Vlaams Belang Protests School Barbecue, Push Pork Down Students’ Throats

 

More delightful news from Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller‘s favorite right-wing Belgian fanatics, Vlaams Belang. Recently they were protesting a ‘school barbecue’ because some students brought halal meat. According to deputy head Jacques Gits they scaled the school walls and “intimidated the children and pushed pork sausages down their throats”.

(via. Islamophobia-Watch)

Vlaams Belang thugs intimidate students at school BBQ

The Belgian press has reported that three Vlaams Belang politicians staged a protest at a school in Schoten, where many of the students are Muslims, because it had organised a barbecue that included halal meat.

The protestors climbed over the wall into the school grounds and, according to deputy head Jacques Gits, “intimidated the children and pushed pork sausages down their throats”. One of the students, who were aged between 12 and 14, added: “They said that halal meat is not real food and that our stomachs needed filling.”

Vlaams Belang claim that they were responding to objections by parents to the “halal barbecue”, although the school itself says that the only complaint it received was one anonymous phone call. School head Ilse De Bast explained: “This week was about other cultures and their customs. Every child was free to bring food from home for their classmates to taste. There was halal meat, but also other food.”

In reply to criticisms, VB leader Filip Dewinter said that the protest “was meant to be funny”. He added: “It would be better if schools stopped exposing children to such multicultural activities.”

It appears that the story was broken by the Anti-Fascist Front who also provide a summary of press coverage.

EDL Invents ‘Child Abduction’ Story to Boost Attendance at Dewsbury Demonstration

HopeNotHate captured this one. A sickening attempt at “opportunism” from the EDL, but what does one expect from fascists (via. Islamophobia-Watch):

EDL invents ‘child abduction’ story to boost attendance at Dewsbury demonstration

In a disgusting attempt at recruiting assorted racists and fascists to attend their forthcoming Dewsbury protest, it seems the English Defence League have stooped to an all time low when it comes to making up a story.

The EDL’s Dewsbury division started a rumour about Muslim men attempting to abduct two young girls from the local area of Kirklees. The EDL said that they had “clear evidence” regarding the attempted abductions and claimed that they would have street patrols due to police inactivity. The EDL also claimed that local residents had been forced to keep quiet regarding the abductions.

The truth, however, is somewhat different.

DCI Paul Jeffrey of West Yorkshire Police denied the abduction attempts and said that a 10 year old girl had contacted the police after a van driver had tried to talk to her. The girl could not describe the driver and did not say he was of Asian appearance.

The EDL also claimed a similar incident occured in the Heckmondwike area, however the police said they have no record of the event, so it either did not happen or was not reported to police.

DCI Jeffrey said “We can categorically state no such series of crimes along the lines of what has be alleged have been brought tothe police’s attention”.

Hope Not Hate, 14 June 2012

Here are some excerpts from the discussion that the false report provoked on the Yorkshire EDL Dewsbury Division’s Facebook page.

LGF: Hate Group Leader Robert Spencer Now Featured Writer at PJ Media: The Backstory

At LGF, Charles Johnson has the backstory on Robert Spencer becoming a featured writer at Pajamas Media.(h/t: CriticalDragon)

It is an interesting article, however I find it hard to believe that investor “Aubrey Chernick” was “nervous” about including Spencer on the site in the past. How could he have been nervous when he was also funding numerous Islamophobic projects including “David Horowitz Freedom Foundation” of which JihadWatch is a part?

Hate Group Leader Robert Spencer Now Featured Writer at PJ Media: The Backstory

by Charles Johnson (Little Green Footballs)

When I worked for PJ Media several years back, anti-Muslim hateblogger Robert Spencer used to frequently email me, begging to be included in PJ Media’s advertising program and have his articles published at the site.

At the time, Roger Simon and the real decision maker of PJ Media, investor Aubrey Chernick, were very, very nervous about Spencer, and worried that his brand of bigotry might negatively affect advertising sales. So they just kept putting off Spencer with excuses about his “non-profit” status being a problem.

Well, now that the right wing has gone completely cuckoo, associating with hate group leaders and anti-Muslim bigots is apparently no longer a problem for PJ Media, because today we discover that Robert Spencer — one of the main inspirations for Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik — has, at last, had his wish granted, and his hate speech and incitement to violence is now regular fare: PJ Media » The Media’s Double Standard for Muslims.

(I’m not going to bother quoting from this; it’s the same whiny anti-Muslim garbage Spencer endlessly recycles.)

Note that Spencer’s article coincides with the announcement that he and loony Pamela Geller are going to participate in a demonstration in Stockholm with the violent far right thugs known as the English Defence League.

I suppose this is another indicator of how far to the right the conservative movement has swung, when a site like Pajamas Media, conceived as a place where left and right could meet and engage in rational debate, has become a hangout for the worst kind of gutter bigotry.

The Profundities of the Pseudo Ibn Warraq: Muslims Forgot Saladin but Remembered Richard the Lionheart

by Garibaldi

The idea that it was not until 19th century European Imperialism arrived on the shores of Muslim majority countries that Saladin was remembered is a novel concept. It is also one that is being taken up in a distorted manner by the anti-Muslim movement.

Let’s take a sample from an article posted on JihadWatch on June 8, 2012. The self-declared ex-Muslim turned anti-Islam polemicist and Western supremacist who goes by the pseudonym “Ibn Warraq” continues his well-worn, unoriginal, selective-copy-and-paste usage of Orientalist scholarship.

According to “Warraq,” Muslims in Saladin’s own homeland had “largely forgotten” about him until novelist Sir Walter Scott and German Emperor Wilhelm II reintroduced him to the benighted, forgetful Mooslims. In fact, in Warraq’s world the supreme “irony” is that they not only forgot Saladin but remembered Richard the Lionheart:

It is ironic that while Richard the Lionheart [1157-1199], the King of England and leading Christian commander during The Third Crusade [1189–1192], is remembered in the Islamic world right up to the nineteenth century, his main rival in the latter conflict, the Muslim Kurd known in the West as Saladin [c.1138-1193], was largely forgotten in his homeland. Forgotten until he was made known again to the Muslim world largely thanks to the German Emperor Wilhelm II’s visit to Saladin’s tomb, to pay his respects in 1898, and above all the novel, The Talisman [1825] by Sir Walter Scott [1771-1832].

Warraq’s claim appears in a series of short JihadWatch blog posts titled, Walter Scott, The Talisman, the Crusades, Richard I of England and Saladin: Myths, Legends and History.

Again this is not an original “Ibn Warraq” observation. The claim that “Saladin” was “forgotten” can also be found on the Wikipedia page for Saladin (exposing the hazards of relying on the online community encyclopedia), with a citation credited to Johnathan R. Smith‘s book, The Crusades, Christianity and Islam.

Smith’s works on the Crusades have been generally well received and this is not the article to discuss them, however the main thrust of Smith’s book is quite simple and straight forward,

Crusading features prominently in today’s religio-political hostilities, yet the perceptions of these wars held by Arab nationalists, pan-Islamists, and many in the West have been deeply distorted by the language and imagery of nineteenth-century European imperialism.

This is an intricate topic, but let us confine ourselves to Warraq’s rehashing of Smith’s claim that Saladin was “forgotten.”

The reality is Saladin was not “forgotten.” Diana Abouali, professor of Asian and Middle Eastern Languages and Literature at Dartmouth wrote an interesting article titled, “Saladin’s Legacy in the Middle East before the Nineteenth Century,” published in the 10th volume of Crusades. In it she recounts his memory up to that point in Ottoman Jerusalem.

I also solicited a comment from professor As’ad Abukhalil, who in the past eviscerated Warraq’s shoddy work (see Abukhalil’s 2004 article in the Middle East Journal: “‘The Islam Industry’ and Scholarship: Review Article”). Prof. Abukhalil is not at all impressed with Warraq’s claim, telling LoonWatch,

I normally would not engage with people who are not trained in Middle East and Islamic studies.  The person in question has regularly revealed his ignorance of matters Islamic and he insults the person (a free thinker) after which he named himself (very undeservedly).  The notion that Saladin was discovered by Arabs/Muslims after some contact with Westerners is too ridiculous to respond to.  In reality, it is the other way round: Westerners took note of Saladin because of the significance that he occupies in Arab/Islamic history and imagination.  Saladin has been immortalized and lauded in many Arabic books and references, from Kitab An-Nawadir As-Sultaniyyah wal-mahasin Al-Yusufiyyah, which is a biography of Saladin from the 13th century.  Ancient Arab historians like Ibn Khallikan and Abu Shamah and Ibn Wasil all appreciated the significance of Saladin.  A history of Arab publications in the 19th century and 20th century is full of books and articles dealing with him.  To be sure, the Arab-Israeli conflict did inspire a revival of attention to Saladin among Arabs and Muslims.  But then again: this is not the first time when the natives are told that only the White Man can inspire them and influence them. (emphasis added)

In the hands of Islamophobes like Warraq claims about Saladin and the Crusades are easily weaponized and used as one more instrument to bludgeon Muslims and Islamic civilization. Indeed the whole premise of Warraq’s series found its genesis in the polemical attempt to rebut Edward Said’s famed work Orientalism. Edward Said, of course is the object of much “scorn” in the anti-Muslim movement.

If some Muslims, Arabs and Westerners stand accused of “romanticizing” Saladin, we can easily see its antecedent, with the Crusades and Richard the Lionheart being  “romanticized,” serving as twin symbols for today’s wannabe “Crusaders.” Hate-groups across Europe and the USA are engaged in exactly this type of a-historical methodology, tying the romanticized image of the Crusades with their bigoted political agenda (just take a look at the rhetoric, images and symbols employed by members of Stop the Islamization of America). At the forefront of such “romanticization” of Crusaders are the likes of Robert Spencer. So it is fitting that Warraq would publish his posts on Robert Spencer’s JihadWatch.

After all, it is not for no reason that “Knights Templar” terrorist Anders Behring Breivik chose to initiate the so-called “counter-Jihad” to “reclaim” the West from the “evil-Mooslim” hordes by citing Spencer, and other neo-Crusaders hundreds of times in his manifesto.

In the end, it is safe to say that Saladin was never forgotten by Muslims and Arabs. His memory still shone over the centuries, he was “immortalized,” even as his image, his importance and story has been reshaped due to encounters between East and West, and today, between Israel and Palestine.

Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller to Appear Alongside EDL’s Tommy Robinson

Premiere North American Islamophobes are appearing alongside EDL leader Tommy Robinson at SION (Stop the Islamization of Nations) anti-Muslim demonstration that is being hailed as the “worldwide counter-Jihad alliance.” (h/t: CriticalDragon)

Worldwide Counter-Jihad Alliance to Launch with Stockholm Demonstration on August 4

By Stop Islamization of Nations, Published: Tuesday, Jun. 12, 2012 – 2:46 am

NEW YORK, June 12, 2012 — /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The first worldwide counter-jihad initiative will begin August 4 with the First Annual Global Counter Jihad rally in Stockholm, Sweden. Representatives from Stop Islamization of Nations (SION), Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE), the English Defence League (EDL), and allied groups will speak.

The Global Counter Jihad rally will feature the president of SION and executive director of SIOA, Pamela Geller, as well as SION Vice President and SIOA associate director Robert Spencer. Also speaking will be the EDL’s Tommy Robinson, SIOE’s Anders Gravers, and other worldwide leaders from official Stop Islamization and Defence League groups.

“The conference,” said Geller in a statement, “heralds the launch of a worldwide counter jihad alliance. Freedom fighters from Europe and America, as well as India, Israel, and other areas threatened by jihad, will at last be working together and forming a common defense of freedom and human rights.”

Tommy Robinson of the English Defense League (EDL)
Tommy Robinson of the English Defense League (EDL)

To Prove Breivik’s Sanity, They Rolled Out the Crazies

Norwegian right-wing extremist Anders Behring Breivik sits on 6 June, 2012 in the courtroom in Oslo. Photograph: Getty Images.
Norwegian right-wing extremist Anders Behring Breivik sits on 6 June, 2012 in the courtroom in Oslo. Photograph: Getty Images.

These are Spencer and Geller’s friends:

To prove Breivik’s sanity, they rolled out the crazies

A deft piece of courtroom theatre in the Breivik trial.

It was one of the weirdest days of the trial so far. They thought they had been given the chance to blow the whole conspiracy wide open. Instead the extreme right-wing obsessives called to testify for the defence in the Anders Breivik trial were exposed to the contempt and bafflement of the ordinary people they typically lionise.

After weeks and weeks of horror, even the survivors of Breivik’s 22 July massacre laughed in the court as the politically marginalised took the stand and relished their moment to finally preach their truth. Each of the unpleasant foursome had their jealous ideological niches – the ever-fractious far-right always will – but each agreed on the existence of a left-wing conspiracy deliberately preventing their popular views from reaching the masses.

In a trial where the only question is over the sanity of a confessed murderer of 77 people, it seems wrong to indulge in reductive pop-psychology. But the temptation is irresistible: in order to prove his sanity, Breivik’s defence had rolled out the crazies.

Ronny Alte, former leader of English Defence League spin-off, the Norwegian Defence League, moaned to a court packed with teenage survivors of a holiday island massacre, how his views means he must fear for his life. Arne Tumyr, chairman of Stop the Islamisation of Norway, complained furiously that the Muslims in his country meant “Winnie the Pooh’s friend, Piglet, is now considered an impure animal.” Tore Tvedt, leader of irrelevant Neo-Nazi organisation, Vigrid, blamed the ever-guilty Jews. Ole Jørgen Arnfindsen, initially adding a sheen of academic authority before descending into unfathomable conspiracy theorising, blamed… It was impossible to know who he blamed.

Each condemned the murders. Yet each still believed they had been called to his defence to legitimise those elements of Breivik’s philosophy where their own obsessions overlapped. They had not. In a deft piece of courtroom theatre, Breivik’s defence counsel, Geir Lippestad, gave them just enough room to show that being a sad, lonely, obsessive may make you a crackpot. But it does not necessarily make you mad.

Each one of these men could have been excused from testifying. A string of witnesses, including Carl I Hagen, the former leader of Norway’s mainstream anti-immigration Progress Party, and Mullah Krekar, Norway’s most notorious Islamic fanatic, were exempted despite originally being on the defence list. Most were able to argue that being called to defend Breivik would put them in an unsafe and morally unbearable position. Lippestad said he had no desire to force them.

Those who did appear were either unfailingly committed to the Norwegian judicial process or saw their appearance as an opportunity to break through the conspiracy and finally be put in front of a receptive public. The fact that they were literally laughed out of court should, but won’t, have dented their belief in a deliberate campaign to ensure their marginalisation.

Breivik complained in his 1,500 page manifesto that he mailed to 8,000 email addresses on the morning before his attacks, that he too had been ignored. He had written twice, we learned, to the influential Oslo dailyAftenposten to complain about its Islam-biased coverage of international affairs. His letters were never published. Hilde Haugsgjerd, the paper’s editor-in-chief said well-written contributions likely to appeal to more than a handful of people were favoured.

Anyone who has struggled through his manifesto, will know Breivik’s missives were deeply unlikely to have met either of these criteria. Yet in some dark corners of the internet, his heartfelt views and pseudo-academic justifications were swallowed and, no doubt, even admired. For the political marginal there is always a constituency and in the shouty internet such constituents can evidently make you feel mainstream.

Arnfindsen is the editor of honestthinking.no, a site aimed at people who don’t realise that websites which evoke truthfulness and honesty should be regarded with the same scepticism as restaurants that testify to their cleanliness. On his site he has hits and acclaim. Shorn of his online echo chamber he and everyone else was shown why he is marginalised. Unable to construct a logical argument, incapable of properly weighing evidence, and flinging out unsubstantiated allegations like a small child playing Cluedo, he like the other nuts who testified to Breivik’s sanity were exposed for what they are.

Breivik wishes to be considered sane. It is galling that these people’s testimony could help him to achieve his aim. But there must also be satisfaction in exposing these crackpots as the fairy tale villains they are. Raymond Johansen, general secretary of the Norwegian Labour Party so loathed by Breivik, said it was important their views should be heard. “If a troll comes out into the sunlight it will burst,” he said. “If it remains in the dark it will grow.”

Mark Lewis is a freelance journalist reporting from the Breivik trial in Oslo. He tweets as @markantonylewis.

Update: Eleven Arrested During EDL Rally in Rochdale

10 of the 11 arrested by police in Rochdale were EDL members (via. Islamophobia-Watch):

Eleven arrested during EDL rally in Rochdale

Eleven men were arrested by police today during a rally by the English Defence League in Rochdale.

More than 400 members of the far-right organisation gathered for around two hours outside the town hall. The majority were brought into the town centre on buses and coaches from a nearby retail park at 1pm.

Many gathered outside pubs on Packer Street amid a heavy police presence before they were escorted by officers to a pen on the car park outside the town hall. Officers dealt with a handful of minor skirmishes as the group marched the short distance to the car park from Packer Street.

Two fireworks, believed to be bangers, later exploded at the feet of crowds stood outside the pen near to the Post Office on The Esplanade. No one was injured.

Greater Manchester Police said eleven men were arrested on suspicion of various offences. Ten of those arrested were attending the EDL rally. An eleventh arrest was made at nearby Broadfield Park, where a counter-demonstration and unity rally was held.

Police dog handlers and mounted police were positioned around the demonstration zone.

Manchester Evening News, 9 June 2012

EDL demonstrations don’t seem to be getting any larger do they? Judging by the photo below, even the “more than 400″ figure would appear to be an exaggeration. Rochdale Online‘s report that only “around 200 of the anticipated 600 EDL members” turned up for the protest is probably more accurate. So much for the biggest street movement in history.

Annual Report: Zero Civilians in U.S. Killed by Islamic Terrorism… Just Like Every Year Since 9/11

Following the devastating 9/11 attack, terrorism has become the number one issue for the U.S. government.  Just under 60% of discretionary spending for the 2012 federal budget was allocated to the military–ten times the amount spent on education and health care.  As a U.S. citizen, over half of your income tax goes to sustaining the war state.  Since 9/11, more than a trillion dollars have been spent funding the War on Terror.  Aside from depleting the nation’s treasury, thousands of U.S. soldiers have been killed during these hostilities.

To justify this exorbitant cost, the American establishment must convince its citizenry that terrorism is a major threat to their safety and well-being.  Terrorism is portrayed as an existential threat to all Western civilization.  For this reason, government officials, with the help of the mainstream media, routinely fear-monger about the overwhelming threat of Islamic terrorism.  Right-wing Islamophobes lead the way, but the basic paradigm is generally accepted by both left and right, Democrat and Republican alike.  There is bipartisan consensus when it comes to the basic premise of the War on Terror, with little difference in foreign policy between George Bush and Barack Obama.

To prove the gravity of the threat, various government-affiliated organizations have been documenting terrorism.  The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), for example, has been diligently recording data on terrorist attacks.  Just this week, the NCTC released to the public its annual terrorism report for the year 2011.

Micah Zenko of The Atlantic published an article entitled Americans Are as Likely to Be Killed by Their Own Furniture as by Terrorism.  Although Mr. Zenko’s good intention and clever title deserve praise, I feel that his article is (unintentionally) misleading.  For one thing, Americans are much more likely to be killed by their own furniture than by terrorists.  And for another, the article’s byline is misleading:

Terrorist attacks killed 17 U.S. civilians last year and 15 the year before.

Those of you who regularly read my writing know that I closely follow such data and have proven again and again that, since 9/11, Islamic terrorists have killed a grand total of zero civilians in the United States.  So, why does Mr. Zenko state that 17 U.S. civilians were killed by terrorist attacks in 2011 and another 15 the year before?

It’s unfortunate that Mr. Zenko failed to mention the very important fact that none of these deaths occurred in the United States.  Moreover, all of these fatalities occurred in war zones–in regions that the U.S. is militarily occupying (Afghanistan and Iraq) or assisting in the occupation of (Palestine).  Buried on page 17 of the NCTC report, we read:

Seventeen U.S. private citizens worldwide were killed by terrorist attacks in 2011. These deaths occurred in Afghanistan (15), Jerusalem (1), and Iraq (1). Overall, U.S. private citizen deaths constituted only 0.13 percent of the total number of deaths worldwide (12,533) caused by terrorism in 2011. Fourteen U.S private citizens were wounded by terrorism in 2011; 10 in Afghanistan, three in Jerusalem, and one in Iraq.

In the entire year of 2011, the Afghan and Iraqi insurgencies killed a combined total of 16 U.S. private civilians.  By way of comparison, note that in a single event in March of 2011, “[a]n American soldier went on a house-to-house shooting spree in two [Afghan] villages…killing 16 people…four men, three women and nine children.”  Not surprisingly, this incident–clearly an act of terrorism if that word is to have any meaningful definition (although admittedly, it does not)–does not find its way into the NCTC report.  This is because it’s only terrorism when our enemies (especially Muslims) do it.

This huge double standard is apparent from the NCTC report itself, which declares on the opening page:

In compiling the figures of terrorist incidents that are included in the CRT and the NRT, NCTC uses the definition of terrorism found in Title 22, which provides that terrorism is “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.” (See, 22 U.S.C. § 2656f(d)[2]).

In other words, by definition the United States or its military cannot commit acts of terrorism.  An act becomes terrorism based not on the action but on who commits this action.  If “subnational groups or clandestine agents” kill civilians in an attack, this is terrorism–especially if that group is Muslim or named “Al-Qaeda”.  Meanwhile, if the United States kills ten times as many civilians in an even greater attack, that’s not terrorism at all and will never find its way in the government’s database of terrorist attacks.

If an American soldier guns down 16 Afghan villagers (including three women and nine children), that’s not terrorism.  Meanwhile, the NCTC counted Major Nidal Hasan’s shooting spree against U.S. soldiers on a military base as an act of terrorism. This, in a nutshell, summarizes the American government’s mentality.

A cursory search of news report in 2011 reveals that on a seemingly routine basis the United States killed more Afghan civilians than the 17 U.S. civilians killed by Muslim terrorists in the entire year.  Here is a very incomplete sampling of the victims of various U.S.-led raids in the previous year:

three civilians, five civilians (including one woman and two children), 65 civilians, nine boys, the Afghan president’s own cousin (can you imagine if the Afghans shot and killed a U.S. president’s cousin–or even the president’s dog?), two children, seven civilians (including women and children), six civilians, two women and a child, two civilians (including a 12-year old girl), a boy, a girl, four civilians (including two women), one civilian (shot and killed because he had a flashlight in his hand), 14 civilians (two women and 12 children), 13 civilians (including three women and eight children), two civilians, “up to 16 civilians”, four civilians, six civilians (including an 11-year old girl), a journalist, four civilians, and seven civilians.

Recently it came to light what I suspected long time ago: to minimize reported civilian deaths, the United States government, borrowing a tactic used by Israel, defines “militant” to mean “all military-age males in a strike zone.”  Simply put, wherever an American bomb falls, there lies a militant.  Even using such an absurdly restrictive definition of “civilian”, the United States has killed way more Afghan civilians than the Afghan insurgency has killed American civilians, a fact that is evident from the incomplete list above.

Long before it was revealed that the U.S. was counting “militants” in this way, Gareth Porter of Counterpunch had astutely noted:

Except for a relatively few women and children killed by accident, the civilians who died in the raids were all adult males who were counted as insurgents in press releases and official data released by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

Porter estimated that in reality U.S. Night Raids Killed Over 1,500 Afghan Civilians in Ten Months in 2010 and 2011, far outstripping the meager 17 civilians killed by Muslim terrorists as reported by the NCTC.  This is not even to speak of the civilians killed by the U.S. in other Muslim countries, such as Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.

But, always remember: they are the violent ones.

*  *  *  *  *

The NCTC has released annual terrorism reports since 2005 (see: 20052006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011).  Going through these, we find that in this entire seven year period, there were only two successful acts of Islamic terrorism inside the U.S. (the Little Rock recruiting office shooting and the Fort Hood Shooting).  Both were against military targets: in the former, Carlos Bledsoe shot and killed a U.S. soldier outside an army recruiting center.  In the latter, Major Nidal Hasan shot and killed 12 soldiers and one military-contracted ex-soldier on a military base.

In other words, at least since 2005, not a single civilian has been killed in the U.S. by Muslim terrorists.  

As for American deaths outside the U.S., the majority of these (over 80%) have been in war zones, according to the data available in the NCTC reports.  Of these fatalities, 97% have been in Afghanistan and Iraq.  From 2005 to 2011, the total number of U.S. deaths outside of war zones has been limited to 17.  This means that, outside of those countries the U.S. wages war in, an average of two American civilians per year are killed by Muslim terrorists.  This, I think, should put Micah Zenko’s article in further context.

*  *  *  *  *

In fact, we can go further back than 2005 using the RAND Corporation’s list of terrorist attacks within the United States.  (RAND is a nonprofit global policy think tank financed by the U.S. government.)  Going through this 2010 report, it becomes clear that Muslim terrorists haven’t killed a single civilian in the U.S. since 9/11.

A similar situation exists in Europe: Europol has been releasing annual terrorism reports since 2006.  As I indicated in my 2011 article Europol Reports Zero Deaths from Islamic Terrorism in Europe:

Zero civilians in Europe have been killed by Islamic terrorists in the last half decade.  In fact, the only injuries incurred from Islamic terrorism were to a security guard who “was slightly wounded.”  Perhaps the “anti-jihadist” blogosphere should find this one security guard and give him a medal of honor and declare him a martyr for the cause.

Unfortunately, since the publication of that article, a French citizen of Algerian ethnicity shot and killed three soldiers and four civilians.  This brings the total civilians in Europe killed from Islamic terrorism (2006-present) to a grand total of four, or an average of less than one person per year.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the great threat of Islamic terrorism in the Western world: you are more likely to die from an allergic reaction to peanuts, being struck and killed by lightning, or being crushed to death by your television set than being killed by a Muslim terrorist.

Nonetheless, the NCTC report states that the “ultimate goal” of the publication “is to maintain global awareness of the persistent threat terrorism poses and the critical need to secure its defeat.”  Could this be anything other than rank propaganda?  Yet, in spite of the horrifically biased methodology employed by the NCTC, the data belies the case being made, a strong indication of how flimsy the ideological basis for the War on Terror really is.

Danios was the Brass Crescent Award Honorary Mention for Best Writer in 2010 and the Brass Crescent Award Winner for Best Writer in 2011.

EDL Shock Troops Get Ready to Descend on Rochdale

The EDL’s coming to town, to spread “racial tensions and incite violence.”

EDL get ready to descend on Rochdale

Rochdale shop owners are preparing ahead of tomorrow’s English Defence League march. The far-right movement will descend on the town at 1.30pm to demonstrate against what they see as an expansion of Muslim extremism.

Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk urged the town to continue as usual. He said: “Tomorrow’s ‘protest’ is nothing more than an attempt to stir up racial tensions and incite violence. The police are fully prepared to deal with this and the protest will be outside of the town centre, which will be open for business as usual. I would urge everyone to continue to support local shops and businesses.”

Local group Rochdale Unity, who will be holding a counter protest at the same time, accused EDL of exploiting the recent case of sexual exploitation of young women in Heywood, which saw nine Asian men handed prison sentences.

EDL splinter group Casuals United have issued a “fatwa” against any media who attend tomorrow’s event without having been invited by EDL leaders, saying they will be treated as “hostile”.

Mancunian Matters, 8 June 2012

From the Looniverse: Terry “Quran Burner” Jones Hangs Effigy of Barack Obama Outside Church

It’s Friday, and time for some good, hearty laughs.

We know Pastor Terry Jones Yosemite Sam, is the male equivalent of Pamela Geller, and hence we know him as: The Looniest Pastor Ever.

Jones most recent attention-seeking gimmick was to hang an effigy of President Barack Obama outside of his Dove World Outreach Church (which is still for sale!). Jones’ bid for attention was successful, and he’s likely going to get a call from the Secret Service as well.

By hanging Obama’s effigy, the Qur’an burning Jones was more or less killing two birds with one stone: combining his hatred for Muslims and his racist attitude towards Blacks. (Terry Jones and his ilk believe that Obama is a secret-Mooslim seeking to Islamize and conquer the “Christian United States,” and by hanging his effigy he was essentially provoking comparisons to the lynching of Blacks.)

Of course there will be those who see this and applaud, or say it is benign, but they are the very same people who are most outspoken in castigating and linking Islam to protests in the Muslim world that involve the burning of an American flag or an effigy of a Western leader.

So, for the purposes of lightening up your day, here’s the looniest pastor’s most recent sides-splitting antic:

(Huffington Post)

The Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., has hanged an effigy of President Barack Obama from a gallows on its front lawn, a move DWOC pastor Terry Jones said was in response to Obama’s recent endorsement of same-sex marriage, as well as his stance on abortion and what Jones called his “appeasing of radical Islam.”

According to the Broward-Palm Beach New Times, the U.S. Secret Service is currently investigating Jones in response to the display.

“The Secret Service is aware of this incident and will conduct appropriate follow-up,” Secret Service spokesman Brian Leary told the paper’s “The Pulp” blog.

The effigy is suspended from a makeshift gallows with a noose of yellow rope, has a doll in its right hand and a rainbow-colored gay pride flag in its left.

In a telephone interview with The Huffington Post, Jones said the flag was meant to call attention to Obama’s stance on same-sex marriage and that the baby doll is there because the president is “favorable toward abortion.”

Jones also said that radical Islam is “the most dangerous threat to life and national security in America.”

There is also an Uncle Sam dummy standing at the base of the gallows outside the DWOC. Jones told HuffPost that the Obama effigy had originally been positioned to be hanging Uncle Sam when the display went up two weeks ago, but that the church changed the display on Wednesday.

The words “Obama is Killing America” are printed on a trailer nearby.

The DWOC came under intense scrutiny in 2011 after Jones burned the a copy of the Quran, a move which sparked three days of violent rioting in Afghanistan that resulted in the deaths of at least 21 people, including seven U.N. workers.

In addition to its higher profile controversial moves, the Dove World Outreach Center has also been criticized for its internal rules, which The Smoking Gun has called “cult-like.”

In the church’s Academy Rulebook, written by Jone’s wife and published in 2007, prospective ministers are directed to cut off most contact with family members.

This is not the first time that an effigy of the country’s first black president has been hanged.

In March 2010, a teacher at a failing Rhode Island school hanged an effigy of Obama in his classroom. That same month, another dummy was found hanging on Main Street in the Georgia hometown of President Jimmy Carter.

In 2009, a Kentucky grand jury refused to indict two men who hanged an Obama effigy on the campus of the University of Kentucky. The men had been charged with burglary and disorderly conduct, the latter count associated with hanging the effigy. The lawyer for the two men said that the disorderly conduct charge violated his clients’ rights under the First Amendment.

What ever will the good pastor come up with next?