughter of non-belewivers (Q 9:29, and see surrounding verses), and that our problems with Islam started on September 11, 2001. This ignores a long history of the wars against the Barbary pirates near the country's birth, and many conquests in europe during and after the time of Mohammad.

As for 9/11 and 7/7, if Islam teaches subjegation and slaughter, and Muslims have claimed responsibility, then the simplest conclusion that it was Muslims who did this.

The insistance that Muslims are being tricked into preforming te4rrorism is also a pretty odd one, and I'd have to ask Alan: if someone gave you a "bomb" and told you to blow someone up, what would it take for you to do it? Do you seriously think the FBI is putting that much pressure (to be fair, maybe it's in that book you mentioned), or is the FBI merely giving them opportunities to do what they want to do?

Joe Bradley said...

Clearly Alan has chosen his preference for terrorism and he's sticking to his guns (or meat cleavers). While he is complaining about the past transgressions of the West (both actual and perceived) genocide against Christians is currently being perpetrated by Muslims on a daily basis and the Sunnis and the Shias are still killing each other. All of this is instructed by the "Book Of Hate".

Personally, I would rather be able to eat my BLT and walk my dog without packing a .44 magnum - BUT . . . . .

The Qur'an Explained [Click Here]

NFBalmain said...
This comment has been removed by the author.