Britain's Brown meets and shakes hands with al-Qaeda linked terrorists in Saudi Arabia

Good God! Look at that smiling Western Slave to Islam.

What a fool. A grinning fool.

What's new? Europe's AQ leader is free on bail in the UK. Brown is meeting potential future immigrants to the UK.

What a fool. A grinning fool.

Posted by: darcy

I couldn't have said it better.
Doesn't he look just so HAPPY?

He looks like the nondescript dull, nerdy, obedient, obsequious,pathetic and cringing schoolboy nobody likes. A sissy. And I went to a typical traditional British grammar school. The place was crawling with characters like Brown.

I went to 10 Downing Street website and guess what - you can no longer e-mail the PM. Oh, they have an excuse, fixing up the site or whatever. Yeah, right. I did read this:

"Latest Commentary
DowningStreet: PM has moved on to Doha, Qatar after donning robes to receive an honorary degree at King Saud University this morning.
Sunday, November 02, 2008 4:54"

The Western British PM Slave got a degree from King Saud U - isn't that special?

Visitors to the DS site CAN, however, send a video to the PM with questions. Anybody game?

Anyone reading the 'excommunicated' thread and was doubting Richard the Lionhearts decriptions of the degeneracy of NuLabour Britain needs only to look at that picture.

The future is bleak.

I couldn't have said it better.
Doesn't he look just so HAPPY?

Posted by: PMK at November 2, 2008 4:59 PM

Oh, he's thrilled to be bowing and scraping to Islamic Barbarians. Positively thrilled. And they are laughing their azzes off at him.

"...needs only to look at that picture." --km

It's worse than a pic of Rage Boy. A million times worse.

A picture is worth a thousand words. That picture must be worth a million.

Britain's Brown meets and shakes hands with al-Qaeda linked terrorists in Saudi Arabia

He reminds me of Mr. Bean smiling at teddy. Other than that, there is nothing cute about this photo-op.

Notice who is NOT smiling in this picture; (I wonder if teddy still managed to keep his head?)

One thing is for sure, brown is keeping his head at the expense of the Western World's financial system.

Since Churchill, Britain has specialised in male nonentities as its leaders.Mr Brownnose has SOLD stamped on his forehead.He's a failure of a human being and an absolute disgrace.

From the article,

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown,center, meets former detainees, whose identity is protected...

I wonder who the thug wearing the shades sitting to the right of the Prime Moron (PM) is?

Obviously, he's coaching the expected answer from the "rehaMilitants" to the PM's begging question, "Can we all now just get along?"

"the Prime Moron (PM)"

That's it, exactly.

Darcy,

Maybe I was a bit hasty with my last post.

Would I have been more accurate with, "Prime Moronister"?

If the Saudi's love him, he has to be rotten...

And he has the cheek to wear a red poppy.

Nice pic. Lets see, if you could just pull the ears out a little, add some freckles to the cheeks, and paint out a front tooth. Yeah, that should do it.

From above: I wonder who the thug wearing the shades sitting to the right of the Prime Moron (PM) is?

I don't know for sure, but he may be reaching for his dirk...

KrazyKafir says,

Nice pic. Lets see, if you could just pull the ears out a little, add some freckles to the cheeks, and paint out a front tooth. Yeah, that should do it.

HAHAHAHA!!! I knew his mug reminded me of someone in my past, but I just couldn't place it.

Thanks a bunch for reactivating that lazy neuron of mine.

Not quite a "pearly boy", but I guess you make use of what you have, until you reach Allah's whorehouse.

I fear this is a preview for the formerly great United States. I guess we'll know, in a couple of days.

To our friends in the U.K., don't feel bad. At least he's not dressed up as a "tribal elder".

To our (rather smug) American cousins:

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l176/musiclover1992/BushSaudiKing.jpg

Take the beam out of your own eye.

Britvic,

Touché!

The Saudi innates are kept in secure compounds with facilities such as gyms and swimming pools while imams give them lessons on moderate Islam...

Gee, they have it rough!

Britvic: If you have followed those who post here regularly, and who are American, then you would know that President Bush has been excoriated just as much as your Prime Minister has. Actually, significantly more. There's little smugness here. In fact, there is much sympathy by most Americans for what is happening to Britain, what with its Islamicization and major descent from the likes of a Winston Churchill leading your (once) great nation to the likes of a Gordon Brown now doing so. You, sir, are mistaken. Please reconsider.

Britvic, I don't think a whole lot of posters in here are big fans of Bush. He was just a better choice than Kerry.

Who is he trying to kid? Even that creep Tony Blair admitted half the men released from Guantanamo Bay went straight back to jihad.

BTW I wonder if the money he is bumming on his trip round the Gulf will be paid off in part by giving London's mega mosque the go-ahead?

When I saw Gordon Brown's Ramadan address to British Moslems on youtube I felt physically ill. He was worse than obsequious: he was dripping with cringe. Truly creepy. I have read the above comments but sorry, I can't laugh about this. I am filled with shame for the white races, who have no need to draw this terrible revenge onto all of us from people who would be quite happy to skin us alive.

If you have followed those who post here regularly, and who are American, then you would know that President Bush has been excoriated just as much as your Prime Minister has.

The difference is that it is not extrapolated to the whole nation, and the British posters here do not gloat and sneer.

The following quote is from the book by J. B. Kelly, "Arabia, the Gulf & the West":-
J.B.K.
London
July 1979

When Great Britain withdrew from her political and military position in the Gulf at the close of 1971, thereby relinquishing the responsibility she had borne for 150 years for the maintenance of peace and security in the region, the occasion was little remarked by a world intent upon other preoccupations. There was slight disposition in the West, and certainly none in Asia or Africa, to question the expediency of a decision whose correctness was taken as self-evident in an age which had seen the dismantling of Europe's overseas empires. Even among the few who harboured doubts about both the wisdom and the propriety of Britain's action there was a certain resigned acceptance of the fact that, in the light of the general infirmity of will which characterized much of the Western world, it was more or less inevitable. Less than two years after the British withdrawal the world had good reason to mark its consequences, as the Arab oil-producing states of the Gulf imposed an embargo upon the export of oil to some Western countries, demanded assurances of political sympathy from others as a condition of sale, and in company with the shah of Persia raised the price of oil to exorbitant heights. With the loss of even the tenuous strategic control over the Gulf's oil reserves which the British presence provided, the nations of the free world have had to rely for their continued access to these reserves upon the goodwill of the governments in power in the Gulf states. The price of this goodwill has been the acquiescence by the Western powers and Japan in the repeated raising of the price of crude oil, a process to which there seems no foreseeable end. Apart from its adverse effects upon their economies, this policy of appeasement, like all policies conceived in similar spirit, affords the nations of the West no guarantee whatever of the security of oil supplies from the Gulf. On the contrary, by confirming the governments of the Gulf states in their estimation of their own importance and, conversely, of the flaccidity of the West, it disposes them even more to believe that they are free to act in the willful fashion which has consistently marked their conduct in the past. For all its gloss of recently acquired modernity, which so beguiles the foreign eye, the Gulf today is very much as it has always been - turbulent, backward, intrinsically unstable - and it is this instability which poses the greatest threat to Western interests in the region. The causes of this instability are manifold: some - dynastic rivalries, racial differences, sectarian antipathies, tribal vendettas - are endemic in the Gulf; others - the impact of oil wealth, the ramifications of the Arab -Israeli conflict, the influence of radical political ideas - are of recent occurrence or alien origin. when to these circumstances are added the great array of deadly weapons with which the Gulf states have equipped themselves of late years, the attraction which their oil wealth exerts for predators of every kind, and the interest which the Gulf's economic and strategic significance cannot fail to generate among the great powers, the result is to make the Gulf on of the most potentially dangerous areas in the world today. Yet the general drift of public comment in the West on Arabia and the Gulf over the past half-dozen years, whether by governments, the press, institutions or individuals, has been in the opposite direction, towards a view of the Gulf in which its material transformation is seen as being accompanied - the occasional economic follies of its governments notwithstanding - by steady progress towards political maturity and a sensible appreciation of the region's close economic, and perhaps political, interdependence with the Western industrial world. To sustain such a view has necessitated the depiction of the regimes in power in Arabia and the Gulf in colours more flattering than their true ones. It has required, also the obscuring or misrepresentation of their basic attitudes towards the West, and the portrayal of their questionable behaviour over oil supplies and prices as nothing more than the proper pursuit of legitimate self-interest."

to be continued

continued from J. B. Kelly's book, page 502:

Yet to question the wisdom and propriety of that withdrawal in isolation is beside the point; for it was merely another step in the long retreat of Europe from Asia and Africa which has been going on since the Second World War, and which has been consistently represented in the West as the inescapable consequence of the rise and prevalence of Afro-Asian nationalism. That the one has led to the other is undeniable; but the explanation generally accorded the phenomenon - viz. that empires are intrinsically unstable because they are morally indefensible, that the rule of one people over another offends against a basic principle of nature, if not a higher edict, and that the transition from empire to nation-state is not only irresistible but also essential if mankind is to live i n harmony - has been flatly contradicted by the events of the past three decades. For what has been lost to sight in all the tumultuous celebrations over the end of the imperial age is the crucial fact that the collapse of the European empires in Asia and Africa was due less to the might of the anti-colonialist forces than it was to the sapping of the European powers' will to rule.

When the riotous set them at naught they said: 'Praise the upheaval! For the show and the word and the thought of Dominion is evil!'

It was primarily the loss of nerve and resolution on the part of the European imperial powers which brought to an end Europe's authority and dominion overseas. In turn, and ineluctably, the retreat from empire has endangered the foundations of order, security and good government in Europe itself; for, as the decline and fall of the Roman empire demonstrated long ago, the holding of the limes, the imperial frontiers, is vital to the maintenance of stability at the empire's heart. A precipitate abandonment of imperial responsibilities, such as we have seen take place within the span of a single generation, inevitably creates its own nemesis. For once the habit of authority begins to atrophy, as it has atrophied with each successive surrender of a colonial territory, the degenerative process becomes virtually irresistible. No sudden reversal occurs, no magical recapturing of the bait of authority, when the shores of Europe are reached. The habit of surrender, born of so many ignominious capitulations in Asia and Africa, has by then become too strong. Thus Europe has reacted to the tactics of larceny and intimidation practised by the Middle-Eastern oil-producing states since 1970 in a spirit of abject appeasement. It is a reaction, needless to say, that can only yield bitter fruit, for it has served to heighten the mood of exultancy which of late years has gripped both Sunni and Shii Islam, a mood fraught with danger for the West, not only of exonomic dislocation but also through the deployment of Arab oil money, of the corruption of Western society and its institutions. Yet Western governments have been reluctant to acknowledge the existence of this danger, preferring to seek refuge in optimistic arguments and predications about the behaviour of Persia and the Arab oil states which are based, not upon their history, their political philosophies or their religious beleifs but upon Western ideas of moderation and good sense, reasonableness and sober judgement, power and responsibility, to none of which the states in question actively subscribe.

Insert Santayana quote:

“Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. In the first stage of life the mind is frivolous and easily distracted, it misses progress by failing in consecutiveness and persistence. This is the condition of children and barbarians, in which instinct has learned nothing from experience.

PG says,

I am filled with shame for the white races, who have no need to draw this terrible revenge onto all of us from people who would be quite happy to skin us alive.

Not sure I comprehend this post. "White races"?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that race fell into three (now maybe more) groups -- Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid (the latter two distinctions now not being politically correct) -- with possible distinct races now falling alongside the "mongoloid group".

Who are the "white races"? Do these include the Caucasoids who inhabit Europe?

What about the Caucasoids of North Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan, Afghanistan and India?

Also, what "terrible revenge" do you expect and seemingly expect for all the "white races"?

To be honest, I'm confused.

Britvic: What evidence could you present to prove your charge that it is extrapolated to your whole nation? Yes, there is a call often times from American posters for Brits to wake up, but the same is leveled by many Americans who post here respecting their fellow Americans. Also, not only do most Americans not "gloat and sneer" at Britain's current situation, but there actually remains a deep affection for the Mother Country which founded America. Please don't make charges if you can't prove them. Again I say, with respect, you are mistaken.

There's no doubt that the "Moderate Islam" these "bad muslims" are being taught to reform them still includes "death to infidels". It's just a matter of who gets to kill the infidels, how, and when.

heroyalwhyness

thank you so much for those very illuminating passages from J B Kelly.

They provide an excellent 'framing' for the photograph and accompanying news report.

Truly "a picture worth a thousand words" and here’s just a few: Britain's Brown is a moron.

What evidence

This - for starters.

Britvic, in that photo...They are not kissing, just swapping chewing gum...

Britvic: My apologies if I ever slighted Britain as a nation. I admit, though, much of the news from there has called me to howl in pain, since I know what good Britain has given the rest of us. I will probably be howling in much greater pain as a professional America-hater descended from one of the most savage slave raiding-and-trading peoples (East African Muslims) takes over as our Prex.

The difference is that it is not extrapolated to the whole nation, and the British posters here do not gloat and sneer.

Britvic,

Who was "extrapolating to the whole nation"?
People were talking about GORDON BROWN in this one picture. Has he become sacred?

PMK asks,

Who was "extrapolating to the whole nation"?

I'll take the blame for that.

In fact, I love to make blanket accusations.

It makes life so much simpler, especially when the "extrapolater" condemns a nation comprised of such pathetic and spineless eaters of greasy, fish and chips.

What exactly is a chip?

Has he become sacred?

No way - and he'll be out soon enough. Do not take our politicians as representative - nobody even voted for Brown.

(And if Obama gets in - got a feeling he won't - I won't take him as representative of all Americans, that's for sure.)

What exactly is a chip?

Look on your shoulder.

Britvic responds to "What exactly is a chip?" with,

Look on your shoulder.

It ain't on my shoulder, and I'm certainly not eating it.

Britvic,

I don't know about the U.K., but I do know that in the filthy world of American politics, our so-called "leaders" are rarely representitive of those whom they are paid to represent. (Sometimes they are. This is known as a "miracle",)

Too often, they hamper the actions of our soldiers to fight resolute battles (Viet Nam, Korea). They find time to extort money from ordinary citizens, trade away trust funds (Social Security), and make stupid laws which will eventually place our citizens under the thumb of the "government", one day.

I love America. It's my home, and when I think of all the other places where my soul could have landed, I know how very fortunate I am. I see her flaws, and they depress me.

But, I'm not the poor Muslim woman, in a Muslim land. I could have been, as easily as not. As it is, I work, own and drive a car, live alone except for my pets (one of whom is a rather large, black dog. She's my anti-Muslim security device! LOL). I don't wear a tent with a mask. I don't have to hide my hair. I'm not educated, but I'm literate. My life, despite America's foibles, could be so much worse!

For what it's worth to you, I like British people. I meet them more often than you might imagine, living as I do in a tourist town. The ones I have met, have been friendly and jovial. They're on vacation, and they're happy! What's more, they're willing to share their good cheer with others.

Anyway, don't let what looks like, but may not be intended to be "nation bashing". Stick around a while longer. LOL... You think Americans bash England? Wait 'til you hear us go off on our own elected officials!

Oil and Money talk...

We need to get off their oil, and stop giving them money....it really is that simple.

I love America. It's my home

Posted by: Abscedere

I LOVE America too. And It's not my home.

An article from last June:

Fitzgerald: The Saudis: Nobody's perfect

The Saudis recently arrested 700 people they said held to a “deviant ideology.” Actually the "deviant ideology" is to mistake the princes, princelings, princelettes of the Al-Saud family, and their spaniel-courtiers, for bad people, greedy people, decadent people who, some claim, have been robbing the country blind.

How could anyone think that? Surely they must have embraced a "deviant" ideology to mistake for criminals the members of the benevolent and wonderful family whose ancestor, having defeated the Shammar tribe in Nejd back in 1920, proceeded to take Arabia. The Al-Saud had already driven the Hashemites out of their position as the Guardians of the Two Holy Places and into exile, with one Hashemite son, Faisal, plumped on the newly-created throne of newly-created Iraq, and another, Abdullah, being given as his consolation prize by the British all of Eastern Palestine.

Al-Saud and his clan renamed Arabia after themselves as "Saudi" Arabia. In order to stay in power, they handed over the intellectual and moral development of the country and its people to the most fanatical Wahhabis, which was not hard to do because the Al-Saud themselves, in the old days, were the most fanatical Wahhabis. Now they are attempting to crush the opposition that they fear the most, that from Muslims who don't like their Grand Theft (hold the "Auto"), don't like their decadence (oh, if only the C.I.A. had its cameras in southern Spain, and at the Trump Tower, and in Belgravia, and along Avenue Foch, and perhaps distributed a few to well-placed bellhops in the Western world's most luxurious hotels and resorts, what a video file -- On YouTube Now, unless the Saudis collaborate -- could be collected), don't like a thing about them, and are prepared to treat them as....Infidels!

The daggers-and-dishdasha Al-Saud, doing their little tribal dance, don't like that sort of thing. They don't mind it when Western critics say, accurately, after a week or a month or a few years in Saudi Arabia, summing up the place, that "money can buy everything -- except civilization." They don't mind the forlorn attacks on the Saudis for continuing to countenance slavery -- see those ads in Saudi papers, where someone offers to trade a girl from the subcontinent for "a late-model American automobile." They don't mind the memoirs of American military men denouncing the way in which the Saudis treated them with such arrogance, as mere hired hands, brought in as mercenaries to defend the Al-Saud. None of that worries them. They don't even worry about the world rising up and seizing, if not the oil directly, then the assets the Saudis have abroad. This could be done by way of compensating ourselves for the oligopolistic rents the Saudis have managed to charge for oil. That amount may well surpass the trillion or so in assets the Saudis may own in the West, and that with perfect justice oil-consuming Western states could seize. The Saudis could do nothing about this. They'd still have to sell oil, and at this point, they have no real control over the market, although they pretend they do. So they would have to continue to charge, as they do now, what the market allows, and not practice the market manipulation that was availed of by them in the past.

No, what worries the Saudis, those fabulously rich and decadent Saudis who rule that country, is the opposition that comes out of Islam. It was the same, of course, with Saddam Hussein. In Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the Christians had a kind of protection because they were, for Saddam Hussein, no threat. The potential threat, for him, were the more fanatical Shi'a, and political opposition was located in the mosques.

Similarly, the Saudis worry not about what the Infidels think, as long as those Infidels continue to give every sign of being frightened of the Saudis and their reaction to things -- see the "66 suitcases of cocaine" scandal. See the BEA bribery scandal (where the Law Lords have spoken, but the government of Great Britain will not enforce the rule of law when it comes to that scandal, for the Saudis have threatened to take their bribe-prompted business elsewhere). See the failure of the State Department to support the right enforcement of our own laws, when it comes to shutting down the Saudi Academy in Virginia. No, they are afraid only of the Islam-based opposition, because, let's face it, they know perfectly well how dangerously murderous fellow Muslims can be. They may also suspect, at this point, that there are all kinds of secret supporters, because there is all kinds of disgust in Saudi Arabia at the ruling family and the regime that endures.

And all that brave talk about the building of "economic cities" is simply blague. It is designed to make everyone think the Saudi rulers do have some kind of plausible plan for the nation's economy beyond oil. But of course they don't, and those "economic cities" will be as much of a waste as was the colossal investment in agriculture made over the past few decades, that all ended in failure, total failure. There is no real economy in inshallah-fatalist Saudi Arabia, though there is gold and greed aplenty.

What they cannot stand is the notion that the war on the Infidels may also come to include them. So their famous "de-programming" sessions of imprisoned Al-Qaeda members consists of having Muslim clerics come in and explain just how wonderfully Muslim the Al-Saud have been, how they are building mosques and madrasas everywhere in the Western world, are funding campaigns of Da'wa everywhere in the Western world -- look, here's the list, look what we are doing, look what we have done, and never fear, the Saudis are doing more, and more effectively, than Bin Laden and his merry men could ever achieve.

And, of course, everything those tame Saudi clerics argue is true. The Saudi regime is the most effective bankroller, the most effective deployer, of the Money Weapon that makes the March of Islam, and so many local Jihads, possible.

So they are right to pick up those men for their "deviant" behavior. In this case, it is the "deviant" notion that the dishdasha-and-dagger boys, with their sneers of cold command, would forget, in all their decadence, to pay their colossal dues to Islam. They might somehow overlook their duty to take part in the "struggle" or Jihad to ensure that all obstacles to the spread and dominance of Islam are removed. Why, the Saudis have spent close to 100 billion dollars of that Money Weapon to further the advance of Islam in the Infidel lands.

What more can good Muslims, devout but alas "deviant" Muslims, expect of them? They're doing their best for the very same goal.

Leave those princelings and princelettes alone. They're with you on the Jihad. Even if they choose, now and again, to phone in a money transfer from a 340-foot yacht off the coast of Marbella. For god's sake, be a little patient with the benign thoroughly Muslim Al-Saud.

We all have our faults.

Nobody's perfect.

Nice pic. Lets see, if you could just pull the ears out a little, add some freckles to the cheeks, and paint out a front tooth. Yeah, that should do it.

Posted by: KrazyKafir at November 2, 2008 5:52 PM

Funny! He really does resemble Alfred E. Neuman. I thought of that, too! How appropriate - "Mad" is exactly right. Dogs and Mad Englishmen.

Wait 'til you hear us go off on our own elected officials!

Fair enough - and you don't see much criticism of officials in Muslim countries. Wonder why....

the collapse of the European empires in Asia and Africa was due less to the might of the anti-colonialist forces than it was to the sapping of the European powers' will to rule.

as the decline and fall of the Roman empire demonstrated long ago, the holding of the limes, the imperial frontiers, is vital to the maintenance of stability at the empire's heart.

Was it a sapping of will or was it a loss of ability to rule, owing to the great wars on the European continent in the 20th century? How could empires be maintained when the mother country was in ruins? Maintaining an empire isn't cheap.
J. B. Kelly dated the retreat from responsibility to the end of the second world war but how much damage was done to Europe by the first world war? Rather than the "limes", it would seem the heart of the empire had been grievously wounded.
According to Peter Viereck: World War I smashed both the moral and economic fabric of European civilization.

(And if Obama gets in - got a feeling he won't - I won't take him as representative of all Americans, that's for sure.)

Britvic,

I hope your feeling is accurate. We'll know soon.

Gordon "What Me Worry?" Brown is in dire need of tarring and feathering, if not a whole lot worse. Such politicians are the physical embodiment of a below replacement level birthrates and and ageing population. Such behavior eventually is reflected in the leadership--degenerate fawning scum begging foreign assistance by offering up the national posterior.
http://www.bravenewsworld.blogspot.com

Aiken Bryce, you're in a foul mood tonight. Is it the election blues maybe, or PMS?

Aiken is a town in S.C. not too far from where I live. Are you familiar with it?

Susanp,

Neither I hope, but maybe PMS.

I've always wondered about that "malady"...

In sincerity, I've been bogged down by a machine.

Maybe that's my foul mood?

I'll figure it out eventually.

And no, I'm not familiar with SC.

"Saudi officials claim their efforts at rehabilitating extremists using months of reasoned argument against radical Islam have a success rate of 80 to 90 percent: Only 35 people out of 3,200 in the program have been re-arrested for security offenses."

.

Of course, what the Saudis consider "security offenses" can only be attempts to carry out attacks inside their country, against Saudi targets.

If by rehabilitating jihadists they really meant persuading them to give up violence EVEN AGAINST INFIDELS, it would amount to a heretic rejection of their religious duties as stated in Mein Qurampf, especially Sura 9.

By the way, to add a bit more to what's been said about Gordon Brown's foolish grin in that picture, doesn't that smile look so NEVILLE-CHAMBERLAIN-ISH???

'Such behavior eventually is reflected in the leadership--degenerate fawning scum begging foreign assistance by offering up the national posterior.'

That line by Max Publius is the best one on the whole thread

"The difference is that it is not extrapolated to the whole nation"

It should be on both accounts.

Aiken Bryce: I don't know, I am sorry, I should not have said anything about white people, it is a big mistake, I know they don't exist.
Maybe in my abject confusion I am talking about white colonizers of lands belonging to people who are not white. People who hate us for eternity. I have been told by so many non-white people how much they hate us; should I believe them? Maybe I shouldn't; maybe I should think they are just joking or something.

At the moment Gordon Brown (who was never actually elected by the UK voters, let's not forget that) is really hanging on by his fingernails, hoping that he can get Labour re-elected at the next elections - I really do think that photograph could come back to haunt Labour.

I really hope so.......

the sauds are selling out for protection as well, thats why OBL wants to rub them out asap. perhaps they can get two birds with one stone.

PG,

Au contraire my lamentablement confondre amigo.

It is good of you to take on the "sins" of the "white races" even though you weren't around when even one of those transgressions was committed.

You are yet young and small. Give yourself another 10 or 15 years before claiming "saviorship" of the "white races".

Or maybe by then you'll have grown a cerebral cortex?

Whoops, I forgot. One needs a spinal cord before that.

Gordon Brown (who was never actually elected by the UK voters, let's not forget that)

Isn't that an evasion?
Britain has a parliament. People vote for the party. Doesn't the PM have to be a member of the House of Commons? SOMEONE had to vote for Brown.
UK voters chose Labour. They got Blair and Brown.

Is this wrong?

Krazy Kafir, It is disappointing to read your vitriolic comments regarding your President, a man who has done more than anyone else in the world to fight islamic fundamentalism and I believe this site is for like-minded people, or am I wrong? I believe your President is a great and good man and that the war in Iraq was started for the right reasons but unfortunately back-fired as no-one expected the onslaught of civil war with the loss of many American lives.

I am English and have always loved my country but am beginning to lose heart with the surge of islamic fundamentalism and the pc brigade brought about by Blair and his cronies, now being continued by Brown and his cronies, and I would bet Obama will be going down the same road if elected. If we in the West do not stand up and speak out against what is going on, then this problem will become huge sooner rather than later, and I feel we have barely seen the beginning of what is going to happen. So let's all stand together against this scurge and speak out whenever we can.

As for that idiot Gordon Brown sucking up to the Saudis and the Qataris, I can tell you from first hand experience having lived in both countries, that they do not like any of us but are happy to take our money to spend it on islamising the West.

"The Saudi innates are kept in secure compounds with facilities such as gyms and swimming pools while imams give them lessons on moderate Islam..."

Judging by the way the Saudi "legal" system deals with petty criminals or adulterers, one would have thought there is something fishy about the way these people are dealt with...

Krazy Kafir, It is disappointing to read your vitriolic comments regarding your President

Posted by: bee

Bee, where was I vitriolic towards Bush? Who by the way isn't even my President. Because I said he doesn't have too many "fans" here? That doesn't seem too vitriolic to me. Even though I think the Iraq was a terrible, no, make that catastrophic strategic mistake, I still would have voted for him over Kerry, or Gore for that matter, if I was eligible.

PMK:

UK voters chose Labour. They got Blair and Brown.

Is this wrong?

It's so wrong I don't know where to begin.

Firstly, only 21.6% of the UK electorate voted New Labour in 2005. In other words, out of every five over-21s whom you pass in the street only one voted for the current government.

Secondly, Brown was not leader of the party in 2005. If you voted New Labour in 2005 (mad fools that you are) then at least you knew who would be Prime Minister. Brown simply took over the reins when Blair stepped down to go on his lucrative public speaking tour. Nobody in England voted for Brown because his constituency is in Scotland, where only Scots voted for him.

Only 24,278 people in the UK have voted for Gordon Brown and they are (or were in 2005) in Scotland.

"What a fool. A grinning fool."

Darcy

Perfect description! No way to improve on that.

Aiken Bryce: I think you missed my point - both times. Never mind.

There was a time When Britain and James Bond had something in common.