Update 2/27/08:What did the near-worldwide YouTube outage have to do with Geert Wilders’ new movie? Click here to learn more!Fitna, The Movie: Due Out This Week
Courageous Dutch MP Geert Wilders has faced such threats from the beginning: 2/1/2005: Dutch politician Geert Wilders watches the latest Internet video clip calling for his beheading. He has adopted an aggressively anti-Islamic position, saying that Islam and democracy are “not compatible, not now and not in a million years.” (Keith B. Richburg — The Washington Post)
From Expatica, with thanks to Fjordman, who keeps an eye on the international reporting on Dutch affairs. Something we at KV should be doing a lot more, instead of relying on internal MSM reporting. Because this bit of news should have made headlines in the Netherlands, but didn’t. Not by a long shot. One wonders why not…
MP Geert Wilders was threatened with a suicide attack last week. Two young men reportedly planned to shoot the politician down and detonate a van full of explosives next to the politician. “Many innocent people were to die in the chaos.”
This has emerged from the report Wilders filed with the Haaglanden police. A warning of the attack planned for either The Hague or Amsterdam came via the anonymous hotline for crime tips. A similar, but less detailed, death threat came in via the hotline this week. It is unusual for this hotline to be used to announce death threats.
The initial, very concrete warning spoke about an attack planned for early February. Wilders would first be shot, and then a man would drive a white delivery van into the victim and detonate the 500 to 600 kilos of explosives in the vehicle.
[…]
The person who called the hotline said that the perpetrators were not fundamentalists, but “just wanted revenge.”
Well, that’s okay then. Just as long as they’re not fundamentalist. Because that would be, eehm… awkward?
According to Wilders, Islam is a violent religion. “If Mohammed lived here today, I would propose tarring and feathering and hunting him out of the country as an extremist. (…) If Muslims want to stay here, they must tear up and throw away half the Koran. They must not listen to their Imam. I have read the Koran. (…) And I know that there are enough terrible things in it. If Muslims do assimilate, they are fully-fledged citizens, not a millimetre less valuable than you or I.”
Wilders believes his new PVV party - it obtained 9 Lower House seats in November - can grow into “one of the biggest parties” in parliament. “Other parties avoid the themes that threaten us in our existence. Everything we are proud of, we sell to the devil. (…) You feel that you are no longer living in your own country.”
On his thoughts about Israel:
The only criticism he has of the country is that “I find Israel sometimes listens to Europe too much. It should have intervened in Lebanon much earlier. I am more inclined to consider that Israel does not go far enough than that it goes too far.”
THE HAGUE (AFP) — Dutch far-right deputy Geert Wilders said in an interview published Saturday that his controversial anti-Islam film will be called “Fitna” , arabic for ordeal, and will be aired in March.
The leader of the Freedom party (PVV), which has nine of 150 seats in parliament, said in November that he planned to make a short film showing that Islam’s holy book, the Koran, is “a fascist book” that “incites people to murder”.
According to the interview with Dutch GPD news agency, Wilders’ 15-minute film is almost done, and he hopes it will be shown on Dutch television in March. He had initially said it would air at the end of January.
Wilders said he has called the film Fitna, an Arabic word that in Islam is used to describe all things that can test the faith and is sometimes synonymous to evil.
“I use the term in an inverse sense because for me Islam … is fitna,” he said.
How did Parviz Khan get that bruise on his forehead?
Parviz Khan is one of nine defendants on trial in the UK for a terrorist plot against the British military. Family Security Matters has been following the trial:
Those shrill cries claiming persecution can now be exposed as false. A trial is currently taking place in Leicester Crown Court. And it is only now revealed that 37-year-old Parviz Khan, one of the nine people arrested in late January and early February 2007, has pleaded guilty to plotting to kidnap and decapitate a British Muslim soldier.
Khan, an “unemployed charity worker,” admitted his guilt earlier this month, but the news was suppressed until a trial involving two other individuals, Amjad Mahmood, 33, and Zahoor Iqbal, 31, began. These two denied involvement in the plot.
But did he get the bruise while in custody?
Evidently not. Dymphna at Gates of Vienna explains that this bruise is nothing unusual among devout Muslims:
What I hadn’t been able to find is any commentary on Mr. Khan’s bruised forehead. Had the police been having a go at him with billy clubs, perhaps? Why no mention of it by the MSM? Strange that it would go unremarked…
Well, sorry, this is nothing as pedestrian as torture. What creates these Muslim stigmata is the effect of devout head-pounding fervor. Fundamentalist Muslims do not touch their head to the ground in prayer. Instead, they bounce their cranium forcefully onto the stone floors on which they kneel. Performing this act of adoration five times a day will get you that prune-shaped hematoma our head-banger suspect now sports. By their bruises you shall know them.
And these people have the nerve to complain about Gitmo…
A prayer bump, also known as a prayer scar, or a zabiba or zebiba (raisin) in Arabic is a mark on the forehead of a pious muslim, caused by rubbing the forehead against a prayer mat. Islam requires its adherents to pray five times a day (known as salah), which involves kneeling on a prayer mat and touching the ground with one’s forehead. When done for extended periods of time, a prayer bump may develop. Devout Muslims consider the presence of a prayer bump to be a worthy sign of religious dedication and piety.
The prayer bump can take the form of a discolouration of the skin, caused by repeated chafing and the build-up of callous. In extreme cases, the callous can be thick enough to create a real bump that portrudes from the forehead. Prayer bumps are common in Islamic countries such as Egypt, where they are colloquially called a ‘zabiba’ (raisin).
Could he have gotten a deep bruise like this merely from rubbing his forehead on a mat?
A mark from dirt, yes. Chafed skin, maybe. A callus, possibly. But a deep bruise? No. Rubbing the surface of the skin against a flat surface does not cause bruising in a normal individual. A bruise is evidence of a strong enough impact to break blood vessels below the surface.
Now I’m not a neurologist, but…
Repeated blows to the head can cause permanent damage to the brain. Any brain function can become impaired when the brain is damaged - motor and sensory capabilities, regulation of internal body processes, sleep and wakefulness, emotional states, memory, reasoning, judgment, personality, and character. The dangers of concussion are well known from studies of athletes, soldiers, and others who have suffered such trauma.
Thousands of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan may be risking permanent brain damage by returning to combat with relatively minor but undiagnosed concussions, often caused by bomb blasts, military researchers say.
Doctors say they are only now understanding the scope of the problem. Researchers screening returning soldiers and Marines at four military bases found that about 10% suffered at least a minor brain injury during combat. About 20% of troops in front-line infantry units suffered such injuries.
The injuries frequently go undiagnosed because troops have no visible wounds or may not know they suffered a concussion, doctors say. Medics and field doctors often aren’t aware of what happened during fighting.
Sports-Related Recurrent Brain Injuries - United States
An estimated 300,000 sports related traumatic brain injuries, TBIs, of mild to moderate severity , most of which can be classified as concussions, (i.e., conditions of temporary altered mental status as a result of head trauma, occur in the United States each year. The proportion of these concussions that are repeat injuries is unknown; however, there is an increased risk for subsequent TBI among persons who have had at least one previous TBI. Repeated mild brain injuries occurring over an extended period (i.e., months or years can result in cumulative neurologic and cognitive deficits, but repeated mild brain injuries occurring within a short period (i.e., hours, days, weeks) can be catastrophic or fatal. The latter phenomenon, termed “second impact syndrome” has been reported more frequently since it was first characterized in 1984. This page describes two cases of second impact syndrome and presents recommendations developed by the American Academy of Neurology to prevent recurrent brain injuries in sports and their adverse consequences.
Hits To Boxers’ Heads Cause More Chemical Markers For Brain Injury
(WebMD) A blow to the head may do more than just make you feel woozy.
A new study shows repeated blows to the head cause an increase of chemicals in the fluid that circulates around the brain and spinal cord. These chemicals are markers for brain and nerve cell injury. The rise of these chemicals of the brain may also help explain what is commonly known as “punch drunk” syndrome, with symptoms of long-term neurological damage.
Researchers studied a group of amateur boxers and found those who had recently suffered repeated blows to the head during a recent boxing match had higher-than-normal levels of certain chemicals in their cerebrospinal fluid (fluid that circulates around the spinal cord and brain). These chemicals, known as neurofilament light protein and total tau, have also been shown to be increased in some neurologic disorders with damage of brain neurons and cells.
Researchers say about 20 percent of professional boxers develop chronic traumatic brain injury as a result of years of repeated blows to the head during their careers in the ring. But little is known about the brain injury risks faced by amateur boxers who must wear protective headgear and compete in shorter bouts.
ScienceDaily (May 5, 2000) — SAN DIEGO, CA – The first scientific survey of head injuries in professional football players suggests that head trauma from the sport may lead to later neurological problems.
Maj. Steve Coughlin, the expert on terrorism who was fired from the Pentagon at the behest of a jihadist mole, is back to work, and with a well-deserved promotion. Great news!
But we still have some work to do - we need to hold our officials’ feet to the fire, so that they do a thorough housecleaning at the Pentagon to remove Hesham Islam and other jihadist moles, along with those who aid and abet their careers.
* Hesham Islam, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, with his ridiculously cooked CV, should have never been given a security clearance. Hesham Islam is your picture book mole:
Hesham Islam is responsible, according to earlier reports, for the firing of Stephen Coughlin, the Pentagon’s only expert on Islamic law. But now the questions about Islam himself, and what his intentions really are, are increasing.
Federal authorities say a high-level Muslim Pentagon aide, who led a campaign to silence a Pentagon intelligence analyst for taking a hard line against Islam, is running an “influence operation” on behalf of U.S. Muslim groups fronting for the radical Muslim Brotherhood.
Hesham H. Islam, a special assistant to deputy Defense secretary Gordon England, recently criticized Maj. Stephen Coughlin, one of the military’s leading authorities on Islamic war doctrine, for making the connection between the religion of Islam and terrorism.
After Islam lodged complaints, Coughlin’s contract with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon was not renewed.
Islam also was upset with briefings Coughlin recently prepared for the U.S. military warning that major U.S. Muslim groups were fronting for the Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide jihadist movement based in Egypt.
Islam, who was born and raised in Egypt, is heavily involved with one of the groups – the Islamic Society of North America, which U.S. prosecutors last year named as a member of the U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and an unindicted co-conspirator in a major terror-funding case.
Islam has persuaded his boss, England, to conduct various outreach with ISNA, including hosting the group’s leaders in the Pentagon and speaking at its annual convention.
The Pentagon is looking into conflicting statements about the background of Hesham Islam, a special assistant to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England who was the focus of a dispute with a Joint Staff counterterrorism analyst.
Mr. Islam faced tough questions about his background posed by veteran journalist Claudia Rosett, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who covered the United Nations oil-for-food scandal with Iraq. Last week, Miss Rosett took the Pentagon to task by uncovering serious discrepancies about the Egyptian-born Islam that no one at the Pentagon seems willing to answer.
Writing in National Review Online, Miss Rosett revealed that certain claims about Mr. Islam’s background don’t fit.
Shortly after she wrote about the discrepancies contained in a Pentagon-written article on Mr. Islam’s background, the Pentagon removed the biography from its Web site, DefenseLink.mil.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said “that piece was taken down in an attempt to reduce the rhetoric and the emotion surrounding this issue while we try to determine the facts.”
The Pentagon does not comment on such personnel matters, he noted. “That said, we are looking into the matter and trying to reconcile conflicting statements.”
Mr. Morrell called later to clarify that the conflicting statements being probed relate to whether or not Mr. Islam used the term “Christian zealot with a pen” in describing Mr. Coughlin, and not about discrepancies in Mr. Islam’s background.
Mr. Islam has come under fire from supporters of Stephen Coughlin, the Joint Staff analyst on counterterrorism whose contract was not renewed. The action followed a meeting between Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Islam several weeks ago when the two clashed over Mr. Coughlin’s views on the Islamic law roots of terrorism.
After refusing comment to Inside the Ring, Kevin Wensing, a spokesman for Mr. Islam, now says that reports in this space that Mr. Islam called Mr. Coughlin a “Christian zealot with a pen” did not take place during the meeting.
Queries to other Pentagon officials familiar with the issue said the phrase was used by Mr. Islam after the meeting, not during it.
No action was taken against Mr. Islam, a Muslim adviser and confidant of Mr. England, for the anti-Christian comments.
Mr. Islam could not be reached for comment.
Miss Rosett tried — and failed — to get straight answers from Mr. Wensing about why Mr. Islam claimed that when he was 7 his family was bombed by Israeli jets at his home in Cairo, when there is no evidence the Israelis bombed the Egyptian capital during the 1967 war.
Also, Mr. Wensing could not explain why Mr. Islam said in his biography that he was on a freighter sunk by an Iranian torpedo in the Persian Gulf when there is no record of the ship being sunk.
According to his 1992 master’s thesis at the Naval Postgraduate School, Mr. Islam is highly critical of Israel and the influence of American Jews on U.S. politics, noting that U.S. ties to Israel have harmed relations to other states in the Middle East.
In 2007 Mr. Bush highlighted the aggression of “Sunni extremists” and “Shia extremists.” In 2006, he warned against “radical Islam.” In 2008, the president merely decried “assassins,” “bombs,” “extremists” and “terrorists.” Why the fuzzy focus? Why declare a “defining ideological struggle” without defining the ideologies involved?
Let’s say you’re attending a meeting of your state legislature, and when it is time to give the opening prayer, a Muslim takes his turn at the lectern. You politely bow your head, and he prays for about four minutes, part of which is in Arabic, and part of which is in English. Since you don’t speak Arabic, this is the part you manage to understand (hat-tip straightarrow, and 1389):
I seek refuge in God against the accursed Satan in the name of God, most gracious, most merciful…master of the day of judgment…[give us] victory over those who disbelieve.
As we begin this new year…in a world with trials and tribulations, we ask you to open the hearts of our legislators and policy makers to make the right decisions….We ask that you guide our legislators and give them the wisdom and knowledge to tackle the difficult problems that face us today in order to eliminate the senseless crimes on humanity. Help them, Lord, to solve the complicated problems…so that we can be a model to the world.
Are you ready to say, “Amen,” and shout “Hallelujah”? Or do you feel like you’ve been slapped in the face as an American? This happened in Des Moines, Iowa, and some of the legislators there did, indeed find this prayer inappropriate.
Yesterday, in Tulsa, Oklahoma City Counselors voted to move from a “generic” prayer format to allowing prayers to be in the name of any organized religion. There were two dissenting votes, one from Councilor Jack Henderson, who warned:
What you are doing is opening a Pandora’s box and you might not like what you see.
Tulsa Metropolitan Ministry Executive Director James Mishler echoed the sentiment:
I think the very people who have been encouraging you to make this change are going to be very uncomfortable when the priest from the Hindu temple is standing here chanting in the name of Krishna or when someone from the Wiccan community offers prayers to the earth mother.
Like, perhaps when a Muslim prays for God to deliver him from the infidels in the United States during his opening prayer? Think that’ll make some folks uncomfortable?
The Hindu part of Mischler’s prophecy is already happening, in five states:
Rajan Zed, prominent Hindu chaplain and Indo-American leader, will recite these history making prayers in New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Washington and Arizona, which will reportedly be the first Hindu prayers of these Senates since their formation.
Zed, who lives in Reno (Nevada), will deliver these prayers from ancient Hindu scriptures at Senate halls in State Capitols in Santa Fe (January 28), Denver (January 29), Salt Lake City (February 13), Olympia (February 22), and Phoenix (March 24). After first reciting in Sanskrit, he will then read the English translation of the prayer.
This has also been ruled into law in some places for the wiccans:
Judges have ruled that witches must be allowed to lead prayers at local government meetings, and that Wiccan convicts must be provided with requested “sacred objects” so they can perform spells in their cells. Witches in the armed services have even formed covens and routinely “worship” on U.S. military bases.
Over the past few years, due to unrelenting lawsuits by the ACLU (like this one in Indiana) over Christian prayers at government meetings, the trend has been to use non-sectarian “prayers,” sometimes called “invocations.” It will be interesting, now that the tide is turning back to allowing various religions to pray to their own gods during this time, to see if the ACLU will as vehemntly fight the Hindus, the Muslims, the Wiccans, etc., and if the Christians (who, by the way, are STILL the overwhelming majority of the United States) will now be allowed to pray to their Father in the name of Jesus Christ without fear of being sued…?
One of my childhood preachers used to shout, “Say, ‘Amen!’ or ‘Oh, My!’”
But don’t get too excited. The test will run for just six months, only within Europe, and only on the Airbus A-318. And the experience will be just as regimented and micromanaged as everything else having to do with air travel in the twenty-first century:
During the first three months of the study, passengers will be allowed only to send text messages and e-mails. But during the second three months (originally the study was scheduled to last a year), passengers will be allowed to make voice calls. According to Wi-Fi Net News, calls can only be made above 10,000 feet and depending on passenger feedback, cabin crew can disable the service at any time. As you may expect, the satellite calls will be $2.50 per minute. Also, passengers will not know they’re flying on the test aircraft until after they board.
Hmmm…wonder what would happen if a flight attendant were to overhear a passenger using a cell phone to complain to someone about the airline, the plane, or the flight crew?
Since cell phone towers don’t reach thousands of feet into the air the cellular signals will be converted into satellite communications that will vault into space and then connect to a ground network.
The technology used by the new generation of aircraft is now so advanced that aviation officials fear that terrorists could use it to fly the plane.>
Aviation regulators have refused to certify Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner passenger jet until it redesigns its computer system to protect against such an event, The Times has learnt.
The Federal Aviation Authority is concerned that terrorists could use the Dreamliner’s in-flight internet system to connect to “systems critical to the safety and maintenance of the aircraft”.
In a report released last week, the FAA said that Boeing had left the pilots’ computers open to attack by connecting the Dreamliner’s entertainment system to the pilots’ controls.
A hacker with a computer and some IT training potentially could hijack the system from his seat.
As we all know, some people in the world are angry and destructive, and many of those are on the Internet. These angry people exert a negative effect on anyone who has the misfortune to encounter them, even if it is only a feeling of fatigue and disgust. Some angry and destructive persons are genuinely dangerous.
The Internet is a tool that can be used for good or ill. The team at 1389 Blog is working hard to do some good: to use the Internet to confront and curb jihadism and expansionist Islam, and to provide knowledge and tools to others who are working to accomplish the same goals. We will never allow anyone to abuse the comments on this blog for the purpose of undermining this effort.
False accusations, mudslinging, and editorial discretion
We have grown especially weary and disgusted with haters who use blogs, comments, forums, Wikis, social news sites, or email to circulate false allegations against others - whether it be public figures, other bloggers, entire groups of people, or whomever else they hate. Despite claims of “fairness” and “impartiality,” disinformation has been planted throughout Wikipedia and other social media, where it becomes fuel for flame wars, mudslinging, and propaganda.
Typically, one or more responders will put in hours or days of unpaid effort to refute those accusations, but then, the malicious accuser simply goes elsewhere and starts the same process all over again.
We have other things to do besides responding to the same falsehoods again and again. If these miscreants can’t win the argument on facts and logic, they hope to win by shouting us down and wasting our time.
Yes - these haters have the right to post what they want - on their own blogs - and to face whatever consequences accrue. When haters commit libel, their victims may sue. When haters incite violence against the persons or groups that they hate, they have passed the boundaries of protected political speech, and we will do what we can to shut them down.
No one has the right to take advantage of other people’s blogs and websites to spew false accusations, obscenities, and bile in front of the readership that reputable bloggers and admins have worked so hard to earn. No one has the right to spam the comments or forum threads on someone else’s website for the purpose of interfering with that website or harassing its owners and participants.
Excluding malicious comments is not censorship - it is vital editorial discretion. No blog or forum administrator - or for that matter, no publisher or media producer - can, or should, publicize every response that comes in. Bigoted ranting, name-calling, bullying and threats, spam, obscenity, incoherent rambles, libel and slander, and ad hominemattacks, attract a lynch-mob mentality, drive away decent readers and participants, and expose the website or organization to repercussions, legal or otherwise. And the endlessly misused argumentum ad Nazium, a/k/a reductio ad Hitlerum, is a signal to readers that the argument has worn itself out, and that intelligent life has departed from that venue.
Oh, and by the way…
If you want to argue with us, you’d better be loaded for bear. We expect to see verifiable evidence and valid logic, presented in a clear and civil manner. Just for starters:
Calling us liars, racists, Nazis, or whatever else is evidence only of your incivility. Accusing us of being “racists” or “Holocaust deniers” or “fascists” merely because we do not accept your accusations against Jews, Israelis, Serbs, European conservatives, white Americans, or whomever it is you happen to hate, doesn’t cut it either.
Hearsay, rumors, innuendo, or unconfirmed urban legends, or something you thought you heard from a “friend of a friend,” does not make for sufficient evidence to back up an allegation.
Articles in Wikipedia are acceptable only for noncontroversial matters, such as technical background, computer and Internet history, and definitions of words and phrases (as shown here in the previous item). But when it comes to controversial political, religious, or historical issues, Wikipedia is far too vulnerable to vandalism, flame wars, and spin, and we generally cannot accept it as evidence. (See our Reference Material resource page, and Byzantine Sacred Art: Wikipedia, the Source of Disinformation, for more on Wikipedia spin jobs.)
For that matter, we roundly condemn Wikipedia’s self-righteous pretense of enforcing a neutral point of view. It is senseless to make a virtue out of amorality! When we write or blog, we do our best to gather and publish the whole truth and nothing but. There is no neutral ground between right and wrong, between good and evil, between truth and error. There is no room for diluting the truth by presenting falsehood alongside it, in an effort to appear “fair and balanced.” The devil has too many spokesmen already, and too many spokeswomen too!
Making patronizing remarks, such as claiming that you “pity” us, is nothing more than mudslinging disguised behind a false sense of moral superiority, and it will get your remarks flushed into the spam bucket without a second thought.
If you, or any of your sources have a vested interest in the issue that could affect credibility, we expect you to disclose it.
Just because you saw something in the mainstream media does not automatically mean it is true. Many stories, photos, and videos have appeared in the mainstream media and have later been shown to be planted by untrustworthy sources, staged, mislabeled, Photoshopped, or otherwise falsified. Check it first!
In particular, we will not post comments that contain racist or bigoted ranting, especially the anti-Semitic ranting and the Serb-bashing that seems to be plaguing the blogosphere these days. We don’t care how many times you have seen or heard the same piece of Serb-bashing or Jew-bashing or Israel-bashing in the blogosphere or even in the mainstream media. As we have just pointed out, this does NOT make it true, nor does it give you any right to repeat it here.
What’s a blogger or admin to do?
1389 Blog posts a comments policy and we enforce it consistently. Anyone with a modicum of common sense should already be aware of what is acceptable on this and most other blogs. But if you have any doubts, read it before you send us email or comment on this, or any other, post on this blog.
We encourage people to post comments or use the Contact Us form in our blog to expose injustice or other wrongdoing. We have no objection to leveling verifiable accusations against public officials or other culpable individuals, organizations, or governments. We have no objection to polemics or to strong opinions. We encourage readers to engage in vigorous debate and to point out any factual errors that we or other commenters might make. We also encourage readers to investigate and report suspicious incidents and criminal or terrorist activity, and to keep us up to date with that information. But if the accusations cannot be substantiated, the communication in question will be either refuted or deleted.
It is up to us, as bloggers and admins, to maintain civility in our part of the blogosphere. If we fail to make this effort, the better part (in both senses of the word) of our audience will leave. I suggest that it is time for each of us to set up and enforce our comment policies to stop that from happening. And when it comes to dealing with haters, I suggest that we take care neither to let malicious commenters spew their bile until everyone else gives up and lets the haters have the last word, nor to allow false accusations to stand unanswered in any of our comment or forum threads.
(Stein hoist: Atlas Shrugs)
Blog Directory
