Winds of Jihad

Turkey ‘warned’ Canada and U.S. against using term ‘genocide’ April 24

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey warned Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper last week not to issue an April 24 declaration where the incidents of 1915 are defined as genocide. The Canadian Parliament recognized the Armenian Genocide and Harper became one of the few heads of state to use the word “genocide” in his written statement during 2006.

Wary of these genocide claims spreading to other countries including the United States, Turkey is trying hard to block efforts by the Armenian Diaspora in almost every country in the world.

Canadian Prime Minister Harper was warned through diplomatic channels last week that “repeating these claims annually will not help in normalizing Turkey-Armenia relations and will harm Turkish-Canadian bilateral relations as well.” “We hope that the Canadian PM will not repeat this year what he did last year,” a high-level Foreign Ministry official said, the Turkish Daily News reports.

Click here for a slide show of Turkish propaganda to whitewash the crime of Turks against Armenan Christians in New York just a few days ago

Ankara made the same diplomatic attempt with the United States before April 24 where President George W. Bush also issues a declaration. Turkish officials said Ankara is not expecting Bush to use the word genocide. U.S. presidents prefer to define the incidents in 1915 as a massacre.

Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper made a statement in connection with the 92nd anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. “Today we recall the horrible losses of 1915 in the Ottoman Empire, particularly the terrible tragedy of the Armenian nation. Last year I reminded, the both chambers of Canadian Parliament adopted a resolution that recognizes the first genocide of the 20th century. This day makes us remember why we should do everything possible to guarantee rule of human rights and democratic freedoms in our times. Today Canadians with Armenian and Turkish descent live side by side and share values of tolerance. We hope Armenia and Turkey will guide themselves with those values in order to develop their relations. Together with you we recall the past and share your hopes for building the future based on peace and mutual respect,” said Steven Harper in his statement.

George W. Bush failed to define the events of 1915 as genocide in his annual April 24 statement.

Is there anything that GWB didn’t fail to do?

The Mass Transit Mullah Hassani.

As Iran has just begun it’s warm-weather crackdown on women’s dress in the regime with the Iranian Fashion Police out in full force, it might (or it just might not) bring up the age-old theological question-

What do women and mass transit have in common?

Quite a lot, according to Iranian Mullah Hojatolislam Hassani. In last Friday’s sermon (Friday is the Islamic Holy day), Gateway Pundit reports that the Islamic hardliner divided women into three groups–

The first group… he said are the women who are badly veiled who are like buses who everyone and anyone can ride.

The second group… are women who are wearing scarves without the Islamic overcoats; they are like taxis who only pick up certain passengers.

And finally, in the third group… there are women like my wife who are like donkeys who let only one person ride them!

According to the New York Times, Mullah Hassani is the most conservative voice of Islam in Iran-

Each Friday, the Muslim holy day, he thunders from his pulpit in the Masjid-e-Jam� mosque against everything he views as threatening to Islam and its rule in Iran.

The New York Post reports that Iranian Mullah Hojatolislam Hassani — the title places him in the second rank of mullahs, just beneath the ayatollah level in the Islamic religious heirarchy — ” is wedded to the social and political precepts that have been imposed on Iranians since the Islamic revolution in 1979.” In fact, Mullah Hassani refers sarcastically to the 20th century as “the American century.” He see what many westerners would call progress as nothing more than decadence and decay.

To underscore Hassani’s devotion to Islamic law, the New York Post reports that Mullah Hassani even had his own son, a Marxist, executed for the sake of the Iranian regime. In the interview, Mullah Hassani sees himself on par with Abraham because he “sacrificed” his own son for the regime–

After years as a political prisoner under the shah, Mr. Hassani became an acolyte of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran’s absolute ruler for 10 years until his death in 1989. In 1983, at the height of antileftist purges, Mr. Hassani led Islamic guards to the hiding place of his eldest son, Rashid, a 25-year-old Marxist, and assented eagerly as a firing squad executed him. It was an event, he says, that proved his loyalty to Islam.

From Peoples Media Company

* No surprises here.

We’ve heard it all before, women without a tent over their heads are ‘catmeat’- ‘deserve to be raped’- now they are ‘like buses’- me thinks there is a certain madness on display here, could it be Islamic?

*

In other news: Germany/Berlin

With thanks to Jihad Watch Germany:

Imam Yakub T. can officially be called a ‘hate-preacher’

The former Imam of Kreuzbergs Mevlana mosque, Yakub T., may now officially be called ‘hatepreacher’. The supreme court of Brandenburg Havel ruled in the last instance and this judgment overrides an earlier one by the lower court in Potsdam, which supported the 61 year old in 2006 in his defamation case against the ZDF magazine Frontal 21

The ZDF reporters secretly recorded some of the Imam’s rants in Turkish and Arabic in November 2004, which was published partly. In this report the Imam was caught on tape raving and spewing hatred against the ‘filthy kuffars who will all end up in hell’-

A red-green judge in the lower court saw nothing wrong with that and dismissed the case with the statement that ‘Christians also threaten hellfire to unbeliefers’ – a rather common view held by left wing moobats who hate their own culture and civilization.

The high court judge saw it quite different and confirmed in his judgement that hate speech is in fact hate speech and that the translations used were correct. He ruled for freedom of speech, against the Imam.

Update:

One of our readers from Germany who kept an eye on this case wonders why this creep is still in the country in spite of having been given his marching orders quite a while ago:

Germany: Mosque “Hate-Preacher” Accepts Deportation

Deutsche Presse Agentur via Expatica today reports that a Turkish-born imam, whom they do not name for some reason, has agreed not to challenge his deportation order.

After a little research, WR can now give an account of what is going on. The preacher in question is Imam Yakub Tasci, or Yakup Tasci (pictured) who was the imam at the Mevlana Mosque in Kreuzberg, a suburb of Berlin. The mosque is situated in Kottbusser Tor, Kreuzberg’s main square. In November 2004, the television company ZDF TV secretly filmed the imam preaching to his Turkish congregation. The subsequent broadcast caused national outrage.

Tasci said: “Those Germans, those atheists, they don’t shave their armpits. Their sweat spreads evil smells, they stink. They are atheists, what good do they do to us? And since they are unbelievers, in the afterlife they can only burn in hell.”

Later he made a speech to the Milli Gorus militant group, in which he said that suicide bombers in Jerusalem and Iraq were “martyrs”. After Tasci’s sermon was broadcast, a spokesman for the mosque had asked for forgiveness and claimed that the imam had spoken in error.

As described by Islam OnLine, on Tuesday March 22, 2005, the judge at Berlin’s Federal Supreme Court upheld a district court ruling that Tasci should be expelled. The reasons given were that Tasci “is preaching violence at his sermons, a matter that poses a threat to national security and discipline in Berlin, and contravenes freedom of religion and speech. The imam has done too much harm to tranquil and peaceful Berlin, which is melting pot for people of different ethnic and racial backgrounds.”

Don’t you wonder why this hate spewing creep is still there?

The Islamic Regime intensifies war on women

The Islamic Republic of Iran has intensified the 27 year tough war on women and Gender Apartheid policy.

Here are some more photos showing the Bassiji-Hezbollah paramilitary militias (including black cows, the female Islamists) repressing and intimidating women who dare not to observe strictly the Islamic dress code.

Notice that the veil in Iran is mandatory for all women, regardless of whether they are Iranian or non-Iranian (even female tourists have to wear it while they are in Iran).

Some Women were arrested and taken to the police station to be interrogated. We can only guess what happens to repeat ‘offenders’ – and who knows what’ll be their fate!

As you can see, its not simply the ‘Revolutionary Guards’ that enforce the black madness called ‘modesty’- its mostly the black cows who run after those who step out of line…

 FROM WND’S JERUSALEM BUREAU:

Abbas group rejoices over U.S. deaths in Iraq

By Aaron Klein
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Mahmoud Abbas

JERUSALEM – Members of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah militias are celebrating a suicide car bombing that killed nine U.S. soldiers in Iraq earlier this week, stating the attack bolsters their belief the U.S. will soon be defeated and retreat from “Muslim lands.”

“It was a very happy day for us Palestinians to hear nine American dogs were killed in Iraq. We feel encouraged and we feel great solidarity with our brothers in Iraq, and we consider this heroic operation, which aims to humiliate the Americans, as proof that the will of the our resistance is more powerful than any [big] American war airplanes,” Abu Ahmed, the northern Gaza commander of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, said in a WND interview today.

The Brigades is the declared military wing of Abbas’ U.S.-backed Fatah party, which American policy largely considers moderate.

Abu Ahmed was responding to news Monday of a suicide car bomber that struck a patrol base northeast of Baghdad, killing nine U.S. soldiers and wounding 20. It was one of the deadliest attacks against American ground forces since the Iraq war started more than four years ago.

“The Iraqi people, with the help of the mujahedeen fighters all over the world, are teaching the American dogs a huge lesson that will serve for generations for anybody who will dare attack lands of Muslims,” Abu Ahmed said. “Iraq will be the beginning of the collapse of the American empire.”

The Palestinian terror leader said he believes the U.S. will soon withdraw from Iraq, and he labeled any retreat a victory for “resistance.”

“Bush is speaking about bringing more soldiers to Iraq as a way to hide his crisis, but by the end of the day the Americans don’t support the occupation and Bush will give up the conflict, which is judged from Allah to fail,” he said. “This is the era of resistance. Bush is staying [in Iraq] now only because Cheney and the Israelis are pressing on him.”

Abu Ahmed said Palestinians are learning from the Iraq insurgency for their own war against Israel.

Read it all.    And don’t forget that we are feeding these turds…

Its mind boggling why the EU and America support these genocidal maniacs:

The 6 arrested Muhammedans in the UK on terrorism charges belong to a group that calls itself Al Muhajiroun-, one group of many, a group like a thousand others that share the same goals, that live by the same rules and read the same book: The Koran.

Hamas or Fatah, the ‘Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigades’-, Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, Jemah Islamiyah in Indonesia, Taliban in Afghanistan and so-called Janjaweed in Darfur; To us infidels or ‘kuffars’ it should be irrelevant what these Islamists call themselves: All belong to a totalitarian belief-system called Islam, all are soldiers for Allah, all are willing to kill and die to make Islam dominate,  to make the world Islamic,  and to either kill or forcibly convert us infidels, unless we submit to live as slaves under Islamic rule and pay the Jiziyah ‘with willing submission’...

All are united under the black flag of Islam and use terror, illegal immigration, intimidation, blackmail, kidnappings, all kinds of fraud, deceit and genocide to make the world Islamic.Their ultimate goal is to bring about the caliphate, which is nothing other than world domination under the sharia.

Nevertheless, the 6 arrested in Britain are all well known proponents for the future caliphate, and their records speak for themselves:

The six men on the list are: Sulayman Keeler, Omar Brooks (Abu Izzadeen), Rajib Khan, Shah Jalal Hussain, Omar Zaheer and Ibraheem (Abdul Haq).

These men are all members of Al Muhajiroun (under its different names). Sulayman Keeler was the one who officially founded the “new” group Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah. Abu Izzadeen is well known. Shah Jalal Hussain is a member whose name came up in a Parliamentary Question from Mr Dismore to the Home Secretary David Blunkett way back in 2001. Omar Zaheer was arrested for his part in the Danish cartoons protest organised by Al Muhajiroun. Abdul Haq is also a spokesman for the group. The only one of the six who did not come up was Rajib Khan but by association it seems likely that he too is a member of this group.

The radical Islamic front group Al Muhajiroun was allowed to operate in the UK for many years, spreading jihad ideology and poisonous hatred in full view of British authorities. In 2003, they held a celebration:

Reverse Assimilation
Mark Steyn

What is immigration for?

I don’t mean what are immigrants for. I myself have lived hither and yon over the years, and at a personal level I vaguely feel individuals who aren’t a charge on the state ought to be able to move around the world with reasonable ease. As it happens, Canadians do this a lot. You can meet the Dominion’s finest in Brussels, Delhi, Hong Kong, almost anywhere on the planet. And I’ve yet to be in a taxicab anywhere on earth and be told by the driver, “We’re now passing through Little Canada.” Canadians emigrate as individuals.

* The Future of Canada? 

But in the western world “immigration” is a phenomenon distinct from “immigrants.” For a start, it’s not about the immigrants, but about the host society. At some point, most advanced democracies decided that mass immigration was a virtue regardless of who’s coming and any economic or other consequences. This is a relatively novel way of looking at a nation-state. A few years back, Hedy Fry sneered that she couldn’t see why people were making such a fuss about illegal immigrants given that the first white men hadn’t asked permission from the people who were already here, either. Which in its delegitimization of the Canadian state, not to mention its other implications, might be considered somewhat inflammatory. Yet Ms. Fry was a minister of the Crown and no one seriously expected M. Chrétien to reprimand her. By contrast, to question immigration in even the most cautious way is to risk being demonized as a racist. Canadians see themselves as a nice people, and so even to raise the subject of immigration feels like an assault not on distant foreigners so much as on our self-image.

But here’s the thing. Whatever the virtuousness of immigration, a dependence on it is a sign of profound structural weakness, and, when all the self-congratulation about celebrating diversity has died down, that weakness ought to be understood as such. For example, the other day Statistics Canada released its 2006 census figures, and the press coverage was mostly the usual boosterism–“Canadian Census Sees Cities Surging” (The Globe and Mail). This is true: we are an increasingly urban nation. But it is not the most salient fact from the numbers. Canada, reported the CBC, “had the highest population growth rate among G8 countries.” Also true, and closer to the core statistic. Of the 1.6 million new Canadians added to the population between 2001 and 2006, only 400,000 came from natural growth–i.e., kids. The other 1.2 million–i.e., 75 per cent–came from immigration.

Compare this to the United States, where over 60 per cent of population increase comes from natural growth. That’s to say, this is not a good-news story but a bad-news story. Canada remains demographically weak: the American fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman is enough to sustain the population even without immigration; the Canadian fertility rate of 1.5 children per woman leads to steep population decline. Ten million parents have seven-and-a-half million children and 5.6 million grandchildren and 4.2 million great-grandchildren: an inverted family tree. You can imagine what shape Canadian social programs would be in under that scenario, and that’s before Junior decides he’d rather head south than pay 70 per cent tax rates just to prop up medicare for Gramps and his buddies.

* Migrants or Refugees? 

So immigration seems like an easy way to pick up the slack–until you unpick what the census is actually saying, and The Globe and Mail and CBC are so artfully avoiding. If native Canadians (if you’ll forgive the expression) are already a 25 per cent minority in the country’s population growth, they will be a small and ever smaller minority in the Canada of the future. Indeed, they’re already at such a low demographic ebb that it calls into question any kind of trans-generational inheritance: “Canada” is in danger of becoming merely a zip code. The novelty junkies have a point: maybe it is time to rewrite that “home and native land” lyric.

Prior to the boom of the nineties and oughts, the all-time blockbuster immigration year was 1913, when 400,000 “new Canadians” arrived. Whether they looked at it like that is another matter: most of them were British subjects moving from one part of His Majesty’s realms to another. In that sense, it was not “immigration” at all, or not as currently understood. The 2006 census numbers take as a given that the Canada of the 21st century will be a project built almost exclusively by foreigners.

Not only is the Canadian state insouciant about this ultimate outsourcing, it welcomes and celebrates it. For example, anti-monarchists such as John Manley and Brian Tobin routinely build their case on the line that in an ever more diverse Canada immigrants from Syria and Belarus can’t be expected to relate to the Royal Family. This would be a very curious argument even in countries with robust immigration traditions–that a foreigner admitted by the state at its discretion should have the right to decide not which of his old country’s customs he was going to retain but which of his new country’s customs he was prepared to accept. It would ring very odd in most places–go on, get a job in Saudi Arabia, and try the same line on their royal family. So, when we buy the Manley-Tobin pitch, we’re essentially accepting the principle of reverse assimilation, the obligation that Canadians assimilate with immigrants rather than the other way round.

* Moving to Canada soon, (and they won’t be dental floss tycoons..)

 

And thereby lies great peril. Not for the Queen. She’ll get by, whatever Canadians decide. But the Manley-Tobin line raises some very interesting questions. If our Liberal grandees are so convinced new Canadians won’t accept the Crown, what other features of our inheritance will they also reject? How many Canadians will be saying “eh?” in 20 years’ time? Or following hockey (assuming there are still any hockey teams up here)? How many will recognize “Sir John A. Macdonald”? What would such a nation be remembering on Remembrance Day?

Commenting on the latest census trends, the Toronto blogger Mark Collins remarked that “it’s not one’s grandfather’s Canada.” Mr. Collins was referring to the accelerating urbanization of the country, but it might be truer to say that contemporary Canada is a land without a grandfather, a land without an inheritance, and that the remorseless shrivelling of a continental nation a mari usque ad mare into half-a-dozen megalopolises is merely a symptom of that. According to StatsCan, 93 per cent of immigrants who arrived between 1991 and 1996 live in urban centres. Again, this is a point of divergence with Canada’s neighbour: in the U.S., the population is moving to exurbs and rural districts. That, in turn, helps explain the healthy fertility rate: America is one of the cheapest places in the developed world in which to find a four-bedroom house with a big yard. Who wants to raise three kids in a city apartment?

So Canada’s urbanization seems unlikely to do anything for that near European fertility rate, but it will inevitably place strains on our constitutional settlement. Can six metropolitan areas still be governed as a confederation of ten provinces? To be sure, the CBC will conjure the usual fantasies–wacky sitcoms about a lovable Janjaweed militia living on Newfoundland, et cetera. But the reality is that nothing but nostalgia will justify maintaining the Atlantic provinces as separate jurisdictions, and how nostalgically inclined the multicultural utopia of Greater Toronto will be inclined to be is anybody’s guess.

In 1913, when those 400,000 newcomers arrived, we knew more or less who they were. We have no very clear idea who the 300,000 or so immigrants per annum of the next few years will be. We assume it’s like those Immigration Canada posters from 1997 marking the 50th anniversary of Canadian citizenship and showing people of many lands holding hands around a globe: Canada is like a neat stamp collection, with one of everything. In practice, it’s not like that. There will be more of some, less of others. Will the Chinese decide there’s greater economic opportunity at home? Will fading European populations prefer to spend their sunset years far from the turbulence of the Continent? Will the recent upsurge in French Jews emigrating to Quebec continue? Or will it degenerate further into, as Le Journal calls it, Montrealistan?

Well, StatsCan is rather coyer on those details. But that’s the reality: the Canada of tomorrow will be built by who shows up. For the sake of multicultural virtue, we decided to outsource the future. Nothing much to do about it now except hope the gamble pays off.

Deadly oil field attack in Ethiopia

From AP

* Some bleeding examples of how the MSM doctors and distorts facts, deflects from reality with fantasy products like ‘rebels, gunmen and militants’ and thereby obscures the global jihad:
ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia – Rebels stormed a Chinese-run oil field near the Somali border yesterday, killing 65 Ethiopians and nine Chinese workers.

It was the first such attack on a foreign company in this Horn of Africa nation, in contrast to Nigeria on the western side of the continent, where rebel groups frequently attack international oil concerns.

* Any idea who these ‘rebel groups’ might be?

The assault by more than 200 gunmen lasted nearly an hour and followed a warning last year from the rebel Ogaden National Liberation Front against any investment in eastern Ethiopia’s Ogaden area that could benefit the U.S.-allied government.

Formed by Ethiopia’s ethnic Somali minority, the Muslim group has been fighting for secession of the Britain-sized region with 4 million inhabitants since the early 1990s, but it had mounted only occasional hit-and-run attacks on government troops in recent years.

* Right. A ‘Muslim group’ it is, the Muslims ‘who are fighting for their rights’- just like they are fighting for the global jihad in over 30 other theaters of war around the world. At least here AP names them a ‘muslim group’,- most of the other publications we checked omitted it.

The scale of the attack in the small town of Abole raised the prospect of a broadening of fighting in Somalia, where the Ethiopian army is supporting the UN-backed interim government in a war with Islamic insurgents. “This was a cold-blooded killing,” said Bereket Simon, a special adviser to Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.

The rebels have fought on behalf of the Somalia insurgents, while Ethiopia and Eritrea are bitter foes. * Why is that? Could it be because the Ethiopians are Christians and the Somali Muslims are commanded to ‘fight the unbelievers wherever they find them?’

Eritreans won their independence from Ethiopia in 1991 after a bloody three-decade rebellion, and the two nations fought a 2 1/2-year war over their disputed border that ended in 2000. Ethiopia has accused Eritrea of waging terror attacks, a charge Eritrea denies.

Eritrea also is thought to be providing support to insurgents fighting Somalia’s acting government, which a hard-line Muslim militia defeated in December with Ethiopian support.

The Ethiopian government, which is dominated by Christians and has the strongest army in the region, has allied with the United States in the campaign against extremist groups in the Horn of Africa. It fears rising Islamic militancy in the region.

* This insipid article is by far the best report we could find. Check the others, they are beyond pathetic!

Next: Murdoch speaks of Bush, militant Islam
In Todays Courier Mail you will find another article just like the one above about Rupert Murdoch on George W. Bush, omitting everything Murdoch sez about the global jihad, it is as if it didn’t exist. Fortunately, The Sydney Morning Herald, (which is not a Murdoch publication) mentions it here:

Excerpt:

He told the 500 or so businessmen and women sitting before him he was optimistic about the future and believed issues such as “alleged climate change” and the integration of China and India into the world economy were manageable.

He pinpointed the rise of militant Islam and nuclear proliferation, particularly in Iran, as the biggest threats.

“The two (challenges) that none of us have any answer for that I know of is the rise of militant Islam and the proliferation of nuclear weapons,” Murdoch said.

“I wouldn’t discount at all the dangers of nuclear proliferation.

“If Iran gets away with it, there will be another half a dozen countries going hell for leather to get in the same race.

“It can only end in disaster for us all.”

* The Sydney Morning Herald is to be commended for printing the truth.

* Charles from LFG has always kept a keen eye on the spin doctors from the MSM and repeatedly exposed the marriage between the Jihad apes and western News services:

Harvard: How the Media Partnered With Hezbollah

During Israel’s war against Hizballah, at LGF we were continually outraged by the media’s uncritical promulgation of terrorist propaganda, and their overwhelming bias against Israel. The barrage of staged and manipulated disinformation culminated in the infamous Adnan Hajj fauxtography incident; and it can be argued that the culture of tacit cooperation with terrorists was at least partly responsible for that stunning case of phony news.

How could Reuters’ experienced editors miss a fake picture that was so bleeding obvious, at every step of the way toward publication? Answer: because they just didn’t care.

It’s interesting that in an age of obsessive media focus on scandals, no wire service or newspaper has ever followed up on that story in any real way. Adnan Hajj seemed to simply vanish off the face of the earth; no interviews, no photos of him, no investigations, just one statement—reported by Reuters—in which he claimed his fakery was to “remove dust,” then poof! Adnan who?

For blowing the whistle on Hizballah’s manipulation of Reuters, LGF was smeared by numerous leftists; the diversionary tactics ranged from personal attacks to attempts to minimize the importance of the faked photos.

Now the Harvard Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, hardly a bastion of neocon wingnut thinking, has issued a paper that absolutely skewers the media for their outrageously biased and terrorist-enabling behavior. Maybe this will be a little harder for them to ignore: How the Media Partnered With Hezbollah: Harvard’s Cautionary Report.

Read it all, there’s more!