Here's hoping she gets her wallet nicked.

Posted by: Interested at June 7, 2006 9:16 AM

Hmmm. No doubt, she's been brainwashed.

Posted by: csa bill at June 7, 2006 9:17 AM

Respect.

Posted by: Kim Hartveld at June 7, 2006 9:19 AM

And here's another article about a female "revert"--the wife of one of the alleged fertilizer-of-peace bombers: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060607.TERRORJAMAL07/TPStory

Posted by: scaramouoche at June 7, 2006 9:25 AM

How about us infidels boycott the Muslims? What a ridiculous woman this is.

Posted by: JanuaryMan at June 7, 2006 9:26 AM

My God, what's happening???
Posted by: Kortnie
--------------------------------------------

Well if you are from Britian (and even if you aren't) I shall explain. The muslims are trying to take over Britain, plain and simple! The only reason they haven't openly started a war or increased suicide bombings is because a) they're too weak right now and b) the British government is still doing something to combat these jihadists. Pray for peace, prepare for war.

Posted by: Erik at June 7, 2006 9:31 AM

This has Stockholm Syndrome all over it.

Posted by: asmodai at June 7, 2006 9:31 AM

By Michelle Malkin
CNSNews.com Commentary
June 07, 2006

Canadian law enforcement officials should be proud of busting a reputed Islamic terrorist network that may span seven nations. Instead, our northern neighbors are trying their damnedest to whitewash the jihadi ties that bind the accused plotters and their murder-minded peers around the world.

We live on a doomed continent of ostriches.

A Royal Canadian Mounted Police official coined the baneful phrase "broad strata" to describe the segment of Canadian society from whence Qayyum Abdul Jamal and his fellow adult suspects Fahim Ahmad, Zakaria Amara, Asad Ansari, Shareef Abdelhaleen, Mohammed Dirie, Yasim Abdi Mohamed, Jahmaal James, Amin Mohamed Durrani, Abdul Shakur, Ahmad Mustafa Ghany and Saad Khalid came.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=/Commentary/archive/200606/COM20060607a.html

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 9:35 AM

I dunno. I think all Yvonne Ridley and the wife of the alleged fertilizer-of-peace bomber are looking for is a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T:

What they got,
Baby I want,
And what I need,
You know that they got it.
All they’re asking, is for me to revert
(Just a little bit)
Habibi (just a little bit) when I get home
(Just a little bit) habibi (just a little bit).

I ain’t gonna do more wrong, by bein’ an infidel
Ain’t gonna do no wrong, ‘cause I don’t wanna go to Hell.
All they’re askin’ is for me to revert
(Just a little bit)
Habibi, (just a little bit) when I get home (Just a little bit).
Yeah (just a little bit)…

Oooo, that Prophet,
He’s sweeter that honey.
Only wants a bit of my money.
All he’s askin’ is for me to revert
(Just a little bit, just a little bit).

R-E-V-E-R-T
That’s what you should really be.
R-E-V-E-R-T
Find out what it means to me.

Oh, don’t sock it to me,
Sock it to me, sock it to me,
A little revert
(Don’t sock it to me, sock it to me,
Sock it to me, sock it to me.)
Whoa, habibi, (just a little bit).
A little revert…

Posted by: scaramouoche at June 7, 2006 9:44 AM

Kortnie--Ostrich: big dumb bird that can't fly. Like a lot of the clueless apologists' theories about terrorism.

Posted by: scaramouoche at June 7, 2006 9:46 AM

Okay Scara! I'll use "miserable, impossible woman" instead

Posted by: Dumbo at June 7, 2006 9:59 AM

sorry, I mean Kortnie, I used that word for alliteration's sake.

Posted by: Dumbo at June 7, 2006 10:00 AM

Yvonne Ridley.....
A failing journalist who was stumped for something to write about. So she borrowed a burqua and went into Afghanistan(to the horror of her mother and little girl, who lives with Gran while Mum plays at war correspondent)where she was kidnapped by the Taliban. She promised them that if she were released she would study Islam. She described in an interview how good looking her captors were, thick luxuriant hair apparently, although I personally think she was confusing them with their sheep. And so,(tempted I suspect by the prospect of a new career with Al Jazeera) she converted.
The Al Jazeera job didn't last long after she shopped her boss for shopping at Marks and Spencer. So now she is with (dis)Respect, as a Gruesome Georgie Galloway groupie. They deserve each other. Georgie will be single soon - its a match made in heaven. Not.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at June 7, 2006 10:16 AM

I thought the whole Idea of Jihad watch was to warn and Inform....why all the name calling?

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 10:17 AM

kortnie,

If it offends you I suggest that you learn a lot more about the English language. I don't give in to PC threats and I never will. The great and glorious language that we call English is rich in profanities and insults, chock full of rude, crude and lewd four letter words and, as is said, "even the Bard swore and the Bible damns".

I'm gay. Go on it's your turn to attach some glorious profanities to my sexual status. I promise you I won't make you walk two steps behind me or call for your stoning or beheading. Just let's stop all the mealy mouthed PC crap.

Dominic.

(Insert St. George's cross here.)

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at June 7, 2006 10:21 AM

Decency and P.C. are not the same....No one ever died from being decent.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 10:26 AM

Detto fatto.

Posted by: Hugh at June 7, 2006 10:31 AM

I must be in the wrong place....I thought we came here to fight the threat of Islam....I guess this is now where people fight like children with petty name calling....while the Jihad fight on...I spend my days in the study of Islam to warn..Yahoo has a bunch of rooms for name calling....sorry just my 2 cents....

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 10:40 AM

Going back to the original story I think the police would be happy to be boycotted by such a burdensome bunch of whingers.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at June 7, 2006 10:40 AM

I think a few here are too sensitive and really need to direct their energy to defending our world from this islamic threat. Kortnie(?) you are one of these.

Posted by: JanuaryMan at June 7, 2006 10:42 AM

'My God, you are clueless, dominic. '
Kortnie, Please don't take my Lord's name in vain.

Posted by: western infidel at June 7, 2006 10:43 AM

Well, Tokyo Rose of the Muslims might have a point. The police, at least those who really understand Islmam, tend to fear Islam, so they and we are truly Islamophobic because we understand it better than the average ignorant fool.

Posted by: Dumbo at June 7, 2006 10:45 AM

The Respect Party is George Galloway's attempt at fusing socialism and Islamism into a broad coalition. If leftists ever scoff at the notion that they and Islamist terrorists are not just on the same page, but are working together, you can offer the Respect Party as an existence proof. Main members of the Respect Party include:

George Galloway, expelled from the Labour Party.
The Socialist Workers Party.
Harold Pinter, the socialist playwright
Members of the Muslim Association of Britain
Members of the Muslim Council of Britain.

"We say to anyone who hates the Americans and wants to throw the Jews out of Palestine: Ahlan wa Sahlan (welcome). The Prophet teaches that we could ally ourselves even with the atheists if it helps us destroy [the] enemy."
-- Abu Hamza al-Masri

Posted by: Steven L. at June 7, 2006 10:47 AM

Just wait until London gets hit by an Islamic terrorist attack -- then things will change... England will finally do something about the problem...

Oh wait...

Posted by: Television at June 7, 2006 10:48 AM

I wonder if Ms. Ridley has a particular harem picked out for herself already? Islam is a religion to appeal to masochists, rapists, chauvanists, illiterates, neanderthals and now it seems, former victims. The fear must indeed be quite an inducer to "see the light", yes Ms Ridley?

I'd contribute a $1 to her psychotherapy fund if I thought for a moment that she was crazy. Instead, I think we are seeing what is part of greater problem: instinctual flocking to what many view as the potential winner in this New World War.

I forgot to add "cowards" to my list, but after my last remark, now seems an appropriate time.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 7, 2006 10:48 AM

Anyway,glad to see we all made it through 666 yesterday.

I wonder if they performed a lobotomy on her,to get her to convert,even after she was freed?

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 10:54 AM

Yvonne Ridley, convert to Islam and former hostage, tells Muslims in Britain not to cooperate with police......

The implication is that law enforcement is to be handled by islamic police within Britain.

The logical extension means that any of these so-called police would have to be appointed; but by whom?

And in the case of an "arrest" for say, petty-theft, would the suspect subsequently be turned over to the Crown or is there another form of jurisprudence that Ridley has in mind?

Brainwashed or not Ridley is calling for nothing less than the establishment of shariah law operating within Britain.

In fact, this requires that an islamic shadow government be fully operational within Britain regardless of “the Crown’s” position on the issue!

This shadow government will one day grow tired of the shadows and demand center stage and the spot light! If not appeased, this now quiet shadow government will one day, take what it demands is its natural right!

Give credit where credit’s due! The islamics, with the help of Tony Blair and company, have accomplished what Hitler could not do; bring the now emasculated British lion to its knees.

Unless British come to their senses (I don’t believe they have the will or inclination to do so -- the leaders at least are drunk with their own PC-multiculturist vomit) – Britian is doomed to live under the islamic curse of shariah law.

The day of the devil was yesterday; with Ridley's pronouncement, today may well begin the days of mourning for the loss of a once great nation we knew as Britian.

Posted by: witness at June 7, 2006 10:56 AM

There is nothing mentally wrong with Yvonne, no Stockholm syndrom. She was just a hardcore anti-western lefty from day one. Her first husband was Daud Zaarur (alias Abul Hakam), a former military commander of the Palestinian Fatah movement in Lebanon. What does that tell you about her personal politics?

Remember that idiot James Looney? He was the Canadian "anti-war" protestor kidnapped in Iraq and then rescued by British forces, who, after being released, continued to support the jihadists and denounce the coalition.

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 7, 2006 11:00 AM

Pentagon releases two videos of Flight 77 crashing into Pentagon

http://www.judicialwatch.org/flight77.shtml

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 7, 2006 11:06 AM

Now, now, children, calm down.
It's bad form to use profanity, or sexual inuendos, or 'rough' language' unless you're refering to Allah, Islam or Mohammad. They are worth recepticals for disgusting language...like a dirty spitoon, or filthy toilet. Islam is a social and moral disaster, multiplying like an infectous disease. Truth bullets wrapped in a profanity penetrate Allahs protective shell. Those who refuse to use profanity toward Allah because they think Allah is God, or out of respect for muslims, or out of sympathy for them, are already dhimmi's or converts in disguise. Some people just naturally dont use 'rough' talk, and thats just fine. Yvonne has chosen to worship a dirty spitoon. She is now worthy of Allahs love, and I am sure she will get it, plenty of it. She may also get a visit from the police.

Kortnie...I dont know if there are any macho dudes on this site or not, but they 'are' all over the internet. You can't avoid them if you participate, so I suggest you toughen up and just ignore it, unless directed specifically at you. Like water off a ducks back.
Have a good day...swami

Posted by: duh_swami at June 7, 2006 11:07 AM

"Who is more wicked than the man who invents falsehoods about God or denies His revelations?" (6:21).......

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 11:09 AM

somethingaboutislam writes: "Unfortunately, there are some members who come here just because they are feminists. Aside from that, they are PC liberals to the core, the very people helping the jihadists....Watch out for those people. Should misogyny not be a part of islam, these people wouldn't even be here."

That is a self-defeating attitude, the same attitude of many ideologically driven activists: Drive away anyone who isn't in 100.000% agreement with your own views. I've seen that attitude here in JW before, when we've gotten sidetracked into controversial side issues like gay marriage and Latino immigration. And even with the smearing of great scholars like Bernard Lewis, the last of the Orientalists, just because he's not ready to dismiss all of Islam as irremediable. And it's the wrong attitude to have. If we are to have any political success, we must form broad coalitions with other groups who may not agree with us 100% on all issues.

The Islamists understand this principle better than some folks here at JW do. Abu Hamza al-Masri said: "We say to anyone who hates the Americans and wants to throw the Jews out of Palestine: Ahlan wa Sahlan (welcome). The Prophet teaches that we could ally ourselves even with the atheists if it helps us destroy [the] enemy."

somethingaboutislam may consider Hirsi Ali as a hero because of her attacks on Islam--but I'll bet he wouldn't like her views on women's rights. Well, that's too damn bad. Don't allow those differences to divide us. The enemy is Islamist domination of the world, and I'm willing to ally myself with people who disagree with me on many other issues--as long as we ally on that one.

Posted by: Steven L. at June 7, 2006 11:12 AM

Steven,
For the first time since my arrival here, I felt like I was in a yahoo chat room.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 7, 2006 11:16 AM

When the coming war breaks out I wonder what will happen to turncoat pondscum like this.

Perhaps it may seem that I am exaggerating but can any of you see any other finale?

I cannot see the Islamic petrodollar perpetual motion of propaganda and madrassas failing just yet and have the feeling that it could last long enough for Europe to be almost in Koranic clutches with Sharia law states being proclaimed in parts of France, Holland,UK.

That is unless direct confrontation occurs in the very near future and the demarcation lines are finally seen for what they are: the WEST vs Islam.

All Islamic strategy seems to be not to deny this coming event but to allow the nascent and thriving european muslim communities time enough to be able to flex their population pressure upon the soft bellied vote-insecure europoliticians whose vision does not extend past that of their nose.

What I cannot understand is just why so many refuse to even consider this at all let alone see it as a possibility or as many see it, as a certainty.

If this war does occur it will be a war of dark age ethics and extermination perhaps of the west or perhaps of Islam. When it occurs will decide who wins.

Posted by: Zathras at June 7, 2006 11:16 AM

Zathras - maybe the Chinese will save us? They don't suffer from Chivary or white/western guilt like us and will not allow subversion and sedition within thier relm like we do.

Posted by: Zebo at June 7, 2006 11:21 AM

Unfortunately, there are some members who come here just because they are feminists. Aside from that, they are PC liberals to the core, the very people helping the jihadists. Their revulsion of islam is a mile deep, but only an inch wide.

somethingaboutislam, please don't label all of us "feminists" as PC to the core. I'm female, I'm old enough to have fought for women's rights for nearly half a century and I am personally insulted and disgusted by "Kortnie's" absolutely ridiculous attitude towards the word - lets' see, bitch wasn't it? I have a bitch out on the porch.

Kortnie, honey, if you can't debate with the boys on their own terms, then you shouldn't debate with boys. If you cannot take the heat, get back to the kitchen. And YES - I do mean to be downright insulting about your extremely childish attitude.

Freedom of speech means the freedom to use speech which offends you. You are not the thought/speech police. We are all adults capable of judging other's remarks ourselves with no regulation by you!

As for Yvonne Ridley, as far as I am concerned the day she willingly covered herself in a hijab she became an abomination in the eyes of G*d and deserves only scorn and derision for her actions. If some compare her to a female dog, she has earned it. After all, non-muslims are compared to dogs every single day of the week by the likes of Yvonne.

Posted by: gallopinggranny at June 7, 2006 11:24 AM

Unless British come to their senses (I don’t believe they have the will or inclination to do so -- the leaders at least are drunk with their own PC-multiculturist vomit) – Britian is doomed to live under the islamic curse of shariah law.

Britain will not live under sharia law.

We are all adults capable of judging other's remarks ourselves

That is the difference between the west and islam.

Posted by: Dilly at June 7, 2006 11:30 AM

The 70% solution. That will get things done. If I can agree with someone on that scale we can get along fine. The issues do not matter only the 70%. The war against islamofacism is global, meaning all encompassing, meaning all issues are being manipulated at all times. Don’t like what someone has to say or how they say it? Tough! Those we are fighting against like to shout down or silence others as well. No one has a right not to be offended. Fight your good fight and let others do the same.

Posted by: tgusa at June 7, 2006 11:33 AM

Comments deemed irrelevant, or that in any way distract from the matter at hand, will either be deleted, or modified.

Why not stick to the topic, and use words that do not offend?

Those engaged in discussions of all those other apparently endlessly fascinating topics -- sex, race, "liberals," "right-wing Christians," etcetera -- are invited to do so at the tens or even hundreds of thousands of websites that exist, where everyone can, to his heart's content, trade "ideas" and "feelings."

Not here. Not now.

Posted by: Hugh at June 7, 2006 11:36 AM

kortnie=naseem?

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 11:36 AM

Steven L. said

The Islamists understand this principle better than some folks here at JW do

Why, some of the jihadists might even visit anti-jihad sites and try to create/exploit fissures, or try to sidetrack the discussion into controversial areas.

Nicely said, Steven L.

Posted by: special_guest at June 7, 2006 11:39 AM

o.k,Hugh

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 11:40 AM

StevenL: And even with the smearing of great scholars like Bernard Lewis, the last of the Orientalists, just because he's not ready to dismiss all of Islam as irremediable.

I agree that 'united we stand, divided we fall' is important and you are right about that.
Everyone has different issues with 'details' but as long as they all oppose Islam and jihad, we are on the same page. Just because someone is loaded with education and degrees, does not mean that they have one lick of common sense, or are right about 'everything'. Islam cant be redeamed because Islam is a mindset. It would require a revison of some kind of the Quran, and the mindset wont go for that. It cant. Islam is a fixed delusion, it cant, and wont, modify itself.
But dont worry, Mahdi will be here soon and beat us all up, then Isam wont have to modify, it will be in charge...you're right...we all need to stand together...

Posted by: duh_swami at June 7, 2006 11:41 AM

but I'll bet he wouldn't like her views on women's rights

Very wrong. In fact, the horrible treatment of women in islam is one of the main themes of my website, http://www.theres-something-about-islam.blogspot.com.

But feminism, in the west, is not about women's rights anymore. It is just another left-wing platform. Indeed, most ideological feminists have given tacit support to the jihadist cause simply because they see them as opposition to the evil George Bush and the Christian right.

My point was that feminists here, are here only for that reason. So rather than alienate an ally, as you suggest, it is important to identify those people who are actually not allies at all, but only here for their own liberal bent rather than being here to help defend our culture from the islamic juggernaut and all that such a thing would mean.

I have often criticized the adoption of the logic that "a enemy of an enemy is friend of mine." The left uses that philosophy to great effect. I refuse to employ that strategy myself. It is intellectually disingenuous. Unless you are really opposed to islam, and not just opposed to the misogynist element in it, then you really aren't a reliable soldier in this battle.

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 7, 2006 11:41 AM

If only Muslims were an enemy without allies....

Posted by: Foehammer at June 7, 2006 11:49 AM

Yvonne Ridley -- member of the Harum-scarum.

Posted by: jsla at June 7, 2006 11:57 AM

It is distressing to read posts on this site that call for speech control - my God, only calls for violence are more repugnant.
Do we want to practice speech control on Jihad Watch?
The best way to control distasteful speech - that is, unpleasantries sans calls for violence - is to ignore it.
Racist, anti-Semitic, classist, sexist remarks should not be proscribed. The writers condemn themselves with their own words ...no need to jump into the cesspool with them...
Of course, those who call for violence should be crushed into the earth (please, only figuratively)...

Posted by: sonnyboy at June 7, 2006 12:00 PM

In the name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate

I, Hasan, the son of Akbar, resident of the village of Saraab, being of sound mind and resolute belief in Muhammad, praise be upon him (PBUH) and the 12 Imams, the Pure Ones, declare this here as my last and final will and testament.

I have found it my sacred duty to answer the call and volunteer as suicide martyr for any mission that our Olama (religious leaders) assign to this humble servant.

I have given the matter great thoughts and have consulted extensively with our village Agha (the mullah). Agha, with patience and understanding allowed me to ask many questions and replied to all my inquiries. In order to assist other brothers who may have similar questions as they contemplate to offer themselves in the service of our infallible faith, I hereby report the essence of my conversation with Agha.

Me. Agha, I offer Your Person my infinite gratitude for giving me a private audience before I head for Tehran and enlist in the Martyrs Brigade. I humbly request that you accept this sum as insignificant offering, representing my entire worldly possession, as a token of my gratitude for your console and time. It is the payment I received for selling my donkey "my soul worldly possession of any value. I gave my hoe, shovel and pick to my elderly parents so that, with the help of my two sisters, they can work our allotted plot and manage to survive. I have only taken enough money from the sale of the donkey to pay for the buss fare to Tehran".
http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_16045.shtml

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 12:06 PM

And even with the smearing of great scholars like Bernard Lewis, the last of the Orientalists, just because he's not ready to dismiss all of Islam as irremediable.

Arrant nonsense. Pointing out what Lewis has said at different times and in different place is not equivalent to "smearing" him. Those who publish must expect to have their work quoted from, analysed, and subjected to criticism.

Passing off the devshirme as some kind of "devoutly to be wished for" career path is not a light matter, even if it seems so to you. It wouldn't to someone poor swine who had had his child seized. Some parents used to mutilate their own children so that they would be saved from forcible conscription.

The same applies to the dhimma. And frankly while you may be happy at Lewis's holocaust-denial over the Armenians, I am not. It disturbs me. He has revised the numbers downwards and now turned the holocaust into a "struggle".

Andrew Bostom was quite right to question aspects of what Bernard Lewis has been saying.

Hugh has done the same:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005052.php

You want to take it up with Hugh and suggest he removes himself from the board?

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 7, 2006 12:13 PM

There is a full internal consistency in Ahmadinejad. Below are a few examples of his sayings, beliefs and actions. Whether one agrees or disagrees with them, they all fit perfectly into a consistent pattern.

▪ He literally believes in the imminent emergence of the Mahdi – the Shiites promised one who is expected to appear to set aright a decadent and wretched world.

▪ He views himself as the vassal of Mahdi, working for him and being accountable to him.

▪ His main task is to prepare the world so to hasten the Mahdi’s coming. If this preparation requires much destruction and bloodshed, so be it.

▪ As a former mayor of Tehran, he developed elaborate detailed plans preparing the city for the arrival of the Mahdi.

▪ He allocated generous sums for extensive road improvement to a mosque at Jamkaaraan near the city of Qum where it is believed the promised Mahdi is hiding in a well since the age of nine over 1100 years ago.

▪ He reportedly visits the well frequently and drops his written supplications into the well for the hidden Mahdi to act upon them.

▪ He has said in private that it was him who asked the Mahdi to inflict the massive stroke on Ariel Sharon.

▪ He sees the Jews as the sworn enemies of Islam. The hostility dates back to the time of Muhammad’s own treatment of the Jews in Medina. At first, expediently, Muhammad called the Jews “people of the book,” and accorded them a measure of tolerance until he gained enough power to unleash his devastating wrath on them.

▪ He says that the Holocaust is a myth. He is, in this respect, in good company with a number of other revisionist claimants.
http://amilimani.com/index/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=2

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 12:24 PM

"Do we want to practice speech control on Jihad Watch?"

"The best way to control distasteful speech - that is, unpleasantries sans calls for violence -is to ignore it."
-- from a posting above

Answer to the question: At times, if necessary, reluctantly, yes.

Reply to the assertion: No, the best way is not always to ignore it. Not if that "distasteful speech" drives away some who might hit upon some thread full of posters back-and-forthing about something, with the content largely irrelevant to the matters for which this website was set up to discuss, and the expression unacceptable.

Posted by: Hugh at June 7, 2006 12:24 PM

"Do we want to practice speech control on Jihad Watch?"

Is there a single forum on the Internet without moderation? I don't know of one.

Thank You Robert and Hugh for actively monitoring the threads for errant posts.

Posted by: deesine at June 7, 2006 12:31 PM

From a previous piece at Jihad Watch on Verbal Decorum from March 18, 2006, with the three introductory paragraphs by RS, and text by HF:

Fitzgerald: Call Us Prudes (Two Notes on Verbal Decorum)

"We are trying to retain the comments section, and have increased policing efforts, although comments still remain largely unmoderated. The usual caveats still apply: no one can assume that we endorse any particular comment because it remains on the page.

Nevertheless, we are doing what we can to make this a cleaner, better-lighted place for rational discussion. This requires the elimination of trolls intent on distracting the unwary. This further requires that free-and-easy-riders be asked to dismount from their hobbyhorses and tether them firmly to the bollard outside the saloon’s swinging doors. And finally, this requires that posters be urged to heed the rules of verbal decorum.

Two examples of the problem were discussed recently in the comments section by Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald, and we thought it useful to post them as a separate article here so as to drive the point home more firmly:

1. "the strong comments of this Bish..." (in reference to the Melkite Archbishop)

Once upon a time, and a very good time it was, nicens little boys not only did not refer to a Bishop as "this Bish," but if in doubt when writing or addressing a letter to a high-ranking cleric of a particular church, they would ask their mothers on what page of Emily Post's Book of Etiquette could be found the precisely proper mode of salutation to be employed, for all kinds of excellencies and highnesses. And their mothers would tell them, and they would look, and they would learn. Never would it have occurred to those nicens little boys to refer to a Bishop, whether Melkite or Nestorian or Roman Catholic, as a "Bish."

Would Evelyn Waugh, or a dashing Englishwoman trying to track down the exact place in Ethiopia from which Pushkin's great-grandfather might have come, after having been granted an audience with the Abuna of the Ethiopian Coptic Church (not to be confused with the Coptic Church of Egypt), in a letter intended for a friend still at home, back in Blighty, on Primrose Hill, in Hampstead, in old Londinium, have scribbled such a phrase as "I met with the Bish today"? Of course not.

2. "did Vice Pres Cheney put the shit in there himself…” (in a posting here)

Some may remember George Carlin's "Seven Little Words You Can Never Say on Television" routine, and the banning of that routine by the FCC, and the resulting case which went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court affirmed a lower court's upholding the constitutionality of the FCC's banning words that it considered "patently offensive."

It would be good, since such "patently offensive words" seldom convince, and always lower the tone, if attempts were made to suppress the urge to use them at this website.

If you wish, you can smuggle all kinds of things in through a poker-faced pun, so as not to outwardly disturb public morals.

An example from a comment posted in October 2005, commenting on some magazine’s listing of the "20 Most Important Intellectuals":

"No Tariq Ramadan? No Cornel West? No Jeffery Sachs? This list is not nearly as completely 100% awful as it should be; the presence of Umberto Eco at #2 throws one off. But nothing takes the cake like having Thomas Friedman, the man who uses his fingers to "make" "quotation" "mark" "signs" "around" "words" when he talks, on any list of "intellectuals."

The world is flat, famously says eager never-doubting-for-a-minute Thomas Friedman. Platitudes, plongitudes.

Le monde est bien plat. Quant à l'autre, sornettes. Put that in your pipe (ceci n'est pas une pipe, as the dissatisfied customer complained loudly to the management of the maison close on rue Chabanais), you compilers of such idiotic lists -- and smoke it."

One of those Seven Little Words hovers hidden amid the smoke (but not the mirrors, which remain demurely inside the maison close) of the last sentence. Those who came across that posting, would thus not have been offended by that hard to discern, smoke-wreathed wraith. A matter of phrasing. A matter of tact.

The failure to observe the rules of verbal decorum could drive away visitors. In the past such a problem would not have arisen. The line between the seemly and the unseemly, le cru et le cuit, would have been clearly demarcated. But unseemly language can now be encountered at every stratum of society. It can be heard in the speech of the grasping stock market racketeer in his home office, next to his home gym, in New Canaan, Connecticut. It can be heard in the lecture of the tie-less, suit-less, sock-less professor on Morningside Heights who, wishing to demonstrate to his students just how with-it he can be, delivers himself of phrases that fail to impress, his crude quotes left to haunt him when they appear, unexpunged and unexpungeable, in the next edition of the Student Guide to Professors.

Unseemliness can even be detected on the lips of the non-native speaker of English. Just imagine a well-bred and fetching French agronomist, winsome and wayward, deeply involved in an irrumation project in Mentula, Mississippi, who has learned from the locals to reproduce an expression the meaning of which she, in her innocence, does not fully grasp. Under the circumstances, one would naturally forgive her lapses of langue and parole.

In order to keep the site presentable and accounted for, one has to be a little less forgiving here.

As the raspy-voiced referee with the cigar stub jammed in the side of his mouth always says in the old movies, just before the opening bell sounds to signal the first round of the bout in Madison Square Garden: 'Got that, boys? Just make sure you keep things clean. No hitting below the belt. Now get out there and fight.'"

Posted by: Hugh at June 7, 2006 12:32 PM

The clearest explanation of the fundamental differences between Islamic and Western thought I have come across.

Recipe for Making a Muslim-

http://www.6thcolumnagainstjihad.com/CUBED_P7.htm

Posted by: gallopinggranny at June 7, 2006 12:36 PM

I only have one suggestion regarding thread moderation: please leave the footer of deleted posts with [deleted] in the body. It's confusing to read about posts that no longer exist.

Posted by: deesine at June 7, 2006 12:37 PM

The Brits should launch a boycott of Muslims...

Don't sell food to them, cabbies should refuse to take their patronage, restaurants should refuse to seat them, schools should outlaw muslim dress, the UK should establish a religious ministry promoting a much more updated Islam with modern human and civil rights.

Make their life hard as hell...

Posted by: skald

ALL the free world should do that.

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 12:49 PM

'Got that, boys? Just make sure you keep things clean ...

I hope Naseem will still be allowed to use the outrageous phrase "wild slutty womens" in reference to the unveiled ladies of the democratic nations. It is such a revealing phrase.

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 7, 2006 12:53 PM

LOL@Yojimbo,personally i could use a few more "wild slutty womens" myself,but that's just me.

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 12:57 PM

skald - No need to discrimminate, makes us looks bad and gives them grevance - just cut off welfare, all forms, including public school. They and other assorted bumbs will leave on thier own accord. They'll definity stop comming.

Posted by: Zebo at June 7, 2006 1:00 PM

You are soooooooo decadent, Western mens.

Posted by: jsla at June 7, 2006 1:06 PM

Thanks, gallopinggranny, for the link comparing the muslims to "the Borg" in the Start Trek episodes. Enjoyed reading it. Interestingly, I had come exactly to the same conclusions as the article, based on examining the utterances of the few muslims who do write here (in particular, Naseem... whose mailings are almost a copy of the Borg's "You will assimilate. All resistance is futile".) I wonder whether the Star Trek folks themselves had muslims in mind when they wrote these particular episodes.

Posted by: Razdan at June 7, 2006 1:07 PM

You can't reason with people blinded by hate. You can't argue with people blinded by Islamic faith. Islam hates the power of the individual. Islam hates the achievements of women. Islam hates progress. Islam hates the religious freedom of others. Islam hates the pre-Islamic heritage of other nations. Islam hates the light of truth. Islam is against free-will and hates democracy, liberty and justice for all. Islam simply loves to eat you alive. That is what Islam does and that is what Islam is. Worshipping that? NEVER!

Citizens of the United States are slowly waking up from a long winter sleep on this issue. However, there are still millions who are extremely naïve about the dangers of Islamic terrorism. Those in the states are good people; they are sympathetic people; they are giving people; they like to see the goodness in human beings and for that, they unconsciously refuse to believe that in a faith -- teachings can make wild animals out of its believers.

The greatest threat facing the United States today is its own ignorance about Islam.

Until citizens of the United States understand the threat of Islam to its society and on its own soil -- people will continue to die in these sporadic attacks. Until there is a true understanding of this faith and a means to control it, we, along with other people will continue to die as a result of its teaching. The threat of Islam is real. Until the United States understands that all violent Islamic fundamentalist groups, including al-Qaeda and Hezbollah and others are true Muslims and wish to kill all non-believers, we will continue to be at their mercy.

No, Islam has not been hijacked by the Islamic militants. The cult of Islam has hijacked humanity for almost 14 centuries. Until we digest this and do something to circumvent the trend, our risk and exposure grows greater in between each attack.
http://amilimani.com/index/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3&Itemid=2

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 1:08 PM

I wonder whether the Star Trek folks themselves had muslims in mind when they wrote these particular episodes.

Posted by: Razdan at June 7, 2006 01:07 PM

i wonder that too,lots of the same quality's between the borgs,and the mo's

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 1:14 PM

Obviously, Spencer has the right and freedom to exercise absolute restriction: he could only allow posters whose names begin with Z if he wanted to. Just because a forum director has the right and freedom to exercise moderation, however, that doesn't settle the question of what degree is appropriate and beneficial. In my view (obviously -- it's not the view of some cab driver in Cleveland), there is a balance between

1) facilitating Comments because their ongoing presence benefits his website

and

2) maintaining order.

While Robert and Hugh have (within the purview of moderation of Comments) performed #2 mostly admirably, it would be nice if once in a blue moon Robert and Hugh acknowledged their gratefulness to the people who benefit this website not only by their sheer numbers and daily presence, but also by their largely civil, interesting, often insightful, and at times concretely helpful participation. In addition, it might be acknowledged once in a blue moon that our participation proves to be mutually encouraging -- a side benefit that cannot but contribute to the main mission of this website. Furthermore, participants here often demonstrate appreciation -- not uncommonly glowing -- of Robert and Hugh, and rarely grumble about the degree and style of restrictions imposed on their freedom to comment. A while back, Robert seriously considered nixing the Comments aspect of this site altogether: again, it would have been nice if, when he decided to keep Comments here after all, he and Hugh had posted a note to us all summing up the reasons why we do him good, rather than giving the impression that, "Well, pish-posh and harumph, we will let you guys continue your little Comments, but mind your p's and q's and remember -- we're watching you like a hawk and you only exist at our Pleasure!"

Posted by: Television at June 7, 2006 1:17 PM

Islam, as it is officially practiced in Iran today, is a stultifying, iron cowl. Today, after 1400 years, militant Islam is again the greatest threat to existence of the free world and Judeo-Crhistian civilization. Persians underestimated the power of militant aggressive Islam, something America must not do the second time.

It was apparent on September 11, 2001 that Americans had already underestimated the power of Islamicist madness. There must be no weakness in American resolve now.

That day also proved as never before that ordinary people can do extraordinary things. Ordinary people became heroes in care and compassion. Heroes appear when circumstances call upon them. Heroes make sacrifices to achieve positive change.

We the people should join hands with heroes today and express our love for America. America is far more than a country. It is a place of greatness, where the souls of Indians still dwell side by side with modern heroes. Native Americans, a group with a proud military heritage of patriotic service, see that America is in grave danger, and all heroes, past and present, need to unite to preserve America.

America is the last haven of hope where humanity can flourish. The world owes a great deal to America for inspiration and practical accomplishment. A true American is generous. Americans have helped every other nation in the world. America’s enemies decry her greatness, yet they want to be in America, and to be American.

http://amilimani.com/index/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2&Itemid=2

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 1:22 PM

Hugh

If original offensive comments that distract are deleted, can the follow-up comments about those comments be deleted as well, so that one isn't left wondering about the context in which they were made?

Except of course for a post or two that lay down the law about etiquette and decorum.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 7, 2006 1:27 PM

From the NY Times:
(Free speech ticking off the UN - Sorry for the long post)

Official of U.N. Says Americans Undermine It With Criticism

By WARREN HOGE
Published: June 7, 2006
UNITED NATIONS, June 6 — Secretary General Kofi Annan's deputy assailed the United States on Tuesday for withholding support from the United Nations, encouraging its harshest detractors and undermining an institution that he said Washington needed more than it would admit.

"The prevailing practice of seeking to use the U.N. almost by stealth as a diplomatic tool while failing to stand up for it against its domestic critics is simply not sustainable," said the deputy, Mark Malloch Brown. "You will lose the U.N. one way or another."

In a highly unusual instance of a United Nations official singling out an individual country for criticism, Mr. Malloch Brown said that although the United States was constructively engaged with the United Nations in many areas, the American public was shielded from knowledge of that by Washington's tolerance of what he called "too much unchecked U.N.-bashing and stereotyping."

"Much of the public discourse that reaches the U.S. heartland has been largely abandoned to its loudest detractors such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News," he said.

Richard A. Grenell, the spokesman for John R. Bolton, the United States ambassador, said Mr. Bolton had not had time to read the speech to react to it fully on Tuesday evening. "Mr. Malloch Brown did not extend to us the courtesy of a copy of the speech," Mr. Grenell said. "We need to read it and will certainly have to respond."

Mr. Malloch Brown is a Briton who became deputy secretary general in March and will leave office when Mr. Annan's term ends on Dec. 31. He made his remarks in a lunch speech at a Midtown hotel to a conference on global leadership co-sponsored by the Center for American Progress and the Century Foundation.

The speech reflected frustration in Mr. Annan's office with a looming crisis over the United Nations budget, which, under a six-month gap agreed to under pressure from Washington in December, will pay the bills only until the end of June.

The deal was struck to link budget approval with achievement of significant management reforms, and Mr. Bolton made frequent mention of Congressional impatience with the United Nations and legislation that would authorize Washington to start withholding its dues. The United States is the largest contributor to the United Nations, paying 22 percent of its budget.

"In recent years the enormously divisive issue of Iraq and the big stick of financial withholding have come to define an unhappy marriage," Mr. Malloch Brown said.

He noted that the United Nations was fielding 18 peacekeeping operations abroad at lower cost and higher effectiveness than "comparable U.S. operations." Yet, he said, that fact has been ignored or underplayed by policy makers and opinion shapers in Washington.

"To acknowledge an America reliant on international institutions is not perceived to be good politics at home," he said.

Mr. Malloch Brown did not mention Mr. Bolton by name, but he criticized the working strategy that many diplomats have associated with Mr. Bolton since his arrival last August. "Exacerbating matters is the widely held perception, even among many U.S. allies, that the U.S. tends to hold on to maximalist positions when it could be finding middle ground," Mr. Malloch Brown said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/07/world/americas/07nations.html?_r=4&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Posted by: ShortBoard Surfer at June 7, 2006 1:45 PM

King Abdullah II warned on Wednesday that his country could never again serve as a "substitute homeland" for Palestinians, in a clear sign that Jordan feared a destabilizing flood of refugees if Israel unilaterally redraws its borders. ( Gee my history books seem to recall a land called trans-Jordan...no maybe just a Zionist trick.)http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1149572634999&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 1:50 PM

OT,but look at what the u.n has planned on the 4 of july,on our OWN soil know less,and our country's birthday.

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 1:51 PM

http://stopungunban.org/pages/fireashot

forgot the link.

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 1:52 PM

Official in Tehran: Iranian insecurity could cause instability in region

Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi warned that a situation of insecurity in Iran would harm the stability of the whole region, according to Iran’s ISNA news agency.

Within that, Safavi emphasized that Tehran is not interested in “making problems” or disrupting world energy supplies. (Reuters)

(Right and Islam means Peace)http://www.ynetnews.com/home/0,7340,L-3083,00.html

Posted by: storagemanager at June 7, 2006 2:04 PM

stop cooperating with the British constabulary? Er... ...just when did they start?

Posted by: waterdragon52 at June 7, 2006 2:06 PM

step 1: defy current western law
step 2: institute sharia for muslims inside western civilizations
step 3: remove all but sharia
step 4: destroy freedom

Posted by: viahj at June 7, 2006 2:18 PM

Unless British come to their senses (I don’t believe they have the will or inclination to do so -- the leaders at least are drunk with their own PC-multiculturist vomit) – Britian is doomed to live under the islamic curse of shariah law.

Britain will not live under sharia law.

I hope not; but seeing things as they stand and discerning the situation at hand, I am unable to arrive at the same conclusion unless what is left of your Parliament, starts acting in your own best NATIONAL interests -- and soon!

We are all adults capable of judging other's remarks ourselves

Okay; most of you are adults, true, go on...

That is the difference between the west and islam.

Islamists most certainly "judge others" as you do -- so technically there is no difference between the west and islam on this point but I won't quibble over this issue.

The difference is a matter of determination. If the British Lion does not raise to the challenge soon and do the unpleasant thing that must be done; than sadly, like Ansalam, it will be slain.

Unlike the lion in a C.S. Lewis tale, there won't be happy endings -- unless one imagines Narnia as being part of a caliphate.

I can't.

Posted by: witness at June 7, 2006 2:23 PM

somethingaboutislam had, I think, the most salient information about Ms. Ridley, that no-one has yet commented:

Her first husband was Daud Zaarur (alias Abul Hakam), a former military commander of the Palestinian Fatah movement in Lebanon.

Posted by: special_guest at June 7, 2006 3:02 PM

I miss the spastic sarcastic gelastic gymnastics of Komments Kraziness. This thread? Ho hum.

Posted by: jsla at June 7, 2006 3:04 PM

We have a bunch of Neville Chamberlains in power the world over, it is over for us...

You must be French skald. Personally, I prefer the Poles, who when Hitler invaded with tanks & guns, fought him with horses & stones and kept right on fighting till the Allies won. I don't hear any fat lady singing yet.

Posted by: gallopinggranny at June 7, 2006 4:05 PM

Yes Gallopinggranny, but the Poles were crushed by the Germans. I ask you, who will crush Islam, when the leaders of the world that crushed the Nazis, are today silent and dhimmified? Who is left to rescue the world as Poland was rescued?

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 7, 2006 5:17 PM

Special_guest, there is more about Yvonne Ridley. This is from the internet. The woman, and I use that phrase lightly, is as mad as a hatter. I hope that phrase doesn't offend any hatters here.
__________________________________________________

Yvonne Ridley has been criticised for her support of Palestinian terrorism and suicide bombers (which she insists be named "martyr operations"), as well as support for terrorism in Iraq and Jordan by Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. She described the victims of the November 9, 2005 terror attacks in Jordan (2005 Amman bombings), which saw 60 persons killed and 115 injured as Iraqi collaborators, Saudi, Indonesian and Chinese intelligence officers and the upper echelons of society. She described Abu Musab al-Zarqawi himself, after he took responsibility for the Jordanian terrorist attack and was subsequently denounced by his remaining Jordanian family, as a brother she’d much rather put up with than have a traitor or sell-out for a father, son or grandfather – by which she means the Jordanian king. [2]. Ridley calls the family renunciation of al-Zarqawi "cowardly". The outpouring of public outrage manifested in spontaneous demonstration she describes as staged and the work of "Jordanian troops out of uniform" and "government lackeys" together with "Christian and Muslim Bedouins" who had all been commandeered or paid to demonstrate by the Jordanian government and the CIA.

At a public conference in Copenhagen, July 2005 Yvonne Ridley declared that "As an alternative news source to the propaganda of western media, it is a necessity for Muslims to keep videos in their homes featuring the slaughter of western hostages." [3]. At the same meeting she compared British PM Tony Blair with Pol Pot. Israel she describes as "that disgusting little watchdog of America that is festering in the Middle East" and further that her party the Respect Party "is a Zionist-free party... if there was any Zionism in the Respect Party they would be hunted down and kicked out. We have no time for Zionists" while both the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties are "riddled with Zionists".
________________________________________________

Actually, she's not mad. She is a muslim jihadist - a full supporter of terrorists, terrorism, and beheadings. And was so long before she was "kidnapped" in Afghanistan. And yet this woman is allowed to run for office in Britain. Melanie Philips was right.

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 7, 2006 5:26 PM

Who is left to rescue the world as Poland was rescued?

I don't know the answer to that somethingaboutislam. I do know that the Poles, despite the overwhelming odds, refused to accept defeat. Those who could get out did and formed fighting units outside of Poland - some of WWII's top aces were escaped Poles. Those who couldn't get out kept fighting inside Poland. The Allied "powers that be" sold the Poles down the river to the Commies at the "end" of the war, but even that was not "the end." Today - temporarily maybe - they are again self determinant.

Don't think I don't worry. I see what is going on in US schools today and am horrified. We are raising an entire generation that has quite literally NO idea whatever of what "freedom of speech" means. They have all been taught that "freedom of religion" means "freedom from religion" - unless you are Moslem.

They are programmed from nursery school to believe that it is both wrong and immoral to make any kind of value judgement whatever. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil - then it will all just go away. And worse - they are not learning the basic skills necessary to think independently, to formulate opinions, to weigh the validity of anything. All logic and reason is being deliberately programmed out of our children in the name of "equality" and "multiculturalism." Your average university graduate today does not have as much defined, testable knowledge as I had to acquire in order to graduate high school. The current crop can barely read - never mind add 2 + 2 without a calculator!

These kids don't even know what "unreasonable search and siezure" means - witness the clear backpacks, the metal detectors at the door, the perfectly legal locker searches - no warrant required.

For that matter, these kids are being raised to not have even a vague concept of "innocent until proven guilty." Just look at the number of kids across the country that have been expelled for things that in my day would have been quite literally a joke. It is beyond comprehension to me that a kindergartener can be arrested anywhere in the US other than for the most horrific act. Half a dozen or so were hauled out of Florida classrooms in handcuffs last year alone.

And then there is No Tolerance. No Tolerance for speech that is not currently PC, No Tolerance for knives at school - even if that "knife" is a plastic picnic knife required to cut food by a child with braces, No Tolerance for anything that does not meet with group approval, No Tolerance for anything whatever. And with No Tolerance comes No Forgiveness.

I don't see many steps for this coming generation from No Tolerance to Sharia. Likely they will not even notice. They know only to act as a group, often in the most barbaric manner, and to do as they are told - with No Tolerance.

Where will leaders come from? From those of us that are old enough to know better. From those of us that deliberately choose to homeschool our children despite the expense and committment in order to guarantee them the power to THINK. From people like Ali Sina & Robert & Hugh with the courage to declare that the Emperor is parading around in his underwear.

Posted by: gallopinggranny at June 7, 2006 6:02 PM

Gee, gallopinggranny . You started out with a staunch example of never giving up, and then you post the most desultory and demoralizing slanders and overbroad generalizations of the young Americans who will win this fight.

You do them a grave disservice in smearing them with this distortion.

Sure, there are problems in our schools. But there should be some semblance of Adult Balance in your assessment, I believe.

Our victory against the Muslim foe is in no measure guaranteed. But surrendering the race before your horse gets out of the gate is wrong. In addition -- don't think the enemy doesn't have a nose for this kind of defeatism.

Suck it up! We are a Great Nation. We are a Great People. Despite all the chatter and noise, our enemies have met their match in us.

Posted by: jsla at June 7, 2006 6:10 PM

gallopinggranny,

you seem to got it pretty well covered,could come from you.

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 6:12 PM

We need a Great Americna president,some Great American generals,like jsla said
We are a Great People.We just gotta "getter done".The goverment we got now,is no longer"Of the People,by the People,For the People".We havent cleaned house for a while,but its time to first take care of 'old mo.

Posted by: patriot4 at June 7, 2006 6:20 PM

The nicest thing that may be said of Ms. Ridley is that she is a hypocrite. If she thinks Britain is beneath Islam she has no business being there.

As she is a jihad accessory she should be stripped of her citizenship by the authorities and sent off to the Islamic nation of her choosing, ASAP.

Posted by: pythagoras at June 7, 2006 6:20 PM

then you post the most desultory and demoralizing slanders and overbroad generalizations of the young Americans who will win this fight.

Not slanders, jsla. Especially not of the young. They simply don't know any better and are only products of their environments. And I would be the last person on the face of the earth to surrender, even after the horse lies dead and bleeding in the dust.

If I am criticizing - and I am - I am criticizing the educational system that we have allowed to sieze control of our schools, our textbooks, our children! If you think that I'm distorting, then I suggest you spend some time looking at educational statistics, examining what is being taught - and more importantly, not taught - in our school systems. Drive by any public school in any city. Take a look at the test scores all over the nation, especially in areas like math - and then compare them to countries like Japan and Singapore. Look at the statistics for the sheer number of children who are being drugged as a condition of attendance in order to make them compliant.

Go down to the bookstore and leaf through a copy of The Road to There: Mapmakers and Their Stories, Val Ross, Tundra Books, 2003. Intended for middle school students. Let me give you a quote:

The king, Roger de Hauteville, born in 1095, was the grandson of Norman warlords, descendants of Norsemen who had wandered into Italy looking for things to steal and people to kill..........The boy was named (take a deep breath) Abu Abdullah Mohammed ibn-Abdallah ibn-Idris al Sharif al Idrisi.....Al-Sharif means "the noble;" unlike Roger's family, al-Idrisi's ancestors were true aristocrats, descendents of the Caliphs who ruled Malaga in Spain.

Some semblance of adult balance? I barely touched the very tip of the iceberg! Don't wonder why the Jihad generation is turning to radical Islam. The answer is right in front of your nose.

Posted by: gallopinggranny at June 7, 2006 6:29 PM

Gallopinggranny,
We know what is going on in the schools. I spend half my free time shooting down the ridiculous ideas that come home. Fortunately these ideas are so dumb it doesn’t require much effort. I spend the other half teaching and reading the things that are not covered in school. Have faith. We are wise to the problem.

Posted by: tgusa at June 7, 2006 7:09 PM

Interesting the similarity to the "Stop Snitching" campaign the Gang Banger/Hip Hop/MTV crowd have going here in the US...

Posted by: infidel4life at June 7, 2006 8:57 PM

"When the coming war breaks out I wonder what will happen to turncoat pondscum like this."

Posted by: Zathras at June 7, 2006 11:16 AM

Initially they'll be fine, cheering on and perhaps even participating in, the slaughter of the enemies of Islam.
However, if these people are choosing Islam as the winning side, they are in for a huge shock later and that shock will likely prove fatal.
God will never let Islam win.

I reckon things are going to get incredibly ugly. Sentimentality, PC, and all those touchy-feely luxuries will go out the window.

Posted by: Mike_W at June 7, 2006 9:20 PM

Give credit where credit’s due! The islamics, with the help of Tony Blair and company, have accomplished what Hitler could not do; bring the now emasculated British lion to its knees.

Posted by: witness at June 7, 2006 10:56 AM

GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN

PS
But it is going to be mighty ughy!!

Posted by: Catherine at June 7, 2006 10:15 PM

A main (or possibly the main) blogspot for the absurd Leninist-Shariah alliance party 'Respect' (i.e. Yvonne Ridley and George Galloway's party) is 'Lenin's tomb' at:
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2004/01/about-lenins-tomb.html

I tried to engage in a reasonable debate about Jihadi violence and the Islamist threat with the many contributors at the aforementioned blog, questioning the far-Left-Islamist alliance that is now in place. As a consequence, I was subject to a torrent of abuse, branded a racist (a charge which annoyed me no end) and finally banned from the site.

If you fancy a trip to the looking-glass world of non-Muslim far-Left Islamist sympathisers, take a look at the 'Lenin's tomb' blog.

Their latest whinge is about the CIA's supposed practice of rendition applied to suspected Islamist terrorists.

Posted by: The Northumbrian at June 7, 2006 10:19 PM

Pray for peace, prepare for war.
Posted by: Erik at June 7, 2006 09:31 AM
================

Pray to win.............

Brits it is past time to prepare, arm and be ready. The peaceful cult of the mos will win if the Brits do not stand up and fight.

Posted by: Texican at June 7, 2006 10:25 PM

Um Thereseomethingetc

I am a feminist. As is any woman really who knows, uses, and protects her rights. The same rights as yours.

I'm not here only because of women's appalling treatment under sharia, but because of everyone's appalling treatment under it. I'm as concerned about men hanged without fair trial, beaten for 'crimes' and having their hands chopped off as I am about women hanged, stoned, beaten.

Come on, we're in this together. I won't presume to read your mind and reasons for being here, please don't presume you know mine.

Posted by: Lili at June 7, 2006 11:05 PM

The BBC, on the lunchtime news today, chose to interview George Galloway. As I predicted, in the post which, regrettably, got deleted for use of the 'b' word (which is obviously unacceptable in overly feminist PC USA), he screamed 'freedom of speech' and 'oppressed moslems' at the top of his voice as well as accusing the media of censorship and oppressing moslems. He even managed to imply that the media were enormously disloyal for throwing one of their own - Ms. Ridley (God rot her) - to the wolves.

Indeed, he demonstrated that he was a past master in the art of dissimulation and outright lying, presumably practising taqiya and kitman. In a performance worthy of the best that Mr. Cecil B. DeMille could come up with, Mr. (and I use the term loosely) Galloway demonstrated just how far he was prepared to go to hang on to his Parliamentary privileges (and, one presumes, his Parliamentary salary). To be honest, he made me ashamed to be an Englishman.

He managed, without actually putting himself in jeopardy, to justify the illegal position that this woman has adopted. Saying that one will not co-operate with the legally established forces of order, even in advance of any request to do so, is illegal, and possibly treasonous, in the UK.

So now we all know where we stand with 'respect' to him and all the senior members of his little party, don't we. Every mark of an Englishman they reject; every civilised standard of behaviour in public life they reject; gravitas means nothing to them; dignitas likewise. All that matters is the corporation - the belly of the beast, the feast, the fat.

But never, never, no matter how serious the fight gets, nor how many nasty, creepy-crawlie men we have to fight; no matter how many sky-scrapers get demolished by scheduled, and innocent, flights; no matter how many tube trains get blown apart and innocent commuters killed by moslem extremists never, never, never, ever, ever use the 'b' word just in case some thin-skinned person gets mildly offended and fails, signally, to see the cultural difference between an angry, gay Englishman and his cultural milieu and a brow-beaten, hen-pecked, well-whipped, American boy's milieu.

As the great poet and defender of the robust English language - and by that I mean English, not some bastardised form of it such as modern feminist PC American English (God rot Microsoft)- John Dryden (1631-1700) wrote:

"Thy genius calls thee not to purchase fame
in keen iambics, but mild anagram:
Leave writing plays, and choose for thy command
Some peaceful province in Acrostic Land.
There thou mayest wings display and altars raise,
and torture one poor word ten thousand ways."
(Mac Flecknoe: 1,203).

Go on, torture the word, but you'll never take the earthy out of English - I'll call cant when I see it and here I see it: mealy-mouthed, sex-is-what-you-kerry-the-coal-in, Morningside - Morningsade - (all fur-coat and nae knickers), hypocritical, rotten cant.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at June 8, 2006 12:05 AM

Blair continues with his plans to bring as many as 100 private Muslim 'faith' schools into the subsidised public sector - despite 2/3 of the population opposing his whole faith school policy.

The rcommendations of the Muslim working groups on discouraging jihadism among young males include, goodness knows why, raising the profile of Islam in the school curriculum, making Islam seem less alien to the general public and combatting Islamophobia.

To help stop forced (kidnap style) marriages the age at which spouses can be shipped in from abroad has been raised from 16 to 18 (Anne Cryer, the labour MP most concerned with the subject wanted it raised to 21 so girls could comlete tertiary education but male Muslim community leaders, who get the vote, outmanaged to limit the damage to their power. The government hasn't even the nerve to outlaw forced marriages, partly because it's hard to tell them from arranged mariages. The age limit has, sensibly, been set at 24 in Denmark.

This government is a one man show and Blair just hasn't got a clue about Islam.

Posted by: wallyUK at June 8, 2006 12:17 AM

Is that the same Yvonne Ridley who raped the 4 Taliban -who kidnapped her and held her hostage- on a daily basis?

Must be, because they let her go without ransom.

There are rumors that these 4 Taliban were traumatized by the experience and since they couldn't get psychiatric counseling they are now actively seeking martyrdom since they can't over this terrible defeat by a female....

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at June 8, 2006 12:38 AM

Yes Gallopinggranny, but the Poles were crushed by the Germans. I ask you, who will crush Islam, when the leaders of the world that crushed the Nazis, are today silent and dhimmified? Who is left to rescue the world as Poland was rescued?

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 7, 2006 05:17 PM

Cheer up something, the magnificent United Nothing will surely save us all from Islamic tyranny provided the dastardly, extortionist US ponies up its "past due dues." What a circus that decrepit den of liars, thieves, and miscreants has become. When they hold their summit on July the fourth and attempt to nullify portions of our Constitution, I do believe they will have done one trick too many.

The socialist, multiculturalist, globalist bureaucrats, in a carefully orchestrated assault on our sovereignty and Constitution, are preparing to enact a legally-binding treaty that would give the U.N. unchallengeable power to ban civilian ownership of ALL firearms.
This, of course, is to pave the way for the UN police and army.

I think this situation bears close scrutiny.

Posted by: Susanp at June 8, 2006 1:47 AM

-Susanp,

I wonder how the assorted illustrious delegates would react if a US infantryman bedecked in full warfighting regalia, including M4, were to walk to the podium in the general assembly and recite, by heart, the oath he swore upon entering the service?

Especially the part about defending the Constitution, including the Second Amendment, against "all enemies, foreign and domestic"?

I still have my BDU's around somewhere. Have to get a haircut. Would probably be a good idea to cover their seats in plastic first, too.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 8, 2006 2:58 AM

Steven - very good post. I agree with everything you've said.

Posted by: londongirl at June 8, 2006 5:14 AM

Read and puke My Journey to Islam by Yvonne Ridley

She even tried to estop beforehand any mention of Stockholm Syndrome, by bringing it up herself.

I would like to see a study that digs into what passes for a brain and examine the assumptions, needs, self image,beliefs, and weltaunschung of converts to Islam, especially women. Men, I can almost understand, especially if one comes from a patriarchial and misogynist culture, religion environment.. Islam does it better.

Posted by: Nariz at June 8, 2006 6:45 PM

I couldn't read past her fatuous "My spiritual journey, like that for many converts/reverts, was meant to be a personal affair between myself and God...." So why the hell write about it online? (For some reason she deliberately misspelled "pervert" as "convert" and "revert" --Freudian slip? Me so confuse...)

Anyway, like biblical plagues we're burdened in the West by things like the anti-Christ Brangelina birthing affair...

Why don't the Muslims give it a go? Are turkey basters halal or haram? YR and MJ could plasticly conjoin and make a stab at the Mahdi, and then we'd be cooking with gas.

I'm ready for denoument. C'mon! people, let's get this thing over the hump. I wanna see how this story ends before I leave the building!

Posted by: jsla at June 8, 2006 7:32 PM