FRENCH POLICE GUARDING SATIRIST CHARLIE HEBDO BUILDING IN WAKE OF MOHAMED CARTOON RELEASE

Folks, there is no easy way out of this.

As long as it’s necessary for police to safeguard a building from being firebombed do to irate Muslims, then the mocking of their religious figures, as distasteful as it is, is paramount and needs to continue and be defended. No one group can be allowed to intimidate others through violence from expressing an opinion. You let it slip here, then free speech is doomed for good.

UPDATE: Charlie Hebdo’s website hacked, via Blazing Cat Fur:

Offices of French magazine that published cartoons mocking Prophet Mohammed guarded by riot police as it plans to release new satirical image

  • Charlie Hedbo’s Paris HQ was firebombed last year after it published an issue it claimed had been guest-edited by Mohammed

By PETER ALLEN

PUBLISHED: 00:23 GMT, 19 September 2012 | UPDATED: 12:00 GMT, 19 September 2012

Riot police were guarding the offices of a satirical magazine in Paris last night as it prepared to publish cartoons mocking the Prophet Mohammed.

Charlie Hedbo’s HQ in the French capital was firebombed last year after it published an issue it claimed had been guest-edited by Mohammed.

Despite the attack, it has now decided to print further drawings, including one of the Prophet in a wheelchair being pushed by a Jewish Rabbi.

Read more:

Slouching Towards Brussels Redux

Gates of Vienna:

Counterjihad Brussels 2012 (large)
 

Tell me again about Europe and her pains,
Who’s tortured by the drought, who by the rains.
Glut me with floods where only the swine can row
Who cuts his throat and let him count his gains.
It seemed the best thing to be up and go.

— William Empson, from “Aubade”

The first leg of my flight to Europe last week was a short hop from Dulles to Philadelphia, where I had to endure a five-hour layover before continuing on to Brussels.

Despite all their glitz and hype, airports are not much fun to hang out in for any extended period of time, and Philly is no exception. You can walk for miles through the terminals searching in vain for something interesting to do. You can look at the duty-free booze, or shop for expensive jewelry, or buy a football jersey, or squint at the cover of Rolling Stone in Hudson News, or partake of high-carb delicacies in “Breads ’n’ More”, the generic airport eatery.

I was fortunate enough to find a decent restaurant, one where I could actually sit down and order good food from a waitress. I told the hostess as she ushered me to my table that I was in for a five-hour layover, and she asked me where I was heading.

“Brussels,” I replied.

“Where’s that?” she asked.

“Belgium,” I said. “Actually, it’s the capital of Belgium.”

I wanted to add that it was also the capital of the European Union, but I had a premonition that she would also never have heard of the EU, and I really didn’t want to discover such an appalling fact about this well-dressed, well-spoken young lady. Whether in her ignorance she is representative of her larger American cohort I cannot say.


Counterjihad Brussels Redux

I had the good fortune to spend three full days in Brussels. The first one, Saturday July 7, was what I call “jet lag day”, a 24-hour period of disorientation and stupor during which normal functioning tends to be difficult.

Brussels: St. Catherine's ChurchBy Sunday July 8 I was ready for action again. Most of our leadership group was staying in hotels near St. Catherine’s Church, which is not as much of a tourist zone as the area around the Great Market.

The Brussels conference was the following day, so the leadership group — actually a variety of leaders from overlapping Counterjihad networks across Europe — took the opportunity presented by their early arrival, and convened informally that afternoon and evening in various watering holes near St. Catherine’s to discuss issues of common interest to the anti-sharia resistance.

Since most of the people there were involved in the following day’s conference in the European Parliament, much of the talk revolved around the planning for that event.

There were, however, other topics on the agenda. They included:

  • The expansion of repression (both official and informal) in Europe, Canada, and the United States against critics of sharia and Islamization
  • The formation of new political parties and coalitions, and the redirection of existing parties, to concentrate on resisting the encroachment of sharia
  • Planned legislative initiatives in various countries that aim to reaffirm the commitment to individual freedoms specified in our constitutions, which all contradict the tenets of Islamic law
  • Strategies for dealing with official resistance to the attempts of individuals and groups to reassert their fundamental rights under their constitutions (or, in the case of Britain, under the English Common Law)
  • Practical methods for coordinating our collective resistance to sharia, both internationally and among different groups within a given country

The more general discussion focused on the crackdowns against free speech that are now underway in most European countries. I was already familiar with oppressive conditions in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Britain, but had not realized how dire the situation is in France, and — to a somewhat lesser extent — in Germany and Switzerland.

When we convened in Brussels five years ago, there had been virtually no prosecutions of Islam-critics in Europe. Since then there have been dozens, and possibly even hundreds, if all the “religiously aggravated public order offences” in Britain are taken into account. The repression is huge, it is ongoing, and it is accelerating.

On that ominous note, we adjourned for the night. The next day we were to take up the same themes in more detail at the European Parliament.

The Brussels Process (large)

The Brussels Process

On Monday July 9, a much larger group (over a hundred people) gathered in an auditorium of the European Parliament to discuss free speech, civil liberties, the OIC, and what has become known as the “Istanbul Process”.

Click to continue:

Andrew Bostom reviews the TV segment of Dr. Wafa Sultan Vs. Sheikh Omar

I agree with this word for word. Dr. Bostom is quite correct that the American, and for that matter Western peoples of the world, public could learn all they need to know about Islam from this one 8 minute clip.

There will be more segments of this clip available soon by the way, and a German version may even be ready tonight.

Eeyore for Vlad:

Sheikh Bakri Helps Wafa Sultan Educate All Americans on Islam

May 17th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |
No Comments
365 visitors have read this article

The danger of Islamic convictions

The courage of Western convictions

Posted By Andrew Bostom On May 17, 2012

 

 

Dr. Wafa Sultan [3], a remarkably courageous and thoughtful Muslim freethinker, recently debated Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad [4]. Dr. Sultan watched passively while the good Sheik expressed without equivocation his pious views—in full accord with classical, mainstream Islamic doctrine on jihad [5]—and then politely added her own plain spoken commentary in response.

This less than 8-minute video segment [6], if viewed objectively and dispassionately, could do more to educate the American public on the theory animating the practice of “Islamic international relations,” without any further explanation required.

In brief, the video [6] exchange confirms State Department consul Edward A Van Dyck’s [7] didactic characterization from 1880, before the malign influence of post-modern self-loathing crippled the ability of our diplomatic corps, and policymaking elites to think and act clearly:

In all the many works on Mohammedan law no teaching is met with that even hints at those principles of political intercourse between nations, that have been so long known to the peoples of Europe, and which are so universally recognized by them. “Fiqh,” as the science of Moslem jurisprudence is called, knows only one category of relation between those who recognize the apostleship of Mohammed and all others who do not, namely Djehad [jihad[; that is to say, strife, or holy war. Inasmuch as the propagation of Islam was to be the aim of all Moslems, perpetual warfare against the unbelievers, in order to convert them, or subject them to the payment of tribute, came to be held by Moslem doctors [legists] as the most sacred duty of the believer. This right to wage war is the only principle of international law which is taught by Mohammedan jurists; …with the Arabs the term harby [harbi] (warrior) expresses not only an unbeliever but also an enemy; and jehady [jihadi] (striver, warrior) means the believer-militant. From the Moslem point of view, the whole world is divided into two parts—“the House of Islam,” and “the House of War;” out of this division has arisen the other popular dictum of the Mohammedans that “all kinds of unbelievers from but one people.”

Moreover, Sheikh Bakri reiterates the heinous conception—and practice—concordant with mainstream Islamic law, sharia, and the ugly history [5] of Islamic depredations, that the very lives of non-Muslim “harbis” are licit.

Below is the full transcript of the English translation but I encourage all to watch the video [6].

Click to continue: