Abidat is ticked because the Knights of Malta were around when the Crusades originally kicked off their 2nd Millenial Tour and because it is a sovereign state under international law, which is a no-no if you are trying to take over the world and establish the big ummah. Oh, and I'm sure he and his homies don't much like that the knights were established to care for poor and sick pilgrims to the Holy Land.

Strength and resistance, sovereignty and charity. Can't have ANY of that from the dhimmis on the other side of the world.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at December 7, 2007 7:31 PM

Poor Muslims. All 1.3 billion of them are sooooooooooooooo oppressed by a small, "secret" organization.

My guess is there are more literates in the "Knights of Malta" than in the entire population of 1.3 billion meteorite lovers.

Posted by: Gringo at December 7, 2007 7:41 PM

as a briton whose ancestors about 2000 years ago were pillaged and subjugated by the roman empire. i declare war on the romans and their descendants for suffering that my people were caused due to war and erm new roads, water supplies, safe warm cities and the aqueduct my people had to put up with.

down with rome!

really, are the muslims this paranoid? the knights of malta are somehow connected with the knights templar and muslims are getting revenge for the crusades?

i declare war on the norman invaders etc...

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at December 7, 2007 7:48 PM

One of the most obvious signs of intellectual weakness is the tendency to accept conspiracy theories quite readily. Among other dysfunctional characteristics of Muslims en masse is their pathetic embracing of conspiritorial plots against them. Whether it be gullible acceptance of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" or nefarious designs by the Knights of Malta or Jews making their matzoh with the blood of Christian or Muslim children, Muslims by the millions reveal their intellectual and emotional bankruptcy by subscribing to such nonsense, absolute rubbish, time and time again. What fools. How can one not conclude that the Muslim world is sick, sick throughout?

Posted by: Wellington at December 7, 2007 8:04 PM

I suppose a muslim who can wade through the boring Quran, can just as easily wade through the boring 'Protocls'. I have difficulty wading through either one without falling asleep.

These jihadists would probably rather attack the Vatican itself, but can't afford the bus fare, the Order in Cairo is much closer.

Posted by: duh_swami at December 7, 2007 9:12 PM

Of the Hospitaller Knights of St. John and Malta:

History's bloodiest siege used human heads as cannonballs

A hot and fetid June night on the small Mediterranean island of Malta, and a Christian sentry patrolling at the foot of a fort on the Grand Harbour had spotted something drifting in the water.

The alarm was raised. More of these strange objects drifted into view, and men waded into the shallows to drag them to the shore. What they found horrified even these battle-weary veterans: wooden crosses pushed out by the enemy to float in the harbour, and crucified on each was the headless body of a Christian knight.
This was psychological warfare at its most brutal, a message sent by the Turkish Muslim commander whose invading army had just vanquished the small outpost of Fort St Elmo - a thousand yards distant across the water.

Now the target was the one remaining fort on the harbour front where the beleaguered, outnumbered and overwhelmed Christians were still holding out: the Fort St Angelo. The Turkish commander wished its defenders to know that they would be next, that a horrible death was the only outcome of continued resistance.

But the commander had not counted on the mettle of his enemy - the Knights of St John. Nor on the determination of their leader Grand Master Jean Parisot de la Valette, who vowed that the fort would not be taken while one last Christian lived in Malta.

On news of the grotesque discovery of the headless knights - many of them his personal friends - Grand Master Valette quickly ordered that captured Turks imprisoned deep in the vaulted dungeons of the fort be taken from their cells, and beheaded one by one.

Then he returned a communiquè of his own: the heads of his Turkish captives were fired from his most powerful cannon direct into the Muslim lines. There would be no negotiation, no compromise, no surrender, no retreat.

We Christians, the Grand Master was saying, will fight to the death and take you with us.

The Siege of Malta in 1565 was a clash of unimaginable brutality, one of the bloodiest - yet most overlooked - battles ever fought. It was also an event that determined the course of history, for at stake was the very survival of Christianity.

Posted by: justamomof4 at December 7, 2007 9:22 PM

Since the Kights of Malta are headquartered in Rome, I think we can assume these creatures are declaring war on the Vatican also.

I firmly believe that it's only a matter of time before these sub-humans detonate a bomb in St. Peters Basilica, the Vatican library or Museum, destroying centuries of great art and manuscripts.

A people who don't understand anything but ugliness, death and destruction can't possibly appreciate the beauty, majesty and grace of an enlightend civilization.

They'll do it, and then congratulate themselves for what they did.

Posted by: rational at December 7, 2007 9:24 PM

as a briton whose ancestors about 2000 years ago were...

-leonthepigfarmer

---------

leon--how do you know your ancestors weren't the Saxons who overran England as Rome fell? I mean, if you were Saxon then your beef would be with the Normans who conquered England a few hundred years later.

Obviously, you have very legitimate grounds for "right of return" as well as compensation, and some sort of retroactive privilege to rape and pillage, but first we all need to establish who you really are so that the descended beneficiaries of your aggressors can be properly identified and then reduced to paupery.

Posted by: Hyman Roth at December 7, 2007 9:49 PM

off topic.

why is germany banning scientology yet muslims want to do serious political and violent damage to world governments.

yet scientologists only crime is to recruit members on the streets?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7133867.stm

and there's a picture of tom cruise on the bbc site, smiling!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at December 7, 2007 9:54 PM

The stuff dreams are made of.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 7, 2007 10:05 PM

OT - sorry.

From CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/germany.scientology.ap/index.html

"BERLIN, Germany (AP) -- Germany's top security officials said Friday they consider the goals of the Church of Scientology to be in conflict with the principles of the nation's constitution and will seek to ban the organization.

The German government considers Scientology a commercial enterprise.

The interior ministers of the nation's 16 states plan to give the nation's domestic intelligence agency the task of preparing the necessary information to ban the organization, which has been under observation for a decade on allegations that it "threatens the peaceful democratic order" of the country."

Scientology????? That's the biggest threat they see??

Let's hope this is just a precident for a more meaningful ban of that which truly needs banning...

Posted by: BunrattyBill at December 7, 2007 10:21 PM

Who needs Hollywood writers?

U.S. officials say the split has produced fledgling contacts between Americans and moderate Sadr loyalists, often tribal leaders or local officials trying to rebuild their communities. Sadr's movement, however, denies this.

"They want to talk about the future. They want to talk about security. They want to discuss how we can improve services in their areas," Odierno said. The west Baghdad neighborhood of Jihad is an example of this nascent relationship, U.S. officials say.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sadr7dec07,0,2183810,full.story?coll=la-tot-world

Posted by: pez at December 7, 2007 10:33 PM

The Seige of Malta 1565

Yeah, another example of those 'peaceful & tolerant' Muslims in action...

Posted by: Morgane at December 7, 2007 10:36 PM

"BERLIN, Germany (AP) -- Germany's top security officials said Friday they consider the goals of the Church of Scientology to be in conflict with the principles of the nation's constitution and will seek to ban the organization."
-- quoted in a posting above

Are the doctrines of Islam, is the locating of legitimacy in the will expressed by Allah (in the Qur'an, and glossed by the Sunnah), rather than in the will expressed by the people, in its collectivism and its flat contradiction of the individual rights that are enshrined in the American Constitution (written) and in the British Constitution (unwritten) and, because Nazi Germany was crushed during World War II, in the German Constitution as well (and in the equivalent in France, Italy, and other Western countries) compatible with, or "in conflict with the principles of the nation's [Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, The Netherlands, Spain, Canada, the United States] constitution"? And if so, as I think it would not be difficult to prove to those willing to examine the texts and tenets of Islam, and not merely to examine them, but to see how the doctrine of Islam has been taken to heart, and put into practice, whenever Muslims were strong enough, for the past 1350 years. Are we not entitled to examine Islam? Shall we be satisfied with smiling imams telling us, the Infidels, one thing, and then being caught on tape, saying another, or writing another, when they think no Infidels are eavesdropping, especially if those Muslim imams or spokesmen or journalists have travelled back, temporarily, to Dar al-Islam, and are unaware that MEMRI (the leader in this field) has amazing monitoring and translating capabilitities?

In what way is Scientology more of a cult than Islam? In what way do its principles flatly contradict those of the American and other Western constitutions? As you look around the world, do you feel more, or less threatened, by Scientology, than by Islam?

Posted by: Hugh at December 7, 2007 10:58 PM

Darn those Knights of Malta! Their very existence is an affront to Islam!

Now is this more of an insult to Islam than the teddy bear?

How about the existence of all these dhimmis? They aren't in the least bit submissive like dhimmis in the past.

And some of these Muslim women! They have jobs and meet men their parents don't approve of! The family does the honorable thing and kills them. Then those darn dhimmis arrest them for murder!

What is the world coming to?

Posted by: tanstaafl at December 7, 2007 11:02 PM

Typical utterances of darkness and evil which is all a muslim can contribute to society, apparently. Not surprising, for their daddy, Killermohammed, was himself a murdering thug who, when people wouldn't 'submit' to him, had them killed. What a whining baby he was. I can not think of anything more wicked and evil than the belief system, founded in hate and lived in violence, called islam. I cannot think of a sicker piece of trash than Killermohammed. There is no doubt that Killermohammed and his followers are Satan's greatest servants doing Satan's greatest work. Remember, God said to Abraham (which got passed down to Isaac and then to Jacob) "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you." And what did Killermohammed and most of the muslims we see today do....they curse Israel (as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob.)

So whose side is quite obvious that these demons are on? Pretty easy to see that one.

Posted by: angryeagle at December 7, 2007 11:13 PM

Hugh - Well said. My point exactly. Here in the US "banning" this or that group, even Nazis and Mohammedans, is problematic. In Germany, not so. I am hoping that this ban, if enacted, will open the way towards at least a discussion on banning Islam there. I'm not holding my breath though...

Posted by: BunrattyBill at December 7, 2007 11:14 PM

Speaking of conspiracy lovers another group that buys into that is the Left which drinks heavily from the cup of conspiracy theories. One only has to examine the rapidly expanding market for 9/11 "truth" literature. You know the ones that state that it was the Mossad or CIA that brought down the WTC. That a missile hit the Pentagon.

Or that the Iraq invasion was ordered by Israel or that the Jews secretly control our gov't.

Ohh and another thing you won't find more virulent anti-semites than among lefties.

Its no wonder the Left is so protective of Islam, they've found their ideological brothers.

Posted by: waltc at December 8, 2007 12:06 AM

"The German government considers Scientology a commercial enterprise."
from the AP article cited above

And what is Islam but a gimmick dreamed up by the Mecca and Medina Tourist Board and the Mecca Hotel and Restaurant Association?

Posted by: ebonystone at December 8, 2007 1:17 AM

Man, is there a more insecure group of people than these sad Muslims? Methinks they need a collective session with a shrink.

(or, if that fails, Western firepower)

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 8, 2007 7:18 AM

"Its no wonder the Left is so protective of Islam, they've found their ideological brothers."

And what, precisely, has the vaunted Right done to stop Islam?

...anything?

I thought not.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 8, 2007 7:19 AM

"Do not stint on your attacks, Egyptians...."

It's only a matter of time before even more of Egyptian history will be destroyed and re-written by the islamic conquerers.

I liked Egypt better in the old days when they didn't have all the islam.

Free Alexandria!

Posted by: mike trivisonno at December 8, 2007 7:37 AM

If they're worried about the Knights of Malta, wait until they learn about...the Illuminati!

Posted by: sceptico at December 8, 2007 9:22 AM

Well Roobar(getbornagain), at least the rank and file of the Right recognizes the threat unlike the Left who only see white male Christian conservatives as the source of all problems.

That said, the collective silence of the Left and the feminists to blog let alone protest the Sudan teddy bear incident or the Saudi woman who was gang raped and sentenced to get 200 lashes. Really makes the Left and feminists look like moral retards and hypocrites.

And lets not forget the support that the Left has given Islamic authoritarians on college campuses across the country and helping suppress free speech of those who disagree with Islamic radicalism.

Posted by: waltc at December 8, 2007 11:05 AM

From above: And what, precisely, has the vaunted Right done to stop Islam?

Plenty, I guess you never heard of Geo Bush and the Bushmen. They invaded two country's to try and 'do' something. They are still trying to 'do' something. Now we may not agree with their methods and reasoning, but what has the left done other than to whine, cry, wring hands, and get in the way.
Bush may be inept, but at least, by all appearances, he is trying to win the war, while leftist/liberals, by all appearances, are trying to lose it.
I hope that answers your question, and it has now been put to rest...

Posted by: duh_swami at December 8, 2007 11:10 AM

"Plenty, I guess you never heard of Geo Bush and the Bushmen. They invaded two country's to try and 'do' something. They are still trying to 'do' something. Now we may not agree with their methods and reasoning, but what has the left done other than to whine, cry, wring hands, and get in the way."

Well, let's see. After kicking out the Taliban, Bush invaded Iraq for no reason whatsoever--thus allowing the Taliban to regroup. And the attack on Iraq has turned the country into a terrorist cesspool.

So, in the end, conservatives have done nothing.

Look to your own faults before blaming the Left.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 8, 2007 11:18 AM

I don't have any faults Roob, I leave those for leftists who blame every one except themselves for world problems. The left is not responsible for Bush actions, but they are responsible for their own ineptness, weakness and constant whining.
The left is bankrupt of moral, and intestinal fortitude. The leading liberals prove that every day. Exactly what has any leading leftist/liberal done about Islamic hegemony? They won't even admit it exists. And you complain that the right is doing nothing? You are being intellectually dishonest, but what is new about that in liberal land.

Posted by: duh_swami at December 8, 2007 11:29 AM

"Abidat accuses the Order of Malta of being run by men who are close to US president George W. Bush and neo-conservative political circles, taking a cue from a report transmitted on the Arab network, Al-Jazeera, on 24 April this year."

...wow! the Muslims are certainly misinformed (spending too much time listening to bearded, crazed fingerpointing clerics, i guess)....everyone knows US President George W. Bush has no close friends......

Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 8, 2007 12:01 PM

"I don't have any faults Roob, I leave those for leftists who blame every one except themselves for world problems. The left is not responsible for Bush actions, but they are responsible for their own ineptness, weakness and constant whining.
The left is bankrupt of moral, and intestinal fortitude. The leading liberals prove that every day. Exactly what has any leading leftist/liberal done about Islamic hegemony? They won't even admit it exists. And you complain that the right is doing nothing? You are being intellectually dishonest, but what is new about that in liberal land."

You're clearly one of those conservatives who continues to delude himself into thinking that Bush is a good president after all and that voting a fatuous, lying drunk into office was not a mistake.

...and you call ME dishonest. At least I'm not being wilfully blind.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 8, 2007 12:48 PM

RoobartSpunsar: You wrote above that "Bush invaded Iraq for no reason whatsoever." May I suggest to you that in order to make your arguments more effective you don't assert something which can easily be contradicted by the facts. The Iraq War Resolution passed by Congress in October of 2002, authorizing the President to use his discretion respecting any force that might be used against Iraq, listed over twenty reasons why such force would be appropriate. Here are some: 1) Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire terms; 2) Saddam Hussein's possession of WMDs (which every major intelligence agency on the planet still thought he had); 3) SH's brutal repression of his own people; 4) the 1993 assassination attempt by SH of Bush I; 5) fulfilling the intent of the Iraq Liberation Act, signed by President Clinton in 1998, which stated that it was US policy to have SH removed from power; 6) aiding and supporting international Islamic terrorist organizations.

Now, you may not like these reasons (I do) but these are reasons nonetheless. To state as you did that Bush went into Iraq for no reason whatsoever is flat out wrong. Egregiously so. I could see how someone could make an argument to the effect that the reasons I listed above were not good reasons (I wouldn't) but to state as you did there was no reason is just sily. Remember, theories without facts are worthless.

Posted by: Wellington at December 8, 2007 12:50 PM

Whenever Roob posts, I am reminded of this little exchange in the movie Major League II:

Rube Baker: "I bet you wonder how I got the name "Rube."

Jake Taylor: "No. I think I know how that happened."

Posted by: Haid Dasalami at December 8, 2007 2:24 PM

"These are photos of the Order of Malta embassy in Cairo. I ask Allah to have it closed down or blown up, along with those inside it, who hate Islam and Muslims."

Obviously a spurious claim, but bombing them certainly won't make them like you.-Marisol

That's true. But if your brain patterns have been destroyed by the habit of deception it might be difficult to see that. A sharp acceptance of fact-truth over lies sharpens the intellect re logical thinking. They have a different brain pattern and are as retarded as Fibrahim Hooper in terms of logic-truth-objective analysis of fact. These deceivers distort their brains using the Quran's permissions to deception as a moral authority to become a Fibrahim Hooper style retard when it comes to truth-logic-fact-reality.

Posted by: Frank at December 8, 2007 2:33 PM

Saddam was a Butcher, A Racist Butcher at that. I thought The Liberal mindset was against Racism. Saddam outgrew his usefulness and became a danger to others. Saddam caused a lot of damage for a long time. Much longer than than the current President we should note.

Didn't President Clinton Bomb Iraq for the full 8 years of his Presidency??? What were those reasons again.

Iraq is it's own problem. President Bushes Decision to not invade in January, Gave Saddam the time he needed to prove the Weapons Inspectors right, After the fact.

The "no WMD mantra" is itself a lie. Repeated enough to make the truth, exposed after the fact, irrelevant. A view far to many enjoy to the detriment of their own long term well being.

Now we will work the Iran Problem back to the bigger lie. For the same peoples further temporary enjoyment.

As for Iraq, It is what it is. A Multicultural Paradise. One would think Progressives would have been all over it.

Instead of living the good life by getting rid of Saddam. The Bath Tub Party chose Death. Most of the Big Spenders are Dead, right?

Being a Democracy, we were pretty much stuck traveling that Road. We were not expect to install the alternitives were we?

As a Nation of Christan principles, we have some measure of responsibility to help end the notion of Inequality, Racism, Discrimination. The factual notion of inequality, as we understand it, being so entrenched in Islam, Has lead us to where we are. Intending to get them to change despite the odds.

Is running away from our principles worth the Butchers Bill? The same Bill that has been paid by others in the past, by us only doing half the Job?

Someone needs to ask Nancy and Harry that question.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at December 9, 2007 12:00 AM

More desparate excuses for violence by the Religion of Desparate Excuses For Violence.

/Move on, nothing to see here..

Posted by: Un:dhimmi at December 9, 2007 6:52 AM