Muslim or Not?

The current wave of atrocities done in the name of the Muslim faith are spanning the whole globe.

From London to Russia, the USA to the Philippines. It seems that the Muslim faith drags in many believers and a certain element of extreme people, that believe in taking their writings to the extreme.

The left wing, bless em! in their very brave attempt to De-stigmatize and make all peoples neutral with equal say and balance for all, is demonstrated in so many circles and on so many levels its hard to shrug this off as a fad.

The extreme leftists like Corbyn and the ‘New Labour Party’ with snowflake liberals that continually fight all aspects of the system to enhance a populist belief in full integration.

US universities attempt to alleviate any concerns by pushing their system farther to left and consequentially more extreme.

One School took it upon themselves to give Christian children lessons in Islam taken to the extreme of actually praying.

As you notice in the film, many parents are upset and yet the board are eager to cut all people off after just being allowed two minutes to state their case, seemingly oblivious to these concerns of parents.

I am not anti Islam, or anti any religion, but if any religion preaches the opposite of what they are being allowed when welcomed to other countries then assimilation will be impossible for future generations.

Anjem Choudary makes absolutely no secret of his aspirations for the future, and is never apologetic for the violence, using tactics of aversion, or denial to put his message across.

Even to the extent of claiming Sharia Law will be the law of the UK one day, yet still left-wing politicians do nothing at all to attempt to stop this hatred at its core level being propagated.

True Choudary was jailed, but for the wrong reasons and it does little to stem the flow of laws that are incompatible with most western societies.

Perhaps that flow can never be stopped if our leaders have a fundamentally different agenda to the people that elect them. A fairly good analogy could be demonstrated in this video…..

It seems that there is actually no problem with radical Muslims at all. They are not actually part of the faith and instead are a separate series of individuals acting on their own independently their holy leaders like Choudary.

As such, according to politicians, you cannot tar a whole faith with the same brush!


This man is not a Muslim Terrorist it would seem. His belief however is that any infidel deserves this treatment and is one of seven billion that are happy to hand out the same punishment to all, from Coptic Christians to British troops on our streets.

It would seem that peoples that have escaped countries that practice Sharia Law are intent on bringing it back for themselves in future generations in their new found homelands.


Even when they still suffer the same extreme penalties of an antiquated religion.

Sharia law_001

This falls nothing short of an erosion of the western society with an active target of spreading their faith with total eradication of any that specifically do not subscribe to their faith.

For instance if I deny Allah and take a stance of say…. an atheist……. this religion believes that anyone that kills me is not guilty of any offense!

That cannot be compatible with any western sort of thinking!


Anti-Assad Death Squads Responsible for Gas Attack

Assad’s wrongfully blamed for Ghouta’s gas attack. Evidence shows insurgents bear full responsibility. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was clear and unequivocal, saying:

“We have the most serious grounds to believe (Ghouta’s attack) was a provocation.” Assad had nothing to do with it.

“There is no answer to a number of questions we have asked, such as where the weapon was made – at an official factory or using homemade methods,” Lavrov added.

Clear evidence shows insurgents have sarin and other toxic chemicals. Pentagon contractors trained them in their handling and use.

They have surface-to-surface missiles to launch them. They have motive, opportunity and capability to do so. They’ve done it multiple times before. They’ve been caught red-handed with toxic agents.

According to Russian political analyst Sergei Markov:

“We hear this argument that the rebels are not technically or morally capable of doing such a thing, and we simply don’t accept that.”

“We’d like to see previous instances (of toxic chemicals used) properly investigated, because you will find that the rebels have used poison gas before in this conflict.”

read more:

Obama waives ban on arming terrorists to allow aid to Syrian opposition

President Obama waived a provision of federal law designed to prevent the supply of arms to terrorist groups to clear the way for the U.S. to provide military assistance to “vetted” opposition groups fighting Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.

Some elements of the Syrian opposition are associated with radical Islamic terrorist groups, including al Qaeda, which was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks in New York, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, Pa., in 2001. Assad’s regime is backed by Iran and Hezbollah.

This is really a very troublesome report of supplying terrorists with arms, with the sole aim of Regime Change, and this is not the first time that rebels have been supported by the US Government.

Several scholars have accused the United States of conducting state terrorism. They have written about the liberal democracies and their use of state terrorism, particularly in relation to the Cold War. According to them, state terrorism was used to protect the interest of capitalist elites, and the US organized a neo-colonial system of client states, co-operating with local elites to rule through terror.

Notable works include Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman’s The political economy of human rights (1979), Herman’s The real terror network (1985), Alexander L. George’ Western state terrorism (1991), Frederick Gareau’s State terrorism and the United States (2004) and Doug Stokes’ America’s other war (2005). Of these, Chomsky and Herman are considered the foremost writers on the United States’ involvement with state terrorism.

Read more

The issue in the article makes a realistic proposal that most atrocities are committed within the U.S. sphere of influence in the Third World. The premise being that if you influence you are basically in control of those fractions, and even today we see Sen John McCain met with rebels that are quite happy to murder indiscriminately.

John McCain Pushes Back Against Lebanese Report Of Photo With Syrian Rebel Kidnapper

The Daily Star of Lebanon reported that McCain posed with a Syrian rebel kidnapper in a photograph. His office denies that the man identified himself and condemned the group’s action. (AP Photo/Syrian Emergency Task Force, Mouaz Moustafa)

The Daily Star of Lebanon reported Thursday that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was photographed with members of a group responsible for kidnapping 11 Lebanese Shiite pilgrims. His office, however, condemned their actions and said that no one in the meeting called themselves by the names mentioned in the report.

The Star reported that Mohammad Nour, a chief spokesman and photographer for the rebel group the Northern Storm Brigade, was photographed with McCain, according to families of the kidnapped and one person who was released. Abu Ibrahim, another man with a reported connection to the group, was also in the photograph.

Read more

What we are seeing is more and more evidence of massacres on all parts of the web and you only need to Google or go to You-tube to see the atrocities taking place daily, and yet the West seems to have blinkers in place or consider these images as irrelevant evidence.

ImageOne could of course argue that Assad has killed more, but should the West support rebel  fractions, and in particular, those that for 11 years have been fighting against. More reports of Al Queda joining the fray in Syria anticipating US support. Additionally can those elements actually be controlled? if not a never ending war would be Syria’s fate for many years to come.

You can see the whole of this report here which asks:

Bashar Al-Assad’s New War: Has Syria’s Civil War Been Hijacked By Foreign Fighters?

The power struggles, political and religious affiliations, the regular defections, and almost daily changes in support cannot guarantee that any weapons sent to help ‘freedom fighters’ will in fact be in sole custody of the right group, which brings the question of whether they could ultimately be used against troops of the West.

O’bagy it seems is not what she appears……

Embattled Syria analyst vouched for rebel group that depicted burning US Capitol

Image 1.jpg

Elizabeth O’Bagy, a pro-Syrian opposition analyst whose credibility has come under fire, might have even more explaining to do – as court documents show she once vouched for a rebel group whose website displayed extremist and anti-American images.

Among the pictures was one showing a burning U.S. Capitol.

O’Bagy was fired earlier this week by the Institute for the Study of War for allegedly lying about her academic credentials. Her writings had been used by U.S. officials to bolster their case for military action against the Assad regime.

O’Bagy discussed the rebel group in question in a June 19, 2013 signed affidavit filed in the case of American Eric Harroun, who was indicted for fighting alongside the terror group al-Nusra in Syria.

O’Bagy’s signed declaration, which included a breakdown of rebel groups and their varying degrees of affiliation to Al Qaeda-linked terrorists, was used by Harroun’s defense to argue that the former Army medic had actually fought with a splinter group and not a terrorist one – a group tied to the one O’Bagy described.

In the document, O’Bagy said she had reviewed the apparent Facebook page for the Al Aqsa Islamic Brigades, and found no signs of jihadist leanings.

“I have also reviewed a Facebook site … that purports to be associated with the al Aqsa (Islamic) brigades,” she stated in the affidavit. “The facebook site does not appear to be particularly jihadist in orientation, and posts videos associated with groups that are all affiliated with the Free Syrian Army.”

Yet newly uncovered images from the group’s Facebook page depict otherwise – including one that shows the U.S. Capitol building engulfed in flames, and armed fighters marching in the foreground. Other images show what appears to be a black-and-white flag, which is viewed by intelligence analysts as a sign of a group’s Islamist bent (although O’Bagy wrote that many fighters not affiliated with jihadist groups use a similar flag).

The Facebook postings, which had been up for weeks, were recently taken down following an NBC News investigative report about the group.

O’Bagy said in the court document that there are several groups that go by the name of Al Aqsa. But the Facebook site she referenced in the affidavit is the same one that contained the extremist images – although it’s possible she never saw those pictures.

O’Bagy, a Georgetown University alumna, was put in the media spotlight following an op-ed piece she wrote in The Wall Street Journal which was cited by Secretary of State John Kerry and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in their case for a military strike in Syria.

Specifically, Kerry read a quote from the op-ed in which she wrote that Islamic extremist factions are not “spearheading the fight against the Syrian government,” but rather that the struggle is being led by “moderate opposition forces.”

Since then, O’Bagy has appeared on multiple news outlets, including Fox News, CNN and NPR, to discuss Syria. She has weighed in on complicated ethnic and religious challenges in the region.

Her credibility and objectivity came into question over her work with a Syrian opposition group called the Syrian Emergency Task Force.

The Journal, after the op-ed was first published, included a clarification noting she is “affiliated” with that group, and that the organization subcontracts with the U.S. and British governments “to provide aid to the Syrian opposition.”

O’Bagy, in an interview last week on Fox News, claimed she is not an employee of the task force, and is not a lobbyist. She said she works with them as an independent contractor, and her contract fee comes through U.S. government contracts.

She also defended herself on Twitter, claiming she is “not paid to advocate” the view that the U.S. should get involved in Syria.

The D.C.-based scholar was fired this week from the Institute for the Study of War for allegedly lying about her education credentials.The institute posted a statement on its website claiming she misled the organization about having a Ph.D.She reportedly claims she had defended her dissertation, but was waiting for the degree.

Calls to O’Bagy from on Thursday were not returned.

US and Russia agree Syria chemical weapons deal in Geneva

“Well, well,well….. politicians actually doing their political job.
This is really a bit of good news amongst all the rhetoric……. today Obama is breathing a sigh of relief, but to be honest, no thanks to him or Kerry. Putin is exploiting their foolishness, but has scored real points in this………
The red line, degrading the Soviet compromise, the vote in the house, British escape, the pandemonium caused by reckless intolerant attitude….

John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov
This should be a lesson to the Brits too…….. not to blindly follow.
All these are relevant issues, but at the end of the day, who brokered the deal…… THE PEOPLE DID!
Starting with the Brits to defeat a vote that showed real sensibility form the parliamentarians……
Then Obama putting his toe in the water with the Americans finding that it was scalding hot forced a huge amount of backpedaling, and best of all, FORCED NEGOTIATION between all sides.
The only negotiation forced by the will of the people in 50 yrs and the ONLY one that can be called a success…….. Now lets start looking at every single weapon that has an indiscriminate nature………….
Seeing you guys are actually talking now, lets look at depleted uranium, drones, atomic weapons………. its a good start!”

Quotes about life

The reasons NOT to invade Syria

With public debate and the public opinion for a non intervention, we see sides putting together arguments for, which seem to be heavily outnumbered by the arguments against. Apart from the fact of course is that the USA have been fighting some of these terrorists since 9/11, and today it appears they would like to join forces with them.

Today we have a selection of pictures of social justice……….

ImageThis shows a rebel getting ready to execute a man in public…. notice some smiles?

And to follow up it is worth noticing the child being exposed to this!


This young fellow is looking at a headless corpse……….

But its actually so much worse……. because it seems in the other direction we have this…….


Dozens of children watching.

And we need to HELP these people? Someone does have their priorities really messed up

Vladimir Putin Warns Against U.S. Military Intervention

This is really getting to be a comedy of errors…… my red line/world red line……boots/no boots on ground……. Brits with us/Brits gone…… world support/no one there……. let the people vote/ hold it off till the polls get better…….. Give up CW/ woops I was kidding…………. Give up CW/ I was serious……….Assad used CW/ the rebels used it sometimes…….. Its for American safety/ they can attack our allies not America……..attack so send ships/dont attack have them sunbathe a while……………..
While we are dithering about interfering in someone elses business the whole issue has become a mockery, and our concerns now lie with wether our makeup is on right, not with the crucial issue that we are talking about peoples lives.
This is a badly thought out intervention without sufficient proof or backing and poor leadership as to a sensible way forward.
One thing is absolutely certain……. an attack on Syria is not nonsensical and unrealistic.

President Obama Address To The Nation On Syria!

We were given what can only be a very dysfunctional President try to make a very difficult sell for nothing at all last night.
He made a claim for nothing other than continued negotiations in an event that has become a farce which ever way it is analyzed.
What was proliferated was supposed to be a vote in the Senate for authorization for an attack on Syria for the use of chemical weapons, and instead we had back peddling after being sideswiped by Vladimir Putin in a stroke of brilliance at averting a confrontation.
The president was up against some key items, that the most formidable Obama knew he would not be able to get over.
The Red line that was set by Obama as his limit, quickly became a global red line when limited support for an attack became apparent.
Evidence that should have been provided at such an important address was not evident in any shape or form. Too much emphasis on ‘We know” when in reality there is strong suspicion but so little to back it up.
“Unbelievable small strike” according to John Kerry and so it was contrary because the President when addressing the issue said the US does not “Do pinpricks” in reference to criticism of what the strike would be.
Give up his chemical weapons said Kerry when asked what Syria could do to avert a strike, in an off the cuff comment that he qualified as not being serious.
Russian President Putin quickly exploiting the comment and brokering a deal with Assad, to take advantage of a great opportunity,was a stroke of genius.
Assad agreeing to be rid of his weapons, and allow them to come under international control to be destroyed.
Boots on the ground, that have been off and on the ground as if levitating.

One thing that has become very obvious is that people, Americans dont want war and to some extent has been the saving grace of this issue. The President has responded and yet been reserved enough to make sure people are informed and to listen to the rumblings.

He has been given a lifeline by the Russians and he has taken it, which has got him out of the mess at least temporarily in the face of a loss should the vote have gone to Congress…… All in all…… no war…. perfect!

Russia To Push Syria To Put Chemical Weapons Under International Control

What should be noted here is that Obama said he would not meet Putin at the summit and talk. It was some sort of childish thing in response to non co-operation from the Russians on Syria.
After that little snub, they kind of wandered together and talked for about 35 mins, and Angela tried to get in on the act, and then all of the representatives joined the fray.
Would it not be astounding that if, in that 35 mins Obama asked for some help and Vladimir responded …………. the result being a phone call to Assad and brokering a deal?????
What we may be seeing is a new understanding from the two most powerful governments in the world. A new co-operation that may do more than all the bombs that we have ever deployed….
I would suggest to both men, and they are indeed men…… that a 1 hour meeting every other week, and get rid of all your war advisors……… you can do it if you want!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Moment of Truth

This week sees the start of the debate that Barack Obama has been forced to call to gain support for the intervention of the United States in Syria. The polls are showing a very steep climb to gain the support he needs.

Monday will see an interview with Assad ARLINGTON, VA; September 8, 2013–PBS’ Charlie Rose will interview Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday, September 9, at 9 p.m. in a special presentation of CHARLIE ROSE. In this global television exclusive, Assad gives his only television interview since President Barack Obama asked Congress to approve the use of force against the Syrian regime for alleged use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people.

Rose has interviewed Assad twice before, once in 2006 and once in 2010. The timing could not be better for Assad as he has opportunity to have his say before the President and logistically would be the only possible time he could persuade the very few that believe an attack on Syria is legitimate, which in any shape or form is really getting the upper hand on the President from the get go.

Tuesday Its probably significant it comes ahead of Tuesdays meeting as Obama goes to Capitol Hill to meet with Senate Democrats on Syria. and what seems to be attempts to delay by Ron Paul who has made little secret of the fact that he will use delaying tactics as long as he can.

Those tactics include filibustering to exhaust available time for debate and indeed at some stage increasing the time of debate, and in either case stalling to make the possibility of intervention less likely to the extent that if hung out for long enough would get to a point that action, any action becomes mute as it is coming to late.

Wednesday may well see a vote in the house, which is make or break for Obama. So far he has changed the red line of Obama to being the red line of the world so damage controllers are obviously working overtime. Presumably the loss of the vote on Wednesday could be attributed to congress wanting a say, therefore he allowed them the choice and he will abide by it (rather like David Cameron) and in that event its congress decision, therefore their fault.

The problem of course is that there is little support, little evidence and little stomach by Americans to join another war, even limited, even a short sharp knock on the knuckles because the public at large see how easily this could get out of hand. Obama apparently does not see it that way.What does not help him is a video of a summary execution by rebels of Assad’s soldiers that surrendered.

Kerry says there is a lot of support by other countries….. He said the foreign ministers discussed the “possible and necessary measures” needed to deter al-Assad from using chemical weapons again. Kerry said a “number of countries immediately signed on” to an agreement reached by 12 countries on the side at the recent G20 summit. And while he named Saudi Arabia as one of those nations, he said the others that had agreed to help would make their announcements in the next day. But we have yet to see the double digit countries quoted by Kerry. However this sentiment was not echoed by White House chief of staff Denis McDonough.

There are so many pitfalls in the current scenarios that will a very significant moment of truth for Obama. But the odds are not looking very good for a successful outcome for the Obama administration