Category Archives: Beyond Stupid

Muslim women ‘radicalised’ in UK

Posted on by

And apparently this happens at Universities. This calls for a repost of Prof. Martins rather clear condemnation of them at the end of this BBC article on the radicalization of women in the U.K. h/t snaphanen

On Monday a female suicide bomber killed 54 people in north-east Baghdad.

Dr Nazreen Nawaz, spokeswoman for Hizb ut-Tahrir
We don’t advocate that British Muslims go over and fight
Dr Nazreen Nawaz, Hizb ut-Tahrir

The attack may have happened on another continent, but there are increasing concerns that violent extremism among women may now also be increasing in the UK.

It is believed that the process of radicalisation often takes place at universities.

One Islamist group linked with this practice is Hizb ut-Tahrir.

While not itself connected to any terrorist acts, Hizb ut-Tahrir has courted controversy and politicians have seized on some of its more inflammatory views.

The Conservative Party has said it would ban the organisation altogether.

Nazreen Nawaz is a spokeswoman for the group. She became a member while studying medicine at King’s College London.

Today, sitting at her dining table in south London, she teaches her four-year-old daughter how to spell and explains her decision to join.

“The philosophy of Hizb ut-Tahrir offered me a view of Islam that could solve many of the problems in the Muslim world,” Dr Nawaz says. Continue Reading →

Diana West: ‘Spoofing the death of Wilders’

Posted on by

From Diana West

Behold the smug mug of Willem Stegeman, who has made a Dutch state-subsidized film “spoofing” an assassination attempt on Geert Wilders.

“Spoofing.”

Of course, the grotesquerie of Stegeman and his “spoof” are not the main story in a backward — no, twisted — report from Radio Netherlands Worldwide (RNW) that leads with the response (“furious”) of Party for Freedom (PVV) members over “Radio FunX’s” assassination-attempt entertainment. Almost as breath-taking is the nasty photo of Wilders with which RNW, supposedly a news organization, illustrates the story.

Currently embroiled in open-ended Kafka-esque legal jeopardy, Wilders has lived under permanent threat of death since that November day in 2004 when Theo van Gogh was assassinated in broad daylight on an Amsterdam street, his head nearly cut off and an Islamic manifesto pinned with a knife into his chest threatening Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali with a similar fate.

What better subject for state-subsidized parody?

From the story, which includes a trailer of the stomach-turning video:

Radio FunX director Willem Stegeman said that the full satirical video will be released next week. “It is an unmistakeable parody. I cannot give away the plot, but I can reveal that it will be a total anti-climax. We are exploring how far we can go, and some may find it in bad taste. But the same can be said of statements by some people in the political spectrum.

Get it, get it? “Spoofing” Wilders’ death is “bad taste” just as “some people” (Wilders) discussing the Islamic institutions of jihad and dhimmitude in this crucial period of Western Islamization is in “bad taste.” Watch out, mijnheer Stegeman. Your IQ is showing.

We are putting an ironic slant on the whole thing, striking a blow against all the ponderousness surrounding Mr Wilders.”

I think by “ponderousness” he means the two-ton bullet-proof vest Geert must wear anytime he appears in public, and the security detail his life now depends on.

Mr Stegeman emphasised that the film makers are not after demonising the nationalist right-wing anti-Islam MP. “But the film’s author is definitely drawing a connection with Pim Fortuyn,” the popular outcast politician who was assassinated in 2002 following a plea for stricter immigration rules.

Not demonizing Wilders, oh no — but “definitely” connecting Wilders to the demonized Fortuyn?

Words fail.

Mark Steyn: Bananas over Bush

Posted on by

I’m sorry but as a long time opponent of government grants to the arts in Canada this story had me imitating that awful Norwegian painting for several seconds. Come to think of it, I wonder if Edvard did this painting cause he was turned down for a fat government grant.

From The National Review:

Thursday, February 04, 2010

Bananas Over Bush   [Mark Steyn]

News from the art world:

An Argentine artist called Caesar Saëz applied to the Canada Arts Council and le Conseil des Arts et des Lettres du Québec and was given, between the two bodies, a grant of $130,000 to create a 300-metre long flying banana that would float over Texas protesting the policies of George W. Bush.

Why Canadian taxpayers are subsidizing Argentine artists to violate U.S. airspace is a topic best left to the next Summit of the Americas.

The good news is that Señor Saëz cashed the check and skipped the country. So the banana’s whereabouts are unknown. French-speaking readers will enjoy this radio interview: “Une subvention de 128 000$ pour faire voler une banane géante au-dessus du Texas.” I particularly like the arts bureaucrats’ insistence that there’s nothing to see here (literally): The granting of public monies for the purpose of producing a particular work of art imposes no obligation upon the artist to produce the work of art. Although the artist was quite specific about the construction of the giant anti-Bush banana (a bamboo structure covered in Tyvek), he never specifically promised to make it. Therefore, its non-existence is not an issue: In taking the dough and scramming town, the artist is in full compliance with the terms of his grant.

And, as I’m sure most contemporary art scholars would assure us, the non-existing work of art becomes paradoxically a work of “performance art” (or non-performance non-art) in its own right. Failing that, he could always claim it floated off over New Mexico with a five-year-old boy inside it.

Answering Jermaine Jackson

Posted on by

A Vladtepesblog source tells us that Jermaine lives rather large in L.A. Drives around in a rather splendid Bentley with Dubai plates on it. How odd. I guess his brother the Jahovah’s Witness gave it to him for whoring out to Islam.

Of college girls and Keffiyehs

Posted on by

Once again I noticed riding the buss, that so many young people wear a keffiyeh as a fashion statement or just as likely as a political one. OK that’s fine. I am all for freedom of speech and especially for political speech, the kind that really matters. However I do think it is a good idea for people to actually be clear on what their speech and symbols really mean. today, I saw an attractive young woman wearing as a scarf, the official headdress of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Does she have no clue that the Saudis in all probability would not let her wear it at all within the KSA? That she likely would not be able to travel un-escorted on the street or on a public bus with men on it? That in fact she is wearing the very symbol of one of the most oppressive regimes for women’s rights in the world now or ever? You would  have to be sacrificed to a volcano to get much worse treatment as a woman than you do in Saudi Arabia.

And the rest of the children who have been led to believe that supporting Hamas and wearing the keffiyeh is a cool counter-culture, anti-corporate, death to capitalism, anti racism sort of statement I profoundly hope you will read the Hamas charter as well as Hizbolah’s. They are online and quite clear. These organizations are literally genocidal. Hamas and Hizbolah are the most racist large scale governmental organizations since Hitler’s National Socialists.

So by all means, preach death to Jews and demand that Canada adopt sharia law and take away women’s rights to choice about pretty much anything, and demand a caliphate here in Canada and for the world if you feel that is what you want to see. But for the love of (insert gods here) do not advertise your semi-literate, under-informed, fashion-based crapioca on the rest of us when in fact you have no actual clue what the symbols you wear mean, and the groups you support actually fight for with your support and probably your money. If you are a genocidal anti-semite   and want a seventh century religious conservative rule with zero tolerance for all alternative lifestyles or points of view carry on. I will fight you in the streets and on the beeches as needs be. But if you don’t want these things, go home and change.

Eeyore for Vlad with a nod to Fred at GAR

Canadian universities and the state of science:

Posted on by

From the National Post Online. Below I paste the relevant article. But do take the two minutes to watch what one Prof. emeritus has to say abou how we as a public should treat universities today before or after this article.

From Canada’s National Post FP Comment:

Lawrence Solomon: Keeping Canadian students in the dark on climate

Posted: January 30, 2010, 12:30 AM by NP Editor

As far as I know, no Canadian university has ever had a formal debate on climate change

By Lawrence Solomon

‘Climate change is natural. Spending time and money on the issue is largely a waste,” posited Steve Paikin, host of TV Ontario’s The Agenda, to his live studio audience at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies Thursday evening. Paikin’s statement to the students came in the middle of an hour-long debate on climate change in which I participated, along with four other panelists.
The statement, the first of three that Paikin posed to the university students, came from an earlier Leger public opinion poll, but unlike the results that Leger found (16% agreed with the statement), not a single student among the 80 in attendance raised a hand in agreement. Continue Reading →

The Wilders trial: Shrugging off Spinoza

Posted on by

17. januar 2010    Arthur Legger

Any one who still claims that the trial against Geert Wilders MP, leader of the Party for Freedom (9 seats in Parliament and 27 in the polls), which starts on the 20th of January, is not a political process: get a grip. Accused by the Dutch ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ exactly a year ago for insulting Islam, comparing the Koran to Mein Kampf and delivering hate speeches, the coming trial against Wilders suddenly got a Kafkaesque and potentially murderous twist. Finally, seven days before his first day in Court, all fangs were out and faces off.

“It is irrelevant whether Wilder’s witnesses might prove Wilders’ observations to be correct”, the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ stated, “what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal”. Unexpected and breaching court procedures the detailed indictment of 21 pages, which Wilders received on the 4th of December and sums up in verbatim all of his Islam and Koran critique in interviews and Fitna, was amended with new accusations of racism against muslims and Moroccans. On top of this, Paul Vellerman, the public prosecutor of the Amsterdam Court decided that the Wilders trial had to be regarded as “an ordinary trial open for public and with a normal procedure, which doesn’t deserve the Department of Justice’s highly secured bunker. His is a normal case and we’ll treat it as such”.

It’s sad to note that Mohammed Bouyeri, the murderer of Theo van Gogh, and Volkert van der Gaag, the assassin of Pim Fortuyn, were tried in this specially designed bunker, but that Wilders has to rely on his personal bodyguards and full metal jacket to ward of terrorists. No safe room for him, which recently secured Kurt Westergaard and his granddaughter, but for months on end the vulnerability of a sitting duck.

The demonized Fortuyn

To a connoisseur of the classic art of Dutch political murder, revived in 2002 with the assassination of the deliberatedly unprotected and demonized Pim Fortuyn, this twist of fate comes, however, as no surprise. The ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ had to do something. Presented with much aplomb in January, already on the 10th of March it turned out that the case against Wilders had one crucial weak spot: it might not hold in Court. For in a comparable case the Dutch High Court acquitted a Dutchman of his earlier conviction of ‘Group-insult’ of Muslims. He had been sentenced to jail for hanging a poster in front of his window that stated: “Stop the cancerous growth named Islam”. The High Court ruled that “if one insults a religion, one doesn’t automatically insult its believers”. Continue Reading →

Iran’s nuclear program now unstoppable

Posted on by

From STRATFOR.COM

Iran: Nuclear Program Unstoppable – Ahmadinejad
January 14, 2010
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Jan. 14 that Iran’s nuclear program has reached the point where Tehran’s enemies will not be able to stop its progress, IRNA reported. He said Iran’s enemies will surrender because of its nuclear achievements.

Well, I guess the UN’s AEA can expect another shiny new trophy to sit next to the one they got from Pakistan for all the help they got from the world body for their assistance in getting the bomb. I bet the UNAEA is really pissed that North Korea hasnt sent one yet. But I’m sure Iran will send one. They are good sports that way.

Anjem gets 24 hour guard at public expense.

Posted on by

Anjem Chaudery file photo

From The Daily Star.UK H/T Snaphanen.dk

ANJEM CHOUDARY GETS 24 HOUR POLICE GUARD

ABOVE: Anjem Choudary gloated over benefits pot
14th January 2010

By Gary Nicks

BANNED Muslim extremist Anjem Choudary is getting 24-hour police protection – and you are paying for it.

His threat to march in Wootton Bassett whipped up so much fury senior officers have stepped in to defend him from hate mobs.

On Sunday, 200 English Defence League supporters descended on the Wiltshire town which honours Britain’s war dead after rumours of a demo by his Islam4UK organisation.

The radical group was banned by the Home Secretary on Tuesday. And police chiefs are diverting men from essential duties to guarantee Choudary’s safety after far-right nuts made death threats against him. Gloating Choudary, 42, even cranked up the hatred against him by claiming the £25,000 benefits he gets every year, and the £325,000 house he lives in, were provided by “Allah” and not the British taxpayer.

The bill to guard Choudary could cost as much as £100,000 a year. But the trained lawyer said he was proud to milk the system, adding: “I am not doing anything illegal.

“If we were living under the shariah there would be free food, clothing and shelter for all. The money belongs to Allah and if it is given you can take it.

“You don’t lie and you don’t cheat – that is what the prophet said.”

But Matthew Sinclair, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Taxpayers are going to be shocked to hear the police are having to waste time they should be spending fighting terrorism looking after Anjem Choudary.”

And Tory MP Patrick Mercer, chairman of the Commons sub- committee on counter-terrorism, slammed Choudary as a publicity-seeker.

He said: “He’s drawing constant attention to himself and diverting resources from their proper use.”

A police source warned: “Choudary has deliberately made himself a target among far-right groups and his plans to protest at Wootton Bassett stirred up even more anger.

“Senior officers are frightened of having a race war on their hands. If something were to happen to him, we would be blamed.”

Below, please find a recent video of Anjem on UK TV. Have a close look at the top of his head. This is what it looks like when you try and polish a turd.

Code Pink To Muslim Brotherhood: ‘Help Us Cleanse Our Country’

Posted on by

From News Real Blog: By way of TROP

cy Morgan

As Americans keep a wary eye on Muslim radicals in Yemen, little attention is being given to a far more dangerous enemy right in our own backyard. Under the banner of ‘anti-war’ activism, the radical group Code Pink is running banner advertisements on the English language version of the official Web site of a terrorist sympathizing group, the Muslim Brotherhood, one of which invites the Muslim Brotherhood to “join us in cleansing our country.” Continue Reading →

As usual, Muslims will probably not be scanned with new scanners

Posted on by

Here is the typical pattern:

Muslims do some anti social act in non Muslim nation, whether it is terrorism, or wear clothing symbolizing an allegiance not connected to the appropriate institution such as a government office. The agency, whether it is an airport security service or government building, makes some kind of rule it deems fair, in order to deal with the problem without singling out Muslims. For example, they may pass a rule saying that all religious clothing or symbols will be banned, or that all people will have to be subject to bomb sniffing dogs.

Then, Muslim groups will produce one of the following arguments or one like it:

1. Muslims do not have a choice about wearing Muslim garments. Muslim women must wear the burkha Jibab hijab or whatever, and therefore, to ban all religious clothing means discriminating against Muslims. Or, Islam does not tolerate dogs, and any attempt to make a Muslim come into contact with a dog is anti-Islam and discriminatory.

Both arguments are patent lies of course. All religious behaviour is voluntary. Islam is not a race. One can always choose between one’s religious practices and devotions and the other aspects of ones life that may be selected against, by those choices. If you do not like dogs sniffing you, you can always walk to mosque or prey at home. However these arguments work. Typically, Muslims win exemptions from the very rules created to protect us, from them. You can bet that Muslims will win an exemption from being scanned at airports and only the 85 year old Jewish women will have to endure this indignity while some jihadiye in a Burka manages to slip on board with a pound of PETP

Here is just the most recent example. H/T to Islam in Europe with thanks. The bold in the article below is mine.

Eeyore for Vlad

Calls for Full-Body Scanners Re-Ignite Privacy Concerns

FOXNews.com

The calls for airports to expand the use of full-body scanners in the wake of the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight have re-ignited privacy concerns from groups and lawmakers who have long said the scanners produce graphic images that could make their way onto the Internet.

Staff at the Transportation Security Administration Systems Integration Facility, one playing the role of a passenger, demonstrate a full-body scanning machines in Washington Dec. 30. (Reuters Photo)

The calls for airports to expand the use of full-body scanners in the wake of the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight have re-ignited privacy concerns from groups and lawmakers who have long said the scanners produce graphic images that could make their way onto the Internet.

The Transportation Security Administration currently has only 40 of the scanners in operation, but it has purchased another 150 and plans to deploy them next year. The agency plans to buy another 300 next year, and some officials are calling on the agency to move quickly in using the new technology, which allows TSA officials to peer under clothing for any contraband. It is believed that the machines would have detected the PETN explosive sewn into the underwear of the alleged would-be bomber last week.

But privacy groups have renewed their complaints about the machines. The American Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday ticked off its many misgivings with the devices:

— They say the scanners produce “strikingly graphic images” of “virtually naked bodies”;

— They say they reveal sexual organs and “intimate medical details”;

— They say they represent an “assault on personal privacy.”

“While it’s important to react quickly, it’s also important to react wisely and to adopt procedures that will be both truly effective and the least invasive to Americans’ privacy,” Michael German, ACLU’s Washington legislative office counsel said in a statement.

The group wants the devices, if used at all, to be employed only when “absolutely necessary” for certain travelers.

Some officials, though, say the near-catastrophe last Friday should make privacy concerns moot.

“There have been privacy concerns expressed about the use of these whole body imaging devices, but I think those privacy concerns, which are, frankly, mild, have to fall in the face of the ability of these machines to detect material like this, explosive on this individual,” Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., said on Fox News. “Just think about it. Three hundred people could have been killed and untold more on the ground in Michigan if this plane had crashed.”

Former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, in an interview with NPR, complained that the devices aren’t as widely used as they should be because of “aggressive” campaigns against them from the ACLU and other groups.

The TSA currently has a number of restrictions on the machines it has in use. Only six of the 19 airports that use them employ them as the primary method of screening. Even then, the machines are optional, and passengers who don’t wish to go through them can opt for a pat-down.

And the officer who helps the passenger through the machine does not view the image it produces. That image is sent to a remotely located officer in a secure room who does not actually see the passenger, according to the TSA. The technology blurs facial features, and the image is supposed to be automatically deleted. Cameras and cell phones are not allowed in the viewing room.

That might not matter to some religious groups.

Isaac Yeffet, former head of Israel’s El-Al airlines, said Muslims would not stand for any widespread use of the device since it would, to some, represent a dishonor to women and their families.

“Realize that a Muslim will know that his wife was seen naked in this machine,” Yeffet said. “You know what would be the reaction? … Terrible.”

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, a Utah Republican who sponsored legislation that passed the House over summer prohibiting the machines from being used as a primary method of screening, told The Salt Lake Tribune that even after the attempted bombing he stands by the legislation, which is stuck in the Senate.

“I believe there’s technology out there that can identify bomb-type materials without necessarily, overly invading our privacy,” he said.

Myleene Klass warned after brandishing knife to deter intruders

Posted on by

And like Canada, you can bet that she or we, would be treated more harshly by the police for defending ourselves than the intruders would for robing, terrorizing, beating or raping us. The fact is, if we were allowed to have a defencive weapon at home and taught how to use it, the number of intruders would drop dramatically. That and of course, stop importing people for whom a British or Canadian jail is a nicer place than life for them on the streets back where they came from.

Eeyore for Vlad

From The Guardian.

Police tell TV presenter she was acting illegally in waving kitchen knife at youths who were peering in window late at night

Myleene KlassMyleene Klass is said to be ‘aghast’ after receiving a police warning for using a kitchen knife to scare intruders at her Hertfordshire home. Photograph: Richard Saker

The TV presenter and Marks & Spencer model Myleene Klass has been warned by police for waving a knife at teenagers who were peering into a window of her house late at night.

Klass was in the kitchen with her daughter upstairs when she spotted the youths in her garden just after midnight on Friday. She grabbed a knife and banged the windows before they ran away.

Hertfordshire police warned her she should not have used a knife to scare off the youths because carrying an “offensive weapon”, even in her own home, was illegal. Continue Reading →

Bill Whittle does a truly exceptional bit of real journalism. Terrorists set agenda

Posted on by

Remember when reporters actually went out to the field and interviewed people who had things to say that mattered for the preservation of American and indeed, western civilized interests? Well Bill Whittle at PJTV has out done himself here, which is hard to do as he has done so many excellent segments for Pajamas TV like this one. Really, all of you who can have one less Cappuccino a month, please buy a membership to PJTV, not just for your own sakes but for all of us. PJTV is a genuine public service.

PJTV’s Bill Whittle Islamic infiltration from Vlad Tepes on Vimeo.

All rise in court – or would the Muslims like to sit this one out?

Posted on by

From The Telegraph h/t Grace

Faced with seven men in full Muslim dress, a District Judge bravely changed the rules to accommodate the accused, says Gill Hornby.

By Gill Hornby
Published: 8:06PM GMT 08 Jan 2010

It’s up to District Judge Mellanby to decide whether these men are guilty of “threatening abusive or insulting behaviour”, and we, of course, expect that she will do so in a fair and proper manner. But we should keep an eye on the case, to see if she brings in any other radical legal innovations, overturning centuries of common law, in the process.

Fascinating legal developments in Luton this week, where District Judge Carolyn Mellanby has created important judicial precedents – without receiving sufficient attention for her pioneering work.

You may know that Mrs Mellanby has been hearing the case of the seven Muslim men who are accused of disrupting the homecoming parade of the 2nd Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment last March. As the soldiers paraded through the town, the men were allegedly heard to shout: “British soldiers go to hell” and “They are killing babies”. They were also allegedly seen to display placards with slogans such as “Butchers of Basra” and “Cowards, Killers, Extremists”, and so face charges under the Public Order Act.

When the case opened, the accused refused to stand for Miss Mellanby. Their religion, they argued, forbids them to stand for anybody except Allah, and they were therefore unable to show their respect for the court’s officers in the customary manner.

Faced with seven men in full Muslim dress, the District Judge bravely changed the rules to accommodate the accused. She did not – as others might have – suggest they might be in contempt, but instead arranged that, thenceforth, the men would enter the court after her, so that the sticky issue of respect would not have to be dealt with again.

We at Vladtepesblog, would like to dedicate the following video to that brave judge for protecting the innocent, and maintaining the west’s fine traditions of legal history. Thank you Judge Mellanby

[kaltura-widget wid=”h13ro79dnk” width=”410″ height=”364″ addpermission=”3″ editpermission=”3″ /]

Ireland’s new blasphemy law being copied by Pakistan

Posted on by

Thanks Sean for this.

From Mr. Obrien’s Thinking Emporium

Ireland’s new blasphemy law – which was passed in July 2009 – came into force four days ago on 1 January 2010. It makes blasphemy a crime punishable by a fine of up to €25,000. It has been the subject of some controversy, to say the least. I’m not going to delve into the whole debate here except to say my position on the law is that I’m agin it. The subject of this post is a couple of interesting comments that appeared on this thread at Politics.ie.

‘FutureTaoiseach’ voices a suspicion about the new blasphemy law, which is similar to comments I had made earlier in the same thread:

The radical Islamists want it [the law]. The govt is concerned about a Danish-style cartoon row blowing up in this country. At the UN, Islamic countries are pushing for a global ban on blasphemy.

To which ‘Half Nelson’ helpfully replies:

Statute
For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion.

Pakistan’s Submission to UN
State parties shall prohibit by law the uttering of matters that are grossly abusive or insulting to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion (p11.1)

Somebody is watching us.

Indeed. When one of the most illiberal police states in the world is plagirising your country’s laws in order to further its global theocratic agenda, that may be a sign that you’re doing it wrong.