Italy: North African jihadists pose 'biggest' terror threat

just where is mussolini when Italy needs him????

You mean Mussolini, the close ally of Hitler...??

Yeah... right...

Italy? Nah! Really?

You mean that beautiful little Italy that has all these rainbow flags flying from every house and where nearly every other mayor is a commie, I mean real commies, not like those socialist turds in the north, where roads are named after Karl Marks and Engels and where Benetton has all those great 'one world' posters all over the place?

My, what's happening here, why can't we all just get along! Lets sing kumbayah and help these poor people. We can't condemn them just because they have another religion now, can we?

Like naive people who bring home a "street person"... and he ends up blungeoning them and their family to death... Italy has let its idealism trump its survival.

The Western Disease.

Rampant Illusions Of Islam.

just where is mussolini when Italy needs him???? posted above.

Forget Mussolini, but where is Oriana Fallaci when we need her?

One hundred years; four generations ago…

The mutinous soldiers first ran into the palace, where they begged the Sultan to intervene on their behalf with the French: “We are soldiers of the Sultan, not of the French!” they shouted. Moulai Hafid was decidedly nervous as he listened to their excited complaints about pay and that the French would make them carry knapsacks, which they regarded as below their dignity as warriors. “Take us with you when you leave Fez.” they begged. The Sultan eventually shoved these deputations back into the streets, where the mutiny had now become a full scale revolutionary journee with the “lowest elements of the towns people” joining the askar. Any French soldier found outside was pursued by a mob and murdered. Women on rooftops kept up a chorus of ululations. From their vantage points, some women even pointed out the quarry to the packs of pursuers. One or two soldiers bolted upstairs onto the roofs in an attempt to escape, only to be brought down by the large stones kept there to hold down laundry. The victims were stripped and hacked to pieces.

The Conquest of Morocco by Douglas Porch

Islamists will find the Italian people a little less tolerant that the French and British.

We Italians do not easily forget our heritage and History.

If it is one thing you will not readily find in Italy is apologists and imbeciles in political circles who pander to these people when they are caught out.

No need for Mussolini and Fallaci, in Italy they are almost all 99% Fallaci when it comes to Islam.

I was in Italy when the ding bat in Iran made the comments about how Israel should be wiped off the map.

The Italians in my knowledge were the only ones to have marches to protest that nuts comments.

They had debates and TV shows in solidarity with the Jewish community in Italy.

We may have surrendered in WW2 but you will find Italians a little less complacent when and if push comes to shove with Islamists in the old Country.

If Moroccans were Christian, Morocco would be a lovely country, something closer to Italy or Greece.
Islam spoils people and places!

"Islamist networks in the Balkans"

More precisely, in the Solar System...

My, what's happening here, why can't we all just get along! Lets sing kumbayah and help these poor people. We can't condemn them just because they have another religion now, can we?
Posted by: sheik yer'mami

Sheik.. makes me think of a recent expose in "spiegelonline.de", a VERY liberal German newsweekly, about the Dalai Lame-ah who recently proclaimed that - GASP - *all* religions strive for and preach peace.

Break out the Koolaid.. I bet they grow some pretty good weed in Ol' Tibet so close to the sun with none of that bothersome ozone getting in the way..

What his made me think of is my own version of thepopuylar old Buddhist ditty re. the Man and the Butterfly..

Here goes mine..

I woke up this morning and I had dreamt that I was an agnostic among many peace-loving and tolerant moslems who took great care to give me great hospitality and take care of my every need while I stayed in Mecca.. only to wake up and see moslems marching in London with sinister, ugly and hateful placards attacking the kind Nation who'd taken them in and taken care of their every need, who'd given them shelter and provided for them.. out of the kindness of their hospitable hearts..

startled as I was I looked around.. and the situation was the same no matter where I looked.. Holland, Germ,any, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, France, Italy.. and a few others too.. everywhere ugly hateful manifestations of moslem hatred toward those who'd been showing them such wonderful and gracious hospitality..

So I remembered that old Buddhist [the original Religion of Peace - not joking on that one] tale of the monk who'd dreamt he was abutterfly but now he was no longer sure he was a Man after he woke up..

Such gorgeous luxurious sophistry in the face of and incomprehensibly violent and evil creed..

Thinking of those inspiring words.. and having put down a lot of Euros to see the Dalai Lame-ah speak in a tennis center in Hamburg.. I rolled over and refocused on my fading Buddhist dream..

That is the state of present-day Europe as I see it.. and much of USA and AUS as well. Thank God to a lesser degree so far.

Everyone wants to hold on to their beautiful dreams...

Very few of us JUMP out of bed at the slightest hint of a menace.

Two lessons I learned from this: Superficially 'grokked' Buddhism is Opium for the West. This is not meant to put down Buddhism at its core. I freely confess I know NOTHING about it so I'd never presume to judge it any further than what I consider its gross misappropriation as a religionate opiate by a disaffected and mentally lazy class of Westerners who are seeking the easy answers to everything.

Another thing I realize is that Buddhism so far does not provide the requisite answers to the comparatively recent threat of islam - if one keeps in mind the thousands of years that Buddhism has been around.

And.. I'd like you.. if you are still reading this.. to consider the following... does the butterfly every wonder if he is really a Man dreaming that he is a butterfly?

I, for one, have never discussed nor have I questioned any of my dreams while I was actually dreaming.

I know this doesn't belong here, but hear me out.. I am dying to know if there is anyone who can report different.. meaning please post - even if ever so briefly - in case you have contemplated a dream while you were actually dreaming.

So far my theory rests almost exclusively upon my own personal experience..

I think that the Buddhist butterfly parable should be interpreted as indicative of Wo/Man's desire to idealize.. Our desire to see only the positive.. Our.. escapism... Our "Three Monkeys Syndrome".

So logically everyone hates those who shout and WAKE them up from their wishful slumber.. the Hugh Fitzgeralds and the Robert Spencers of the World being among the first and foremost.. as well as uniquely eloquent and factually persuasive.. to shatter those beautiful dreams of those who'd rather be a naked butterfly fluttering across a giant sunlit rainbow flag..

ZAP!

Even in the Matrix those dreams are catered to and the body is maintained for the gain of those who enslaved most of Mankind.

Noone likes to confront the Really Bad News that is Right In Our Faces!

But yes, those Italians with their Rainbow Flags and those Germans with their Multikulti-"Kültürfests" have to somehow be brought back to Reason - if we all are to survive as Free Women and Men and as Free and Independent Nations.

I really have a hard time to figure out what's so bad about our Reality today as we have it!!

NOONE's ever had it this good.. as pertains to the great wide masses of the Free Western World.

GET OVER YOURSELVES, you stupid rainbow-butterfly dreamers.. Your selfish delusions of Icarus are threatening to drag down not only your own selves, but also the very rest of us, whom you so vehemently and often viciously oppose and denounce for attempting to awake you from your sweet and wishful dreams.

Time to WAKE UP!! Your dreams are not only a danger to yourselves, but a danger for All Mankind.

We are begging you to WAKE UP and join us so that we may together defend the Freedom and the Humanity that we presently have.

Reality ain't so bad, people.

Things could get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.

Allahfanculo:

Buddhism all but wiped out in India and Indonesia. Thailand, a Buddhist country, is under attack in the south and a Muslim general ousted the elected PM a year ago.

"We can't condemn them just because they have another religion now, can we?"

The above is an actual phrase from Germany's green party minister Jurgen Trittin, a facilitator and panderer to the Islamic cause.

http://google.com/trends?q=jihad&ctab=0&geo=all&date=2007&sort=0

Well, it appears that Morocco has once again reclaimed the top spot in Google jihad queries.

Assalamau Laikum all,

I am somewhat surprised that so many peoples support Italy after what the Romans did to Jesus PBUh.

I support Dua ...but strictly without violence....so I do not offer any support or hope for those morrocan lunds that do so damage Islam.

However getting back....Italy essentially snatched the cradle of christianity from the ME to Rome....that after they knocked off Jesus PBUh....our joint prophet .

Surely after bringing the seat of religious power to Italy...you started to change Christianity ....making it more Western...in name, (e.g. Royal city of David...rather than Daud), deed and flavour.

The real essence of christianity is where it touches shoulders with...your favourite ...Islam....and that means the ME.

In Italy, Christianity has grown on it's own....it's roots have been changed ...and it has less character....and I can to an extent understand that you don't want to touch shoulders with Islam in Italy itself...but then you cannot know the real christianity....how can you deny yourself this?

How can you support Islam without supporting violence Naseem. How do you think Mo expanded the caliphate and ummah. Flowers and candy?

Yes, the maghreb has gotten a major increase in terrorist activity, both in recruitment and chatter.
(makes it easier to get through western scrutiny, much like those that got as far as they did in the UK)
But the largest increase itself by far comes from India (same reasons as above).

This means they're trying to find new ways to penetrate our levels of security, which they've not been able to break using their old methods.
Though evil & twisted (as if any of them aren't), such methods make perfectly good sense for them to try this.
Now, while I seriously doubt we should be on guard for Apoo at the squishie machine at the local quickie-mart (a joking spin off the TV show "The Simpsons"), remember there are more mOslems in India than there are in all of Pakistan-and though most of them hate the "paks" (their derogatory term for them), there are obviously sympathizers as well...and many of them would appear more Hindu than mOslem (recall history of India & both pakistani regions).

Case in point for profiling.

I am somewhat surprised that so many peoples support Italy after what the Romans did to Jesus PBUh.

Naseem the only thing that somewhat surprises me is how you have consistently taken ignorance to new heights.

A major difference between rational, reasoned thought common in the west, and the insanity common in your part of the word is that we do not condemn whole nations as wicked and evil. Every individual is to be judged on the content of their character.

There are good and bad people in all groups, including Muslims. Muslims who want no part in the anti-infidel jihad, who want to live as equals and who do not want to replace democratic law with sharia, are welcome in our civilization. Muslims who harbor sympathy for jihad, sharia, dhimmitude, etc, must be confronted, discredited and neutralized. The problem is, it is impossible to do so using Islamic arguments, therefore, for the good of humanity, Islam as an idea must be confronted and discredited. One must necessarily do so with humanitarian arguments foreign to Islam.

Contrast all of this with Muslim world rhetoric that tars Jews as "apes and pigs" and marks all Jews for death. All that does is set up open-ended warfare that continues for generations, an explicit rejection of peace for all time.

"If Moroccans were Christian, Morocco would be a lovely country, something closer to Italy or Greece. Islam spoils people and places!"
-- from a posting above

But it was. North Africa was inhabited by Christians as well as local cults, before Islam arrived with the Arab conquerors. Tertullian and St. Augustine -- he of Hippo -- were Christian maghrebins.

During the period of French rule in Algeria (1830-1962), and in Morocco and Tunisia (roughly 1912-1956) and Italian rule in Libya before the War, and the British not ruling but, under Lord Cromer, helping to reform and make relatively efficient and corruption-free the Egyptian Civil Service (see Edward Cecil, "Memoirs of an Egyptian Civil Servant"), North Africa enjoyed its only modern period of what might be called civilization. The first schools and universities, hospitals, semi-decent treatment of non-Muslim minorities (the loi Cremieux of 1870, that permitted the Jews of Algiera, who had to endure such terrible mistreatment under Islamic law, were now to be considered citizens of France, and to be treated as equal citizens, not as wretched dhimmis), the new methods of agriculture (what is in Algeria today is entirely the result of what the French left, in plant, and knowhow, and traditions).

North Africa has descendly descended since the French, the Italians, and even Lord Cromer's civil servants, all left. For a while these lands coasted on that inheritance. The one that seems to be doing the best is Tunisia, and that is for one reason only: Bourguiba was both militantly secular, and unafraid to use force. His Destour Party was the only game in town. His successors have managed to keep the faith: Ben Ali runs a police state, but a benign police state, designed only to keep Islam in check, in the manner of Ataturk. And that is why Tunisia, without any oil at all, is the one semi-successful Arab state. Its Francophone elite (French television is always showing programs about very well-off elegant French-speaking Arabs at home, and they always turn out be Lebanese Christian antiquaires or, when Muslims, "cultural Muslims" from Tunisia. It keeps the French public in a relatively subdued state, and of course nicely misinformed about the menace of Islam. There are more Gannouchis than Ben Alis in North Africa.

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
Islamic education for all
Great Britain plan would move toward 'religion of state'
Posted: August 2, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

A new government study is being condemned by the Christian ministry the Barnabas Fund because its proposals would move closer to imposing Islam in the United Kingdom as "a religion of state."

Among the proposals from the study being considered for implementation is the provision by universities for Islamic studies for all students.

The report was initiated by Bill Rammell, the minister of state for higher education and lifelong learning, officials said. He appointed Ataullah Siddiqui, senior research fellow at the Islamic Foundation, to write it.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56973

Well, I got an idea 'Italy'! Why don't you get off your behinds, rally the spineless Europeans around you, get the Pope out of his palace, and start doing something about it?!

Instead what do we read? We read that 214 members of the European parliament are going to try to do something about Islamophobia.

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/08/02/european-socialists-take-aim-at-islamophobia/#comment-11359

As for what the Romans did to Jesus, and what some think the Jews did to Him - maybe we should do what Jesus did - forgive them. None of those people are alive today and I think that getting 'over it' is about due. But, then there is the 'what have the muslims done to us, and what are they doing to us now, and trying to do to us' that is more pressing. I don't want think that following a rapist, enslaver, kidnapper, torturer, liar, thief, and a murderer, such as mohammed, is anything that I want to do.

Italians are painfully aware of Allied Moroccan atrocities commited in WW II, looting and raping, as demanded by their Mohamedan war manual, the Koran. De Sica's film "Two Women" will remind them of this for a long time, as it is burned into to common people's collective consciousness, along with other atrocities commited by the Mohamedans over the centuries.

If you are not familiar with "Two Women" here's a short description of De Sica's film: http://www.tcm.com/thismonth/article.jsp?cid=99299&mainArticleId=136002

Little Italy will be the first to respond to the new worldwide jihad threat with a hard line against the Mohamedans, because they had suffered much over the centuries from these Moslem devils.

The poster just above mentions the excellent movie "La Ciociara" (englished as either "Two Women" or as "Women of Rome") that was made from a book by Alberto Moravia. He describes the behavior, not of the American, or the French, troops, but specifically of the Moroccans who came as part of the French contingent.

One might also note the behavior of the Central Asian troops of the Red Army when they arrived in Germany.

Finally, last night I saw a program on the RAI (the Italian channel) in which a man in Reggio Calabria was being interviewed. He was talking about all the invaders and sea raiders who had made life intermittent hell for the locals. He mentioned "arabi, marocchini, e mamma-li-turchi."

I allow myself to believe that the first comment in this thread was merely a thoughtless and lame joke. There is no room at this website for those nostalgic for fascists or nazis or other supposed "strong men." Mussolini was a clown and a menace, and deserved what in the end he got, and no one should weaken in their understanding of what he did and was. In fact, there is one current Muslim Arab leader who, in his jutting-jaw pose (as when standing beside Sarkozy), and his sheer goofiness and his crowd-haranguing and his Green Book and his dreams of past Tripolitanian glory that entitle his country, so he thinks, to "lead all of Africa," is a perfect double or sosie of the late and entirely to be unlamented Benito Mussolini. And that is Muammar Khaddafy. An Arab Mussolini. And even some of the backdrop -- built by Italians -- is reminiscent, in Benghazi and Tripoli, of the stage-set of the earlier and Italian version of Khaddafy, Benito Mussolini, haranguing the crowds from the balcony (e che balcone!) of the Palazzo Venezia.

Khadaffy's son Saif al-Islam Khaddafy, who works tirelessly as head of the Khaddafy Foundation, a job for which he was hired after the usual nation-widesearch, is quite fond of Italy. Naturally, like any sensible Arab, he spends as much time in Europe as he can. I can't remember if it is he, or a brother, involved in soccer with the Perugia team. But surely, if you were Khaddafy's son, you would high-tail it out of unendurable Libya and stay in Italy, if you could -- wouldn't you?

Here, in Italian, is an article on the Moroccan troops (the soi-disant "goumier") in southern Italy, that graphically describes their raping and looting, and also describes, what is as important, the fact that the French promised them that they could engage in "saccheggio e preda." Perhaps Stefania or some other native Italian samaritan will translate the text below at a speed faster than I could rival. It's an important article and deserves to be disseminated in English:

Tommaso BARIS

Montecassino 1944, scatenate i marocchini
tratto da Millenovecento, n. 14, dicembre 2003.

Tommaso Baris è dottorando di ricerca di storia contemporanea presso la Facoltà di Scienze Politiche dell'Università La Sapienza di Roma. La tesi di laurea "Esperienza bellica e mutamenti sociali. L'impatto della guerra sulla popolazione civile del Frusinate 1943-1948" ha vinto la prima edizione del premio "Luigi Micheletti". Sullo stesso argomento Baris ha scritto anche il libro "Fra due fuochi", uscito per la Laterza

Nella primavera del 1944, gli anglo-americani, bloccati ad Anzio e Cassino dall'accanita difesa tedesca (1), decisero di aggirare l'ostacolo chiedendo al comandante francese Alphonse Juin di espugnare la dorsale montuosa degli Aurunci, prendendo alle spalle il dispositivo di difesa germanico. Il 12 maggio l'offensiva francese fu lanciata in direzione del monte Faito e del monte Maio, il cui controllo consentiva l'accesso alla catena dei monti Musoni. Grazie all'attacco condotto attraverso località assai impervie, in due giorni le truppe marocchine inquadrate nell'esercito francese (i cosiddetti goumier) aprirono ai mezzi corazzati la via per Ceprano e Frosinone e risalirono, nella settimana successiva, la provincia fino alla valle dell'Amaseno e del Sacco, costringendo i tedeschi a una rovinosa ritirata per evitare l'accerchiamento (2). Durante la loro travolgente avanzata, per circa due settimane, dal 15 maggio all'inizio di giugno, quasi dimezzate dalla resistenza tedesca (alla fine della battaglia i goumier erano ridotti a circa 7 mila), le truppe francesi si abbandonarono a una serie impressionante di saccheggi, omicidi e stupri in tutti i paesi conquistati, soprattutto contro gruppi ristretti di persone o individui isolati, finchè non fu loro ordinato di arrestare la marcia a Valmontone. Il carattere sistematico delle violenze e la sostanziale acquiescenza di comandanti e ufficiali diffusero la convinzione della libertà di azione concessa ai soldati coloniali contro i civili, nonostante le sanzioni previste nei codici militari per i reati citati. In un memorandum della Presidenza del Consiglio, l'atteggiamento degli ufficiali francesi era duramente stigmatizzato perché «lungi dall'intervenire e dal reprimere tali crimini hanno invece infierito contro la popolazione civile che cercava di opporvisi», segnalando come le truppe marocchine fossero state reclutate «mediante un patto che accorda loro il diritto di preda e saccheggio» (3). «Gli ufficiali lasciano ai marocchini una discreta libertà di azione» e «nella generalità dei casi essi preferiscono ignorare e da qualcuno è stato anche detto che agli irregolari marocchini spetta il diritto di preda».

Una nota del 25 giugno del 1944 del comando generale dell'Arma dei Carabinieri dell'Italia liberata alla Presidenza del Consiglio, segnalava nei comuni di Giuliano di Roma, Patrica, Ceccano, Supino, Morolo, e Sgurgola, in soli tre giorni (dal 2 al 5 giugno), 418 violenze sessuali, di cui 3 su uomini, 29 omicidi, 517 furti compiuti dai soldati marocchini, i quali «infuriarono contro quelle popolazioni terrorizzandole. Numerosissime donne, ragazze e bambine (...) vennero violentate, spesso ripetutamente, da soldati in preda a sfrenata esaltazione sessuale e sadica, che molte volte costrinsero con la forza i genitori e i mariti ad assistere a tale scempio. Sempre ad opera dei soldati marocchini vennero rapinati innumerevoli cittadini di tutti i loro averi e del bestiame. Numerose abitazioni vennero saccheggiate e spesso devastate e incendiate» (5).

L'impatto per la popolazione civile fu quindi traumatico. L'ondata di violenza generalizzata e sottratta a ogni controllo dei tanto attesi liberatori gettò gli abitanti in uno stato di prostrazione profonda, accentuando il senso di sfiducia verso ogni realtà esterna. La liberazione tanto agognata si trasformò in un incubo di violenza sfrenata e incontrollata. L'inatteso seguito degli avvenimenti è rimasto impresso a caratteri assai vividi nella memoria dei protagonisti (6). «Li potettero qua a migliaia, se vedevano scegnere dalla montagna... da luntano erano come alle furmiche», ricorda Concetta C. «Ma fuiette nu passaggio, in tre iuorni, facettero l'inferno. Erano na razzaccia brutta e sporca. C'avevano gli 'recchini agliu nase, certe vesti longhe (...). pe tutta la montagna se sentivano strilli e lamenti...» (7). Giovannina M., un'altra testimone intervistata, dei marocchini dice: «Nui aspettavamo gli liberatori, arrivettero chigli da n'auta razza. Erano brutti, parevano gli diavoli. Ce rubettero chigliu poche che c'era rimasto e facettero tanto scempio della populazione... C'avevano carta bianca agliu fronte e facettero tutte chelle sporcizie agli omene e alle femmene... una strage. Chisti marocchini erano sporchi, come alle bestie. Erano niri con gli occie rusci, con gli 'recchini agliu nase... na montagna piena, sbucavano da tutte le parte, pigliavano tutte le donne che incuntravano e se le purtavano alla boscaglia, passavano in colonna in mieso a nui... addò vuò scappà?» (8).

Non diversa l'immagine trasmessa dalle fonti ufficiali. Una relazione del Ministero degli Affari Esteri sottolineava che «quotidianamente, in qualunque ora del giorno e della notte» avvenivano «violazioni carnali, ferimenti e assassini, rapine e saccheggi. Molto frequenti erano stati i casi di ragazze giovanissime deflorate e violentate successivamente da interi gruppi di soldati in preda a furia sadica», mentre «molte donne sono state trovate cadavere a seguito delle violenze patite. Molto spesso tali atrocità sono state commesse in presenza dei famigliari, ridotti prima all'impotenza, e dopo il massacro degli stessi», confermando che «i genitori, i fratelli, i mariti» erano stati costretti «ad assistere allo scempio effettuato» e spesso «uccisi, feriti o malmenati per la resistenza fatta o la difesa esercitata allo scopo di impedire le violenze carnali» (9). La natura selvaggia del comportamento del Cef disorientò quindi la popolazione, convinta di vedere arrivare gli americani: «Girava la voce che venivano gli americani... invece gli americani non c'hanno passato alla montagna» (10) dice Tommaso Fortunato. la sorpresa fu totale. Gli abitanti rimasero stupiti prima dall'aspetto dei liberatori, poi, dall'inatteso dilagare delle violenze. «E' stata brutta. per fortuna i marocchini qui non sono passati... all'inizio quando ho visto a Sora questi neri, ho detto: mamma mia guarda gli animali... lo dissi alla figlia della padrona, perché non mi rendevo conto che anche loro erano esseri umani» (11). «Nui non lo sapevamo mica che chisti marocchini pigliavano le femmine», racconta Maria De Angelis, «Nui sentivamo alluccà (gridare) ma non lo sapevamo chello che stevano a portà annanze (avanti) la gente pé la riparà e loro non ce vulevano ì (andare)» (12).

La sensazione di impotenza, la tolleranza mostrata dai comandi verso i marocchini, il riconoscimento ufficiale che pareva accompagnare la loro violenza selvaggia e indiscriminata, totalmente al di fuori di una possibile regolamentazione, sconcertò gli abitanti dei paesi liberati. L'impossibilità di una qualsiasi difesa dinnanzi al dispiegarsi di una ferocia animalesca (più volte richiamata dall'accostamento dei goumier alle bestie), così feroce da fuoriuscire dalla sfera umana (indemoniati e diavoli sono infatti definiti ripetutamente i marocchini), l'abbandono subito dalle autorità alleate in cui avevano riposto tanta fiducia, segnarono in maniera indelebile la memoria dei giorni di guerra. L'immagine restituitaci, e dalla documentazione archivistica e dalle testimonianze orali, è quella di un paesaggio infernale: «I soldati marocchini che avevano bussato alla porta e che non venne aperta, abbattuta la porta stessa colpivano la Rocca con il calcio del moschetto alla testa facendola cadere a terra priva di sensi, quindi veniva trasportata di peso a circa 30 metri dalla casa e violentata mentre il padre (...) da altri militari veniva trascinato, malmenato e legato a un albero. Gli astanti terrorizzati non potettero arrecare nessun aiuto alla ragazza e al genitore in quanto un soldato rimase di guardia con il moschetto puntato sugli stessi» (13).

«Nui le semo incontrati per la via e pure in mieso alla strada se pigliavano le femmene», racconta sempre Giovannina M. «Gli omene anziani che stavano con nui nun ce putevano soccorre pecchè loro erano assai e ammazzavano chili che difendevano le donne...C'erano gli graduati che erano bianchi, francisi e non gli dicevano (g)niente. Iemmo (andammo) a fa commedia agliu commando... ce dissero che per fa ì (andare) annanzi gli marocchi li avevano dovuti dà "carta bianca". Solo alla fine, dopo tre iuorni, gli tolsero sta carta bianca». «Arrivettero addò stavamo nui e con chisti ce stevano pure i francisi, chigli che gli cumannavano», aggiunge Concetta C. «E facettero stragi... Io c'avevo le mie cose, quando se ne accurgettero gli due che m'avevano sbattuta per terra s'alluntanarono (...). Sai quante vecchie so morte per gliu dolore...». La popolazione poté soltanto nascondersi, sperando di riuscire a sfuggire ai soldati: «La notte so arrivati chisti marocchini e hanno cominciato a bussare alle case... grida dappertutto nel paese. A casa nostra non hanno fatto niente pecché la seconda notte si è ristretta tutta la famiglia... abbiamo chiuso dentro con una varra (sbarra) dietro la porta, e così dopo tre giorni è passata la furia» (14). Per il capitano Pittalli «il 90% delle persone che hanno attraversato la zona di operazioni delle truppe marocchine sono state derubate di ogni loro avere, come anche molto alto è il numero delle donne violentate, e notevole anche il numero degli atti contro natura commessi a danno di uomini», ricordando che «molti casi vengono taciuti» (15). I dati del Ministero degli Interni, raccolti pochi mesi dopo la liberazione, indicano in circa 3.100 le donne vittime delle violenze sessuali da parte delle truppe marocchine (16) ma si tratta di una stima nettamente inferiore al numero reale degli abusi. La guerra moderna tendenzialmente totale, mise quindi in comunicazione anche le piccole località periferiche con i grandi eventi, che spesso finirono per coinvolgerle. La comunità, impossibilitata ad incidere sugli eventi, non riuscì ad elaborare una valutazione condivisa della violenza che la travolse.

Note
(1) Sui numerosi tentativi degli anglo-americani di sfondare la linea Gustav nella zona di Cassino esiste una vasta bibliografia: W Nardini, Cassino fino all'ultimo uomo, Milano, Mursia, 1962; R. Bohmler. Montecassino. Con le truppe tedesche dalla Sicilia a Roma, Milano, Baldini & Castaldi, 1965; F. Majdalany, La battaglia di Cassino, Milano, Garzanti, 1974; J. Piekalkiewicz, Cassino. Anatomia di una battaglia, Novara, De Agostini 1981; D. Hopgood/D. Richardson, Montecassino, Milano, Rizzoli, 1985.
(2) B.H. Liddel Hart, Storia militare della seconda guerra mondiale, Milano, Mondatori, 1970, pag. 750.
(3) ACS, PCM, 1948-50, n.33491, f.19-10, sf. 1 Violenze truppe alleate. Il memorandum non datato accompagna la lettera del Presidente del Consiglio Ivanoe Bonomi alla Commissione alleata di Controllo del 10-7-1944.
(4) ASMAE, Affari politici, 1931-1945, Francia, b. 98, f. Atrocità varie commesse dalle truppe francesi ai nostri danni, sf. 1 Nota del capitano Pittalli della stazione dei Carabinieri del 25-5-1944.
(5) ACS PCM, 1944-47, n.10270, f. 19-10, sf 1 Truppe alleate comportamento. Nota del Comando generale dell'arma dei Carabinieri del 25-5-1944.
(6) Sull'immagine delle truppe marocchine conservata nella memoria delle donne: V. Chiurlotto (a cura di), Donne come noi. Marocchinate 1944-bosniache 1993, in "DWF", n1, 1993, pp 42-67.
(7) Intervista a Concetta c, 1918, contadina, realizzata il 12-9-1999 ad Esperia.
(8) Intervista a Giovannina M, 1921, contadina, realizzata il 13-9-1999 ad Esperia.
(9) ACS, PCM, 1944-47, n.10270 f. 19-10: "Truppe alleate comportamenti". Telespressodel 16-10-1944, inviato dal Ministero degli Affari Esteri alla Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, al Ministero degli Interni, allo Stato Maggiore Generale, alle rappresentanze diplomatiche italiane di Londra e Washington.
(10) Intervista a Tommaso Fortunato, 1912, contadino, realizzata il 20-11-2001 ad Esperia.
(11) Intervista a Laura A, 1927, casalinga, realizzata il 23-04-2001 a Cassino da Francesca Burdi.
(12) Intervista a Maria De Angelis, 1927, contadina, realizzata il 30-12-2001 ad Esperia.
(13) ASF, Prefettura di Frosinone 1927-1987, II serie, b.1620, f. "Donne violentate dai marocchini. Piedimonte San Germano". Segnalazione dei Carabinieri all'Ufficio provinciale dell'Assistenza postbellica del 9-9-1946.
(14) Intervista a Gladinoro Messore, 19282, contadino, realizzata il 90-2-2002 a S. Ambrogio sul Garigliano.
(15) ASMAE, Affari politici, 1931-45, Francia b.98, f. "Atrocità varie commesse dalle truppe francesi ai nostri danni" sf. 1 Nota del capitano Pittalli alla stazione dei carabinieri di Aversa del 28-5-1944.
(16) ACS, MI, Gab.1944-46, b. 27, f. 2097, "Assistenza sanitaria alle donne che subirono violenza da parte dei marocchini nella provincia di Frosinone e Littoria". Nota del 13-9-1944.

IL PROCLAMA FANTASMA DI JUIN
«Il vostro generale vi annuncia, vi promette solennemente, vi giura, sul suo onore di soldato e sulla bandiera della Francia, che si alza, per l'ultima volta, il sole sulle vostre sofferenze, sulle vostre privazioni, sulla vostra fame. Oltre quei monti, oltre quei nemici che stanotte ucciderete, c'è una terra larga... ricca di donne, di vino, di case. Se voi riuscirete a passare oltre quella linea senza lasciare vivo un solo nemico, il vostro generale vi promette, vi giura, vi proclama che quelle donne, quelle case, quel vino, tutto quello che troverete sarà vostro, a vostro piacimento e volontà. Per 50 ore. E potrete avere tutto, prendere tutto, distruggere o portare via, se avrete vinto, se ve lo sarete meritato». E' tradizione diffusa che all'alba del giorno fissato per l'attacco sul fronte del Garigliano, il 14 maggio 1944, il generale Alphonse Juin abbia inoltrato, alle truppe nordafricane (goumier) della seconda divisione di fanteria, del generale Dody, e della quarta divisione da montagna, del generale Guillaume, il proclama appena citato. Di questo proclama, pubblicato nelle più disparate versioni non si ha però attualmente traccia che ne assicuri la veridicità storica. E' comunque da rimarcare il rifiuto opposto dalle autorità francesi alla libera consultazione degli archivi militari per la vicenda in questione: se ci fosse una smentita a questa tesi o comunque una serie di carte che la rendessero improbabile, il comportamento delle autorità francesi sarebbe lo stesso?"

The most important thing to have translate is this excerpt:

"le truppe francesi si abbandonarono a una serie impressionante di saccheggi, omicidi e stupri in tutti i paesi conquistati, soprattutto contro gruppi ristretti di persone o individui isolati, finchè non fu loro ordinato di arrestare la marcia a Valmontone. Il carattere sistematico delle violenze e la sostanziale acquiescenza di comandanti e ufficiali diffusero la convinzione della libertà di azione concessa ai soldati coloniali contro i civili, nonostante le sanzioni..."

Sacheggi -- lootings
Omicidi -- murders
Stupri -- rapes

And it was the same with Muslim troops from Central Asia in Germany. It was the same with the Arabs in Damascus, when the English and the Australians, who had in fact taken Damascus from the Turks, allowed for the sake of Arab self-esteem (akin to what the Americans pretended about the value the Saudi and other Arab troops, utterly useless, during the Gulf War, or the way in which "Iraqi" troops are given exaggerated credit by American generals -- though not the intermediate officers and men -- in present-day Iraq) to enter Damascus and take control of the Grman and Turkish prisoners, whom they proceeded to massacre and mutilate in the style that was employed by Muslims massacring the English in India in 1857, or in Afghanistan a bit later, or again, against the English, in Iraq (Mesopotamia) during the 1920s.

Nothing changes. And nothing will change, unless the entire civilization undergoes a makeover. And it won't. It can't. There is Islam. Some have tried, in even tiny ways, to change it. They haven't succeeded. The only way to deal with it is, as is done in Turkey and Tunisia, to suppress and constrain it. In the Lands of the Infidels, suppressing and constraining should not be necessary if Islam is not permitted to gain or retain a significant presence in the first place.

Italy faces its "biggest terrorism risks" from North African jihadists, including some linked to Islamist networks in the Balkans, the Middle East and Central Asia, according to a report by the Italian secret services.

Every country in the West, including the United States, knows about the Muslim (not Jihadist) threat to themslves, but they leave their doors wide open to Muslim immigration into their countries. It's if the leaders of Western nations are so paralyzed with fear of offending the Islamic world that they would rather take a chance with the security of their own people than to do what's necessary to protect them.

The world trade center, along with numerous other terrorist conspiricies, hasn't goaded our own leaders into doing the only logical thing to defend us -- Stop Muslim immigration into our country.

So I wonder if there's any terrorist act that could possibly goad other Westen nations into doing what is necessary to protect themselves?

Will Italy act if Muslims blew the dome off St. Peters, and maybe destroy centries of great art works along with it?

Will the British act if all the stained glass windows in Westminister Abbey are blown to pieces?

Will France act if Notre Dame, or the Louvre, with all its irreplaceable art works, are reduced to a pile of rubble?

Will the Netherlands act if they lose a few dozen Rembrandts, along with a couple hundred other works by the great Dutch masters?

We didn't act after the world trade center -- not in the way we should have by banning Muslims from entering this country --, so I wonder how much carnage other Western nations are willing to endure before thay do anything?

I suspect one of the few ways in which Italy could truly clamp down on North African jihad is to do what Western Europe should have done a long time ago-encourage as much tension, in North Africa and among European immigrants, between Arabs and Amazigh. I don't know what any actual European posters here would say, but to my knowledge, even among muslim immigrants the difference between Arab and Amazigh peoples can be astronomical. Amazigh like Kablyes, Chawis and Riffians become succesful teachers, professors, members of APrlaiment, doctors and lawyers, earning salaries in the six figures on aregular basis. Arabs become more likely to remain trapped in ghettos and suck of welfare systems in a manner so shameless that it cannot be seen even among the worst "welfare pimps" in America. There must be some in Italy, and Spain and France, who've noticed the blatantly obvious differences between Arabs and Amazigh, whether it was during WWII, the Algerian war of independnece or among recent immigrants. They're the ones who remain staunch atheiests, convert to chrisitanity in large numbers, or at the very least keep Islam int heir socieites under control, offering genuine hope for "refomation" that makes them not a quarter as dangerous as Arab immigrants

BTW, does anyone know if the Gourmeirs who did all those atrocities in Italy were Arabs or Berbers? Given the big differences between Arabs and Amazigh, I would imagine that the Gourmiers who did those atrocites were either Arabs or Berbers who thought of themselves as arabs. Also, being ethnically berber does not in these societies ena being "berber"; just like how Egyptian Arabs are often descended from Coptic Christians and Iraqi "Arabs" from Assyrians, so most North African Arabs are in fact descended from Amazigh.

Lastly, what was the situation with the Cnetral Asian troops of the Red Army? Were troops like the Uzbeks, Kazakhs and Kyrgyz really known for being unnecessarily cruel among Red Army troops? It's just that the Red Army was quite horrific in general, and these Central Asian troops, especially the Kazakhs, were probably not pious or serious muslims in any sense of the word, hence it seems unlikely they would have been particularly motivated by religous incnetives to be particualrly cruel. Same goes for North African Non-Arab troops, although given the racist sentiments among WWII Europeans, any accusations of actoricites by non-white troops have to be taken with a dose of salt. Not to be defending Islamic jihadists in any snese, but the accusations against North African and Central Asian troops could have been made, and probably were, against black african troops, including Christians, Hindus from India and even black American troops. To be sure, this was a time period where accusations agaisnt troops of color were easily inflated for propaganda purposes.

I am somewhat surprised that so many peoples support Italy after what the Romans did to Jesus PBUh.

our joint prophet .

Naseem,

Obviously, you don't understand Christianity. Neither the Romans or Jews killed Jesus. Jesus was both fully God and fully man. He came into this world to suffer and die as payment for man's sins. It was man's sin that killed Jesus. No man could have killed him unless he allowed it. He allowed it to save men from the consequences of his sin. That is why he is the savior.

Jesus is not our joint Prophet, because he is not a Prophet. He was, and is, God and man. It is the great lie of Islam that Jesus was merely a Prophet. Mohammad led many people to their spiritual destruction with that lie.

Oriana warned about it, passionatelly. Criminal Julio Andreotti should be put on trial as a traitor to Italy. Clinton, Albright, Clark, Blair, Clare Short, George Robertson, Jamie Shea, Xavier Solana, Kosovo Gauleiter Bernard Kouchner (now France's Foreign Minister) and others should be put on trial as war criminals. They made Italy's situation far worse by aiding jihads right accross the Adriatic from it.

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Naseem.

Be quiet. Stop trying to stir up trouble among us, and divide us, just as all Muslims have tried to do since the 7th century. But we at Jihadwatch know about that nasty little trick and we won't fall into the trap.

I love ALL my fellow Christians, whatever language they speak, whatever country they come from. I love Catholics, Protestants, and Eastern Orthodox; Copts and Ethiopians. (And I love the Jews, and I love Israel. Oriana Fallaci the Italian wrote: "I stand with Israel!", and I say that, too.)

My daughter's godmother is a wonderful Italo-Australian Christian. I love Italy! Italy has produced wonderful Christian poets, saints, musicians, artists, sculptors - Dante Alighieri, Benedict, Gregory, Francis of Assisi, Gabrieli, Monteverdi who wrote the glorious 'Vespers of 1610' in honour of Jesus' mother Mary; Giotto, Raphael, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci. Oh, and I LOVED Oriana Fallaci, atheist though she was. Islam would destroy all the beauty of Italy. God bless Italy and give her courage and strength and faith to defeat the Jihad and to say NO to sharia!

Yes, Naseem, a Roman governor authorised the crucifixion of Jesus. BUT as the Roman soldiers were nailing him to the cross, Yeshua prayed: "Father [God], forgive them, for they don't know what they are doing". And at the foot of the cross a Roman centurion declared: "Surely this man was the son of God". (Read what 'rational' said to you, above. He or she is quite right. Christians believe Jesus offered himself, in his death, as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world - and thus He offers peace with God to everyone, to Romans, Jews, me and you.)

By the end of the first century after Jesus' resurrection there were thousands of Roman Christians. Between the first and fourth century AD many Latin-speaking Christians died as martyrs rather than renounce their faith in Jesus. They were not Muslim 'martyrs' who rush into battle to 'slay and be slain' - they were Christian martyrs, and died without weapons in their hands.

Islam is certainly NOT our (Christians') 'favourite' [you were being sarcastic, I think]. I do not hate you, yourself, Naseem: you are a fellow human being, even though you are the slave of a lie. But I reject the lies of Islam. For 1350 years Islam has mercilessly tried to deceive, enslave or kill all Christians and all Jews. Islam is and has always been the sworn enemy of Jews, and of Christians, and of YHWH the Holy One of Israel, whom Christians affirm to be "God and Father of Jesus the Messiah".

Now for the truth about Jerusalem, and King David.
Jerusalem is the Holy City of the Jews. Muslims have no right to it at all. It is the city of DAVID. King David ( his name is HEBREW, not Arabic) WAS NOT AN ARAB, AND WAS NOT A MUSLIM. HE WAS A JEW OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH AND HE WORSHIPPED YHWH THE GOD OF ISRAEL - who is NOT the same as 'allah'. David's name means "beloved of YHWH". In Hebrew it is written 'dodavehu', and THAT IS ITS TRUE AND ORIGINAL HISTORICAL FORM; 'daoud' is a garbled Arabic mishearing.

I know that you have been taught by your Muslim teachers that David was a Muslim. So I know you will not believe me; I know your smiling mask will rip off to show a serpent's face beneath, you will snarl and call me a liar.

But nothing you say can shake me from what I know to be the truth, supported by the Hebrew scripture (more than 1000 years older than the Quran), by archaeology, and by history: David was a Jew, of the tribe of Judah. The prayers he wrote are sung by Jews today (the Psalms) and the God David loved and worshipped is the same God who is worshipped today in the synagogue. Who is totally unlike 'allah' .

Jesus loved the Psalms of David. He recited a verse from Psalm 22, and a verse from Psalm 31, as he was dying on the Cross. He prayed - 'FATHER, into thine hands I commit my spirit'. See: he calls God 'Father'. That alone shows he was not a Muslim.

Quit trying to divide Middle Eastern Christians from Western Christians (Italians or anyone else).

And don't you dare try to Islamise the church in the Middle East!! Jesus died on the Cross; Mohammed lied, and said Jesus wasn't crucified. Christians know Jesus was a Jew; Mohammed lied and said Jesus was a Muslim. Jesus says: forgive. Mohammed says: fight. Jesus (Yeshua of Nazareth) does not belong to Islam at all. He was not a prophet of Islam. He was a Jewish rabbi who is honoured by Christians as Word of God, Son of David, Son of God.

Christianity is Christianity. Islam is Islam. They are different in every possible way.

Christians and Jews are bound together in the end, despite the pain we have inflicted on each other - because Yeshua is a Jew, even though Jews don't believe he was all that the Christians say he is. We share the Hebrew scriptures; we both sing the Psalms.

And Islam says Jews and Christians are liars for saying that the Hebrew scriptures are true, for confessing the love, holiness and forgiveness of the God of Israel. It tries to force them to bow down to a cruel tyrant 'allah'. When we refuse - because we know the difference between truth and lies, love and violence - Muslims curse us and try to kill or enslave us.

I stand with Italy, and with Christians everywhere, and with Israel and the Jews!

"between Arabs and Amazigh"
-- from a posting above

This subject has been discussed many times at JW. Google "ethnic fissures" and "Berbers" and "Jihad Watch" and "Posted by Hugh." That should be enough. Such words and phrases as "cultural and linguistic imperialism," "Kabyle," "Kateb Yacine" can also be googled with the group.

>> ......remember there are more mOslems in India than there are in all of Pakistan-and though most of them hate the "paks" (their derogatory term for them), there are obviously sympathizers as well...and many of them would appear more Hindu than mOslem (recall history of India & both pakistani regions).
Case in point for profiling.
Posted by: jcom972
>>

Jcom972,
This is a half truth. Most Indian muslims love Pakistan and would love all of India to become
a muslim country.
They supported the partition of India in 1947, rioted for it, but most of them stayed back in India. There may be a few exceptions, but it is just that. Actually, their love for Pakistan makes no sense - because they enjoy much greater freedom to kill & rape at will in dhimmi India.

I realise how it can be confusing for westerners to distinguish between Hindus & Muslims from the Indian sub-continent (particularly when the idiot dhimmi PM of India issues demarches to Denmark
protesting the muhammad cartoons !).
But, I a Hindu can smell a Muslim from a mile away. Indian muslims have undergone a process of biological Arabicization for the past 1300 years and share many physical characteristics, typical of 7th century Arab barbarians. I don't know about other people - but I can identify a Muslim from South Asia just by looks. (I would be confused by John Walker Lindh or Richard Reid types though)

I'm aware that the Israelis have software that will screen images against known terrorists.
Perhaps, one day such software will be enhanced by human cognition to accurately identify Muslims.

To Hugh,

If you are still reading here, I know for a fact the differneces in civilizational advancement of Arabs and Amazigh have been touched on by you many, many times. I was inquiring to any European Jihad Watchers if they've ever been able to take note of the differneces between these groups and figure out what exactly should be done about it.

So to any European posters, what's your take? Have you seen the AMazigh, the genuinely "secular" muslims, atheists and converts to Christianity, to be inherently different from Arabs, and if so, what do you think should be Europe's natural response?

Maybe the Italian Mafia will whack all the Jihadists.