If World War 2 had been conducted like this

If World War 2 had been conducted the way Western Governments are now conducting the Jihad war being fought against them we might have had the following kind of behaviour:

The Scene: May 1940. We have just gone through the 254th consecutive night of German bombers blitzing London. The British Government announces its total surprise that on this particular night London should have been chosen to be attacked. The PM goes on the radio and makes the following statements about the current "War on Airplane bombers":

• Nobody should jump to conclusions about who might be responsible for this particular bombing, especially as we have no conclusive evidence yet that any of the previous 253 bombing raids were in any way related.
• In fact, our intelligence on previous raids reveals they were carried out by men from different cities with nothing whatsoever in common other than the fact that the cities all happened to be in Germany.  What we must not do is infer from this that the German people mean us any harm whatsoever especially as their Government adheres to the Nazi philosophy which we know seeks worlds peace. 
• At present we have no idea what the  motive was for any of these attacks but we must treat each one as a separate crime with separate motives. We do not yet know the names and nationalities of the men who carried out tonight's bombing raid. They are just as likely - indeed more likely - to be British men with a grudge against the Government's new income tax system as men of any other nationality. There is certainly no reason to be believe this is in any way connected with Germany. 
• And just because we have been bombed now for 254 consecutive nights there is no reason to believe that this will happen again. Obviously citizens should be extremely vigilant as they go about their nightly activities tomorrow - be especially on the look out for British men complaining about income tax who are known to have access to bomber planes. 
• However, what we will not tolerate are those racists among us who assert that if we spot German bomber planes entering UK airspace tomorrow that we should assume anything other than purely peaceful intent. Attempting to stop such planes flying over London would be considered by us to be unacceptable racial profiling. 
• In the extremely unlikely event that bombs are dropped again we will treat each individual bombing as a separate criminal act and will spare no expense in attempting to track down the individual pilot responsible in each case. In the unlikely event that such a pilot is found to be from a foreign country (which is just as likely to be Honduras, New Zealand, or Zaire as it is to be Germany) we will expect the government of that country to help us track down the criminal.  Indeed we now have reason to believe that a man named Fritz Schmidt of Hamburg was a pilot involved in a previous bombing and as a result I have asked Herr Hitler the German Chancellor to consider bringing this man into custody. 
• Moreover, because several men from German towns have been previously implicated My Majesty's government is hereby donating 15 billion pounds to Herr Hitler's Germany to ensure that they have the resources to find and punish the guilty men.

Yes a war cime happened today...

While nobody knows whether or not there really was a chemical weapons attack in Syria or whether it was by Assad's forces or the Jihadists, there is no doubt that the firing of several rockets from Lebanon into civilian areas of Israel today was a genuine war crime. Unlike whatever happened in Syria, this attack had no military purpose. It was purely to terrorise civilians.

Of course you won't even hear about this attack in the main stream media and, in order not to upset Obama by actually defending themselves (the Americans have already demanded no response from Israel), the Israelis are desperately trying to minimize the event by calling it a "one-time incident". If they know this already I can only assume they have re-employed Uri Geller for his ability to see into the future.

Statement from the families of Israelis murdered by terrorists now being released for no good reason

Isreally Cool has a statement from the families of Israelis murdered by terrorists who are being released after being pressured to do so by the Obama Administration. The statement should be read in full as it brilliantly lays out the case that releasing these terrorists inevitably produces exactly the opposite effect expected of the 'peace makers' who demand it. The statement is addressed to John Kerry who, despite all the turmoil and mass killings taking place in the Arab countries surrounding Israel, has decided that it is only Israel that deserves to be the focus of his attention and anger.

Like his boss Obamo, Kerry has a long history of supporting dictators, communists and anti-Semites as well as being wrong on just about everything. Until Obama appointed him Secretary of State he was, fortunately, unable to do too much damage to the world with his idiotic views. That has all changed now. His pressure on Israel alone, coupled with his angry statement this week that "all Israeli settlements are illegitimate" breaks all previous US policy and written agreements with previous administrations. It not only confirms him (and his boss) as an ignorant antisemitic bigot, but means that extremely dangerous times lie ahead.

More on the terrorists release here.

Warsi displays her anti-Israel obsession and gross incompetence at the same time

Anybody who has has paid the slightest bit of attention to what Baroness Warsi is really all about would not be surprised by today's story that she lied to Parliament about the number of Palestinian 'killed by Israelis' since January 2012. She claimed the number was 3643 when even the anti-Israel UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) gives the number as 262, of whom most were combatants (OCHA takes its information primarily from Hamas who include, for example, people they kill themselves as 'collaborators'). I have not seen the figures that Israel provides, but I doubt if they are more than 50 of whom almost all are combatants.

Responding to - of all people the Jew baiting Jenny Tonge - Warsi would have been very eager to take the most exaggerated figures she could find to satisfy Tonge (and her own) blood lust against Israel.

People who think that an educated Muslim woman who refuses to wear a veil cannot also be an Islamist supremacist  should start looking at the evidence. They should also take a look at Danny Lockwood's book "The Islamic Republic of Dewsbury", which has has some very interesting first hand accounts of Warsi's duplicity.

What the peace process means for Israel

Daniel Greenfield has written an article about the "Sacrifices of peace" which is one of the most important and brilliant I have seen. Every person who cares about Israel should read this in its entirety.

What he has done is look at the direct quotes by the 'leaders' of Jewish communities during the holocaust (especially Chaim Rumkowski of the Lodz ghetto) as they tried to 'negotiate' with the Nazis over which Jews could be sacrificed in order that some could survive. He compares these quotes with those of Israeli leaders like Rabin and Sharon (and now Netanyahu) as they make their 'painful concessions' to ensure that at least part of Israel can survive. The analogy is striking and difficult to dispute. For example, when the Nazis demanded all Jewish children and old people be sent for extermination Rumkowski said:

The ghetto has been struck a hard blow. They demand what is most dear to it - children and old people. ... In my old age I am forced to stretch out my hands and to beg: Brothers and sisters, give them to me! Fathers and mothers, give me your children! Yesterday, in the course of the day..I was given the order to send away more than 20,000 Jews from the ghetto, and if I did not – 'we will do it ourselves'. Should we have accepted this and carried it out ourselves, or left it to others?'But as we were guided not by the thought: "how many will be lost?" but "how many can be saved?" we arrived at the conclusion – those closest to me at work, that is, and myself – that however difficult it was going to be, we must take upon ourselves the carrying out of this decree - I must carry out this difficult and bloody operation.. I must cut off limbs in order to save the body! 

Fast forward to 2005 and see how Ariel Sharon, of all people, described his unilateral decision to forcibly remove the entire Jewish community of Gaza and all Israel defence forces there, leaving the South of Israel at the mercy of Hamas rockets.

This step is very difficult for me personally. It was with a heavy heart that the Government of Israel made the decision regarding Disengagement, and the Knesset did not lightly approve it, ...The responsibility for the future of Israel rests on my shoulders. I initiated the Plan because I concluded that this action is vital for Israel. Believe me, the extent of pain that I feel at this act is equal only to the measure of resolved recognition that it was something that had to be done.

Like the Nazis, the Palestinians have made it very clear that they will not stop until every single Jew is 'removed' from the entire land of Israel. Like the Nazis they are prepared to achieve their goal in stages knowing that they can rely on the Jews to cut off their own limbs. While the Jews of the holocaust did it because they could not resist the Nazis' demands, the Jews of Israel do it because they feel they cannot resist the demands of the 'international community'. Despite the following words by Rumkowski every Jew of Lodz was ultimately sent to the death camps:

I tried everything I knew to get the bitter sentence cancelled.....When it could not be cancelled, I tried to lessen the sentence. Only yesterday I ordered the registration of nine-year-old children. I wanted to save at least one year – children from nine to ten. But they would not yield. I succeeded in one thing – to save the children over ten. Let that be our consolation in our great sorrow.

Daniel Greenfield concludes, by analogy:

Rabin warned that if Israel did not accept an autonomous territory, then it would be forced to accept a state. Peres warned that if Israel did not accept a state in Gaza and the West Bank, it would lose Jerusalem. Sharon warned that if Israel didn't accept the expulsion of the Jews of Gaza, it would lose everything up to the '67 borders. Olmert warned that if Israel didn't accept the partition of Jerusalem, it would lose the entire city. Israel accepted most of these things and each of the terrible losses it sought to avert came about anyway, not naturally, but because of these prior concessions. The autonomous territory paved the way for a state. The loss of Gaza and the West Bank made Jerusalem next on the schedule.

Unusual example of Sharia imposed in the UK: no mankinis* allowed during Ramadan

This extraordinary story - in which a charity-raising pair were attacked by a violent mob of Muslims in Birmingham for 'insulting Muslims on Ramadan' because of their fancy dress attire -  is reported in today's Sun**. But equally extraordinay is that (consistent with the story I reported on Monday) the Sun goes to great lengths to avoid the Muslim angle completely, referring only to an  'angry mob'.

Mankini pair face mob riot

TWO men who dressed in mankinis for a sponsored walk had to be rescued by police after they were attacked by an angry mob. Steven Ellis, 41 and brother-in-law Jason Hendry, 22, were pelted with stones and eggs by the crowd — who accused them of insulting locals during Ramadan.

The animal-loving pair donned the comedy outfits — skimpy trunks with shoulder straps — for a dare on their eight-mile trek to raise £300 for Birmingham Dogs’ Home. But they were attacked as they stopped in the city’s Sparkbrook district to give two dogs with them a drink. Steven’s wife, Victoria, 36, who was following the pair in a car, said: “We stopped in a supermarket car park and were suddenly surrounded. “There was a crowd of about 30 to 40 men who began throwing stones and eggs at us. “They were shouting at Jason saying that he was a pervert and a paedophile, and one of them called me a dirty white slag. “The abuse was appalling. I had our five young children in the car and they were terrified. “We called the police who escorted us out of the area. They said the trouble was due to sensitivities over an EDL march and Ramadan.” Jason added: “It was disgusting behaviour. I was angry with them for how they reacted. “We tried to explain it was just a bit of fun, to raise money for charity.” 

* The mankini was pioneered by Sacha Baron Cohen for his Borat character

**I have reproduced the story here as the Sun online is no longer free.

Sun suggests Boston bomber was white supremacist after all

The main stream media's determination to downplay, or even whitewash altogether, the central role of Islam and Jihad in terrorist attacks around the world has been the subject over the years of many of the postings on this blog.

Sometimes the extent to which the media will go to cover up the Islam angle can be breathtaking. But todays' article in the Sun (note to non-Brits: this is the largest circulation newspaper in the UK by a very long way and is supposed to be 'conservative') ranks as the most incredible I have ever seen in this respect:

In the immediate aftermath of the Boston marathon bombings the main stream media were desperately hoping that this was carried out by right wing extremists. Even after the overwhelming evidence that it was a Jihadist attack the media were still 'looking for motives'. When the surviving bomber made it clear in his own words that his motive was Jihad against the USA and the West (after he had trained with Al Qaeda affiliates in Chechnya) the main stream media did what they always do in such situations - go very quiet.

In the UK there has been almost no coverage of the case since the immediate aftermath of the bombings (primarily because it is one of those stories that very blatantly contradicts the main stream narrative that Islam is a religion of peace).The article in today's Sun is the first it has carried about the bombings for a while. Note that the Sun, like the rest of the media, previously ignored all of the evidence of the bomber's writings and readings about Jihad because they did not consider this relevant. So, actually saying things like "I will dedicate my life to Jihad" and reading Al Qaeda manuals are considered irrelevant but reading a white supremacist publication is apparently enough to reinstate the media's desired outcome after all.

Update: I see that Jihad Watch  and Pamela Geller are also reporting that the BBC is running with this story. That makes perfect sense. It seems the BBC have invested an enormous amount of effort to do everything they can to find a motive other than Jihad.  But all they have come up with is the fact that white supremacist material has stuff that would be of common  interest to a Jihadist, most notably a desire to kill Jews. Hence this classic quote from the BBC article:

Reading material he had about white supremacy commented that "Hitler had a point".

Wow - that really proves he was not a Jihadist.