Four 20-year-old Bradford University students and a 19-year-old school student were jailed after a trial at the Old Bailey for being found with material said to be glorifying Islamic terrorism on their computers. Aitzaz Zafar, Usman Malik and Awaab Iqbaal were jailed for three years each, Akbar Butt was jailed for 27 months and the school student, Mohammed Irfan Raja was given two years youth detention.
Such is the atmosphere created by politicians and the media after the attempted terror bombings in London and Glasgow earlier this month that there was very little opposition in the media to what are police state measuresthe jailing of these youths merely for downloading material readily available on the Internet Marxists are not the best source on political freedom; this alliance with Muslims who would murder atheists in their homelands, is as bizarre as is it suicidal.
The case is the first successful prosecution under the Terrorism Act 2000 for possessing material useful for terrorism.
Raja, at the age of 17, had run away from his home in London leaving a note to his parents saying, if not in this [world] we will meet in [the Garden of Paradise]. According to the prosecution, he was planning to go and fight in Afghanistan after training in Pakistan, and for that purpose he had joined the four students in Bradford. No serious evidence that this was anything more than an adolescent fantasy is reported. The 7-7 terror was anything but a fantasy.
His parents talked to him over the phone and persuaded him to return home after three days. Raja was said to have been depressed and had discussed Islamic fundamentalism with the Bradford students over the Internet. His parents contacted the police and Raja apparently confessed, during several interviews, of his desire to fight Muslim causes abroad. He directed the police to the Bradford students who were arrested for having the extremist material on their computers.
One of the students, Aitzaz Zafar, was interviewed on BBC Radio 4s Today programme. Asked whether the inflammatory jihadist material he had downloaded was not an indication of terrorist intent, Zafar said that he was researching into my religionlooking at all aspects of it. He had become more politically aware as a student, and research had led me to different sites and places. The interviewer pressed him on why he had horrific material, including the video of a beheading. Zafar said that he had downloaded a zipped file containing more than 200 documents. I never read all of them and in court they cherry-picked one documentand within that a paragraph. Asked why he had a copy of the Terrorists Handbook on his computer, he said he had been in a chat room discussing the Muslim religion and politics, and it was one of the files that had been sent himpeople send you all sorts.
Reports of the trial claim that the five youths had made Internet contact with a certain British man called Imran who in one online chat had advised them how to travel unnoticed to Pakistan. Also mentioned was a Brother Ali in New Jersey, who had told Raja to get in touch with the Bradford students. Whether either of these men had sent them the zipped file or the Terrorists Handbook is not recorded. They were not produced as witnesses, and no explanation was given of why they were not arrested also. It is hardly a secret that such chat rooms can be used by provocateurs and the intelligence services. Anyone who can't read terror preparation in the above narrative, is brain dead.
There is clearly some disquiet in establishment circles at the way democratic rights are being trampled on in such cases. David Livingstone, an associate fellow in international security at Chatham House, home of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, appeared as a witness for the defence at the trial. He told the Today programme that there was no evidence that the five had planned to instigate a terrorist attack. The prosecution could radicalise young Muslims through a perceived sense of injustice, he said. Elie Kedourie attacked RIIA dhimmism in his book, "The Chatham House Version"
Posted by: McZoid ||
08/01/2007 13:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in Britain
#1
Asked why he had a copy of the Terrorists Handbook on his computer, he said he had been in a chat room discussing the Muslim religion and politics, and it was one of the files that had been sent himpeople send you all sorts.
Curiously enough, he neglected to delete such an obvious Islamist tract.
The prosecution could radicalise young Muslims through a perceived sense of injustice, he said.
If this is an actual effect, then why is this world not already radicalized against Islam by constant Muslim injustices inflicted upon the West? After some 9,000 terror attacks since the 9-11 atrocity one would think that by now this world's Muslim population would have enjoyed some serious attrition. If we somehow have managed to restrain ourselves in the face of endless Islamic atrocities, isn't it long past tea for Muslims to shut their collective pie hole about how they are treated?
I already knew that.
Some of the highlights...
But, the thing is, Che was so absolutely incompetent in everything he did except - the one thing he succeeded at in life - the mass murder of defenseless men and boys. I remember, right after 9/11, I think Dan Rather called Osama bin Laden "the Che Guevara of Islam," and I said, I wish we could be so lucky, because then it would be a cakewalk, because Che was so completely and utterly incompetent. In fact, there is reason to believe - I spoke to some of the people who tracked Che down in Bolivia - that he was incapable of applying a compass reading to a map. And this is a man people put on a pedestal with Mao Tse Tung, the leader of the 8,000-mile Long March. You really develop a sense of humor at the imbecility of some people.
He is the Ringo Starr of revolutionaries. It has dawned on me that what I have written is actually an inspirational book and that what I give are inspirational talks. Because if Che Guevara - a coward, a sadist, an imbecile - can see his picture become the most widely reproduced picture of the century, then folks, there's hope for all of us. It is astounding that a man who was so completely worthless should become so idolized. And that only happened because he hooked up with Fidel Castro, the most effective propagandist in modern history, and he's still at it.
Yes, let's face it. If you see it from afar, his image, and you're not very knowledgeable in history - and most people in this country are not - you say, "hey, that's a cool picture, that's a cool-looking guy." And then you hear, vaguely, that he was an anti-establishment rebel and you say, "that's pretty cool." I tell kids, you know, that they may hear that Che Guevara "fought The Man, he fought The Man." No, no, no, he was The Man
#2
Rene Dumont, a French socialist economist, went to Cuba to advise the regime and told them, good grief, you've done more radicalization, more nationalization in two years than the Chinese revolution did in eight years. They were nationalizing everything, stealing all private property, turning farms into state farms - and that naturally would get rid of any potential capitalist rival.
And so now, Hugo Chavez becomes the standard bearer for communism in the southern hemisphere by stealing everything in Venezuela.
First, at an Iowa campaign stop, the Democrat presidential contender railed against people "who want to shut me up." Video at the link.
Now, in a Tuesday interview with liberal talk show host Ed Schultz, Edwards has expressed surprise that these dark, yet still unnamed, forces have so far failed to shut down "progressive" talk radio:
EDWARDS: We have to fight back against these people. We cant let them do this kind of stuff to us. And theyre always going to be very powerful forces that dont want us to hear my voice, and the voices of those like not just me, the voices of those like us. They want to shut all of us up, Ed. Thats what this is all about. Im amazed youre still able to talk on the radio. They dont want to hear this stuff. And what we have to make clear is were gonna stand up and fight and we together, all of us, we will not be silenced.
Hey Johnny: who exactly are these people? Care to name them? And how do they plan to shut down liberal talk show hosts such as Ed Schultz? "They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action."
That's quite a contention, some evidence to back it up would be grand.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/01/2007 08:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
No, Johnny... they're not out to shut you up. They just don't give a damn about what a scummy ambulance-chasing lawyer with a nice bespoke suit and a $400 haircut has to say.
Now, go away and play, and stop bothering the grownups.
john, your voting population has been constant and disproportionaly represented for half a century, trough feeders are who they are, they'll say what you'll say, and thier persistance is noteworthy, but not alarming......because we have you surrounded and we are the non voting majority....waiting for our turn.
#8
Ah, that's too bad. Why just yesterday, John was feeling Oh So Pretty Well, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that Hillary isn't out to get you, John.
Throughout human history, demographers tell us, nature has provided about 105 male births for every 100 females. This sex ratio at birthstable across generations and ethnic boundariesmay range from 103 to as high as 106 boys for every 100 girls. In only one generation, that ratio has come unglued.
A Chinese census reports ratios as high as 120136 boys born for every 100 girls; in Taiwan, ratios of 119 boys to 100 girls; in Singapore 118 boys per 100 girls; South Korea 112 boys per 100 girls; and in India, where the practice was outlawed in 1994, the ratio continues to exceed 120 boys for every 100 girls in some areas. Countries such as Greece, Luxembourg, El Salvador, the Philippines, Cape Verde, and Egypt, even among some ethnic groups in the United States (Chinese, Japanese, and Filipino), are showing the same deadly discrimination against daughters.
What is the cause of the crisis? Experts point to a recent confluence of four main factors: rising access to sonogram technology, increased access to abortion, a preference for sons, and fertility decline.
Of the four factors, the first two seem fairly straightforward. Simply put, parents who prefer sons are better equipped than ever to get what they want. Abortion is increasingly legal, available, and socially acceptable in every part of the world. The second factor, sex detection, has been recognized by concerned government officials for years, and even banned in India. Sex determination by sonogram or ultrasound, amniocentesis, and IVF is increasingly available.
Some U.N. officials have argued that the third factor, son preference, is the primary cause of the problem and therefore should be the main target of international condemnation. Son preference is prevalent in East and Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa, and stems from norms and laws related to inheritance, dowries, mens higher wage earnings, and a desire to carry on the family line.
Thus killing girls before or after birth is part of the wider problem of violence against women, like dowry deaths and widow burnings. It is important to note that these practices, too, persist long after Delhi has banned them. Desperate, the government has introduced state-run orphanages for unwanted girls. As Ashley Fernandes recently noted in First Things, the good that this stop-gap measure will do is still uncertain. Indias first woman head of state, Pratibha Patil, announced at her inauguration last week that stopping female feticide tops her agenda.
Over the last generation, the world has witnessed a drive toward smaller families, and this is directly related to sex selection. With fewer children, the sex of each child matters more. Analysis by Nicholas Eberstadt shows that, in India, each child after the first is increasingly unwanted, such that, with the second child, the desirability of girls to boys is 16% to 40%. By the fourth pregnancy, a girls desirability is a sad 9%, compared with 75% in favor of a boy. With these odds, and with cheap sonogram technology and easy access to abortion, is it any wonder India reports that 300,000 to 500,000 girls go missing every year due to infanticide and abortion?
In China, at least half of all second or higher-order female pregnancies are terminated owing to sex. The most recent Chinese census shows a sex ratio of 150 boys for 100 girls in subsequent pregnancies. Hence, the fertility-reduction imperative drives the culling of girls.
The fertility-reduction imperative, in turn, is at the heart of a generation-long campaign by international development institutions. From the time Robert McNamara took the reins of the World Bank in 1968 to the latest Bank health, nutrition, and population strategy released in April, successive Bank presidents have pursued an aggressive population-control agenda, targeting developing countries.
UNFPAs latest update to its report on member-state contributions shows that eight wealthy European countries, along with Canada and Japan, pay 86% of the $389 million bill to fund that agency, which aggressively promotes population control. The top per capita contributors were Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands. The Bush administration withdrew American support in July 2002 because of evidence that UNFPA collaborated with the Chinese governments one-child policy. Nonetheless, USAID remains the worlds top provider of contraceptives, budgeting $150 million per year for the effort.
There's more, sadly, at the link.
IIRC, the Romans solved their female shortage by paying house-calls in Sabine towns and villages.
#4
Various mostly Radical Enviros have argued that alleged severe enviro stress? will over time induce nature to make specias produce more males to increase potentias for survival.
#5
There may be rational reasons historically for the preference. But it doesn't make sense any longer. It will be interesting to see how quickly these cultures can make the transition to a state where sons and daughters are equally welcome and loved.
Not only America is nervous of Tehrans intentions
For an American secretary of state and secretary of defence to visit the Middle East jointly is rare, and an indication of the strategic and political importance of this turbulent region. More unusual still is an announcement by Washington of huge arms deals to Israel and key Arab states without immediate uproar and accusations, by both sides, of bias. The new $63 billion package, however, has been calibrated to ensure the continued strategic balance among Americas allies in the region. While bolstering military aid to Israel by $30 billion, an increase of 25 per cent, the Americans are also to send arms to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. The aim is not to change the military balance between Israel and its neighbours, but to help governments to cope with what Condoleezza Rice has called, correctly, the greatest threat to security and stability in the Middle East: Iran.
For Washington, the threat posed by Tehrans expansionist aims and nuclear ambitions is now a higher priority than the quest for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement. This assessment is shared by all those leaders who met Dr Rice and Robert Gates at Sharm el-Sheikh yesterday. Like America, they see Iranian support for Hamas and Hezbollah, its attempt to dominate Iraq and its drive to build a nuclear weapons capability as a direct challenge to their interests. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf are determined to stop this outbreak of Persian nationalism, and bolstering their military capability is part of their response.
Indeed, the US package for Saudi Arabia includes missile defences, early-warning systems, air power and naval upgrades. Only a few years ago this would have been as unacceptable to Israel, which has no peace treaty with Riyadh, as it may still be to many members of Congress. It is still controversial. The US aim is as much to rein in Saudi policy in Iraq as it is to confront Iran. Increasingly, the Saudis have been arming and funding the Sunni minority in Iraq, and the weapons have been finding their way to extremists allied to al-Qaeda, who are using them to kill coalition troops and promote sectarian violence against Shia groups and the Iraqi Government. In a rare display of anger, Washington recently denounced this intervention by its long-standing ally. The Saudi Government, fearful of any US withdrawal from Iraq, should heed the candid warning. For although Riyadh may exercise restraint, it has done little to crack down on the religious extremists, wealthy maverick members of the Royal Family and some quasi-legitimate foundations that are arming Sunnis. It is a counterproductive policy with a predictable outcome: a backlash from the Shias and increasing dependence by Iraqs Government on Iran.
Mr Gates, who travels on to Riyadh, will ask King Abdullah to do far more to underpin the al-Maliki administration in Baghdad. He must make it clear to the Saudis and their Gulf neighbours that the US will not maintain the present high troop level in Iraq indefinitely. The more that the al-Maliki Government is supported by its Arab neighbours, the less the scope for Iranian hegemony.
A significant increase in arms in a volatile region involves risk. Washingtons decision to back its allies demonstrates a commitment and trust that has to be matched. Moderate Arabs have a vital role in stabilising Iraq and the region. It is one that they must play responsibly and actively.
Posted by: ryuge ||
08/01/2007 08:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Like the Saudis would actually fight the Iranians instead of just duck and run.
Get real. Its a 30 bil package for Israel along with a 33 bil package that terrorist can dip into.
Good work: it creates a totally distorted picture about the magnitude of US aid to Israel with the reader, and if caught out, you can always plead an innocent mistake. And every little bit helps---Goebbels would be proud of you Mr writer.
Nasrallah will not stop accusing the Lebanese government of conspiring against the Lebanese Shia community until more youths and simpletons are brainwashed into believing his lies. As Hitler once believed, the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it. And as such, the Iranian-backed outlaw has been consistently rehashing and redacting the details of the summer warwhich he startedto make it look like a plot by the Lebanese government against the Shia community.
Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said last summer's war with Israel had thwarted U.S. plans for a new Middle East and warned his group will continue to possess a large rocket arsenal to strike Israel again if Lebanon came under attack.
"This war aimed to impose a new Middle East, broken up into confessional and ethnic mini-states, serving the interests of the United States and Israel," Nasrallah said in a speech broadcast Saturday. He said that "the American project was swept aside by the victory of the Islamic Resistance," the armed wing of Hizbulllah.
Another aim of the war, which cost more than 1,200 lives in Lebanon, mostly of civilians, according to Nasrallah, was to strengthen the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. "The Israelis and Americans wanted the Siniora government to expand its authority to the whole of Lebanon's territory to the detriment of the resistance, but that was another failure," he said, gesticulating with his right hand to stress his points.
Nasrallah, who keeps reminding us that he and his rockets are ready to "defend ourselves and the country" is setting up another catastrophe, if not civil war. Hizbullah's mouthpiece Al-Manar keeps digging up "evidence" of a conspiracy to allegedly transfer the Shias out of southern Lebanon. Not long ago, Nasrallah himself accused Siniora of trying to dispossess the Shias, 1948 style. In between bouts of accusations, the Hizbullah minions berated the government of allegedly withholding reconstruction funds (which Hizbullah wanted to appropriate). And we all know the charade that is the "national unity government", which is supposed to give Shias the political voice Hizbullah says they lost after their resignation.
Thanks to Hizbullah, the Shia today appear as the only community with questionable allegiance to the state. Their historic marginalization, at one point due to feudalism and state neglect, has been replaced with fundamentalist aspirations. With Hizbullah mobilizing them like toy soldiers, they have lost a struggle to be more than pawns in the Arab Israeli conflict. In the 1970s, you heard many voices in the community speaking against PLO transgression on national sovereignty. In the 1980s, and following the killing of Moussa As-Sadr by Khadafi, the Syrian takeover of Amal, and the invasion of Iran and the birth of Hizbullah, the Shias managed to become a nuisance to everyone contemplating independence from Syria and Iran.
"Divine Victory" does not mask the fact that the Shias of Lebanon are at their worst state ever. Their resistance to Israeli occupation turned into an Iranian tool, Hizbullah takes the credit for what befell the community in terms of destruction and self-inflicted marginalization. The voice of Hizbullah's clerics is the only voice allowed, and it drowns out all other voices, including Hizbullah's so-called allies, Amal. Sadly, Hizbullah is applying the same principle to the rest of Lebanon, demanding a veto power in the government. Nasrallah, a man who claims he single-handedly defeated the American "project" in the region, has actually only destroyed the Lebanese state project, and jeopardized the future of the entire Shia community. If Lebanon is ever broken up into mini states, it will be because of Nasrallah's actions, and not a US plot.
There is no doubt in my mind that Hibzullah's actions will spell disaster for the Shia community. For who will take those villagers in if, as Nasrallah predicts, Israel launches another war on the country? Where will they go? Beirut, occupied by Hizbullah and the scene of recent violent Sunni-Shia clashes will think twice before hosting Shia refugees. Nor will Christian and Druze areas. Is Nasrallah counting on Emile Lahoud to host them in Baabda, or Michel Aoun in Rabieh? Or perhaps Assad will open his borders and host them in his palaces? Or maybe Kadhafi will send them bullet proof tents, now that Nasrallah got them to forget about Moussa As-Sadr.
If Israel attacks Lebanon, the Shia villagers will simply have to die: that is the only option Nasrallah has given them. That is, after all, what keeps the anti-Israeli flame burning: massacres. The Shias, like many in the Arab world, are to stay stuck in time and space until the gods of the anti-Israel struggle, now residing in Damascus and Tehran, decree otherwise.
In Lebanon, it used to be Shias "had tails" or were too poor and unsophisticated for the Sunni aristocracy. Thanks to Nasrallah's backward ideology, Shias sprouted rockets and are ticking time bombs.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/01/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
#1
I so want a picture of this guy swinging by his neck from a lamppost for my trading card set...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
08/01/2007 12:57 Comments ||
Top||
#2
unfortunately, this sounds like wishful thinking,
#3
Nasrallah, a man who claims he single-handedly defeated the American "project" in the region, has actually only destroyed the Lebanese state project, and jeopardized the future of the entire Shia community. If Lebanon is ever broken up into mini states, it will be because of Nasrallah's actions, and not a US plot.
When that time comes, count upon Nasrallah to twist even such a catastrophe into another stunning Muslim "victory".
If Israel attacks Lebanon, the Shia villagers will simply have to die: that is the only option Nasrallah has given them. That is, after all, what keeps the anti-Israeli flame burning: massacres.
Which is what they will roundly deserve for allowing Hezbullah to emplace its rocket launchers all through their villages. Like the Iraqis, Afghanis and so many other hapless Muslim societies, they'd damn well better to kill the terrorists when they see them coming or be prepared to die along side of them.
I so want a picture of this guy swinging by his neck from a lamppost for my trading card set...
Me too, but imagine how much more effective it would be ifduring his speecifying, like in the graphicNasrallah got a .50 caliber haircut. What a great message to send Islam. "Screw with us and die." Period.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Nasrallah will not stop accusing the Lebanese government of conspiring against the Lebanese Shia community until more youths and simpletons are brainwashed into believing his lies. As Hitler once believed, the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it. And as such, the Iranian-backed outlaw has been consistently rehashing and redacting the details of the summer warwhich he startedto make it look like a plot by the Lebanese government against the Shia community.
