He is attempting to make Rage Boy look like Borat. What a idiot!

Then Frenchie says...

"Islamist extremism is a serious threat and will continue. But Al Qaeda's brand of terrorism has little in common with Shakeel's upbringing or experience."

Oh brother....there is no hope for people like this. Terror is a tactic and...oh never mind.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 10, 2007 7:49 PM

JW deserves the support and gratitude of all posters for it commitment to free speech. It's one of the only outlets that we have that allows people to vent their true thoughts and feelings about Islamofascism. Where else can we go to hear the truth, see the truth and speak the truth?
Don't let some shallow-minded PC journalist intimidate you.

Posted by: jewdog at November 10, 2007 7:54 PM

Stunning to me that a paper would quote unmoderated comments in a mainstream article. Testimony to the success of Robert Spencers’ work and the gravity of the struggle that the free West faces.

And now the type of speech that will actually end up hurting people (from the article):

Sad story: Patrick French (left) meets Shakeel Bhat and discovers that he is more a victim than a threat.

Look at the body language in the article’s third picture from the top. French’s hands open and extending. Bhat’s hands clenched and eyes studying.

Thank you for letting us comment Robert. It’s therapeutic.

Posted by: pez at November 10, 2007 7:59 PM

From the linked article:

Sad story: Patrick French (left) meets Shakeel Bhat [a.k.a. Islamic Rage Boy] and discovers that he is more a victim than a threat

There's a fine bit of journalism, pointing out for the 2,102,283,192th time that Muslims are not a threat, they are the victim.

Note to self: Make myself more outrageously quotable, so I can appear in Daily Mail stories.

Posted by: special_guest at November 10, 2007 8:01 PM

I'm enraged that I never get quoted in the world press--what, I'm not a rabid fanatic, too? [Also very photogenic--I'm distributing a press kit with promo pics. Not!]

Posted by: John C at November 10, 2007 8:01 PM

Mr. Spencer

D'Souza Alert!

OT I know but he is back at it again. As of late he has been on the rampage against atheist but I knew he would find some way to tie this back to his original argument that we are at fault for upsetting Muslim values.

It is called the "external being,"!

The artical says...

Muslim extremists are attacking America because not everyone in the U.S. follows a moral code given by an "external being," D'Souza said. This new moral code leads to acts such as adultery and gay marriage, he said.

http://media.www.dailynorthwestern.com/media/storage/paper853/news/2007/11/08/Campus/Conservative.Author.Says.U.s.Culture.War.Caused.Iraq.Conflict-3087948.shtml

He sounds like retro-1960s conservative hippie with all this talk of external beings.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 10, 2007 8:06 PM

article = artical...stupid

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 10, 2007 8:10 PM

I wouldn't worry about it, it's par for the course really isn't it? The only thing that bothered me really was that there wasn't a link to your site so people could judge for themselves.
I was half inclined to leave a comment to the article but had already had one comment rejected by the Daily Mail today when I protested at the MCB comparing themselves with the Jewish people of the 1930s. That was flat out disgraceful.

Posted by: Ginro at November 10, 2007 8:14 PM

Wow! i didn't expect to see a comment i posted here end up being quoted at the top of that article of the daily mail .

I must apologize for casting a negative light on all the good that Jihadwatch does. I have nothing but the highest respect for this site and the work of R.Spencer , and my comments added ammunition to those who would paint any opposer of Islam and Islamic violence as racist or bigoted or the dreadful Islamophobic.

My comment came out of a frustration at repeatedly hearing and seeing all this seething rage,hatred and violence from Islamists everywhere directed at the West and our values!
I see the picture of Rageboy and what he stands for and i have to admit it does set my blood to a boil. he sums up the attitude of a growing number of Muslims wolrdwide to see our culture destroyed and to have their belief system and Sharia law imposed on the world. there is a big difference though in saying i would like to put my fist down his throat out of frustration than actually acting out against another person with violence as we see Muslims doing to non Muslims all over the world on a daily basis.

as usual the negative focus is on those who resist rather than the real aggressor.

my sincere apologies to JW and it's readers if my comments caused any harm.

Posted by: MoBlows at November 10, 2007 8:21 PM

Note to Patrick French who seems to follow these comments.

Attached are the Muslim texts (from a Muslim University source). Take some time and read them. They really are interesting. And then ask your Muslim co-workers to discuss the supremacist elements of Islamic doctrine and how to manage them in the 21st Century. If you are met with denial from your co-workers, please reflect upon the reaction.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/

Posted by: pez at November 10, 2007 8:26 PM

Its not the PC issue that worries me – it’s the tendency to “fine-tune” the truth that does….

“Shakeel's religious family followed the Sufi tradition, a mystical and tolerant form of Islam that is common in Kashmir. His father would often take him to mosques and taught him two lessons: do not be greedy and help Islam to spread by peaceful means”

What Patrick French does not reveal is the brutality of Islam in Kashmir over the last 7 centuries – http://www.kashmir-information.com/ConvertedKashmir/Chapter10.html
[several following chapters have additional details]

“Muslim historian, Hassan, has, in his book "History of Kashmir", given an account of this barbarism of Sikander. He has written that Sikander crushed Hindus the most. An announcement was made in the city that the Hindu who would not adopt Islam was either to be killed or to be banished. As a result of it many Hindus fled from Kashmir, many accepted Islam. Many Brahmins preferred death and died. It is said that Sikander collected six maunds of sacred thread from the converted Hindus and got it burnt. Hazrat Amir Kabir has witnessed the scene himself and he suggested to Sikander that he should impose taxes on the Hindus instead of torturing them to death. All the Hindu scriptures were collected and thrown in the Dal lake and were buried under clay and stones”…..

“Syed Mohd. Hamdani had made Sikander to understand that so long the idols in the temples of idol worshipping infidels were not destroyed, there would be no purpose of conversion. These very places of their deities were source of their inspiration. These very centres may inspire them, in future, to give up Islam. Thus destruction of these places was necessary for delinking fresh converts from their national roots and mainstream. If such places of deities were allowed to survive, inspiration for Indianness will survive. The Sultan accepted as dignified the political idea of Syed Mohd. Hamdani, and became ready to destroy the greatest work of human history and in doing so there was not an iota of civilisation, humanity and wisdom.

Historian Hassan has written that there were many temples during the time of Hindu kings which were just like wonders of the world. Their design and art were so fine and delicate that a viewer would get spellbound. Filled with jealousy and hatred Sikander destroyed these temples. From the material of the temples mosques and shrines were built. First of all he focussed his attention towards Martand temple built by Ramdev.

It took one year to fully damage and destroy this Martand temple. Aflter having failed to demolish the temple totally this enemy of art, culture and godly beauty, stuffed the temple with wooden slippers and set it ablaze. Seeing the matchless beauty of the fold studded domes of the temple getting destroyed Sikander kept on laughing and went on giving instructions for the complete destruction of the temple by treating it as God's order. Stones from the temple's foundation were not spared. It was total plunder and destruction of the temple and the people living around the temple were directed to adopt Islam. Those who did not accept this direction were butchered alongwith their family members. This way people from one village to another were converted into Islam. Even today one gets surprised over art and skill of the builders of this world famous Martand temple by looking at its ruins.

Similarly under the instructions of Sikander one famous temple at Bijbehara, Vijeshwar temple, and 300 other temples around it were destroyed and demolished. Historian Hassan has written that a mosque was built with the idols and stones of Vijeshwar temple and in this area a quarry was built which is called Vijeshwar quarry”
“Rajtarangani, Joanraj, has written "not a single village or town was spared where places of worship and temples were not damaged and destroyed. Many Hindus lost their courage and accepted conversion. Many migrated from Kashmir and many committed suicide."

There was no end to the horrible story. One British historian has written in his book "Beyond the Pir Panjal" that two Hindus were put together in a sack and drowned in the lake. They had only three alternatives left, either to adopt Islam, or struggle or accept getting killed. There was anger and annoyance in the Hindus against the Sultan's cruel activities. But all those Hindus who launched a struggle against it were trampled to death.

Salutation to those brave Hindus who achieved martyrdom while fighting in the battlefield instead of either committing suicide by taking poison, or tolerated injustice, or adopted Islam or fled like cowards”

Would recommend that Patrick French and his band of distortion-peddlers try getting a better understanding of the history of Islamic butchery against “infidels” in Kashmir – this butcher has never stopped – visit the Kashmiri Pandits in ramshackle refugee camps to realize how benign the “rage-boys” of the world are….

Posted by: AJack at November 10, 2007 8:29 PM

That's what I noticed, too: it sounds as if these quotes are from paid writers at JW.

"'MoBlows', writing on the Jihad Watch website..."

"On Jihad Watch... 'The Goobs' writes... 'Johndoe' thinks..."

If you read the entire article, the writer's bias is obvious:

"Shakeel is a one-off, an eccentric, but he may be more representative of Muslim anger around the world than we like to admit, whether in Ramallah, Srinagar or Chechnya.

"He doesn't understand us, and we don't understand him. Our assumption that any form of unrest or protest by Muslims must be connected to the Al Qaeda cause is plainly wrong.

"In fact, Osama Bin Laden has hijacked Islam from the vast majority of the world's Muslims.

"Shakeel Ahmad Bhat is the product of poverty, lack of opportunity and state brutality. Islam is to him a way of life. He is illiterate and his only source of news is the street.

"Surrounded by other people who lack knowledge of the outside world, is it any surprise that he believes barmy conspiracy theories about the attacks of 9/11?

"Islamist extremism is a serious threat and will continue. But Al Qaeda's brand of terrorism has little in common with Shakeel's upbringing or experience."

Posted by: Josephine at November 10, 2007 8:29 PM

To the daily mail staff. instead of glorifying a potential jihadist and demonising people that are sick of islamic jihad, why dont you do some real undercover journalism and expose the sickening sick underbelly of british islam.
our nation is at war and you seem to think it's some kind of joke.

and moblows, don't worry mate, you have done nothing wrong. your post was legitimate and heartfelt. it was only offensive to rage boy, a person who hates the west and wants sharia law across the world.
why the british press are so concerned about that comment is beyond me when the UK is facing a serious jihadist uprising in the coming years.

i believe that the daily mail also tried to make abu hamza appear as though he were a harmless "pantomime" type evil character who had no political clout.

how wrong they were, as per.

MOBlows, you rock!!!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 10, 2007 8:39 PM

patrick french wrote:
"Many other internet postings about Rage Boy are so revolting that they cannot be published in a family newspaper."

LMAO

Considering this beyond-absurd kook fringe propaganda hit piece YOU just put out, patrick french, I'm surprised YOUR garbage that your bosses call an article even PUT in what is supposed to be (as you said) "a family newspaper".

Journalistic activism at its finest (we know it better here as FRAUD). One would be inclined to suspect you're bucking for a job at Der Volkischer Beobachter considering this trash you call an article.

Find some other beverage to drink because that Kool-Aid from Jim Jones`Peoples Temple you are obviously soaking your head in isn't making it.
Oswald Moseley would be SO proud of you.

Wise up

Cheers!

Posted by: jcom972 at November 10, 2007 8:39 PM

But... The Daily Mail has it all wrong! I love Rage Boy! There are so few public figures in any arena who are invariably good for a laugh.

I don't feel threatened in any way by Rage Boy, nor do I wish him ill. He's doing his thing, in his own part of the world, and hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of ever affecting anything in my life, except for being something to amuse me.

As for whether or not he's a victim: he's the one who puts himself out there, in front of the cameras. I don't put him there, nor does anyone else, and I could be wrong about this, but I doubt anyone here wields any of those cameras.

So, rage on, Rage Boy!

Get a clue, Daily Mail.

Posted by: Abscedere at November 10, 2007 8:49 PM

"Al Qaeda's brand of terrorism has little in common with Shakeel's upbringing or experience."

I would recommend that people read the following online books/chapters:

http://www.kashmir-information.com/PastPresent/chapter19.html

http://www.kashmir-information.com/WailValley/B2chap8a.html

Just a google on "Kashmir + Pandit + genocide" will bring additional details

In reality there's no difference between the Al Qaeda types and Kashmiri Muslim terrorists - the line that Patrick French tries to draw is entirely manufactured.

"Shakeel Ahmad Bhat is the product of poverty, lack of opportunity and state brutality"

What "French" does not tell us is that Kashmir in India has only 3.56% of its people living in poverty - by far the lowest of any state within the Indian Union - where the average poverty level for populations in some of the "richer" states reaches 25% or more.

Posted by: AJack at November 10, 2007 8:51 PM

"In fact, Osama Bin Laden has hijacked Islam from the vast majority of the world's Muslims.

Seems like the "vast majority" arent doing very much about it Mr French.

Posted by: Elric66 at November 10, 2007 9:06 PM

This is a story as told by Rage Boy. Believe it?
Made up by RB?

What is the Arabic translation of Rage Boy?

Posted by: Pelayo at November 10, 2007 9:07 PM

Jayson Blair?
LOL

Posted by: jcom972 at November 10, 2007 9:12 PM

Not even a mention? I think I am the one that linked his likeness most times.

"Many other internet postings about Rage Boy are so revolting that they cannot be published in a family newspaper."
Hmmm, I wonder how what we have written here stacks up against the beheadings and IED videos the jihad media so proudly post.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 10, 2007 9:19 PM

Shakeel Ahmad Bhat is the product of poverty, lack of opportunity and state brutality."

from the article cited in the posting

Thank heavens for that. If he had wealth and opportunity, and lived in a land without state brutality, think of the damage he could do -- like the British physician who rammed a car full of explosives into the Glasgow air terminal, or the North Carolina graduate student who mowed down pedestrians on a sidewalk with his SUV. they weren't poor, they didn't lack opportunity, and they lived in liberal Western democracies. But they are all Moslems.

Posted by: ebonystone at November 10, 2007 9:29 PM

Hey, any publicity (for Jihad Watch) is good publicity!

Gets JW more readers from the UK. All they gotta do is google "Jihad Watch."

As for sh-t-boy, he don't bother me. He's a good poster boy for Pakistani jihad though.

Sad that what were once members of an ancient civilization of great depth, have been eaten out by Islam, a cancer virus, infecting a healthy civilization with a one-dimensional, shallow ideology of evil (you copy that "Daily Mail?").

Should've beaten them back at the Sindh, inhabitants of Bharatvarsha.

Let that be a lesson to all of us. Give them (Islamics) nothing, not an inch, not a millimeter. Best: not let them land, set foot into your (our) territory.

Islamics not welcome here. Basta

Posted by: unicorns62000 at November 10, 2007 9:32 PM

This story shows how comments left here can and will be used as if they originate from the JW team. Something for all of us to keep in mind when posting.

By the way, Patrick French isn't a Mail writer. He's a historian / author specialising in Central and South East Asia. His books are highly regarded, so commissioning a piece from him would be seen as quite a coup by the Mail's execs, even if it did differ from the paper's usual strident views.

Apart from Rage Boy's pathetic reality - an illiterate, jobless semi-idiot who lives with his mother - what really stood out was the author's attempt to create a subliminal distinction in readers' minds between "peaceful" Sufism and Salafism. Luckily, Rage Boy himself blew that one out of the water:

"I asked what would stop him protesting. What would satisfy him? 'If peace were to prevail in the entire world and people would understand the message of the Koran'."

Shows there's no difference at all in the ultimate goal.

("curry munching ass-pirate" made me laugh out loud. Gotta remember that one.)

Posted by: Matamoros at November 10, 2007 9:32 PM

Abscedere...I agree with you. I kind of like 'Rage Boy', he is a lot like an endearing cartoon character. I don't hate him at all. I have a hyperactive leftist/liberal friend named Daryl, who is a lot like Rage Boy. He waves his arms, yells, sputters, and likes to get right in your face to do it. Usually it's about Bush. If you can imagine Rage Boy fully into his routine only four inches from your face, you got the picture. I like the guy, so I let him come over, but when he starts on his R.B. imitation, I throw him out. A couple of times by the seat of his pants. Nothing personal, it's just business...French is out of line quoting posters in Roberts name, Comments are opinions, and not Roberts. He did the right thing in reminding everyone with his standard disclaimer. I don't know where French got the quotes, but if he visited JW/DW he should have seen them...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 10, 2007 9:39 PM

"I never hurled a grenade in a public place."

Truly, I say, the pièce de résistance.

Posted by: jihadwatcher at November 10, 2007 9:51 PM

(Thanks to Matamoros for posting this)

"By the way, Patrick French isn't a Mail writer. He's a historian / author specialising in Central and South East Asia. His books are highly regarded, so commissioning a piece from him would be seen as quite a coup by the Mail's execs, even if it did differ from the paper's usual strident views."

Big deal,
So is noam chomsky & his radical ilk-ology.
I don't care if he was Superman...
a propagandist is a propagandist is a propagandist,
and the world is full of "highly educated" militant ideologues such as patrick french, whose article was beyond immoral, which only serves to prove a century-old quote justified:

"...to educate a man in mind, but not in morals is to educate a menace to society."-Theodore Roosevelt

case-in-point, patrick french

Posted by: jcom972 at November 10, 2007 9:58 PM

Before commenting, think carefully. Imagine your words being quoted by this kind of malevolent and incurious jouralist, or by CAIR, or any number of groups waiting to gather up ammuniation. There is no need, and it is not fair, to indulge yourself -- to let off steam, to utter threats, and so on --at the expense of this site. So don't. As for the various Muslim agents provocateurs who no doubt were among those quoted -- please bring them to the attention of the management and the bouncers will be called in.

Posted by: Hugh at November 10, 2007 9:59 PM

"His story was not what I had expected and showed the personal torment of life in a society that has gone wrong. Although it is hard to prove the authenticity of his story, given my knowledge of Kashmiri political history over the past 20 years, everything he told me sounded plausible:

after all, what reason would he have to lie? " From the story..

Perhaps the koran, it is in there, right?

The only thing I ever said about this follower of islam was about the picture that showed two U.F.O.s above his head, beaming down data.

That was my story, and I'm staying with it.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at November 10, 2007 10:10 PM

Islamic Rage Boy is a Muslim buffoon. Patrick French is something even worse: he's an apologist for Islam's rottenness. But I have no doubt that IRB thinks himself in league with all that is right with the universe and that PR has virtually no hesitation in thinking himself sapient, fair and objective. For those who post here at JW, these two are, in microcosm, what the West is up against------Islamic ignorance and useful idiots making excuses for Islam's wretchedness.

Posted by: Wellington at November 10, 2007 10:16 PM

daily mail"The terrorist threat we face in Britain comes from the spread of Al Qaeda ideology, combined with the failed multicultural project that led successive governments to refuse to promote the active integration of immigrant communities.

This calculated lack of loyalty led directly to the obscenity of the 7/7 bombings, when men who were born and bred in England blew up themselves and their fellow citizens, since their only allegiance was to a synthetic external identity.

That is true rage."

it's all our fault for not intergrating them. last time i checked i never saw a single sikh protest or hindu indians protesting and blowing up londoners because of racism thye may have experienced. incidentally i have been faced with black racism and pakistani racism and i never went on a mass serial killing spree in central london because i was a "victim".
this patrick french, french by name french by nature, so called historian/dhimmi thinks he's so smart and so PC. good luck on that one next time he's on a fact finding mission in afganistan or northern pakistan and he's about to get his head cut off with a rusty machete and he's already filled his pants in fear and terror.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 10, 2007 10:17 PM

Islamic Rage Boy is a Muslim buffoon. Patrick French is something even worse: he's an apologist for Islam's rottenness. But I have no doubt that IRB thinks himself in league with all that is right with the universe and that PF has virtually no hesitation in thinking himself sapient, fair and objective. For those who post here at JW, these two are, in microcosm, what the West is up against------Islamic ignorance and useful idiots making excuses for Islam's wretchedness.

Posted by: Wellington at November 10, 2007 10:17 PM

I am convinced that the enemies of freedom come in here drop a bomb and then leave. I think I smell a tactic. Last week a new poster came onto an older less commented on thread, and said something about doing something bad to all muslims. I gently cautioned him that that kind of talk would get deleted. Later his comment was deleted by Marisol.
I think the tactic may be to post a bomb on an older thread hoping it will get overlooked, so that it can be exposed later. I looked at several other threads and could find no where this poster had commented.
One bomb and he's out of here...sound suspicious?

Posted by: duh_swami at November 10, 2007 10:33 PM

Ouch lol that was dirty. The Daily Mail really dragged Jihad Watches name through the mud there. That was very, almost agenda like, probably so.

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader at November 10, 2007 10:43 PM

I am so sorry to admit this, but I thought that article was hilarious. I laughed out loud several times. And no, I don't believe anyone "threw" the sister out the window, sorry.

Gosh, do you think this means I am getting truly jaded?

Posted by: Kay at November 10, 2007 10:55 PM

His death cult, born of the collision between the harsh religious tradition of the Arabian Desert and the rush of new Saudi oil money, holds that all non-believers are fair game in a war fought for the imposition of universal Muslim rule and the restoration of the Caliphate.

I feel like we have the right to critize any relgion that 'holds all non-believers' as fair game. I don't like feeling like target practice, thank you very much. Now or in the future.

This article sounds more like a BBC kum-bay-ya article than a Daily Mail article.

Did the reporter think that maybe Rage-Boy isn't out shooting because his shoulder injury prevents him from doing so? It doesn't keep him from buring flags though or going to rallies. Couldn't find a job that didn't require lifting? Sounds lazy to me.

And a lot of comments are deleted lately it seems. If they are unmoderated the nasty ones would still be here.

I think this reference to JW will bring more Daily Mail readers here, not turn them off. They are sick of it too.

Posted by: Borg at November 10, 2007 11:10 PM

Islamic "rage boy" is finally understanding the parody that he himself represents.

mo blows, kudos to you old man.

Even I could can sense the indifference of Robert in this posting. His point about unmoderated comments aside, Mo blows' comments were far from contraversial.

The "rage boy" is what he is. It is a part he now plays, no doubt. Putting a fist down his throat is synonomous with a really hard deep punch, which the "rage boy" earned lang ago, for being an over-the-top obnoxious Islamist activist.

Good fun on a Saturday night.

Posted by: awake at November 10, 2007 11:23 PM

Re: (Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)
-----------------
I've had two comments deleted, and got a reprimand from Robert for postings that could be misunderstood as promoting "terrorism" against Muslims. Robert noted he is attempting to address the truth re Jihad and such posts are not helpful to that purpose. Even dear Darcy has got a post deleted.

It is sometimes necessary to delete posts because there are Jihadist liars (and their flunkies) who will use posts, take them out of context, and fool people that that is what Jihad Watch is about. (Even Fibrahim Hooper did that when on a program with Dennis Prager. Of course, Fibby is a liar doing what Fibby does/did).

Jihad Watch is really about two things and two questions: 1) Jihad Watch is about reporting on the grist coming from the ever grinding world-wide Jihad mill and 2) pointing out that the mill activity has sanction in Muslim dogma.

As for the two questions: 1) Are points 1 and 2 true or false? and question 2) What is to be done about that?

Posted by: Frank at November 10, 2007 11:35 PM

Robert, Marisol, Greg, Hugh-

As long as they spell your name right, all free publicity is good publicity.

Anyone with a sense of humor reading the Daily Mail will see the name "Moblows" and laugh.

I only wish they had quoted my description of Islamic Rage Boy as an "an animated toilet scrub-brush with a set of circus dentures and the emotional stability of a tea-kettle with a broken whistle spring".

But I guess that's a little abstruse and verbose, and not overtly anti-Muslim enough for their pity-party paradigm of the poor misunderstood Mohammedan malcontents.

Good work, too The Goobs.

These rent-a-paroxysm protesters need to be exposed as the flatulent frauds that they are.

Posted by: profitsbeard at November 10, 2007 11:50 PM

Now we can have a new competition. Instead of being fatwah-worthy we can see who amongst us get quoted in stupid newspaper articles.

Well done to the guys who got mentioned:)))

Posted by: Gramfan at November 11, 2007 12:05 AM

Reading the Brussels Journal, largely as a result of the controversy that Charles of LGF has fomented, I find that it the LGF crusade against BJ is entirely unfounded. It is a case of cheap pot-shotters going after a real and intellectual anti-jihad site. I hope that Robert Spencer relinks to BJ, because it is a far more reasonable and legitimate anti-jihad site than LGF is or ever will be.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 11, 2007 12:15 AM

Oh, Shakeel, where did your life go wrong? Are you getting royalties from all those fierce mug shots? I love them! Here's is a French tender moment:

"In the early Nineties, thousands of young Kashmiris streamed over the border to Pakistan to take up arms against India. Shakeel, just 13, decided to join them. He was so small he had to be carried on an older boy's shoulders when he went up to the mountains."

Just 13, carried like a babe in arms to do jihad... ah, such a sentimental shot. I will cherish forever. :-) Maybe someday, Shakeel, you will learn to read, and then you can see what is written in the Koran about "kill the infidels", take them not as friends, love death better than life, and then you will understand. There is a God, but it's not Allah... then you will have to run and hide, because death comes to apostates in Allah's mysterious ways.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at November 11, 2007 12:21 AM

MoBlows, Goobs & Johndoe, Congratulations. I envy you!!!

Oh, & Patsy French, Rage Boy is a Sufi? Thank Allah, and thanks for letting us know. Wonder what he'd have been like had he been a Wahabi?

Oh, Patsy, try interviewing one of many Kashmiri Pandits now living in Himachal, or Delhi, or elsewhere? What's that you say - you can't? Why - because most of them have settled into normal lives elsewhere in India and moved on - even while by law, Indians (outside Kashmir) cannot buy property in that state (not that they'd necessarily want to).

Cry me a river, Bhat kisser!!!!

Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 11, 2007 1:05 AM

IRB in a good mood

>:O

IRB slightly miffed

>:O

IRB downright annoyed

>:O

IRB having a Cerebrovascular accident

>:O

Posted by: Mike_W at November 11, 2007 1:09 AM

Guess Spencer stepped on some British corns to garner a hit piece like this. And when they are reduced to hit journalism, it means they have no intellectual arguments to make for their side.

Expect more as Spencer makes more inroads and Islamic "leaders" in the west continue to make their insane demands of western society.

Posted by: waltc at November 11, 2007 1:44 AM

Most likely...
problem is...it doesn't take much to reduce them to hit-piece journalistic activism, just one thing:
REALITY.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 11, 2007 4:30 AM

Well, I used to buy the mail (for the sudoku really, as the rest of it is pretty poor) but no more.

However, I hope some people learn from this and self moderate their posts. This was bound to happen and is bound to happen again.

Posted by: Xeno at November 11, 2007 5:18 AM

What a crock! The Daily Mail self-loather is not even original; another dhimmi jackass did the same take last summer.

Arafat would same one thing in English and the opposite in Arabic; Rage Boy, like all dhimmi fodder, is a clone.

Keep one thing in mind: Rage Boy and scum like him have coerced the exile of 400,000 Hindus from Kashmir. Most Hindu nationalists despise Gandhi-Nehru for making a Hindu minority country: Pakistan. That should not have happened. As I write, all but 1% of Pak Hindus have been coerced out, and India is stuck with 130,000,000 unproductive Muslims. Sharia privileges are guaranteed to Muslims in the Indian Constitution, as are they allowed to set curriculum in educational institutions. Result: 50% of class time is spent in either Islamic instruction or learning the worthless Arabic language.

Posted by: supercargo at November 11, 2007 5:19 AM

From Pez:"Testimony to the success of Robert Spencers’ work"

Oh how true. What's that saying? Something like "first they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."

Well Mr Spencer's certainly not being ingnored, and he's way past the ridicule stage.

Posted by: ewha1 at November 11, 2007 5:51 AM

...How DARE you insult the great Islamic Rage Boy?! Leave him alone, ye pathetic fools!

ISLAMIC RAGE BOY PWNS YOU ALL!!!

...on a serious note, the Daily Mail IS a good newspaper, and in their defense, they didn't state that the views of the posters indicated the official view of JihadWatch--only that the posts were posted on that site. I'm pretty sure they are well aware of the fact that the posts don't always indicate Robert Spencer's views.

As for the rest of the article, I agree that he ignores the extremely vicious nature of Islam in Kashmir, though much of it is in response to equally vicious behaviour from India. It's a shame that a place as beautiful as that must put up with so much brutality. If only they really did practice Sufism--but I doubt they ever did.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 11, 2007 5:52 AM

"rning the worthless Arabic language."

Arabic is hardly worthless--knowing the language of your enemy is half the battle.

Plus, there is plenty of excellent (non-Islamic) literature written in it.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 11, 2007 5:54 AM

The Daily Mail is usually quite a good newspaper as far as the UK media goes.

However, the Mail on Sunday is no better than the Daily Star as far as their reporting inaccuracies go.

By trashing JihadWatch, they've just trashed themselves. All anyone has to do is google JihadWatch and see the truth for themselves.

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 11, 2007 5:58 AM

"I agree that he ignores the extremely vicious nature of Islam in Kashmir, though much of it is in response to equally vicious behaviour from India"

Not backed up by facts - Islam has been butchering people in Kashmir for the last 7 centuries - including much of this century - please note that the population of Hindus in Kashmir valley has gone from 29% to less than 1% within this century.

Posted by: AJack at November 11, 2007 6:38 AM

In Pakistan, former prime minister Benazir Bhutto said the bomb that blew up her homecoming convoy, killing 140 people, may have been strapped to a child dressed in her party colours who was handed up to her vehicle moments before the blast.

So was the little girl a jihadi? Was she aware that she was going to die? Or did some loving parent or uncle promise her paradise? Did they strap a bomb to a child knowing she would get close, not caring about her? Was she someone's child bride and therefore they had the right to do this to her?

Or was this a child who just happened to get killed by the religion of peace? By a jihadi who really didn't care that a child would be killed?

Lots of questions. Just a casual mention of this in passing. No answers.

This is what Jihad Watch cares about, not Rage Boy.

He is just comic relief for the frustrated masses.

Posted by: Borg at November 11, 2007 7:03 AM

And does this reporter know that by sending a child to it's jihadi death, that muslims believe it's ok? Because that child immediately grows up and can have sex in paradise? And more importantly for the mentor who sends the child to it's death, that same child can guarantee it's whole family a place in paradise?

It's like winning the lottery.

Posted by: Borg at November 11, 2007 7:06 AM

As the Daily Mail likes to trash us now, lets see what Wikipedia has to say about the Daily Mail:

Inter-war period

In 1922, when Lord Northcliffe died, Lord Rothermere took full control of the paper.

In 1924 the Daily Mail published the forged Zinoviev Letter which indicated that British Communists were planning violent revolution. It was widely believed that this was a significant factor in the defeat of Ramsay MacDonald's Labour Party in the 1924 general election, held four days later. (In some Labour circles, e.g. by former Labour leader Michael Foot, the paper is often referred to as 'The Forgers' Gazette')

Support for Nazism and Fascism

In early 1934 Rothermere and the Mail were sympathetic to Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Rothermere wrote an article, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts", in January 1934, in which he praised Mosley for his "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine", though after the violence of the 1934 Olympia meeting involving the BUF, the Mail withdrew its support for Mosley.

Rothermere was a friend and supporter of both Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, which influenced the Mail's political stance towards them up to 1939. During this period it was the only British newspaper consistently to support the German Nazi Party. Rothermere visited and corresponded with Hitler on many occasions. On 1 October 1938, Rothermere sent Hitler a telegram in support of Germany's invasion of the Sudetenland, and expressing the hope that 'Adolf the Great' would become a popular figure in Britain.

In 1937, the Mail's chief war correspondent, George Ward Price, to whom Mussolini once personally wrote in support of him and the newspaper, published a book, I Know These Dictators, in defence of Hitler and Mussolini.

Rothermere and the Mail supported Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement, particularly during the events leading up to the Munich Agreement. However, after the Nazi invasion of Prague in 1939, the Mail changed position and urged Chamberlain to prepare for war, not least, perhaps, because on account of its stance it had been threatened with closure by the British Government.

The paper continued to be referred to on occasion by critics as the Daily Heil, referring to its conservative stance and its past support for Mosley.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at November 11, 2007 7:21 AM

Once again an article Hitler, Goebbels, Ley, Göring, or Streicher would be proud of. By negative inference this journalist likes to argue the opposite and is either a hapless dupe of the islamo fascists or he is worse. The article about rage boy has some serious problems about sanitizing his despicable life. Consistent with the journalistic concept of the bigger the lie the more the public will believe it, let's recast the article and see what it admits about rage boy. Let us translate between the lines:

"But since the start of the anti-Indian insurgency in the late Eighties"
Rage boy is from a place where muslims traditionally kill hindus because of perceived problems that muslims are not supposed to be subservient or live in peace with their neighbors.

"We went to Malik Angan, a poor area that the security forces monitor closely, though they risk being shot at or stoned."
Like Gaza hamas jihadi the many muslim inhabitants find it easier to murder and mayhem and live in squalor rather than to worry about and work to improve their own lives. Socialist journalists and islamo-apologists always blame the "haves" for the poverty of the "have-nots." Socialists never blame psychopathy of the individual or psychopathy of the collective or the religion or the culture.

"Shakeel Ahmad Bhat is a 29-year-old failed militant."
He has not killed that many people, and never had the courage to suicide.

"Although it is hard to prove the authenticity of his story, given my knowledge of Kashmiri political history over the past 20 years, everything he told me sounded plausible: after all, what reason would he have to lie?"
I guess with all his religious studies he never learned the lesson that his prophet recommended being dishonest to the infidel.

"His father would often take him to mosques and taught him two lessons: do not be greedy and help Islam to spread by peaceful means."
The author fails to mention the mosque where peace was taught. Perhaps it is near Shangra La where the author used to ride on boats in the lake as the author tells us earlier.

"Shakeel did not like school and he had difficulty learning to read and write. His teacher thrashed him with a stick but it did not improve his studies."
Although he received a good islamic education, he was unable to memorize the koran, but he was resolved to be a success anyway.

"Pakistani-backed terrorist activity against Indian rule in Kashmir was beginning. The Indian government's reaction was brutal. While searching for militants, police raided Shakeel's home and threw his 18-year-old sister Shareefa out of an upstairs window. She broke her spine and died from her injuries four years later."
Shakeel and his father were probably behind some of the islamic atrocities committed against infidel hindus. His sister probably jumped out the window when the infidels broke into the house looking for dad and rage boy because of some bombing somewhere. Is the article suggesting the police selected rage boy's and his dad's house at random to torment these fine people and murder his sister? Why would they not have just murdered him and his dad, since his sister was just property to be married off at great expense later?

"In the early Nineties, thousands of young Kashmiris streamed over the border to Pakistan to take up arms against India. Shakeel, just 13, decided to join them."
Shakeel was a precocious child taking up the Jihad at 13.

"In Muzaffarabad he was taken to a snow-covered training camp run by the Pakistani army in conjunction with the militant group Al-Umar Mujahideen. Armed with an AK-47, he returned to Srinagar hoping to drive out the Indian army."
Yeah, he was trained to shoot over the heads of infidels so they would move. He never considered that by killing infidels with the AK-47 he would achieve heaven. He never considered that allah would be pleased the more infidels he killed.

"Shakeel was not a very good militant. When I asked him how many people he had killed, he looked embarrassed.
"I gave scares but I never killed anyone," he said. "I couldn't. I never hurled a grenade in a public place."
His greatest achievement was opening fire on the cavalcade of a visiting Indian government minister."
He claims no verified kills. Is he stupid enough to admit killing? Wouldn't that get him arrested. Also what is meant by "I never hurled a grenade in a public place." Does that mean he hurled them elsewhere. Also, firing on the government minister is an attempted murder is it not as is the other atrocities he has allegedly confessed to. It is traditional to punish a criminal who tries to murder people but who does not succeed assuming he is telling the truth about not having a verified kill.

"Even when his team caught a police informant, Shakeel called for him to be set free. "I thought I would set an example. Forgiveness is better than killing."
This is forgiveness to a fellow muslim, not to an infidel.

"Shakeel Ahmad Bhat is the product of poverty, lack of opportunity and state brutality. Islam is to him a way of life. He is illiterate and his only source of news is the street."
He is the product of a failed islamic education and world view. If he put half his time into figuring out how to make a living, embracing the freedom and prosperity that capitalism brings, instead of fighting infidels, he could do more than live pathetically begging his brothers for change so he can order a cup of tea at a merchant stall. He would do better if he loves tea so much to open his own stall and sell it to the infidels rather than to try to kill them. A live customer is always better than a dead one even if the customer is an infidel!

Posted by: David England at November 11, 2007 7:42 AM

"I gave scares but I never killed anyone," he said. "I couldn't. I never hurled a grenade in a public place."

His greatest achievement was opening fire on the cavalcade of a visiting Indian government minister.

So, he never killed anyone, but he opened fire on people?

They beat his 75-year-old father instead, leaving him with a broken leg; he spent the rest of his life bedridden.

That would be the 75 year old father who allowed a 13 year old to go on jihad?

I suggested to Shakeel that he must have been tempted by the prospect of a job and a wife – he was unlikely ever to get such a good opportunity again. He looked shy and covered his face with his hands.

"I want to marry a non-Muslim woman and convert her to Islam."

Why? I asked.

In a moment that might have come straight out of the Borat film, he answered in a soft, serious voice: "I have been told that if I can convince a non-Muslim woman to marry me – but not convert her by force – then there will be a place for me in heaven."

I suggested there might be some suitable candidates in Britain. "If the offer comes," Shakeel said, "I am ready to accept it."

So, he only wants to marry someone he can convert? Not for love. I'm sure some British born gal would love to marry someone who has never had a job, can't read or write, and who only wants to be married so he can convert her. What an offer!

Our assumption that any form of unrest or protest by Muslims must be connected to the Al Qaeda cause is plainly wrong.

The Al Qaeda cause is islam dominating the world, therefore, Osama is not hijacking islam. Rage Boy wants what Osama wants.

Shakeel Ahmad Bhat is the product of poverty, lack of opportunity and state brutality. Islam is to him a way of life.

Poverty, caused by islam, lack of opportunity, caused by islam (what tourists wants to be there?)(he quit school, nobody forced him did they?) and state brutality caused by the reaction to islam. Yes islam is a way of life. He had an opportunity for a job but didn't take it because he hopes to marry a non-muslim for the cause of islam.

The article writer was a hippie when he visited last?

Peace and love. Can't you feel it?

Posted by: Borg at November 11, 2007 8:07 AM

"The article writer was a hippie when he visited last?"

In the immortal words of the Great Prophet Eric Cartman: "THE HIPPIES MUST RESPECT MY AUTHORI-TAH!"

Since saying DEATH TO HIPPIES would make me sound like some sort of jihadist, I'll settle for:

EXTREME DISCOMFORT TO HIPPIES!!!

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 11, 2007 8:16 AM

Pace Hugh....I am honoured to be one of those quoted by Patrick French and I stand by my original post. French is the Orla Guerin of the male species and his article reeks of the same agenda-driven, wilfully ignorant and maudlin sympathy for its chosen victim, which is quite typical of the BBC style that is so easily swallowed up by the brain-washed masses in Britain. However, the average Mail reader will see through all that and will be inspired to make a beeline for this site for moral support and like-minded perceptions. Welcome Mail readers and fellow counter-jihadists who refuse to be hoodwinked by PC appeasers like French. And as for his romanticised and uncritical view of Sufism? Please!! Bin-Laden is a Sufi.

Posted by: johndoe at November 11, 2007 8:17 AM

So, he only wants to marry someone he can convert? Not for love. I'm sure some British born gal would love to marry someone who has never had a job, can't read or write, and who only wants to be married so he can convert her. What an offer!

Is Naseem reading this? Her English is pretty good for a Pakinstani, unless she really is a non-person-troll. Subcontinent English speakers, unless they had been abroad or to university, do not speak that well.

Shakeel's dream of finding an infidel gal to marry is not an uncommon one in the Islamic world. I've heard it well discussed by Moslems, even bragged to me, an infidel, in my travels. Inbreeding has this effect, that they are left simple and without reserve, and slow to learn. Marrying for love never entered the conversation, except to tell me that all western women are whores, so they must be 'disciplined' for this.

Peace and love under the covers... but take cover when they shoot at you.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at November 11, 2007 9:09 AM

The Daily Mail is a very Tory paper & the Tories are backing islam !
See here if you doubt it http://regionalnews.bnp.org.uk/page/6/

Please moderators don't just remove my posting as you did for the link to Shahid Malik MP being the most expencive MP in the UK (in the story of the poor soul being stopped at the airport )
It's Here for those that missed it http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=1806

Posted by: TrueBrit at November 11, 2007 9:41 AM

"It's an Extremists' world, the Moderates just live in it."

Posted by: objective1 at November 11, 2007 10:53 AM

"It's an Extremists' world, the Moderates just live in it."

Posted by: objective1 at November 11, 2007 10:54 AM

To Patrick French:

Because of Islam, your country is dying. London, in particular, has become Londonistan.

You like that? Honest answer, please.

Posted by: darcy at November 11, 2007 10:56 AM

"Shakeel...had difficulty learning to read and write...Aged ten, he refused to go to class and stayed at home with his family...'I thought KASHMIR SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION,' he told me."

Dems some pretty big words for a 5th grade drop out to be tossing around!

Posted by: dm60462 at November 11, 2007 11:26 AM

As a Brit I think Borg said what I wanted to say, well said, if only this hack could understand that, well he is Main Stream Media, and we expect them hardly ever to report the truth.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 11, 2007 3:19 PM

OT

Lest we forget.......A BIG thanks to the veterns past and present. Without you I would not be sitting here reading free speech and typing free speech. Let's do the job!

Thanks to you all, and to all the families who have been left because of the sacrifice they have made.....

Posted by: gymgal at November 11, 2007 4:41 PM

OT - Here's something to make you laugh.

Islamofashion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKIgzScJ1WU&eurl=http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Borg at November 11, 2007 6:09 PM

"To Patrick French:

Because of Islam, your country is dying. London, in particular, has become Londonistan.

You like that? Honest answer, please."

Posted by: darcy at November 11, 2007 10:56 AM

Uh Huh. No reply. I knew it. Coward. You and "Rage Boy" belong together. All happiness to you both! Gotta love that Islam!

Posted by: darcy at November 11, 2007 6:57 PM

BORG:

Laughter is irrelevant.

You WILL BE ISLAMICIZED.

From THE UMMA COLLECTIVE

[What is your designation? (And we ain't talkin' no collection from no haute couture designer, neither.)]

Posted by: John C at November 11, 2007 7:04 PM

""Shakeel...had difficulty learning to read and write...Aged ten, he refused to go to class and stayed at home with his family...'I thought KASHMIR SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION,' he told me."

Dems some pretty big words for a 5th grade drop out to be tossing around!"

I'm sure French altered the quote somewhat to make Rage Boy seem more intelligent. Here's what the guy actually said:

"KASHMIR FOR MUSLIMS! DEATH TO THE INFIDELS! MUHAMMAD JIHAD!"

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 12, 2007 5:28 AM

"They told Shakeel to stop going on demonstrations but he refused."

....typical Muslim reaction upon hearing good advice....and just why did he refuse?....did he agree the the militants violent actions?....did he have another opportunity to hurl grenades?....did he think the quickest way to peace was through violent activities?....did he enjoy screaming and fist shaking while cursing and condeming Non Muslims to death?....perhaps he leaped for joy when the effigies were burned....

and

"In a moment that might have come straight out of the Borat film, he answered in a soft, serious voice: "I have been told that if I can convince a non-Muslim woman to marry me – but not convert her by force – then there will be a place for me in heaven."

....this surely shows a segment of the grand Islamic plan to rid the world of Non Muslims....it seems Muslims get to heaven by killing Infidels or by marrying them and removing them from the Non Islamic gene pool...as we know, if a child is born to Islamic parents, the child will be a Muslim from then on...

yep, Rage Boy is just a Muslim....not at all unlike Ahmadinejad, Nasrallah, Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri...et al.......

Ban Muslim Immigration (no matter how peaceful they claim to be)

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 12, 2007 6:27 AM

Talk about your "bad karma". Imagine being Rage Boy's sister, and being chucked out of a third floor window by the Indian Army all in the same lifetime.
/defenestrated

Posted by: MP at November 12, 2007 1:38 PM

Stand by for ditzy female Daily Mail readers lining up to wed Rage Boy in ...3, 2, 1...

Posted by: MP at November 12, 2007 1:41 PM