Acto de terrorismo islâmico falhado em NY

Mais um acto de terrorismo islâmico falhado, este contra o edifício da Reserva Federal americana. Qual o propósito do terrorista, na verdade mujahid? Leia aqui o que não lê nos media americanos, muito menos nos nossos:
As reported exclusively on The Point yesterday, the Federal affidavit [ndr: depoimento juramentado] states that Nafis wanted to carry out a major terrorist attack to “make one step ahead, for the Muslims… that will make us one step closer to run the whole world”.
 Nafis believed that, “Targeting America’s economy is most efficient way to draw the path of obliteration of America as well as the path of establishment of Khilipha (Caliphate.)” 

In Media Covers Up Muslim Bomber’s Caliphate Goals de Daniel Greenfield. Mais sobre a matéria, do mesmo autor.


Uma caricatura por dia p'r_àcalmar a mouraria

Daniel Pipes lança o desafio:

What would happen if publishers and managers of major media reached a consensus, "Enough of this intimidation, we will publish the most famous Danish Muhammad cartoon every day until the Islamists tire out and no longer riot"? What would happen if instances of Koran burning happened recurrently?
Would repetition inspire institutionalization, generate ever-more outraged responses, and offer a vehicle for Islamists to ride to greater power? Or would it lead to routinization, to a wearing out of Islamists, and a realization that violence is counter-productive to their cause?
I predict the latter, that a Muhammad cartoon published each day, or Koranic desecrations on a quasi-regular basis, will make it harder for Islamists to mobilize Muslim mobs. Were that the case, Westerners could once again treat Islam as they do other religions – freely, to criticize without fear. That would demonstrate to Islamists that Westerners will not capitulate, that they reject Islamic law, that they are ready to stand up for their values.
So, this is my plea to all Western editors and producers: display the Muhammad cartoon daily until the Islamists get used to the fact that we turn sacred cows into hamburger.

Comecemos de imediato à nossa insignificante escala:


Embaixador norte-americano na Líbia sodomizado?

O rumor levanta várias questões que o autor deste artigo no frontpagemag.com explicita:
« This revelation about the sexual denigration of the reportedly gay Ambassador Stevens raises several questions. First, when are so-called liberals going to shed the rose-tinted goggles of multiculturalism and get in touch with a righteous anger about a pathologically anti-gay, ragingly misogynist, mob culture that sexually violates and murders innocents?
When are American progressives, who whine about a mythical Republican War on Women, going to denounce this perverse sexual pathology in Arab culture? When are leftist academics, up in arms about the Bush administration’s enhanced interrogations of hardened terrorists, going to vent their fury against a culture that routinely commits sexual torture and mutilation?
 Another question: If suspicions of Ambassador Stevens’ homosexuality are true, why did the administration send a gay man to an unstable hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism? Did it not realize that the possible discovery of his sexual orientation could have ramped up the danger for Stevens?»
Vale a pena ler todo o artigo.


Justiça poética (8)

Lahore (NdE: Paquistão): Several Muslim parties and a Christian group held rallies on Sunday to protest against a movie released in America.
Around 10,000 people participated in the main rally organised on The Mall by the Tehreek Hurmat-i-Rasool (THR).
One of the participants of the rally, Abdullah Ismail, passed away after he was taken to Mayo Hospital. Witnesses said he had complained of feeling unwell from the smoke from US flags burnt at the rally.

In Tundra Tabloids.


A Caça-à-bruxa islamofóbica

Daniel Greenfield, vulgo Sultan Knish: a ler à discrição:
The NYPD is taking a break from investigating multiple shootings in four of New York City's boroughs, including the attempted murder of an NYPD Sergeant, to head down to the city's much overlooked fifth borough, Staten Island, to investigate a case of littering.
Muslims arriving at the New Dorp football field, a few blocks away from the New Dorp High School, discovered some bacon lying on the ground. The field is usually home to the New Dorp Central Cougars and the Staten Island Tech Seagulls, but that day instead of boys and girls running around joyfully in the sun, robed men had come to attend a Ramadan event. The media and police were quickly summoned and now the NYPD is investigating the bacon as a hate crime.
The Ramadan event had been organized by a local chapter of the Muslim American Society. The Muslim American Society is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood, and some of its chapters have called for the murder of Jews. Calling for the murder of Jews however falls under freedom of speech. Unlike bacon which is a hate crime.
Staten Island had 226 robberies, 342 felonious assaults, 380 burglaries and 1,129 misdemeanor assaults last year. The figures are probably even worse this year and the NYPD has better things to do than train bacon-sniffing dogs to track down litterers. But the case of the lost bacon is not New York's most absurd Islamophobia witch-hunt to date.
Leia o resto.


«O Turbante e a Suástica: o Grande Mufti e os Nazis»

Uma vez que as eleições no Egipto deram a vitória ao candidato da Irmandade Muçulmana e que os EUA saudaram o vencedor, em vez de lhe retirar o tapete debaixo dos pés, importa mais que nunca conhecer esta organização.

Vlad Tepes começa com este uma série de videos sobre a matéria. Vede e divulgai:


Massacre de Houla perpetrado por rebeldes sunitas

Afinal, ao que parece, o massacre de Houla foi perpetrado pelos rebeldes sunitas vitimizando alauitas e chiitas, ao contrário do que se disse nos primeiros dias após o acontecimento.
Conclusão: duvidar sempre das informações que nos chegam daquelas bandas; afinal, o profeta do islão, do qual todos os envolvidos, cada um ao seu modo, são seguidores, terá dito: «guerra é logro». Todos eles mentem desde que com intenção virtuosa.
Outra conclusão: não tomar qualquer tipo de medida, diplomática ou outra, com base nas informações que nos vão chegando do mundo islâmico pelos media. Só pessoas idóneas no terreno são fontes fiáveis de informação.

It was, in the words of U.N. special envoy Kofi Annan, the “tipping point” in the Syria conflict: a savage massacre of over 90 people, predominantly women and children, for which the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad was immediately blamed by virtually the entirety of the Western media. Within days of the first reports of the Houla massacre, the U.S., France, Great Britain, Germany, and several other Western countries announced that they were expelling Syria’s ambassadors in protest.
But according to a new report in Germany’s leading daily, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), the Houla massacre was in fact committed by anti-Assad Sunni militants, and the bulk of the victims were member of the Alawi and Shia minorities, which have been largely supportive of Assad. The report’s information is attributed to opponents of Assad, though the sources declined to have their names appear in print out of fear of reprisals from armed opposition groups.
According to the article’s sources, the massacre occurred after rebel forces attacked three army-controlled roadblocks outside of Houla. The roadblocks had been set up to protect nearby Alawi majority villages from attacks by Sunni militias. The rebel attacks provoked a call for reinforcements by the besieged army units. Syrian army and rebel forces are reported to have engaged in battle for some 90 minutes, during which time “dozens of soldiers and rebels” were killed.
“According to eyewitness accounts,” the FAZ report continues,
the massacre occurred during this time. Those killed were almost exclusively from families belonging to Houla’s Alawi and Shia minorities. Over 90% of Houla’s population are Sunnis. Several dozen members of a family were slaughtered, which had converted from Sunni to Shia Islam. Members of the Shomaliya, an Alawi family, were also killed, as was the family of a Sunni member of the Syrian parliament who is regarded as a collaborator. Immediately following the massacre, the perpetrators are supposed to have filmed their victims and then presented them as Sunni victims in videos posted on the internet.
The FAZ report echoes eyewitness accounts collected from refugees from the Houla region by members of the Monastery of St. James in Qara, Syria. According to monastery sources cited by the Dutch Middle East expert Martin Janssen, armed rebels murdered “entire Alawi families” in the village of Taldo in the Houla region.
Already at the beginning of April, Mother Agnès-Mariam de la Croix of the St. James Monastery warned of rebel atrocities’ being repackaged in both Arab and Western media accounts as regime atrocities. She cited the case of a massacre in the Khalidiya neighborhood in Homs. According to an account published in French on the monastery’s site, rebels gathered Christian and Alawi hostages in a building in Khalidiya and blew up the building with dynamite. They then attributed the crime to the regular Syrian army. “Even though this act has been attributed to regular army forces,” Mother Agnès-Mariam wrote, “the evidence and testimony are irrefutable: It was an operation undertaken by armed groups affiliated with the opposition.”

Depois de Israel, os muçulmanos querem reconquistar a Península Ibérica

Já o temos dito, mas não é demais lembrá-lo: os muçulmanos, de acordo com a doutrina do waqf, consideram que um território uma vez possessão islâmica é para sempre possessão islâmica, sendo dever de todos e de cada um dos muçulmanos tudo fazer para o recuperar.
A doutrina é antiga e actual. Primeiro estão concentrados em Israel, espinho atravessado na orgulhosa garganta da ummá; depois reclamarão a Península Ibérica, o Al-Andalus, cenário de uma  mitológica prosperidade e superioridade cultural e civilizacional islâmicas, estranhamente jamais repetidas e sem nada que se lhe compare passados 600 anos.
Quem duvida, oiça o que os próprios muçulmanos dizem:


O que é o islão pela voz de um muçulmano esclarecido

Tenho para mim que a melhor maneira de conhecer uma religião é pela voz e pelas acções dos crentes em aplicação das respectivas doutrinas.
No caso do islão temos o problema da taqiyya, doutrina que não apenas permite mas incentiva o muçulmano a mentir e benefício da sua religião.
Por isso, aqueles momentos de franqueza em que um muçulmano (não um muçulmano qualquer, se virmos a sua biografia e curriculum) são de grande valor, uma vez que nos permitem conhecer o islão visto por dentro, a partir do conhecimento pleno dos seus textos e das suas tradições.
Nessa medida, parece-me que este video é provavelmente o mais importante que alguma vez vi enquanto instrumento de instrução dos não-muçulmanos sobre o que é o islão.
É ver e mostrar a quem quiser ver e a quem não quiser, especialmente.


Justiça poética (7)

"Islamist militants killed by own bombs: Nigerian army," from Agence France Presse, April 23:

KANO, Nigeria: Five suspected Islamist militants were killed when bombs they were assembling exploded during a shootout with government troops in northern Nigeria, a military commander said Monday.
"I can confirm that five suspected members of Boko Haram were on Saturday night blown to pieces by IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices)," they were assembling, Colonel Victor Ebhaleme told AFP....
Ebhaleme said the insurgents had thrown a bomb at the soldiers when the other bombs inside the house went off "killing the five suspects and destroying the house".

In Jihad Watch.


Reino Unido: casamentos forçados de meninas desde os 5 anos

Serão  mórmones? Metodistas? Cristãos Ortodoxos? Testemunhas de Jeová? Maronitas? Melquitas?

Via Tundra Tabloids.

Consultation Finds Girl Of Five Forced Into Marriage
As a consultation looking into criminalising forced marriage in England, Wales and Northern Ireland reaches its end figures have shown a 5-year-old may be the UK’s youngest victim.
The child is one of 400 in the last year to receive assistance from the government's Forced Marriage Unit.
Joint head of the Forced Marriage Unit, Amy Cumming, said 29% of the cases it dealt with last year involved minors.
"The youngest of these was actually five years old, so there are children involved in the practice across the school age range," she said.
The case comes as no surprise to the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (IKWRO): "We have had clients who are in their very early teens, 11-year-olds, 12-year-olds, the youngest case we had was nine years old."
IKWRO campaigns officer Fionnuala Murphy said that now the consultation is over she hopes forced marriage will become a criminal offence.
"Our organisation is pro-criminalisation because we believe that it will empower victims to know that this is a crime, to stand up to their parents and to stand up for their own rights and it will enable them to come forward and seek help and say what's happening to me is wrong."
Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone said the government would now look at all the arguments.
"We will now consider all of those views and responses to the consultation before we make a decision on the best way to protect vulnerable people.
"We are determined, working closely with charities and other organisations doing a tremendous amount in this area, to make forced marriage a thing of the past."
A decision is expected to be announced later this year.


D. Greenfield e os «Direitos Incivis» (e insanos, diria eu)

 Daniel Greenfield, excelente, como sempre:
«The civil rights movement is a success story, so much so that any and every movement has found that it can borrow the narrative and tactics of it to ram through whatever measures it likes. And so we come to the year 2012 where civil rights means men in dresses having the right to use the ladies room and the right of terrorist groups to be free from police scrutiny ― among many other equally insane "rights".
Any group is now able to represent its agenda as a new civil rights movement, all it has to do is identify a form of access that it wants and to demand that the courts force any and all to grant that access. Even if it to the ladies room.
If the outcome is impossible, that's all the more reason to demand it. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms, but thanks to activist federal judges who think the peasants have no right to vote on issues in referendums, it is well on the way to becoming the law of the land. And what if the outcome isn't impossible, just hideously expensive in terms of human life and dignity? That's what a stroll through your local airport is for, where Muslims cannot be touched, but small children and the disabled can.

Once we begin with the premise that Muslims are no more likely to be terrorists than the Amish, any outcome that says otherwise must be tossed out as a random case of workplace violence or telepathically transmitted PTSD. To monitor Muslims and Muslim groups as if they were more likely to fly planes into skyscrapers than Mennonites is discrimination, no matter how rationally based it may be. Better for thousands of Americans to die than for the tenets of liberalism to be challenged by common sense and statistical evidence.

And thus we have gone from a civil rights movement based on rejecting the absurd notion that race should limit voting rights to a civil rights movement based on an equally absurd notion that religious and ethnic differences play no role in religious and ethnically motivated violence.

When you are being compelled to believe absurdities, you know that something has gone very wrong in the process. It is also an easy way to mark the transition from a rights based movement to something else entirely. Generations after the death of Martin Luther King, we are being urged to accept sexually mutilating children as the next civil rights movement, and you can only guess at whether I am discussing sexual reassignment surgery for children or female genital mutilation for Muslims. And it really makes no difference. Either one is an equally valid horror show that shows how far into the ditch we have gone.
This has been the pattern for every civil rights movement since which demands its special privileges. Having run out of races, we are now pandering to such bizarre notions as sexual identity as genetic and permanently fixed, yet existing entirely apart from the body of the person, and that religiously motivated terrorism exists entirely apart from the religion.

This isn't post-modernism, it's post-reason. It's post-everything. The left has always sought out the taboo and the transgressive, but as a society we are swiftly running out of transgressions to embrace and protect with government legislation. The more tolerant that Americans grudgingly become in the name of decency, the harder the commissars of correctness have to search for some new bigotry to charge them with. (...)»

A. McCarthy sobre a violência desencadeada pela queima de Alcorões

É de ler na íntegra; não consigo destacar nenhum excerto:
Why Apologize to Afghanistan?
By Andrew C. McCarthy
We have officially lost our minds.

The New York Times reports that President Obama has sent a formal letter of apology to Afghanistan’s ingrate president, Hamid Karzai, for the burning of Korans at a U.S. military base. The only upside of the apology is that it appears (based on the Times account) to be couched as coming personally from our blindly Islamophilic president — “I wish to express my deep regret for the reported incident. . . . I extend to you and the Afghani people my sincere apologies.” It is not couched as an apology from the American people, whose frame of mind will be outrage, not contrition, as the facts become more widely known.

The facts are that the Korans were seized at a jail because jihadists imprisoned there were using them not for prayer but to communicate incendiary messages. The soldiers dispatched to burn refuse from the jail were not the officials who had seized the books, had no idea they were burning Korans, and tried desperately to retrieve the books when the situation was brought to their attention.

Of course, these facts may not become widely known, because no one is supposed to mention the main significance of what has happened here. First, as usual, Muslims — not al-Qaeda terrorists, but ordinary, mainstream Muslims — are rioting and murdering over the burning (indeed, the inadvertent burning) of a book. Yes, it’s the Koran, but it’s a book all the same — and one that, moderate Muslims never tire of telling us, doesn’t really mean everything it says anyhow.

Muslim leaders and their leftist apologists are also forever lecturing the United States about “proportionality” in our war-fighting. Yet when it comes to Muslim proportionality, Americans are supposed to shrug meekly and accept the “you burn books, we kill people” law of the jungle. Disgustingly, the Times would inure us to this moral equivalence by rationalizing that “Afghans are fiercely protective of their Islamic faith.” Well then, I guess that makes it all right, huh?

Then there’s the second not-to-be-uttered truth: Defiling the Koran becomes an issue for Muslims only when it has been done by non-Muslims. Observe that the unintentional burning would not have occurred if these “fiercely protective of their Islamic faith” Afghans had not defiled the Korans in the first place. They were Muslim prisoners who annotated the “holy” pages with what a U.S. military official described as “extremist inscriptions” in covert messages sent back and forth, just as the jihadists held at Gitmo have been known to do (notwithstanding that Muslim prisoners get their Korans courtesy of the American taxpayers they construe the book to justify killing).

Do you know why you are supposed to stay mum about the intentional Muslim sacrilege but plead to be forgiven for the accidental American offense? Because you would otherwise have to observe that the Koran and other Islamic scriptures instruct Muslims that they are in a civilizational jihad against non-Muslims, and that it is therefore permissible for them to do whatever is necessary — including scrawl militant graffiti on their holy book — if it advances the cause. Abdul Sattar Khawasi — not a member of al-Qaeda but a member in good standing of the Afghan government for which our troops are inexplicably fighting and dying — put it this way: “Americans are invaders, and jihad against the Americans is an obligation.”

Because exploiting America’s hyper-sensitivity to things Islamic advances the jihad, the ostensible abuse of the Koran by using it for secret communiqués is to be overlooked. Actionable abuse occurs only when the book is touched by the bare hands of, or otherwise maltreated by, an infidel.

As our great Iraqi ally Ayatollah Ali Sistani teaches, touching a kafir (“one who does not believe in Allah and His Oneness”) is to be avoided, because Islamic scripture categorizes infidels as equivalent to “urine, feces, semen, dead bodies, blood, dogs, pigs, alcoholic liquors,” and “the sweat of an animal who persistently eats filth.” That is what influential clerics — not al-Qaeda but revered scholars of Islamic law — inculcate in rank-and-file Muslims.

And they are not making it up. Sistani came upon this view after decades of dedicated scriptural study. In fact, to take just one telling example (we could list many, many others), the “holy” Koran we non-Muslims are supposed to honor proclaims (in Sura 9:28), “Truly the pagans are unclean . . . so let them not . . . approach the sacred mosque.” It is because of this injunction from Allah that non-Muslims are barred — not by al-Qaeda but by the Saudi Arabian government — from entering Mecca and Medina. Kafirs are deemed unfit to set their infidel feet on the ground of these ancient cities. You don’t like that? Too bad — grin and bear it . . . and, while you’re at it, surge up a few thousand more American troops to improve life in Kandahar.