Michael Adebolajo has launched an appeal against his conviction.

Well naturally, whilst incarcerated he is adopting the only avenue of Jihad left open to him, namely tying up the resources of the infidel in any way possible. The Fort Hood Workplace violencist Nidal Hasan is doing just that by submitting an endless stream of complaints. A bullet rolled in pig fat would put an end to it in both cases.

And I'll bet that when the appeal has been rejected, then the appeal to the Supreme Court upholds the sentence, the ECHR will interfere and say that we are infringing on his human rights.

We should uphold his human rights - feed him three times a day - bacon for breakfast, pork chops for lunch, pork loin for evening meal, all served with a Waitrose wine. No one can say that that ain't healthy. And a shower every day.

Who here has been to Headchopper Square in Old Jeddah? On a Friday after midday prayers. Now that's how to practice human rights.

Teenage style response....

Folium, that's an unwarranted and unjustified insult..........................to all teenagers.

Michael Adebolajo has launched an appeal against his conviction.

Well naturally, whilst incarcerated he is adopting the only avenue of Jihad left open to him, namely tying up the resources of the infidel in any way possible. The Fort Hood Workplace violencist Nidal Hasan is doing just that by submitting an endless stream of complaints. A bullet rolled in pig fat would put an end to it in both cases.

And I'll bet that when the appeal has been rejected, then the appeal to the Supreme Court upholds the sentence, the ECHR will interfere and say that we are infringing on his human rights.

We should uphold his human rights - feed him three times a day - bacon for breakfast, pork chops for lunch, pork loin for evening meal, all served with a Waitrose wine. No one can say that that ain't healthy. And a shower every day.

Who here has been to Headchopper Square in Old Jeddah? On a Friday after midday prayers. Now that's how to practice human rights.

So you want to drag the UK back into the Middle Ages?

If we continue to pander to the demands of those who flee to Britain for either political or economic reasons (and often both) where they are welcomed freely, and have been for centuries, but who themselves have agendae other than freedom of the individual in mind, then we shall be back to the Dark Ages, not the Middle Ages.

If you have had the doubtful privilege of watching Friday afternoon entertainment in Saudi, then you will see where these vocal minorities wish to take us, and where our 'liberal' thinkers are happily consigning us.

f we continue to pander to the demands of those who flee to Britain for either political or economic reasons (and often both) where they are welcomed freely, and have been for centuries, but who themselves have agendae other than freedom of the individual in mind, then we shall be back to the Dark Ages, not the Middle Ages.

If you have had the doubtful privilege of watching Friday afternoon entertainment in Saudi, then you will see where these vocal minorities wish to take us, and where our 'liberal' thinkers are happily consigning us.

So you think that the UK will become subject to Sharia Law as applied in Saudi?

Do you have any serious evidence (and please not the Daily Mail or any of SD's hate sites) to support this preposterous suggestion?

What proportion of the UK's population would be in favour of this and at what rate are they due to increase in the future?

Why should anyone, even (heaven forbid) "liberal thinkers", wish to replicate Saudi style application of law in the UK?

PS without wishing to be too irritating, the term "Dark Ages" is no longer used by historians as it is too simplistic and largely inaccurate.

So you think that the UK will become subject to Sharia Law as applied in Saudi?

Do you have any serious evidence (and please not the Daily Mail or any of SD's hate sites) to support this preposterous suggestion?

What proportion of the UK's population would be in favour of this and at what rate are they due to increase in the future?

Why should anyone, even (heaven forbid) "liberal thinkers", wish to replicate Saudi style application of law in the UK?

PS without wishing to be too irritating, the term "Dark Ages" is no longer used by historians as it is too simplistic and largely inaccurate.

No, I don't think it will happen - but if the placators of extremism ever get control of the levers, it may well do so.

The 'Dark Ages' may not apply to british history between 350 AD and 650 AD as it used to, but it does apply to many other areas of the globe, past and present.

So you think that the UK will become subject to Sharia Law as applied in Saudi?

Do you have any serious evidence (and please not the Daily Mail or any of SD's hate sites) to support this preposterous suggestion?

What proportion of the UK's population would be in favour of this and at what rate are they due to increase in the future?

Why should anyone, even (heaven forbid) "liberal thinkers", wish to replicate Saudi style application of law in the UK?

PS without wishing to be too irritating, the term "Dark Ages" is no longer used by historians as it is too simplistic and largely inaccurate.

No, I don't think it will happen - but if the placators of extremism ever get control of the levers, it may well do so.

The 'Dark Ages' may not apply to british history between 350 AD and 650 AD as it used to, but it does apply to many other areas of the globe, past and present.

Intrigued...who are the "placators of extremism"?

Are they the same people as the "liberal thinkers", who I thought were already consigning the UK to the "Dark Ages", and "happily" doing so no less?

Yes, the same people who sit in Whitehall and our local council offices, who prefer sitting at their desks to going out in the community and discussing the problems facing the ordinary people. I go out to pubs, RBL, supermarket cafes and other venues where people sit and discuss their lives.

In almost all these discussions I find serious concern about the changing face of Britain and the lack of control that people have over the way their lives are 'trending'.

As most of you know, I have spent 40 years of my life outside the UK, working in all parts of the world (although little in the Americas) and have employed/worked alongside almost all nationalities. All countries have changed over those 40 years - my five different tours in Saudi have shown me five different countries. My different tours in VietNam have shown how fast that country is developing. My time in Bangladesh has shown very little advancement and my time in Nigeria scared seven different types of sh*t out of me. (But the Port Harcourt Hash was a real fortnightly fun run through the jungle).

My concerns cover not only the UK, but the world in general, where extreme views are becoming the norm - on many fronts. Far right Christian fundamentalists, Middle eastern zealots of several differing beliefs, nationalist views in Eastern Europe, all are threatening any chance of universal hegemony, which would require tolerance, but also no attempts at evangelical conversions, no condemnation of the changing of any person's beliefs (heresy) and no imposition of any one cant over any other, but solely a system of people being able to live together in reasonable harmony.

Giving credence and tolerance to the less tolerant views of many cults and sects does not help towards such universal aims. The leaders of such groups should be told that such views are unacceptable and will be condemned and that sanctions will be imposed on any further dissemination of such views/teachings.

Conservatives are intolerant of the intolerant, liberals are tolerant of the intolerant, providing they belong to an alien culture, but intolerant to the point of obsession with respect to local conservatives.

P.S The dark ages are worth a thread in their own right, but were largely a result in a turndown in trade due to Islamic slave raiders and pirates.

Steely Dan, your last sentence shows your ignorance history; no doubt due, as is much of the ignorance contained in your posts, to your blind prejudice.

The European dark ages are accepted by historians as beginning with the decline of the Western Roman Empire; beginning in the 4th century, 200 years before the birth of Mohammed. Brought about in part by the invasions of Pagan Germanic peoples.

Very little reading will show all but those blinded by prejudice that the Islamic world was far ahead of the Christian one in science and learning throughout the medieval period.

Of course, no Christian has ever engaged in slave raiding and piracy (sarcasm)!

It is also worth remembering that during the Middle Ages, whilst some Muslim states did persecute non Muslims, in most Christians and Jews were allowed to live and practice their religions freely.

Very different from the position of Jews in Christian Europe, where they were persecuted and massacred; for example the Rhineland massacres of 1096 and the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290.

Of course in extending normal rights to all prisoners our liberal friends would no doubt approve of written consent being sought before Michael Adebowale underwent a medical procedure.

Result, a doctor almost loses an eye.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/363576/Lee-Rigby-killer-Michael-Adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctor-s-eye-out-with-a-pen

Of course in extending normal rights to all prisoners our liberal friends would no doubt approve of written consent being sought before Michael Adebowale underwent a medical procedure.

Result, a doctor almost loses an eye.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/363576/Lee-Rigby-killer-Michael-Adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctor-s-eye-out-with-a-pen

Funny how this story pops up on all the usual "beacons of tolerance" websites and blogs...and what a story from the courageous Mr Lemanski.

Despite being handcuffed to 2 prison guards, allowing him little, if any, independent movement, the "pesky mohammedan fanatic" tries to stab the "courageous doctor" (wonder what ethnic group/religion he was?), requiring no less than "a dozen police officers", "armed with machine guns" no less, to subdue the shackled maniac. Since when have the Met been equipped with machine guns, but heck why let mere facts get in the way of a good agenda-driven froth?...

My goodness, 14 people wrestling with the soon-to-be-convicted piece of shiite, not forgetting all those "machine guns" getting in the way. This amazing "reporter" also seems to be clueless about Tasers, with his breathless 50,000 volt fixation. It's the amps that get you, not the voltage.

So bottom line.... a piece of convicted scum is involved in a minor scuffle, and the only casualty is...? Sounds like the minor earthquake/no tsunami, dog almost bites man style of "reporting", aka "bears shit in woods" in-depth analysis. Must have been a quiet news day. But I suppose any opportunity to advocate capital punishment (especially for non-white, non-middle class types), and demonize the entire muslim faith cannot be overlooked. Interesting to peruse Mr Lewanksi's previous articles for the "makes the Daily Mail look like serious journalism", Daily Star, as owned by the porn king of East London.

When's there is no story, the messenger is about as interesting as it gets.....

What's the next fabrication, whoops, cutting-edge scoop, "mooslim-looking person stares at slave-owning respectable Southern womenfolk, thus necessitating a lynching to show them who's master"?

It is also worth remembering that during the Middle Ages, whilst some Muslim states did persecute non Muslims, in most Christians and Jews were allowed to live and practice their religions freely.

Very different from the position of Jews in Christian Europe, where they were persecuted and massacred; for example the Rhineland massacres of 1096 and the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290.

That's totally uncalled for....

Claiming that Christians have been responsible for far more "cleansings", pogroms, and outright genocides against Jews is just not part of the agenda. Only "mooslims" commit such atrocities, the rest were just "misunderstandings"......

Facts getting in the way of agenda, heaven forbid (can't say "jehovah-forbid", just in case the stoner mob are around). Two flat ones and a bag of gravel, please....

Conservatives are intolerant of the intolerant, liberals are tolerant of the intolerant, providing they belong to an alien culture, but intolerant to the point of obsession with respect to local conservatives.

P.S The dark ages are worth a thread in their own right, but were largely a result in a turndown in trade due to Islamic slave raiders and pirates.

Looks like you failed your early European History GCSE, or was it the 11 plus (would explain much...)?

"conservatives" (in your lexicon) hate anyone who dares to present a counter (aka reasoned, supported) argument to bigotry, agenda, GFE and ignorance.

Followers of liberalism cannot stomach extremists of any ilk, shade or context. We don't discriminate.....

Yes, the same people who sit in Whitehall and our local council offices, who prefer sitting at their desks to going out in the community and discussing the problems facing the ordinary people. I go out to pubs, RBL, supermarket cafes and other venues where people sit and discuss their lives.

In almost all these discussions I find serious concern about the changing face of Britain and the lack of control that people have over the way their lives are 'trending'.

As most of you know, I have spent 40 years of my life outside the UK, working in all parts of the world (although little in the Americas) and have employed/worked alongside almost all nationalities. All countries have changed over those 40 years - my five different tours in Saudi have shown me five different countries. My different tours in VietNam have shown how fast that country is developing. My time in Bangladesh has shown very little advancement and my time in Nigeria scared seven different types of sh*t out of me. (But the Port Harcourt Hash was a real fortnightly fun run through the jungle).

My concerns cover not only the UK, but the world in general, where extreme views are becoming the norm - on many fronts. Far right Christian fundamentalists, Middle eastern zealots of several differing beliefs, nationalist views in Eastern Europe, all are threatening any chance of universal hegemony, which would require tolerance, but also no attempts at evangelical conversions, no condemnation of the changing of any person's beliefs (heresy) and no imposition of any one cant over any other, but solely a system of people being able to live together in reasonable harmony.

Giving credence and tolerance to the less tolerant views of many cults and sects does not help towards such universal aims. The leaders of such groups should be told that such views are unacceptable and will be condemned and that sanctions will be imposed on any further dissemination of such views/teachings.

Seems like you fit the demographic of the classic Telegraph reader. The Daily Mail is more geared to a female readership, and those challenged in the "news section" by more than 2 syllable words.

The "world going to hell in a handbasket" attitude is the hallmark of every generation in some of its senior sections. "pubs, the RBL, supermarket cafes and other venues" would tend to present a similar demographic and mind-set. What's better than peer-group and self-reinforced prejudices and world views.

Meanwhile the rest of the world and its inhabitants really aren't quite so bad, and, compared to the "glory days" of 30, 40, 50, 100 years ago, life for most people is hugely improved, if still a long way short of perfection.

Of course in extending normal rights to all prisoners our liberal friends would no doubt approve of written consent being sought before Michael Adebowale underwent a medical procedure.

Result, a doctor almost loses an eye.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/363576/Lee-Rigby-killer-Michael-Adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctor-s-eye-out-with-a-pen

Funny how this story pops up on all the usual "beacons of tolerance" websites and blogs...

And on no legitimate news sites

Indeed, not even Steely Dan's organ of choice, the Daily Mail, carried this (non) story.

It is also worth remembering that during the Middle Ages, whilst some Muslim states did persecute non Muslims, in most Christians and Jews were allowed to live and practice their religions freely.

Very different from the position of Jews in Christian Europe, where they were persecuted and massacred; for example the Rhineland massacres of 1096 and the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290.

I hesitate to offer this in an out of the box thread, seeing as many of our esteemed illiberal liberals treat anything outside of their own box as heresy. As I stated Islamic piracy, as first carried out by Mohammad against the tribes of Mecca has been a time honoured tactic, as well as the attendant slave taking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGU0y0ASRss

The PC orthodoxy regarding the so called 'Golden Age' is also a myth, well worth a thread in it's own right, as is the context of the crusades against a backdrop of centuries of Islamic aggression prior to the first crusade.

No one has said that there weren't slavers and pirates who were Muslims.

Surely even you don't deny that there were as many slavers and pirates who were Jews, Christians, any other religion you choose?

Slavery was commonplace all over the world in the pre industrial age; ask any black American or West Indian.

Can you explain how Muslim slavers and pirates caused an event which started over 200 years before Mohammed's birth?

It wasn't Muslims who carried out the Rhineland massacres; it was Christian crusaders.

No one has said that there weren't slavers and pirates who were Muslims.

Surely even you don't deny that there were as many slavers and pirates who were Jews, Christians, any other religion you choose?

Slavery was commonplace all over the world in the pre industrial age; ask any black American or West Indian.

Can you explain how Muslim slavers and pirates caused an event which started over 200 years before Mohammed's birth?

It wasn't Muslims who carried out the Rhineland massacres; it was Christian crusaders.

Suggested reading - "Mohammad and Charlemagne" - Henri Pirenne. The fall of Rome 476AD did not result in the Dark ages. Trade flourished, infrastructure was maintained for some 250 years under Gothic custodianship. Records such as coinage, or the number of shipwrecks (measure of trade) tailed off dramatically after 700AD - The real start of the Dark Ages. 5 Crusader battles scarcely show as a blip compared to the 500 or so during the first Jihad. The video shows the battles as dots in 20 year frames and also de-bunks the so called 'Golden Age' myth.

Of course in extending normal rights to all prisoners our liberal friends would no doubt approve of written consent being sought before Michael Adebowale underwent a medical procedure.

Result, a doctor almost loses an eye.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/363576/Lee-Rigby-killer-Michael-Adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctor-s-eye-out-with-a-pen

Funny how this story pops up on all the usual "beacons of tolerance" websites and blogs...

And on no legitimate news sites

So if it wasn't on BBC, it never happened?

Of course in extending normal rights to all prisoners our liberal friends would no doubt approve of written consent being sought before Michael Adebowale underwent a medical procedure.

Result, a doctor almost loses an eye.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/363576/Lee-Rigby-killer-Michael-Adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctor-s-eye-out-with-a-pen

Funny how this story pops up on all the usual "beacons of tolerance" websites and blogs...

And on no legitimate news sites

So if it wasn't on BBC, it never happened?

Can you point to the place where I mentioned the BBC in my post please?

The PC orthodoxy regarding the so called 'Golden Age' is also a myth

It was the wish for Persian astrology soon followed by the introduction of paper from China that created the so called golden age. It allowed the rich superstitious rulers to simply get entire libraries of conquered lands translated. Though immensely rich, the cost of papyrus was not cheap so with the availability of cheap paper, translating texts of all kinds took off.

There are some seriously noted people who would have had access to these translations by perhaps employing his own translators to the task. Mathematicians and astronomers for example. You can bet your bottom dollar that some of the astronomers considered the man in charge to be un-Islamic since astrology is considered sorcery. Maybe they just stole it so it is ascribed to them.

Funny how this story pops up on all the usual "beacons of tolerance" websites and blogs...

Of course in extending normal rights to all prisoners our liberal friends would no doubt approve of written consent being sought before Michael Adebowale underwent a medical procedure.

Result, a doctor almost loses an eye.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/363576/Lee-Rigby-killer-Michael-Adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctor-s-eye-out-with-a-pen

And on no legitimate news sites

So if it wasn't on BBC, it never happened?

Can you point to the place where I mentioned the BBC in my post please?

It's really a simple enough question. You said the incident was on "no legitimate news sites".

Why does the incident have to appear on a so called "legitimate news site" to be factual?

chukd, it didn't appear on ANY news site except that of a rag owned by a pornographer.

One of todays major headlines from that 'paper': Provocative Miss Porter! Jorgie bares underboob and peachy posterior in underwear!

(I wont dignify it with a link; it's easy enough to find for those who wish to do so.)

Quality journalism at it's best (sarcasm)!

As said before, not even Steely Dan's organ of choice, The Daily Mail, carried this non story.

Steely Dan, I don't have time to give you another history lesson at present.

It's really a simple enough question. You said the incident was on "no legitimate news sites".

Why does the incident have to appear on a so called "legitimate news site" to be factual?

It's not a simple enough question at all. You only mention the BBC because you don't like them. You could have chosen any one of a dozen news sources as an example. The Daily Telegraph? The Times? Reuters? The Press Association?

If what the Daily Star alleges happened were true it would be plastered right across the British media. It's not even mentioned in the Daily Mail and they would never pass up a chance to print a story like that. It wasn't true. It was made up. Who made it up is not really apparent but all the usual suspects are in the wings.

The article that SD quoted appeared in the Daily Star, Pamela Geller's website, Jihadwatch and Frontpage.com. It was quoted word for word on all of them. It also appeared on:

http://eastangliandivision.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/lee-rigby-killer-michael-adebowale-tried-to-gouge-doctors-eye-out-with-a-pen/

http://halalporkshop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/lee-rigbys-killer-attacks-doctor-during.html

http://www.britainfirst.org/news/lee-rigby-killer-michael-adebowale-attempts-to-gouge-out-a-doctors-eye-with-a-pen/

http://jn1.tv/video/news/soldier-s-killer-tried-to-blind-doctor-in-pen-attack.html

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/muslim-savage-who-hacked-to-death-british-soldier-lee-rigby-tries

They all quote the Daily Star and use that favourite trick of the British gutter press 'A source revealed...'

The Daily Star is the British equivalent of the National Enquirer. If you're happy to accept that kind of publication as a purveyor of credible news then I have to say I'm really disappointed in you.

Can you explain how Muslim slavers and pirates caused an event which started over 200 years before Mohammed's birth?

The fall of Rome 476AD did not result in the Dark ages.

Steely Dan, I don't have time to give you another history lesson at present.

Encyclopaedia Britannica

Dark Ages, the early medieval period of western European history. Specifically, the term refers to the time (476–800) when there was no Roman (or Holy Roman) emperor in the West; or, more generally, to the period between about 500 and 1000, which was marked by frequent warfare and a virtual disappearance of urban life.

Mohammed was born c. 570, that's about 100 years after the fall of the Roman empire, so I'll correct "over 200 years before Mohammed's birth" to "about 100 years before."

Pirenne is one historian, with his own thesis; some historians agree, others don't.

Regardless, the Islamic conquests were not the only conquests; before, at that time or since.

From the 15th century on, much of the world was subjugated, colonised and forced into Christianity by European powers. Do you find that as evil as you do the Islamic conquests of earlier centuries?

As for your video links, I admit to never having heard of Dr Bill Warner and a Google search has come up with nothing other than puffs from his own websites.

Perhaps you can come up with a link to an independent source carrying his biography and his academic qualifications; specifically what his doctorate is in.

I wonder if you know how many, approximately of course, Jews have been murdered by Muslim states since the foundation of Islam compared to the many millions massacred by Christian states in the 19th and 20th centuries; i.e. the Russian pogroms under both the Tsars and the, officially of no religion, Soviets and, of course, the Holocaust.

Western, Christian Europe has as much blood on it's hands as the Islamic world.

Unfortunately, extremists in both religions want that to continue; but fortunately at the moment the tolerant prevail. Hopefully this will continue.

As for your video links, I admit to never having heard of Dr Bill Warner and a Google search has come up with nothing other than puffs from his own websites.

Perhaps you can come up with a link to an independent source carrying his biography and his academic qualifications; specifically what his doctorate is in.

From the 'Political Islam' website

"Bill Warner holds a PhD in physics and math, NC State University, 1968. He has been a university professor, businessman, and applied physicist. "

"Bill Warner is the nom de guerre of Bill French."

So he isn't even who he says he is.

PhD in physics and maths........

A well qualified historian, then!

Found a brief biography for Bill French.

BILL FRENCH
ORGANIZATION Heads the for-profit Center for the Study of Political Islam in Nashville.

CREDENTIALS Former Tennessee State University physics professor; author of Sharia Law for Non-Muslims (2010; under the pen name Bill Warner).

SUMMARY French has no formal training or background in law, Islam or Shariah law — which in any case is not an established legal code, as the book title implies, but a fluid concept subject to a wide range of interpretations and applications. He garnered attention recently by leading the opposition to a proposed mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn.

(7by7 emphasis)

He's entitled to his views, of course, but to quote him as an authoritative source is really scraping the barrel!

When one makes statements such as 'Christians massacred 5,000 Jews in Russia, in the 19th century' and compare this to the number of Jews massacred in the ninth century by Muslims, or any other such comparison, one must also bear in mind the number of Jews existing in the entire world at that time, also the number existing in that part of the world.

None of these massacres are to be condoned - the Bani Hillel drove from Arabia across the Meghreb to Morrocco massacring the existing population of farmers and townspeople, bringing their goats with them, causing the entire region of previously verdant land to join the deserts of the Sahara. Remember that Libya was the breadbasket of the Roman Empire, but was brought to desparate poverty by the advance of Islam.

Percentages of population - whether the Christians, Jews and Muslims slaughtered by the Crusades or the numbers of Jews, deviants and gypsies (Roma) slaughtered by the Germans in the 1940s - should be considered alongside the actual population numbers.

Are you seriously suggesting that there were no goats, or other bovidae, in North Africa until the Arabs brought them?

The desertification of North Africa began about 6000 years ago and was caused mainly by climate change.

Amazing what Mohammed and his followers seem to have achieved before he was even born; first the fall of the Roman empire, now the creation of the Sahara desert!

Must have been some guy!

Your remarks concerning the Holocaust and the world's Jewish population at the time are too contemptible for further comment.

6 million dead is 6 million dead, no matter how many survived.