Good thing the British authorities barred Pamela Geller and me from entering the country. If they hadn’t, Muslims might have grown enraged and started plotting jihad attacks against British soldiers. Anyway, the cowardice of British authorities is apparently inexhaustible: they don’t say, “Be alert, be vigilant, and stand up for yourself and your country. Defend yourself if attacked.” Instead, they say, “Don’t wear your uniform on the street.” Unconscionable. “Hounslow soldiers ‘on alert over threat of copycat Lee Rigby-style killings,'” by Robert Cumber for GetWestLondon, February 24 (thanks to Marc):
Police have reportedly stepped up patrols around Hounslow Cavalry Barracks amid concerns extremists are plotting a copycat Lee Rigby-style killing.
Counter-terror officers have warned soldiers at the military base in Beavers Lane, Hounslow, to be alert as the British soldier’s murderers await sentencing this week.
Members of the Welsh Guards were told to avoid drawing attention to their army status by wearing their uniform in nearby pubs or Hounslow High Street, according to a report in the Mirror today , after intelligence suggested fanatics in the area supported Mr Rigby’s killing.
Neither the police nor the Army would comment directly on the reports or what security measures have been taken.
However, a police spokeswoman said: “We work very closely with our colleagues in the military to ensure appropriate protective security measures are in place and that intelligence is exchanged, monitored and responded to.”
Mr Rigby, who served for two years in Hounslow , was killed near the Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich last May.
Michael Adebolajo, 29, and Michael Adebowale, 22, said they carried out the horrific attack in revenge for the Army killing Muslims. They were both found guilty of his murder and are due to be sentenced this Wednesday.
john spielman says
Does the cowardice of the UK govt have no limits? Ths is an INSANE WAY TO LIVE! If the military can not be proud of their vocation and their glorious past of disposing of the Nazi menace a mere 70 years ago, then there must be serious treason high places of Downing street and parliment.
I suggest that the military WEAR THEIR UNIFORMS IN PUBLIC but walk in groups, armed to the teeth, and take on with deadly force any who try to do them harm.
mortimer says
That would endanger the public.
gravenimage says
John Spielman wrote:
I suggest that the military WEAR THEIR UNIFORMS IN PUBLIC but walk in groups, armed to the teeth, and take on with deadly force any who try to do them harm.
mortimer wrote:
That would endanger the public.
……………………………….
Mortimer, I admit I am at a loss as to why you’d consider British soldiers willing to defend themselves a danger to the public—wouldn’t it be the murderous Jihadists who present the threat?
zhingisender says
This would not endanger the public. It would encourage the public by showing that the authorities are pushing back against Islam and its numerous encroachments on our way of life.
voegelinian says
There are two fears at work here, in the minds of the PC MCs:
1) a fear of Muslims
2) a fear of white backlash (usually deemed to be “right wing” on a trajectory toward “fascist”)
The first fear is psychologically supressed by the individual PC MC, who then does his or her best to try to make sure it is also suppressed socially. Although psychologically suppressed, it still exerts effects, motivating speech and behavior; but as with all unhealthy psychological repression, the resultant speech and behaviors will be distorted to a point where they interfere with rational thought and behavior in relation to the fear. This fear is, of course, rational and not a phobia. But, of course, the PC MC doesn’t agree — which is why he or she tries to suppress it. And yet, they can’t fully do so. The result, when PC MCs are in charge of protecting and informing their society, and when Muslims are metastasizing amok, is the “KeystoneKops Effect” (a registered trademark): i.e., official ineptitude combined with lurching attempts at being hawkishly no-nonsense against “terrorism” (e.g., the drone program; the NSA surveillance attempts; etc.).
The second fear is irrational, and thus it is a phobia. I call it Autophobia — a fear peculiar to the modern white Westerner: a fear of himself, a fear of his own race and culture. What he fears is that his own people will go down the slippery slope to rounding up all these Muslims (perceived by the anxious PC MC individual as an ethnic people, or a wonderful rainbow or tapestry or mosaic of ethnic peoples), putting them in camps, and exterminating them. In order to stop this horrible eventuality from devolving, the PC MC must suppress any internal thoughts (through a voluntary and continual suppression of such “thought crimes) and any external expressions in society, through a variety of styles of censorship available in free societies.
Champ says
And why not have them roll over and play dead, too …
veggiedog says
The British have turned into the French….. too bad, I will not visit Europe that way it is these days again.
Islamisdeath says
Friends just returning from London said they would never set foot in the UK again. They were totally unprepared for what they saw and experienced. Muslims walking 4 & 5 abreast on the sidewalk knocking them over if they did not stand back and let them have the whole sidewalk and more. Other friends went to the Netherlands last year and reported other muslim thuggishness not to mention the unavailability of meat that wasnt halal which they claimed tasted different. Again said never going back.
Defcon 4 says
Muslimes pushing the unbeliever to the narrowest part of the road, straight out of the islamic textbooks of hate.
Wich says
Yeah, if they dare wear them, they will face what is happening in Zanzibar!
See it here https://news.yahoo.com/bomb-blasts-zanzibar-cathedral-tourist-bar-154746917.html
CogitoErgoSum says
If a soldier is afraid to be seen wearing his uniform in his own country, something is wrong with either the soldier or his country. A soldier should be proud of his uniform and of his country and, in like manner, his country should be proud of him. I foresee the day when soldiers will patrol the streets of Western cities in large numbers equipped with the weapons of war. Question is: what type of uniform will those soldiers be wearing then?
mortimer says
Not afraid. Far from it. It’s a matter of protecting the public from danger. Shame on you for thinking it. The British soldier is far from afraid, if anything overly brave. Many British soldiers are sure to be carrying concealed weapons from now on and few policemen will blame them.
The shame of it is the British government that allows jihadists free entry and fails to understand that JIHAD IS NORMATIVE ISLAM, RATHER THAN AN ABERRATION.
Islamisdeath says
They may carry concealed weapons but if they use them, even if in self defense the treasonous govt will go after the soldier and piss themselves apologising to the murderous muslim who attacked him.
CogitoErgoSum says
Mort, I admire the British for their courage during WWII and that includes not only the military but the civilian populace and the political leadership of the time as well. Churchill was an excellent wartime leader who was eloquent and inspiring, a man who could stare evil in the face and never once blink………but where is his kind today? I’m not seeing anyone who even comes close…….but then again I”m not seeing the likes of Roosevelt, Truman or Eisenhower on this side of the Atlantic either. I’m sad to say it but I guess it takes all-out war for those types of leaders to appear.
voegelinian says
“but then again I”m not seeing the likes of Roosevelt, Truman or Eisenhower on this side of the Atlantic either.”
The reason why the entire West remains myopic about the danger of Muslims is a deep and broad problem. One indication of just how deep and broad it is, comes from a report about Eisenhower that rather surprised even me when I first read it about two years ago over at the “Logan’s Warning” website:
with reference to a mosque that had been built in Washington, D.C., in 1957 (and planned for years before that) — a mosque, by the way, that, just like Imam Rauf’s Ground Zero Mosque in our time, was deceptively framed by the term an “Islamic Center”:
…the Islamic Center’s dedication ceremony took place on June 28, 1957. Former United States President Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke for the American representatives. In his address, he praised the Islamic world’s “traditions of learning and rich culture” which have “for centuries contributed to the building of civilization.”
He affirmed America’s founding principle of religious freedom and stated that:
“America would fight with her whole strength for your right to have here your own church and worship according to your own conscience. This concept is indeed a part of America, and without that concept we would be something else than what we are.”
Eisenhower concluded:
“As I stand beneath these graceful arches, surrounded on every side by friends from far and near, I am convinced that our common goals are both right and promising. Faithful to the demands of justice and of brotherhood, each working according to the lights of his own conscience, our world must advance along the paths of peace.”
For my analysis of these nauseatingly Wilsonian statements of Eisenhower’s, see:
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2011/01/proto-pc-mc-those-conservative-1950s.html
and for the Truman Era:
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2012/04/those-politically-correct-1940s-and.html
gravenimage says
Yes, Voegelinian—even a guy as generally clear-eyed when it came to evil as Ike could be fooled by Islam since it is regarded as a religion.
By the way, this is the same “Islamic Center” where President George Bush went just days after the attacks of 9/11, read from the Qur’an, and claimed that “the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful”.
But as Steve Emerson notes, this Saudi-backed “Islamic Center” was described in the 2005 Freedom House report as a “hotbed of hatred”.
More details here:
http://www.investigativeproject.org/207/radical-outreach
Defcon 4 says
If soldiers wearing the uniform of their country, in their country, is a danger to civilians, then maybe it’s time the military overthrew a corrupt government and institute martial law.
thomas_h says
Thank you Defcon4.
I have aired such scenario quite a few times here and in other forums asking if the readers would, if not back it up actively, welcome such development. My simple question was either totally ignored, or met with indignation by readers horrified by the damage to democracy such a coup would necessary cause. Obviously, our understanding of what democracy is for and when it is reasonable to apply it, differs fundamentally.
voegelinian says
One problem with overthrowing a government is when the vast majority of the people won’t go along. I’m still waiting for evidence that more than a handful of Western people in any Western country have a clue about the problem of Islam — and for the smattering few million who may have slightly less vague misgivings about Islam, how many of them distort those misgivings with the complex protective padding of various PC MC assumptions and axioms that effectively nullify any conclusions that would lead them to the state of civic duty and moral courage necessary to even begin to entertain something like a revolution?
And that’s not even to add that you guys are putting the cart before Paul Revere’s horse: There are many public steps a people would take long before, and showing signs that they are desirous and capable of, revolution: Like, for example a few Million Man Marches on Washington and 10 Downing Street, for starters.
thomas_h says
@Voegelinian,
Yours and mine understanding of the dynamic of a military overthrowing a government is very different.
To forcibly overthrow government the overthrowing team doesn’t need that “the vast majority of the people” should “go along”, but only that the vast majority doesn’t go against them. In fact, such a team can succeed, and often had, despite not having the support of the majority of the people.
There is no need for coupe d’etat when the vast majority of the people are for or against something, aware of their number and sufficiently piss*d off. In such a situation forcibly overthrowing a government is not required because the government will be removed by the democratic mechanism (I’m talking about the West) of the popular vote.
I don’t know so much about the US, but in the West Europe, the UK specifically, the problem is not lack of people who would like to see stop to moslemization of their country. Unfortunately, their anger is not allowed to “mature” into action as it is being cleverly diffused (and confused) by the ubiquitous official propaganda beamed from every institution, every social sector, media, entertainment industry…at every level of public and social life. From the cradle to the grave. People are not so much angry as chronically irritated, frustrated, self-doubting, What they don’t, or rather don’t dare to doubt, is the Ultimate Wisdom of the Welfare State. That is their religion and their opium. It provides them with all justifications and reasons and energy to control the “get angry” impulse to get strong enough to make them act. Still, they know something is wrong.
However, if a well organized, dynamic and fully committed group moves quickly and decisively, declares martial low, arrests who needs to be arrested, restores the language in which the word treason once again evokes association with most wickedest and foulest calling for swift justice, and at the same time speak unabashedly of history, nation, country, honour – it may very quickly galvanize, if not the masses, then sizeable number of people, to rally behind such a group. I don’t think “the masses” would mind it in the sense they would go actively against the development. In the situation where the repressed emotion and passions are given a legal rostrum and provided with legitimate and morally coherent language the supporters of the suddenly old regime would have to formulate a counter argument using devalued, exposed as bogus, completely compromised notions. Not having the language they won’t be able to control the debate any more. The “masses” will have no reason to support them.
The overthrow of government as I see it wouldn’t be a violent revolt ala Syria. The public opinion and sentiments in say the UK, Denmark…France is suspended in precarious balance. What is needed is a controlled push.
“Like, for example a few Million Man Marches on Washington and 10 Downing Street, for starters.”
“For starters”?
To organize such “starters” you will have to create an organization able to counter the gigantic apparatus of repression, control and intimidation which oversees every spontaneous public act. How do you do it without paralyzing the mammoth? (except doing the coup?)
And if miraculously a Million Man March on Washington happens today, tomorrow you will have a Three Million Men March protesting the Million Men March of today.
gravenimage says
Thomas H wrote:
To forcibly overthrow government the overthrowing team doesn’t need that “the vast majority of the people” should “go along”, but only that the vast majority doesn’t go against them.
…………………………………….
Thomas, the public—in the United States, at least—would not react passively to the overthrow of the government.
Even most people who are extremely critical of the current administration and its policies would oppose a coup—whatever its goals.
It would, in fact, be difficult for those involved in such a coup to convince *anyone* that their goal was the defense of freedom.
I believe in education and rational persuasion. Ultimately, I believe that most Westerners are for freedom—they just have to be made fully aware of the existential threat that Islam presents.
mortimer says
Lee Rigby was wearing a T-shirt.
They should wear Islamic jihadist dress to mess with the head of the jihadists.
Anthony Galliart says
Amazing! The Muslims have vowed to kill or enslave all non Muslims! Wake up free world! If we know it’s coming why do we not kick them out of our nations? What person with any real common sense would allow someone sworn to murder or enslave you and your family , stay in their guest house?
mariam rove says
shameless and cowards to say the least. M
Michael Copeland says
Muslims do not need to be “fanatics” to support Lee Rigby’s killing. They need only be ordinary boring orthodox. “We are forced by the Koran in Sura At-Tawba”, explained the killer. That sura, or chapter (9), which, being later in time order, overrides and abrogates peaceful verses elsewhere, instructs muslims (v.5) to “Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them”. The Koran forms part of Islamic law. One who denies any verse has to be killed. Anyone can, without penalty, perform the killing, since it is killing “someone who deserves to die” (Manual of Islamic Law o8.7(7)). It is just ordinary basic undisputed Islam, easily verified.
As the killer assured his listeners, “You people will never be safe”.
The Koran can be consulted online. The Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller”, is available as a free download.
girigirihanasu says
Come on guys. The abuse being hurled at the UK from JihadWatch is now getting a bit out of hand. During the height of the IRA campaigns the UK military had similar policies, but I heard no accusations of ‘cowardice’ from Americans. Was it because it was Americans who were funding the IRA?
Jay Boo says
Given the situation in the UK it does not seem too unreasonable to tell soldiers take such a precaution, however some UK politicians really do need to learn how to call Islam by its proper name. Islam is not a religion and is not peaceful.
To be fair and balanced Muslims should also be advised by the government not to wear Islamic clothing.
girigirihanasu says
Politicians will always be weasel-mouthed, but that doesn’t mean the military is. There are no restrictions on profiling mosques and muslims in the UK, unlike those the FBI seems to be labouring under. The UK has an enormous bank of experience on dealing with insidious terrorist threats and although I certainly don’t trust politicians, I trust the military and the police to know on which side their bread is buttered, even if cretinous politicians force them to put on a sickly sweet smile for PR purposes.
Jay Boo says
The co-exist liberals might have a point.
Using the laws of reverse – liberal logic with cultural relativism,
shouldn’t Catholics be allowed to jail and behead all Muslims who don’t observe fast during Lent?
What about those Muslims who go to a mosque wearing Islamic style clothing and who praise Muhammad? They are clearly committing blasphemy against Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism, so it is therefore the duty of all non-Muslims to slay them where you find them.
It is so written.
Every liberal must surely agree to this and in order to properly appease.
PJG says
One of the ridiculous things about liberal left-types is that they are self-proclaimed “pacifists” yet they despise the pacifist nature of Christianity and admire the violent, intolerant nature of Islam.
Wellington says
People in general in the West, whether in Britain, America, Canada, The Netherlands, Australia, France, Italy, etc. are NOT the problem in thwarting Islamic supremacist designs (e.g., a la Muslim Brotherhood, “we seek to destroy Western Civilization from within…”). No, rather it is the complicity of the Western elites in politics, the media and academia who are indeed THE problem, even more than Islam itself.
Eternal shame on elites like Cameron, Obama, the BBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, the CBC, professors aplenty at Western universities——ah, the list is a long one. As much as I despise Islam, I despise the current crop of Western elites even more. After all, making excuses for tyranny (and if Islam is not a tyranny, then there is no such thing) is actually worse than tyranny itself. If no excuses made, then tyranny would be ended far sooner in virtually every single case that could be provided. No one understood this verity better than did Ayn Rand.
(Please, no overall statements against this woman in order to discount what I have said here. I too have reservations about some of what Ayn Rand maintained, but on the issue of hesitating about terminating evil early on and, by not doing so, being so much more costly for civilization, she was eminently correct.)
girigirihanasu says
@Wellington As with 99% of the time I completely agree with you.
But the Brit-bashing on JW since Robert and Pamela were barred entry is counter-productive. JW is losing its air of considered reasoning. The kingpins of the anti-Jihad camp need to be subtle, that’s why IMHO it was a naive and costly error to be seen to be so cozy with the EDL. Even though the EDL’s manifesto is admirable, their modus operandi attracts thugs and therefore dissuades waverers from joining the anti-Jihad movement.
Wellington says
girigirhanasu: Please understand I am not a Brit-basher. Far from it in fact. I esteem British civilization though I deplore those among the British elite who are presently harming (if not betraying) Britain as I deplore those among the American elite who are doing the same to my country.
As for the EDL, I comprehend they are a controversial organization, though I’m still not sure exactly how much of this is due to calumny as opposed to accuracy. In any case, thank you for your comment and may Britain experience a new birth of freedom soon.
gg says
That’s right – sit on your computer ranting and raving about muslims yet discourage people from having anything to do with the ONLY anti-muslim organisations.
Clever. Makes sense. Moron.
voegelinian says
Yep. The fact that the EDL remains marginalized shows the clueless complicity of the majority of ordinary people of England. Without their clueless complicity, the “elites” wouldn’t be able to have any sociopolitical traction to ply and practice their policy.
In an unfree society, elites can have enormous influence and power over sociopolitics. In a free society, if it’s flawed at the top in any significant way (and the official myopia about the problem of Muslims constitutes one giant significant way), the ordinary people who make up the fabric of society are also responsible.
airborne 2 para says
it take’s two muslim jihadist and a car driven at 40 mph from behind to take out one British Soldier, with out a doubt face to face with out the car Lee Rigby would have taken them both out no problem. did they get the idea from Mr Anjem Cowardly.
Islamisdeath says
Muslims are complete chicken sh@t cowards. They only hit the ederly, women, children and attack adult men only in packs when the man is alone and unsuspecting. They are demonic, low life pond scum.
Transmaster says
Every time I see this photo of the brave SOI I think about how this scene would be played out in Wyoming. These two would not be standing there holding bloody knifes and explaining what they did. They would be dead, shot to doll rags.
DVult says
Turn over the two jihadi murderers to Rigby’s regiment to deal with as they please. I’m sure they could think of something.
Karin Westendorf says
arm them
Karin Westendorf says
arm them
citycat says
I think it is the top man and down in Islam that needs to be turned over. The two jihad murderers are brainwashed pawns, not even that. As great a danger, if not more, is creeping towards us all just around the corner, if not next door being polite.
PJG says
WILLINGLY brainwashed pawns. We can’t even grant them the “excuse” of having been born into Islam.
They are part of the spearhead of the unsettling truth the West has to face: first we take in Muslims who are grateful and appear to assimilate. Then their children and large numbers of new arrivals revert to type. Then they start to convert others.
I still have friends who believe that Muslims will come to appreciate our values and fit in. (These friends also believe that “optimism” is a virtue.)
eib says
They are forbidden to wear the uniform of the soldier in their own country!
What do the words friend and enemy mean?
What does the word, nation mean?
Obviously, these things have become absurdities in Britain.
Absurdities brought on by Islam– the religion of irrationality.
gravenimage says
UK soldiers warned not to wear uniforms in public: alert over copycat Lee Rigby-style jihad murders
…the cowardice of British authorities is apparently inexhaustible: they don’t say, “Be alert, be vigilant, and stand up for yourself and your country. Defend yourself if attacked.”
……………………………………
*Exactly*.
More:
….intelligence suggested fanatics in the area supported Mr Rigby’s killing.
……………………………………
Y’think? And—I’ll have to whisper here—what if it isn’t just “fanatics”?
fair_dinkum says
it may be a wise precaution to an extent.
with instructions to be armed and to seek and destroy would make me feel better.
gg says
Recently, a soldier was refused entry onto a British Airways flight because she was wearing her uniform – it might upset the muslims flying on the plane.
They might get nasty. It’s all your fault.
FatherJon says
Looks like the Islamist agenda is gradually winning. This story reminds me of army policy in Northern Ireland where, after some off-duty soldiers were killed by the IRA, soldiers were encouraged to grow their hair long to avoid being mistaken for soldiers
Rezali Mehil says
All,
This is not about the proud british army….and you all know it.
Robert Spencer is SOoooo pissed off about not being able to go to London …and yet Muslim scholars are allowed….that is what this is all about.
London is always mentioned in JW but only in the context of Pamela and Robert not being able to see Madam Tussaud and have their wax models there….they see themselves as “defenders of the realm” ..but the British know better…they need d”efenders of the Kalam “.
It ain’t going to happen Robert …Mufti Shaykh Akhtar Rida al-Qadiri http://www.ahlesunnat.net/media-library/downloads/regularupdates/akhterraza.htm is going to get there before you maan…
Allah SWT forgive my stare…….but the man looks smart.
More Later…..
Rezali
CogitoErgoSum says
The British need more “d’fenders of the Kalam?” No, I think they need more defenders of the faith, a term once applied to Henry VIII. However, he ended up changing the leadership of the faith to himself…..and now it seems the descendants of the subjects of his realm are more interested in defending a different faith right now. But….I’m going to bet that it just seems that way at the moment and somebody will soon set me straight on that account. God bless the Queen but I wonder what problems King Charles will face and how he will handle them?
flakmusic says
I just want to tell you that I have visited Madam Tussaud recently and gave them a wax model of Allah – with hoofs and pig ears; of muhammed -wearing nothing but brassiere, and one of Muhammood riding Allah waving lavatory brush. It is entitled: The Mother of All Jihads”.
They found it very interesting and promised to include it in their first exhibition after the government change.
More Later…
ps. what is this SWT, after allah?
My Latvian friend insists it is an anagram of a very funny (and very vulgar) sentence in Latvian. I would like to tell you what it is in English, but I am afraid Mr. Spencer will bar my comment.
marclouis says
SWT “Swine W@nk!ng Tool” perhaps? I prefer to use IHE for “If He Existed”, because everyone is in the habit of talking about him as having existed, when really who knows? there are good arguments either way.
flakmusic says
That’s a cute one, too.
Thanks
Rob Crawford says
“SWT” must be a handwriting recognition error. I can see how an ‘S’, ‘H’, ‘T’ and a vowel could be misinterpreted that way.
gravenimage says
flakmusic wrote:
ps. what is this SWT, after allah?
……………………………..
That would be “Subh’allah Wa T’alla”—”Glorified and Exalted is He”. flakmusic.
I have to admit, I like Marc Louis’ suggestion better, though…
flakmusic says
I said “anagram”, but I meant, of course, acronym.
“flakmusic” is an anagram!
Rezali Mehil, try to crack it. Hint: it consists of two words. The first starts with “F”!
Enjoy!!!
gravenimage says
The repulsive Rezali Mehil wrote:
This is not about the proud british army….and you all know it.
Robert Spencer is SOoooo pissed off about not being able to go to London …and yet Muslim scholars (sic) are allowed….that is what this is all about.
…………………………………………..
What rot. This is about the survival of freedom in Britain. The two issues are, of course, of a piece.
More:
London is always mentioned in JW but only in the context of Pamela and Robert not being able to see Madam Tussaud and have their wax models there….they see themselves as “defenders of the realm” ..but the British know better…they need d”efenders of the Kalam “.
…………………………………………..
And what is the Kalam? Ilm Al-Kalam is Islamic “scholarly” debate, the only freedom of speech that supremacist Muslims like Rezali Mehil recognize.
It is notable, though, that Muslims hate freedom of speech to such a degree that even Kalam is considered controversial, and a great many Muslim clerics condemn it.
“Ilmul Kalam is Haram – Shaykh Dimashqiah”
http://www.dimashqiah.com/en/553.html#.UwzMxUaxiBU
This is just one example. There are thousands more.
More:
It ain’t going to happen Robert …Mufti Shaykh Akhtar Rida al-Qadiri http://www.ahlesunnat.net/media-library/downloads/regularupdates/akhterraza.htm is going to get there before you maan…
…………………………………………..
This appears to be primarily examples of a supremacist Shi’ite “scholar” trying to refute the arguments of supremacist Sunnis. In other words, it is Muslims infighting over the carcass of Great Britain. *Ugh*.
This is what they see as the future of the United Kingdom. The nasty Rezali Mehil herself has inveigled residency in England, and is working to undermine that great nation.
More:
Allah SWT forgive my stare…….but the man looks smart.
…………………………………………..
Of course back in the Islamic Republic of Iran Rezali Mehil could be in deep trouble for mooning over an unrelated male—perhaps she would be accused of “adultery”. But in the UK today she can have it both ways—enjoying Western freedoms while working to replace them with brutal Shari’ah.
Defcon 4 says
I never would’ve realized what the “kalam” reference was, until you shed light on it. It’s amazing how this islam0nazi conflates kalam w/freedom of speech.
gravenimage says
Thanks, Defcon 4. And yes—this Muslim troll has been trying to undermine freedom of speech for several years here now.
Rezali Mehil says
Graven,
Never forget Kalam as the written word for muslims is a Shiite thing….
As that disgusting program on Saturday “take me out” program says…”no writey… no Sunni”
I am not nasty….I am a normal muslimah
More later ….
Rezali
Defcon 4 says
A “normal muslimah” that has all the appeal to me of claiming you’re a normal nazi. It’s YOUR religion that is a jew hating, intolerant, f’ed up ideology of hatred, supremacy and violence beeotch. It’s your religion that advocates the extermination/persecution of the najjis kaffir, the untermenschen of your damned, dumb death cult.
gravenimage says
The sickening Rezali Mehil wrote:
Graven,
I am not nasty….I am a normal muslimah
………………………………..
Well, that’s the problem, isn’t it? This Muslimah is in favor of Muslim supremacy, of the oppression of Infidels, and considers the rape of a little nine-year-old child by a brutal warlord in his fifties to be a “gift from Allah SWT”.
All *absolutely ‘normal’* for Muslims.
London Jim says
I know that barracks perty well, and the environs. It was a Terratorial Army base for years, and uniformed ‘weekend’ soldiers, usually young guys, travelled to-and-fro, most times alone. Since Rigby’s murder I can understand the caution as Hounslow is a predominantly ‘asian’ area. Hell, only weeks after 911 , before I started getting clued-up about jihad, I went into ‘Dove cars’ minicab office in Hounslow West (not half a mile from the barracks) ,and there was a handwritten note on the advertizing board saying ” sign up for jihad ” ,with a mobile # to contact.
That area is highly suspect, along with so many others around. Not good.
Blangwort says
If you look for trouble, it will find you. Every urban area has blighted parts of town where it is not wise to go. It so happens that Islam is often found there. It is a religion of hatred. So the question is obviously, is Islam the cause or the symptom of hatred?
I’m sure one could make a cogent argument both ways and find clear evidence both ways. However, if we banned Islam, would it make the world a better place? I doubt it.
These are the features of humanity that we must fight. Personally, I lean toward the notion that Islam is the symptom, not the cause. There will always be people who gravitate toward the sociopath side of humanity, and they will look for any justification to do it. Islam is that justification.
In any case, we must fight such people. We must not deprive them of an example and a lesson that might teach them to curb such behavior. The notion that soldiers should not wear their uniforms in public sends exactly the wrong message.
Wear your colors proudly and if anyone objects, stand tall and fight them if you must. That goes for everyone in every country.
Defcon 4 says
Islam is symptom? For over a THOUSAND years?
duh_swami says
There would be no such problems had the door not been opened for these people in the first place. And it is still open. All kuffar capitulations to Islam and sharia are based on fear and cowardice.
I don’t think the large percentage of UK kuffar are cowards, but certainly the upper crust leadership is. Resident shahada addicts know this and take full advantage of it. If you invite bully’s into your home, expect to be bullied. If you don’t have enough manhood in you to stand up to a bully, you will certainly be beaten.
Rob Crawford says
I do wonder if the sight of Rigby’s murder made any Brits reconsider the “rivers of blood” speech. A beheading certainly strikes me as the headwaters of that river.
David says
I was reading comments about the Lee Rigby murder in the British Sun newspaper and one comment was: “The next time there is a Lee Rigby type killing all hell will break loose, and Anjum Choudary will die shortly after as well”. Looks like the authorities have dug a big hole they can’t get out of now.
Kenny says
To all who’s comments appear to kick the UK to death over our embarrassing political ‘elite’. Please consider that many an ordinary British citizen (like myself), are embarrassed, frustrated and marginalised by their craven cowardice.
May I suggest that we don’t deserve many of the negative comments you make about us?
Perhaps we should show more unity?
Please.
Defcon 4 says
No one, anywhere in western civilisation, has any right to indict the UK, because
the same amoral, apathetic, corrupt malaise can be seen in any western style democracy, from Spain to New Zealand, from AUS to Canada, from the US to the Low Countries.