Steely Dan

So the Arab spring spreads to Mali, like a plague, and now the population can enjoy 7th century norms being restored by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic not Islamic enough Maghreb.

http://www.telegraph...n-Timbuktu.html

Here is a Hamas spokesman ranting on about Egypt's failure to provide them with fuel. He does make a couple of points that Hamas apologists may struggle to explain though, especially concerning the origin of the fakestinians.

http://blogs.news.co..._it_from_hamas/

The Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security in Gaza, Fathi Hammad, wants more petrol from Egypt and makes two points that few in the anti-Israeli lobby will want to hear.

First, he wants the help of Arab nations so that Gaza can wage “jihad” against Israel so “Zionists” will be “annihilated”. (From 1:15)

Second, the people of Gaza are not originally from Israel - “Brothers, half the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis.” (From 1:45.)

And this is where your obsession let's you down.

Try watching the actual video of this Hamas guy and you will see the context of his comments. It's rather like your use of the word "indigenous", beloved codeword nowadays of racist organizations such as the BNP and extremists such as Breivik. Does that mean you are a racist? Context is key.

The Hamas person was trying to appeal (and doing a pretty poor job of it) to Arab countries by drawing attention to the origins of the Palestinian people. Without wishing to be too controversial, where do most Israelis come from?

It's a silly argument for any friend of Israel to get into. The Middle East is a hideously complicated mish-mash of diametrically opposed objectives and objections, reducing it down to simplistic viewpoints serves little purpose. Quite who is truly "indigenous" to that scrap of real estate is basically irrelevant. What needs to be addressed are the concerns and priorities of those sharing it today, and if Israel ever wants real peace and be allowed a normal life as most people crave, it will have to sit down with scumbags from Hamas and other unpleasant folk just as the Brits had to deal with murdering scum like Adams and McGuinness to resolve the N. Ireland conflict.

You forgot to unspin jihad to annihilate the Zionists. What is there for Israel to discuss, quick annihilation or slow annihilation? Indeed that the Hamas spokesman is there at all speaking in the capacity he does is down to Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, uprooting 7,500 of their own citizens while they were at it.

As for where do the Israelis come from, there is a wealth of archeological evidence of a Jewish presence in Israel for 3000 years, including the temple which the Al-Aqsa Mosque was built on top of.

P.S it is most revealing you seem to have Breivik and Baruch Goldstein on a continuous loop seeing as these two apart you are really pretty hard pressed to find racist religiously motivated mass murderers who are not Muslim, and even Breivik is a stretch.

Here is a Hamas spokesman ranting on about Egypt's failure to provide them with fuel. He does make a couple of points that Hamas apologists may struggle to explain though, especially concerning the origin of the fakestinians.

http://blogs.news.co..._it_from_hamas/

The Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security in Gaza, Fathi Hammad, wants more petrol from Egypt and makes two points that few in the anti-Israeli lobby will want to hear.

First, he wants the help of Arab nations so that Gaza can wage “jihad” against Israel so “Zionists” will be “annihilated”. (From 1:15)

Second, the people of Gaza are not originally from Israel - “Brothers, half the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis.” (From 1:45.)

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration.

We are not going to sit and watch that we are made a minority in our own country. We do not accept it; it is unacceptable.

We shall fight. We shall fight against the traitors in the Labor Party and against political activists that work for other organizations that support multiculturalism and Islamification. The attacks on 7/22 were preventative attacks for the defense of Norway’s indigenous people, ethnic Norwegians.

Transcript of Anders Brievik's statement in Oslo Court, 5 Feb 2012.

Perhaps the logic, and sadly, the actions, of people like Brievik are a good reason that they should be electronically monitored by any government intent on protecting its citizens. Resisting mass immigration does seem to have nasty side-effects, at least for some of its more extreme proponents.

Obviously for those intent on provoking a clash of civilizations, both the muslim terrorists and defenders of indigenous rights have a vital role to play.

"Indigenous" is the "new black" (pun intended) when it comes to extremist views, hence the use by groups such as the BNP, EDL (a favourite of Brievik's), and fellow travellers. If you want a laugh check out the Indigenous Weekend (spot the non-white person) clip on YouTube.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5GvewIAmC4

I have no problem with monitoring extemists, however it would appear that anyone who objects to soaring crime rates, inner city no go zones, foreign law and constraints on free speech are now branded bigots, xenophobes or racists. Actually the EDL were described as naive but well meaning by Breivik and Nick Griffin the BNP leader so to conjoin the BNP & EDL together is not being intellectually honest.

There was a meeting of European defense leagues in Denmark last weekend and as per usual the number of arrests of these so called extremists was dwarfed by those arrested belonging to ANTIFA, indeed this is almost invariably the case when Unite against (sic) fascism counter demonstrate against the EDL in the UK so who are the extremists?

P.S Here is another example of what the UK authorities are up against, notice it from a Sikh community forum complaining about Muslim gangs in the UK grooming and raping underage girls. Understandably they are upset when the BBC refer to the accused in such cases as 'Asian' tarring them by association. Just look at the list without your PC specs on and you can see there is a problem which warrants increased surveillance.

http://www.sikhsanga...g-muslim-gangs/

I'm on the same page as the Sikhs on this one, though I doubt they would be welcome at the 'indigenous weekend'.

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration. The other is concerning cyber-crime, hacking etc. Whatever, either by happenstance or design there are good reasons why governments are doing this, though I don't approve for myself and this was a small part of my reason for being here.

To prevent Islamic terrorism? Or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration? Oh dear. Could you just remind me, what was the latest abhorrent terrorist attack in Europe? Could it be in Scandinavia? By a nutter who held similar views to the ones you are expressing? Not an Islamist? But a white supremacist? Who clearly held similar views to you?

The old Etonian fools who are now running the UK are fast becoming a laughing stock, even amongst the Tory Party! They are rapidly becoming a figure of fun, making up stupid policies on the hoof in a desperate attempt to appease their masters in the USA. And relying on people like you on internet forums around the world to try and give credibility to these laughable attempts to scare the populace into giving up their hard fought rights to free speech. I believe the politically correct expression is, 'Useful idiot'. How does it feel?

I'll ignore your slander, but I understand in the total absence of facts that's what the left are reduced to. I'll just observe that Breivik by his own admission was a cultural Christian with no religious beliefs who was lamenting the erosion of his culture, which is a totally different matter to race, so hardly a 'white supremacist'. Besides which Breivik was one lone madman as oppose to thousands with a sick and insane ideology responsible for over 16,600 terrorist attacks since 9/11, including the 7/7 attacks in London. We are also getting close to the Olympics and I expect the culture enrichers are planning something to coincide with that.

P.S It's more than a bit rich you mouthing off about free speech seeing as that is exactly what the OIC and their left wing stooges are trying to limit.

It certainly wasn't very sporting of the militants, but I suppose any activity that causes anything other than death and suffering is haram.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17607549

Fuel has started arriving in the Gaza Strip as a result of a deal between the territory's Hamas-led government and the rival Palestinian Authority.

So presumably had the deal been done earlier there would have been no need for power cuts or candles.

Not at all. Their silence of condemnation for this act is deafening. Where are the local muslim leaders condemning this act of base terrorism?

Meeting in a phone booth to work out the text.

I've read more than once that these insurgents have no "clearly stated aims". Seems to me you can't negotiate with a group of people who don't want anything....other than to blow people up. It's one of those things where both sides are fighting and angry but they've forgotten why.

I've never been to the region but I have to think that not everyone in that area has an anti-Thai sentiment. Can anyone who has travelled there give insight? Do they seriously want to break away from Thailand because they're treated badly and quite different (as I read somewhere)? Or is that just press?

"No stated aims", Where have I heard that before? I suspect the unstated aim is Jihad, which in this case would mean returning lands which were once in Muslim control back to the Muslims. If you think that can be granted by negotiation with the population there still retaining Thai citizenship then indeed give it a try, personally I think this will be impossible so the violence will continue until either all the insurgents are killed or the Thais wash their hands of the 'troubled' provinces and leave.

Then of course there were the recent riots and looting in the UK organized by all accounts using portable web devices with online maps to tweet which shops they intended to loot next, perhaps it is this sort of info that needs real time access as oppose to court orders granted.

So the UK government trades the establishment of Eurabia for securing its energy supplies, and becoming an ally of the left against the USA.

The UK government also plans to intercept and monitor the communications of groups such as the EDL, BFP etc as part of their campaign of policing and vilification of such groups opposed to migration, while the pro-jihadist type groups are favoured by comparison.

Have I got that right?

The UK government, as with other E.U Countries has lost a lot of decision making power to the E.U and thus the left wing federalist policies come in via the back door. I won't post any links about Eurabia here as they are probably off topic, but they do make interesting reading and explain why it is that front groups for radical Islam get largely ignored compared to those that oppose them. I suspect there is currently a tug of war going on between the old multi-culturalists and the rejectionists so any measure that increases government power to monitor can be used both ways depending on the prevailing government policy at the time - both will lead to curtailment of freedoms.

I guess the juxtaposition of this with the UK internet monitoring law changes is purely coincidental.

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration.

I think we are all clear on your views on Islamic terrorism but I am intrigued about your "resistance to mass immigration" comment, and why this is more worrying than terrorism.

What such groups/people would the UK government want to monitor?

Worrying for governments, if their policies are anything like the Eurabia theory in order to secure energy supplies and give the left an ally against the U.S. We are governed by consent, in other words the population as a whole complies with the law and behavioural norms of society providing the government does not let any section of society stop cooperating thus gaining inordinate benefit or causing trouble. The recent Bradford West election was won on religious sectarian grounds against the backdrop of the working class populations rising alienation to the mainstream parties.

Bradford, as does Tower Hamlets might resemble a non-assimilating ghetto where British laws and norms increasingly become subordinate to alien ones. This may lead to increasing civil disobedience which the government are terrified will escalate, therefore in my opinion they use very heavy handed policing and try to vilify groups which oppose unrestricted immigration and the resulting social problems. Thus the internet monitoring may be to disrupt and stop the likes of the EDL or British Freedom party as much as say those of 'Muslims against the crusades', especially if the government favour the latter for their own reasons.

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration. The other is concerning cyber-crime, hacking etc. Whatever, either by happenstance or design there are good reasons why governments are doing this, though I don't approve for myself and this was a small part of my reason for being here.

http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=46534

This reflects something I've felt for a while, indeed every trip to the UK I see small but cumulative changes restricting freedoms which would otherwise be taken for granted. I suspect hard economic times ahead and society becoming more unruly are an environment likely to result in a more totalitarian future.

I think the IRA simile breaks down under scrutiny. Incidentally I suspect the E.U was largely responsible for the peace treaty because large amounts of E.U development grants started a boom in Ireland, which became known as a Celtic tiger. The original religious antipathy between the Catholic and Protestant communities had also receded a lot as the UK became increasingly secular, so what started with a religious enmity was only maintained like a phantom limb as it suited the paramilitaries who got a lot of revenue from controlling drugs, gambling and vice. The economic boom years meant it was possible for the paramilitary leaders to make money from less risky avenues such as property development.

The situation in the Southern provinces may also ebb and flow for economic reasons, but there is far less cultural common ground between the protagonists than there was in Ireland, not to ,mention the thorny issue of religion being greater.

There must be many "moderate"Muslims in the South who know the whereabouts of these murderers ,do you think they will turn them in?, IMHO NOT A SNOWBALLS IN HELLS CHANCE, perhaps a 20 million baht reward for information leading to there capture may provide a bit of stimulus ,there is nothing worse for a criminal/ terrorist to know that there is a price on his head!. they could start by nailing wanted posters in every village ,even put them on TV like they do in the US which appears very successful in apprehending lawbreakers.

Ah, the search for the 'moderate' Muslim, it reminds me of the situation in theoretical physics where all the models suggest there must be loads of dark matter in the universe, however proving it is always problematic. I suppose self preservation has something to do with it, and informers do get killed if they are found or even suspected.

However I think any separatist group can't get anywhere unless it has the tacit consent of a good proportion of the population it represents, though again this tacit support is helped by a little terror and intimidation as any totalitarian fascist regime knows only too well.

Well judging from the devastation and the number of casualties it looks like the m.o. of the separatists has changed to an Al-Quaeda, J.I style model - namely indiscriminate carnage. Jihad brings poverty and then ethnic cleansing sadly - mediation is not what is desired by the separatists, even if that was the original gripe I fear rent-a-jihaddist will only be happy reversing back to the 7th century.

a study by Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill states that from 1980 to 2005 following percentages were true for culprits terrorist attacks in the US.

Latinos: 42%

Communist: 5%

Muslims:6%

Jewish:7%

left wind groups:24%

others:16%

There is a big difference between anecdotal evidence and statistical evidence.

Really?

A hallmark of research is that it is neutral and thus open to unanticipated results and findings.

It seems as if researchers at Duke and the University of North Carolina got together to violate this cardinal principle of scholarly research in their report, "Anti-Terror Lessons of Muslim-Americans."

Read more on Newsmax.com: Duke-University of N.C. Terror Study Flawed

Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

I can also come up with a number out of nowhere and say 79% of thaivisa contributors are nazis. It doesn't make it true.

The only proven statistic I had the time to dig up is this:

According to religious history professor Jan Hjärpe there were in 2008 - 515 acts of terror in the EU countries. The number of muslims responsible for those terror acts were zero. Yes, nil.

Most of the acts were carried out by Basque nationalists in Spain. At second place were the Corsicans.

Source 00.00-00.40:

That would offset the 18,665 Muslim terror attacks since 9/11, worldwide that is, which is no doubt more representative than the E.U. Try googling for it, I believe there is a site keeping stats organized by year each with a source cited from mainstream press. Indeed the 14 killed here in Thailand is featured in the list for month just ended.

Bare in mind this is what the relatively moderate Afghan government are doing, the Taliban obviously provide no stats. It does beg the question whether this sort of regime is one Nato troops should be fighting and dying for.

The alternative is to just be rid of a malignancy. Would you as an alternative option be in favour of turning the country into a wasteland which would necessitate the deaths of many that were non beligerent? i.e Let North Korea use Afghanistan as a nuclear missile testing site?

Well that would be quicker, seeing as it is the Taliban are responsible for over 75% of the deaths. As per the O.P though if you are dealing with a 'malignant' ideology you can't really come to an accommodation with it, you either remove it root and branch or you wait for the population to eventually liberate themselves. But the Obama administration has clearly marked out troop draw downs leading to complete departure, which is essentially the only info the Taliban need. The job is either seen through to the end or is frankly not worth undertaking.

Fighting the Taliban is becoming a drag.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2122130/Chief-army-officer-Afghanistan-orders-guardian-angels-protect-U-S-troops-insider-attacks.html

Speak of the devil. I agree with this. Because of that, I'm not sure whether to cheer for Obamacare to win or lose in the court. Losing might be winning in the long run. I like Obamacare but I LOVE single payer. So does Obama. He compromised and tried to do a ROMNEY and see what's happening:

http://www.washingto...JtjS_story.html

I’m talking about a single-payer health-care system. If the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare, a single-payer system will go from being politically impossible to being, in the long run, fiscally inevitable.

Total collapse, in the long run, is fiscally inevitable.

He has a mixed record. It is a reasonable record to run on, especially with economic news trending positively. He got Bin Laden, Bush didn't. No, I actually don't think white people voted for Obama to prove they aren't racists. They could have not voted for him and lied about it if they just wanted to impress their friends. Obama is heavily favored now but things could still go wrong for him, such as a war with Iran.

I've seldom found the prospect of war more attractive.

The Ron Paul contingent have been very quiet. Might be because the old loon has sort of been pushed aside. LOL.

The democratic senate have gone without any budget at all for something like 3 years, so not sure about their coherent fiscal policy, but at least Ron Paul seems to be out of the picture, so there is some good news.

Actually, his economic policies are the most sane of all his policies - the trouble is having set off on a Keynesian road to ruin the choices are stark, it's either cold turkey for a long time, or just postpone the inevitable complete collapse until it happens off your watch. I wonder which path a politician would choose?