The difference between a congenital Muslim and a Muslim convert is the difference between hope (however limited) and outright despair. When I hear that someone "converted" to Muslim, I say: "Guilty. Lock him up."

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at November 7, 2006 9:03 AM

Surely this cur is the best argument for the reintroduction of the firing squad.

Hear that Ibrahim ? How's that for appeasement and dhimmitude ?

Posted by: dgene at November 7, 2006 9:04 AM

Now the poor guy will be stuck in a comfy cell with his Koran and laptop. How will he get by?

This pig gets a better fate than the one he planned for his victims. It just doesn't seem right.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 7, 2006 9:05 AM

We hope Dhiren Barot's accommodations in the British jail are as resplendant as those at "club gitmo" in Cuba. Dhiren Barot, we hope that many more of your number will join you soon--there are too many of you walking around and infecting our world.

Posted by: BB at November 7, 2006 9:06 AM

Folks, does anyone agree with me?

I think that there should be a new law on the statute books. The law should recognise Islamic Jihad, and it should ban it under pain of death.

At the moment we deal with vaguries of anti-terrorism, and it doesn't really recognise what we are up against. What we are up against is an attempt to impose slavery upon free men, and this is one thousand times more serious than random terrorism.

I am not the greatest of scholars, and definitely not when Islam is concerned, but the legal minds amongst you would be able to formulate something more waterproof.

Perhaps intent to murder or maim in the name of Islamic Jihad, murder and maiming in the name of Islam, threats to murder or maim the critics of Islam, acts to bring about the Sharia Law should all be viewed as crimes of treachery. It is still law in Britain to put traitors to death.

Posted by: FREE LEE at November 7, 2006 9:25 AM

Assalamau Laikum all,

It will be interesting to see how other prisoners react to him. After all this is not Afghanistan, I'm sure there are TVs in british prisons and others will have seen the news about him.

There will be Kafur prisoners...who maybe getting out in the near future....even these peoples do not like to see wanton destruction.

Who will be his friends in there? Other muslims I think will be wary of him.

And will we hear from his "controllers" of his "service"....lookout for that?

Yet others may have to share a cell with this vile convert. Perhaps his best punishment maybe to "live alone"....but certainly the British taxpayer will be paying upto £100k to £200k per annum to keep him there....but it might be more because of his halal dietary requirements.

Posted by: Naseem at November 7, 2006 9:29 AM

FREE LEE-

Your idea is a good one. However, the enemy must be clearly identified first and most spineless politicians refuse to name that enemy. Not only that, but it seems that treason is no longer a big deal so it's unlikely someone will be hanged for it.

We really live in disheartening times.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 7, 2006 9:32 AM

Dude is getting a measure of what he deserves anyway. As for his fellow prisoners?....can't speak for Britain, but if he were in the USA, he would have to be under protective custody or Bubba would get him for sure...(after he had "married" the muslim scum, first however...)

Posted by: angryeagle at November 7, 2006 9:41 AM

More likely he'll be in a nice open prison in months. But I am pissed off at the cost of putting him up for 40 years. It would be cheaper to buy a travel lodge and brick him up in there.

Posted by: beachhutman at November 7, 2006 10:01 AM

Assalamau Laikum beachhutman,

Yes, Mr. Smith in the UK may be working hard to keep his family going, his cars going, his gas/elec prices maybe sky-rocketing, his petrol price maybe going up...and in frustration he may boot his childrens out at the age of 16 to shack up with some very nice muslims ...but he still has to pay his share of earnings to keep Dhiren where he is...that is probably a cool £1M every decade.

Don't forget about sundries like a high-up shlef in the cell to keep the Koran, and special loos that do not face east.

Posted by: Naseem at November 7, 2006 10:11 AM

Re: "You planned to slaughter hundreds, if not thousands, of wholly innocent men, women and children"

This is not true, as per the belief -system, since unbelievers are not innocent because they refuse to believe. This perception on the part of the believers is the main-spring of the supremacist attitude that entitles a Muslim to exploit or even kill an unbeliever. The Koran, unlike the Bible or the scriptures of other religions, is considered direct dictation from God and therefore a believer is "only following orders". This belief-system is similar to the Nazi belief-system in that regard.

The proposition that the belief-system prohibits the taking of innocent life only applies to Muslims because as per the belief-system they alone may be considered "innocent". Make no mistake of it, this altered perception is every bit as dangerous as the Nazi view of non-Germans as "subhuman". In the final analysis, there is no reasoning with people with such belief-systems. The believers treat their dogmas as fact. In that sense it is a mental illness since it treats a dogma-belief as if it is objective fact.

Posted by: Frank at November 7, 2006 10:12 AM

Ahh the plan is so well laid out and the Dhimmis in Europe Latin America and America are still so clueless.
Interesting read.

http://www.meforum.org/article/687

Posted by: Islame at November 7, 2006 10:15 AM

OT

Here comes Santa on his - camel. Get your kids picture taken in front of a middle eastern oasis. No snow and reindeer for the French.

http://trans.voila.fr/voila?systran_lp=fr_en&systran_f=1162912042&systran_id=Voila-fr&systran_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.france-echos.com%2Factualite.php%3Fcle%3D10809

Posted by: Borg at November 7, 2006 10:16 AM

Halal is not a dietary requirement. It's not like Diabetes. To make an animal suffer before it's eaten is outrageous and so inhumane it's sickening. The meat doesn't taste any different and he should be made to eat pork, and if he doesn't like it, he can starve.

He's not on vacation and shouldn't be treated as such. He should be cleaning toilets, Hamza's butt, and everything else nasty. He should be allowed the koran, since that's what got him there in the first place...like kiddie porn to a pedophile.

Make him suffer...it won't be like the families of those he intended to kill would have suffered, but a learn a lesson suffer.

Posted by: freewoman at November 7, 2006 10:17 AM

I skipped the nt....he SHOULD'NT be allowed the koran.

My bad.

Posted by: freewoman at November 7, 2006 10:19 AM

Naseem (enlighten us on the name Naseem--with your posts I want to write "Nauseum")--you must be muhammadan, correct? You posted:

"...but certainly the British taxpayer will be paying upto £100k to £200k per annum to keep him there....but it might be more because of his halal dietary requirements."

To which we respond that our beloved "alarmedpigfarmer" will be asked to supply a lifetime supply of pork sausage, now to be DB's only food staple from now on -- halal of course for such scum.

Posted by: BB at November 7, 2006 10:29 AM

He is something called a 'Counter-profile terrorist' (http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/19518.shtml):

Converts to Islam have been involved in virtually every major Al Qaeda-inspired cell uncovered in Europe since the September 2001 attacks on the U.S. The latest example is the August arrests of 22 people allegedly linked to a plot to blow up U.S.-bound flights from London.

Three of those arrested were converts, including 21-year-old Don Stewart-Whyte, the suburban son of a former Conservative party organizer. He embraced Islam six months before being charged with intending to bring bomb-making ingredients on board a plane.

The vast majority of converts, like the vast majority of Muslims, are moderates who reject the violent ways of Al Qaeda-inspired groups. But a leaked report from Britain's MI5 service this summer raised concerns that violent Islamists are actively recruiting converts, counting on their local knowledge or appearance particularly in the case of white converts to better avoid detection.

A study released this month by the Washington-based Nixon Center examined the profile of 373 terrorists in Europe and the U.S. It found 35 of them 9 per cent were converts to Islam.

"The high numbers confirm findings from intelligence sources that Al Qaeda, as part of its efforts to penetrate the United States, seeks counter-profile individuals such as women and Europeans as well as converts," wrote the report's authors, Robert Leiken and Steven Brooke.

Pascal Mailhos, director of France's national police intelligence service, estimates 5,000 of the country's 5 million Muslims have embraced violent beliefs. He said 400 are converts.

"The phenomenon is on the rise and we are very alarmed," he told Le Monde newspaper. (Estimates put the number of converts in France as high as 100,000, and 50,000 in Britain.)

A striking example appeared in the Philippines, where the government is calling for the international blacklisting of the Rajah Solaiman Revolutionary Movement. The group is made up of 80 Christian converts to Islam and has been linked to bombings in the Philippines.

There's also evidence of converts being trusted with high-level roles in Al Qaeda, a once hierarchical organization experts believe has been transformed into an ideological franchise by the U.S.-led "war on terror."

Posted by: pagandkapitat at November 7, 2006 10:35 AM

The first article in the Guardian that made sense. And it gets blasted by the comments section. If this is any indication of how the majority of people in the UK feel, then it is indeed lost.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1939961,00.html

Posted by: Borg at November 7, 2006 10:43 AM

Only total losers convert to Islamania. That way, they can act out their worst impulses under the fiction that God OK's it.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 7, 2006 10:56 AM

According to the BBC law reporter, Barot pleaded guilty because if he had fought the charges the government had threatened to extradite him to the US 'and they don't mess about over there - in stead of 40 years, he would have got 240.' I bet most of these Muslims deliberately drop the soap in the showers anyway.

It's interesting to note Naseem's contempt for a convert. I'm reminded of the way Anthony Burgess ( who went to a Catholic school where the boys always referred to protestants as scum) always looked down on the convert,(and vaguely heretical) Graham Green. Someone born into a religion always regards themselves as more the real thing than some johnny-come-lately. On the convert's side, it means that he has something to prove.

Posted by: wallyUK at November 7, 2006 11:29 AM

sorry, make that Greene

Posted by: wallyUK at November 7, 2006 11:31 AM

"Jihad Plotter Gets Life..."
-- the title to the article above

Jail forever for the Jihad Plotter.

But honor forever to Dennis Potter. Royalties -- who can stop them? -- forever to the creator of Harry Potter.

Let's not let lambdacism run riot in the West; likely, it would only lead later to regret and rue. It would be "a victory for the terrorists."

On another note, those who may be inclined to pay their respects to Admiral Yamamoto and others dishonorably honored at Yasukuni Shrine are requested to repeat aloud the first sentence in the paragraph just above. In lieu of agenbite of inwit, a little phonemic distress.

Posted by: Hugh at November 7, 2006 11:38 AM

'Finegan's Wake' - more unreadable than the Koran? Discuss.

Posted by: wallyUK at November 7, 2006 12:00 PM

'Finegan's Wake' - more unreadable than the Koran? Discuss.

Posted by: wallyUK at November 7, 2006 12:00 PM

Never read 'Finegan's Wake'. Did read 'Mein Kampf' as well as the Koran. Nothing can be worse than these two peas in a pod (I'm still unsure which is more unreadable).

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 7, 2006 12:32 PM

Finnegans Wake (no apostrophe) is much more interesting than the Qur'an. It's a good book to take to the gym. Dive in to Anna Livia Plurabelle, swim a few laps, and then emerge dripping but well-satisfied.

Your question --what book is even more boring than the Qur'an -- is a good one. I don't have a specific book in mind (save perhaps the collected works of our last 4-5 presidents, secretaries of state, defense, and so on) but a good guide is to find books that contain, in their titles, some dead-giveaway words and phrases.

Here are fifteen:

1. Organizational Development

2. International Community

3. Palestinian (id est, "Palestinian")

4. Diversity (except if the author is E. O. Wilson, or any other biologist writing on bio-diversity)

5. Youth (save in "Childhood, Boyhood, and Youth" by Leo Tolstoy)

6. Gender

7. Hegemony

8. Dynamics (as in "Dynamics of Political Opposition" but not as in engineering and physics textbooks)

9. Challenge (the "challenge" of anything)

10.Change (as in "To Change the World")

11.Society (save in R. H. Tawney's "The Acquisitive Society" and Galbraith's "The Affluent Society")

12. Constructing (and Re-Constructing) unless, again, it is a book written for engineers or boys with Lego sets

13. Identity (except, possibly, in Angus Wilson's "Cards of Identity")

14. Management (unless used outside the world of business-school-speak-and-write-and-think, as in "The Management of Dreams")

15. YOUR ENTRY HERE

Posted by: Hugh at November 7, 2006 12:40 PM

To WallyK above:

Addendum or prolegomenon to any future or past or present metaphysics:

"Agenbite of inwit" is one of the recurring phrases in Ulysses, not in Finnegans Wake.

Posted by: Hugh at November 7, 2006 12:42 PM

there in love with nukes and want to use nukes on the west as well as dirty bombs well give them what they want close up give them death by tossing them in to the cooling pit for spent fuel rods and let them die from radation sickness like they would had us do

Posted by: islamakapigeaters at November 7, 2006 1:26 PM

Please Hugh, no more James Joyce references, your erudition notwithstanding. They are presumptious and pedantically pompous. And they are impertinent and supercilious to any thread on jihad, or in fact, to any topic of discussion in the English language.

Posted by: August22 at November 7, 2006 7:38 PM

"They are presumptious and pedantically pompous. And they are impertinent and supercilious to any thread on jihad, or in fact, to any topic of discussion in the English language."
-- from a posting above describing an example here of a poster incapable of detecting method in any madness

Please explain as fully as possible why you find exactly two brief references to James Joyce:

1. presumptious [sic]
2. pedantically [sic] pompous [sic]
3. impertinent [in what way? -- or did you mean "irrelevant"]
4. supercilious to [sic] any thread on jihad or
5. to any topic of discussion in the English language [including, presumably, discussions of literature, of Joyce, or of agenbite of inwit]

Then I'll be able to understand the precise nature of your objections. And with that I will be better able to explain the method in the seeming madness, the need for occasional paronomastic or allusive comic relief (at least, for some), and why that kind of display helps semaphore to a certain desired audience that this is not one more dreary right-wing "islamophobic" website full of cheerleaders for whatever the leader of the "war on terror" deems necessary, but something much more dangerous to the collaborators and apologists of Islam: a site that cannot be easily pegged or easily dismissed as full of Know-Nothings and Right-Wingers, not only becuase of the quality of what is often put up on the subject of Islam, by both the staff and many of the posters, but also because the kind of patter that is sometimes indulged in (even when it takes the form of a routine, a series of private or semi-private jokes that others are free to join in on or not as they choose) is neither "presumptious [sic] and pedantically pompous" nor "impertinent" nor "supercilious [sic] to any thread on jihad" but rather, just good clean fun, by exuberantly spirited young men (and unless one were naturally exuberant and humorful, how else could one stand, or have the stamina, day after day, to deal with the grim and disturbing matter at hand), seniors or perhaps upper middlers, just letting off a little mental steam, as they run around during self-directed rec.

So explain those stated objections.

Fire away. Make sure your aim is good. Don't let me get in a return volley.

Posted by: Hugh at November 7, 2006 10:05 PM

Hugh, you have to give us James Joyce in order to let off a little steam? Why not give us some humor that actually has something to do with jihad? Or better yet, just give us humor. Perhaps a skit, you know a comedic exchange between the jihadist and the judge, or like the one I did not long ago, between the ACLU and the jihadist. Why not make people laugh for a change, rather than make them shake, or scratch, their head?

You have to give us references to James Joyce, smugly aware that most people will have no clue what it is you are referring to. A joke, if you can call it that, between yourself and yourself, is hardly of any use, comedic or otherwise, to the readership of jihadwatch, or of any mitigating value to its critics, as if that would matter in any case. But you don't care. So that can't be your motivation. As long as you can insert some obscure reference to some literary work, that you are sure is remote enough from the experience of the average person, you are self-satisfied. That is what I call pedantically pompous.

BTW, I'll concede presumptuous, but supercilious, pedantically, and pompous, are not spelled with a (sic) after them.

Posted by: August22 at November 8, 2006 8:02 AM