Friday, September 29, 2006

No time

No time for blogging this week. I'm too busy working and when I'm not busy with that I'm busy with being lazy. Strangely, this has nothing to do with my marijuana harvest. It's primarily because I am tired and looking for a little joy and comfort.

But I've added a couple of blogs to the blog roll. They're all good so if you don't know them already please check them out.

Oh, and of course - Fuck Islam! ;)


OK, so I decided to play with thenew blogger beta, which is why the look and feel has changed. It also means the blog roll fell off but I'll stick it on again later. I guess this means I'll finally have to makethe effort of writing a decent template.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

DE: Opera cancelled for fear of offending Muslims

A production of Mozart's opera Idomeneo has been cancelled in Berlin for fear of offending Muslims. Or at least that's what the headlines say. But the opera wasn't cancelled for fear of offending Muslims. It was cancelled for fear of offended Muslims.

Kirsten Harms, the director of the Deutsche Oper, said that the Berlin state police had warned of a possible - but not certain - threat and that she decided it would be in the best interest of the safety of the opera house, its employees and patrons to cancel the production.

So it would appear that tantrums get results since now it's consider reasonable to not only surrender to terror but to surrender to the possibility of future terror. Not in my book it's not, and thankfully others who have a public voice are starting to speak up also.

"Our ideas about openness, tolerance and freedom must be lived out on the offensive. Voluntary self-limitation gives those who fight against our values a confirmation in advance that we will not stand behind them" - Klaus Wowereit, Berlin's mayor

Well said Klaus.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also spoken up:

"We must take care that we do not retreat out of a fear of potentially violent radicals," Merkel was quoted as saying in Hanover's Neue Presse newspaper. "Self-censorship out of fear is not tolerable."

Is this the first sign of European politicians once again evolving vertebrae? I hope so.

You can read more about this here and here.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Friday, September 22, 2006

BBC aiding terrorists yet again.

As their lead story, the BBC report on a massive gathering in Lebanon, a supposed victory rally for Hezbollah, with head terrorist Nasrallah heading things up.

Hezbollah has called the outcome of the five-week conflict a "divine victory".

What they don’t tell you is that Nasrallah has appeared on Lebanese TV back in August apologising to the Lebanese people and accepting full responsibility for the war. I reported this here back on August 30th. The BBC didn’t see fit to mention it back then either.

"We did not think, even one percent, that the capture (of the two soldiers) would lead to a war at this time and of this magnitude," said Nasrallah. "You ask me, if I had known on July 11... that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not."

In fact, instead of seeing fit to let you know that Nasrallah essentially admitted that he fucked up big time and that the war was his fault (although I personally think it was just spin to calm much rightous Lebanese anger aimed directly at him) they decided to tell you this:

Obviously national television doesn’t count as a public appearance to the BBC. Maybe it doesn’t count becaue Nsrallah himself wasn’t claiming a victory, but terrible miscalculation.

Much later in the article and after they’ve made it clear that this is all about victory, they slip in this little paragraph:

"The Beirut rally had been expected to coincide with the final pullout of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon, but the Israeli military said on Friday that some troops would remain in Lebanon over the Jewish New Year holiday this weekend."

So perhaps the people gathered, according to schedule, to celebrate the leaving of Israeli troops and not a Hezbollah victory as the BBC want you to believe it. But why stop just a distorting one truth when you can distort them all?

Notice how in the main text on the left the BBC try to point out how so few Israeli civilians were killed but over 1,000 Lebanese died and an unknown number of Hezbollah fighters? Well, Hezbollah fighters are civilians but still combatants and the number of them that were killed is included in the grand total of a little over 1,000 casualties, but of course the BBC don’t want you to know that. They also don’t see fit to mention that Hezbollah were proven to be using non-combatants as human shields and that they even used death threats to force Lebanese civilians to remain in place as human shields.

They also fail to mention the NNN thousands of Israeli civilians that were displaced and that Hezbollah are condemned for war crimes by Amnesty International for deliberately targeting civilian and civilian areas with in excess of 4,000 rockets filled with explosives and thousands of ball barings designed to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible. If the Israelis had not evacuated to safer areas with shelters the Israeli death toll would have been much, much higher.

The "Conflict Facts" box on the right hand side simply restates the biased spin in the main body of the text. Pay attention to the "Quick guide: Hezbollah" link as we’re going to come back to that in a second.

At the end of the article they tell us this:
"Since the cessation of hostilities Hezbollah has been organizing reconstruction in its heartlands and paying compensation to the families whose homes were destroyed. "

But it has also been calling for a government of national unity to replace the current one.

So the BBC is trying again to highlight what a nice bunch Hezbollah are. This is not surprising considering that the BBC and other MSM were knowingly complicit in staging photos during the war with their best buddies Hezbollah. However they are also saying that the government wants a government of national unity to replace the current government. Remember that also.

Before we leave that article, let’s take notice of the fact that the following words appear absolutely no where in the article:

And let’s also note that the BBC at no time mention that Hezbollah started the war by invading Israeli territory and attacking Israelis there and kidnapping two Israeli soldiers. Neither do they mention that this war that Hezbollah "won" came to an end only because of pressure placed on Israel, who were doing very well at completing their objectives, agreed to cease fire due to international pressure largely due to public opinion that had been seriously distorted by the BBC’s, and other scum MSM, complicity in faking biased news in support of Hezbollah terrorists.

Let’s flip over now to their bullshit quick guide to Hezbollah. I’m not going to go into this in detail right now. I just want to point out the bullshit of their idea of "a government of national unity" that was previously mentioned. I’m no fan of Lebanon’s government, which has a sordid history all of its own, but in the quick guide we find the following:
"It has become the most powerful military force in Lebanon, but also has 23 of the 128 seats in parliament, with two seats in the Lebanese cabinet."

So let’s thank the BBC for pointing out that Hezbollah is already part of that government, they just want more power than they have so far achieved within Lebanon’s political system.

Just to finish this off, let’s note the one thing the BBC does get right in their quick guide.
"The group calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. It regards the whole of Palestine as occupied Muslim land and it argues that Israel has no right to exist."

Yep, that’s right – Hezbollah has the explicit goal of destroying a sovereign nation. No negotiation. No peace. No dialogue. The destruction of a sovereign nation is their goal. In other words, a permanent declaration of war!

But obviously that is meaningless to the BBC in their rush to be the number one global propaganda platform in support of terrorists.

Fuck Islam. Fuck Hezbollah. Fuck al-BBC.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Thought for the day.

I am not prepared to die or kill to make a better world. I am prepared to die or kill to prevent a world in which I wouldn’t wish for anybody to live.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Thursday, September 21, 2006

UN: 40,000 Protest Against Ahmadinejad. Media Bias Hides The Facts.

40,000 people protested to say "We will not be silent". Staggeringly, the Main Stream Media have remained utterly silent of this fact. Try searching on Google News. Try the BBC, who in their coverage of Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s visit to the UN spared not one word in recognition of the 40,000 people that thronged the streets to voice their opposition to the betrayal of inviting a terrorist supporting, holocaust denier who is bent on the destruction of an entire country, to speak at the so called United Nations.

This is a travesty. This is the ultimate proof of the hypocrisy of those organisations that call themselves news providers. They give not one sentence of their efforts to the reality at hand. They ignore 40,000 peaceful protestors who gathered to support human rights on one side. On the other side they utterly fail to expose the human wrongs of the man, the regime, and the ideology that the protestors gathered to oppose.

Not one word on the BBC mentions article 104 of the Iranian penal code for example. Article 104 requires that the stones used to stone women once they are sentenced to death for adultery, such as 34 year old mother of two Malak Ghorbany, should be "not so large that they would kill a woman too quickly, nor so small that they would fail to cause serious injury or pain". Not one word about how adultery includes being a victim of rape. Whilst they leap at the chance to highlight their hatred of President Bush or America in general, not one word of investigation is wasted on the Iranian Presidents support for killing homosexuals, destroying an entire country, stoning rape victims, executing children, funding, arming and training terrorists that kill innocents indiscriminately.

Not one single word is invested by these so called news gatherers on the fact that President Ahmadinejad is a viciously evil man and the head of a viciously evil and brutal regime that murders for "crimes" that we in the West call freedoms. Not one word is used to inform the public that when this regime does murder for a something we do call a crime they have a strong tendency to murder the one that we would call the victim.

Meanwhile, their hero Chavez is trotted across the pages with great gusto as the MSM orgasms at the opportunity to highlight someone else that hates President Bush. Of course, they ignore the fact that Chavez is a criminal, widely suspected of having embezzled billions from state oil. They ignore the fact that he has run the Venezuelan oil business into the ground. They ignore the fact that their hero is supporting regimes that support terrorism and genocide. They ignore all of this exactly as they ignore Castro's guilt in the murder of thousands and the oppression of millions.

So without voicing my absolute disgust at these betrayers of the faith that free people placed in them I wish to share with you only this.

This is what the BBC says of their page entitled "UN General Assembly at-a-glance".

All you need to know about the 61st session of the United Nations General Assembly:

And here is the photograph they choose as their photo of the day.

And they mention not one word of the 40,000 peaceful protestors that gathered outside to let the world know that we will not be silent!

And neither will we be silenced. Not by the Islamists, not by the theocrats, not by the liars and abusers, and not by a media that has turned against the people and the freedom of the world.

Atlas Shrugs has more.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Animals are funny, and so are drunks.

It's not often the BBC do something worth mentioning with out including the terms liars, distortion, bias, terrorist enablers, or simply filthy Hezbollah gusset sniffing, Jew and American hating shit whores. Yet every so often they publish something that brings a smile instead of a sneer to my face. This has happened today. Here it is along with an all time personal favourite.

Man bites panda after zoo attack

A drunken Chinese tourist says he bit a panda who attacked him after he jumped into a zoo enclosure to "hug" the bear.

"I bit the panda on its back but its fur was too thick," Mr Zhang recalled.

Full story here.

Russian squirrel pack 'kills dog'

"They literally gutted the dog," local journalist Anastasia Trubitsina told Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper.

They are said to have scampered off at the sight of humans, some carrying pieces of flesh.

Komosmolskaya Pravda notes that in a previous incident this autumn chipmunks terrorised cats in a part of the territory

See it here.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

With people so stupid is it any wonder we have religion?

For a time it baffled me that anybody actually believes in any of the religions. I couldn't figure out if there was some point I was missing or some fact that I had failed to grasp. To be perfectly honest, when I was first learning about religion I didn't seriously think that anybody believed in it. I just thought I was being taught about what people believed before they actually knew anything.

What became apparant to me is that people believe in religion, regardless of their motivations for that belief, primarily because they are just unbelievably, staggeringly stupid.

I'll prove my point.

Watch this video before you read on:

Now, here's a selection of some of the comments posted against the video.

what happens next i wanna know the secert?

what the hell happened with the girl? i hope she isn't dead!

Amazing!!! That was really shocking though... How did he do that??? Unbelievable!Hope that he put her body back in one single piece...

If this is not tv trickery, it's sorcery or satanic in nature. There is no explaination. As for MOST of his "tricks". Does anyone agree?

Wow, you people are really intelligent.
"Oh, yeah, that was totally fake. I can tell because challenging the validity of magic tricks is my profession."
I hate to tell you this, but, this video is real. I saw the lady on the news, she had to get surgery to reattach the second half of her body. She's suing Chris Angel and the makers of the show.

i'm a big believer of chris angel.. but i fort tht was one trick tht may have been fake as if tht was me a wudnt run away lyk tht or b laffin a wud b shit scared

looks like he runs with the upper half to hide what he does with his right hand, pushing something on the lower body. maybe he starts up anything robotic that makes the lower half stand up and move some toes?
but...the woman is walking normally when she comes up to the bench..
it is a fantastic trick

is this a fake?

Many of the other comments discuss whether this is Satanic magic or witchcraft. Braindead chimpanzee retards.

At this point I feel secure to rest my case, but I feel a powerful urge to attempt to make a point, and it's a dangerous and likely unpopular one because I'm going to challenge the idea of democracy.

I'm not saying that I am certain that a line should be drawn or even how or where to draw it but who amongst us that doesn't feel as mentally disabled as the commenters seriously believes that people that are so unimaginably stupid and easily fooled, given to wild belief before giving any thought, prone to leaping to the most ridiculous assumptions, and generally incapable of reason should be trusted with giving serious thought and making serious decisions about serious topics?

Basically, who thinks that these morons should have an equal say in deciding policy? If you think they should have an equal say I'd like to know on what reasonable grounds you reach that decision and what makes you happy to have these fools equally responsible for the governement of your own and your children's lives?

Tough questions right.

But there's more. What's the difference between these people who leap to vacuous and irrational assumption running your lives and someone with a far more socially respected and prevelant yet equally irrational assumption running your life? What's the difference between these idiots that leap to a belief in satanic magic before thinking of the possibility of disabled people and the respected idiot that has leapt to an equally ridiculous belief in sky faeries and theirr associated commands of dubious morality based not even on the evidence they have seen in front of their eyes?

It may be socially respectable to have faith, but having faith certainly does influence one's thinking and as such can you really believe that it is reasonable to value the judegement of someone that leaps to belief based on nothing equally to the judgement of someone that thinks using reason and evidence alone?

I think not. And before you leap in and say "but faith is not so stupid" let's remember the madness that is Islam and why not look below to see where Christianity is up to.

Remind you of Palestinian kids on Palestinian TV talking about how they will be so happy to become martyrs?

Pure, unabated, unreasoned, dangerous, baseless, madness.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Know your enemy

This is an interesting read over at The American Thinker. It stops short of saying what to do next but provides an accurate and succint assessment of the real problem with Islam and why all non-Muslims need to wake up to and smell the coffee.

The author is not wrong. We are very likely to be facing millions of non-Muslim deaths at the hands of the Islamists in the very near future.

You should read it.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

UK: Killing 6 year old girls for honour.

The winner of todays Sickest Fuck Award for Unimaginably Brutal Stupidity has been won by Birmingham dentist Hussain Ahmed, age 26. Mr Ahmed burned, 6 year old Alisha Begum to death in her house because he didn't like that her 21 year old brother was seeing his 15 year old sister. A local Imam has said "We do not agree with this killing because we do not understand the reasons behind it. Islam explicitly permits realtionships between adult men and legal minors."

I know, I shouldn't joke about this because it's aboslutely tragic. But sometimes you've got to change your style to show people that not only do you think that they are sick fucks but also that their actions are soooooooOOOooOOOoo unbelievably stupid that they also qualify as clowns.

And now you're a child murderer as well Mr. Ahmed. So I'm starting a compition in your honour right below.

Competition: Will you be the first to pop Hussain Ahmed's cherry?

What’s the challenge?
Only one lucky man will be the first to arse-rape Hussain Ahmed when he hits the cells. Will you be lucky enough to share a prison? Will he drop the soap when you meet in the showers? We want to know.

That’s right, the race is on to pump that arsehole full of hot infidel man cream. Ahmed might have only just entered Britain's penal system, but how long will it be before a British penal system enters Ahmed?

The race is on to make Ahmed your bitch!

It could be you!!!

Competition rules:
Competition open to all convicts currently serving time in British Prison.
Extra marks may be given to gang fun entrants.

An exclusive chance that some people will actually respect you for what would otherwise be your shameful prison secret.

For those of you that find it possible to still give a shit about reality the full story is here. :(

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Why am I so rude about Islam?

I thought I'd explain why I'm being so offensive about Islam. Here are my reasons:

1) I've read the Qur'an and many of the ahadith.

And what I see is a viciously oppressive ideology that stifles progress and individual freedoms. It enables those that would abuse power to abuse absolutely and those that follow to follow without a shred of thought. The result is the horrific trampling of individual rights and liberties. The result is unthinking brutality.

Now, the two main arguments people make against my understanding of Islamare these. First, because I have read a translation I have not read the Qur'an. I think that's bullshit. I've read quite a lot of books in multiple languages. I would absolutely agree that whilst the poetry of Shakespeare does not translate completely between English and Spanish that the meaning does. Similarly whilst some of the poetry of the Qur'an may not translate I'm damn sure that the meaning does. Arabic is not some secret code of hidden meanings absent from all other human thought. Perhaps the poetry of it makes it sound more beautiful and thus more effective as a brainwashing tool upon Arabic speakers, but the meaning of it shines through in English and those parts which come from later in Muhammad’s life are barbaric. I've shared a number of conversations with some friends of mine who have Arabic as their first language and they tend to agree that my understanding is pretty good. The meaning is not lost in translation.

The second argument apologists use to attempt to undermine criticism is that I am not an Islamic scholar. This argument is also pure bullshit and to suggest it isn't is actually blasphemy on their part because the Qur'an describes itself as a clear and complete book. By its own definition it needs no explanation and no scholars. To say otherwise is to speak against the Qur'an.

So having familiarised myself with Islamic ideology I can say that I am being offensive to it because I am offended by it. It's primitive, barbaric, stupid and unpleasant and the world would be a better place if people were better people by not drowning out the clarity of their own thoughts with this vile nonsense.

2) Muslims need to face criticism and insult to their faith.

In the not so distant past saying something against the Church or Jesus could quite easily get you killed. Just saying "I don't believe" was enough to face torture and execution. Christians like to pretend that this was a dark error in the past but the fact is that all of the nastiness of Christian history wasn't an accident; it was actually based on the Bible itself and excerpts such as this:

New Testament, Luke 19:27, Jesus says "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

Freedom to insult a religion goes hand in hand with freedom of religion and freedom to disagree and question. You can't just draw a line and say "You can't insult religion" because there is no line that determines when disagreeing with the scripture is insult or valid questioning of existing interpretation. If you remove the right to insult by trying to draw that line the line will tend to gravitate closer and closer to the line of the scripture. That means bloodshed and oppression, even in Christianity, because fundamentalist views come from far more barberous times than ours. If Islam is going to learn to modernise then it needs to be insulted and the faithful need to learn that they can't draw lines any more. This is a key principle of human freedom.

3) Why shouldn't I insult those that kill based on nothing at all?

As far as I'm concerned anybody that believes that a bunch of ignorant peasants from many centuries ago have provided the ultimate truth of life, the universe and everything is certainly lacking critical facilities in their thinking. This ancient wisdom comes from people that didn't even know why there was night and day. They thought illnesses were caused by demonic possessions and that teh sun was dragged across the sky. There is something very wrong with modern people that believe these ignorant ancients knew the ultimate truth. They are simply mad.

Maybe they are not mad in many other aspects of their life. Maybe they are quite capable in a number of skills, have average or high IQ's and could whip my arse in a number of intellectual challenges, but there is certainly something very wrong with their thinking if they accept faith as a justification to ignore fact. If they are prepared to elevate that faith as a reason to commit violence or oppress people then they are not just stupid they are criminally insane. And they are dangerous.

To bow down to their oppression is unacceptable to me. Years ago, when I was at school we had some bullies and it was always my policy to never submit. I got punched quite a few times for that policy, but in the end that policy worked for me. The bullies learned that I'd never submit to them so they would have to fight and that even if they hit me then they were absolutely certainly going to get hit back, evenif I had to go and find them to return the punch the next day. Violence or the threat of violence will never equate to justification to change my thinking. My thinking is based on fact and understanding, not threats.

So when a bunch of hot blooded jihadis start foaming at the mouth, killing and threatening to kill if we don't respect their madness and submit to it, my answer is clear, concise and immediate - fuck you! Bring it on. Even with the knife to my throat I will not respect them or their beliefs. And the stronger they get with their threats the stronger my resolve will be to stand against them.

4) Islamists have no sense of perspective.

With them it's "our way or we'll cover the highway with your blood by cutting off your head". They are not reasonable. Their beliefs prevent reason. A good example of this is the Hamas covenant which states that dialogue cannot be accepted as a means to reach its objectives and that only violent Jihad is acceptable.

So if constructive dialogue is useless and the inevitability even of trying to make peace with them is war then I don't see any reason to pretend to respect them - I don't. I don't respect their beliefs, I don't respect their methods and I don't respect their goals.

5) Islamists are deeply offensive

Deadly so, in fact.

But what about offending the moderate Muslims?

Tough shit I'm afraid. That's what freedom means - people that don't share your beliefs don’t have to respect them so long as they obey the rest of the laws that govern their interactions with you.

In Conclusion:

Fuck Islam.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

UK: The Pope must die according to Muslim

The Daily Mail has this:

"A notorious Muslim extremist told a demonstration in London yesterday that the Pope should face execution.

Anjem Choudary said those who insulted Islam would be "subject to capital punishment".

His remarks came during a protest outside Westminster Cathedral on a day that worldwide anger among Muslim hardliners towards Pope Benedict XVI appeared to deepen."

Hmmmmmm, those that insult Islam should be killed hey? So just for saying that Islam is a vicious fairy tale that some people are still stupid enough to believe even though the whole lot is based on the rantings of a kiddie-fucking, derranged, illiterate, lying, terrorist, ignorant, psychopathic war monger from the anus of history someone should be killed? Hardly seems fair to kill people just for saying the truth.

Or perhaps the police should just arrest this freak of ignorance for inciting violence, since the UK does have laws against that sort of thing. They shouldn't find it too hard to prosecute this freak, especially since he was carrying a placard saying "Behead those who insult Islam" around London's streets back in February over the cartoon jihad.

Mr. Choudary, you'll have to kill us all before you will finish off our commitment to freedom of speech. When the time comes, many of us are prepared to die and prepared to kill to ensure that you don't get your way. Europe may currently be struggling to wake up from the haze of unconstrained and suicidal multiculturalism but the vast majority of us will be prepared to die or kill to defend our right to life and liberty when the time comes.

Michelle Malkin has this and more about the behaviour of the religion of peace in London.

"Holy Mass on a Sunday is the very source and summit of the Catholic week, so my family decided this Sunday to make the trip to Westminster Cathedral together. As we came out about 100 Islamists were chanting slogans such as "Pope Benedict go to Hell" "Pope Benedict you will pay, the Muja Hadeen are coming your way" "Pope Benedict watch your back" and other hateful things. I'll post more pictures of it when I get more free time. It was a pretty nasty demonstration.", writes London blogger, Joee.

Someone from London, please make an official complaint and force the police to arrest these scum. These scum are attacking your right to speak freely, your right to think freely and your right to live freely. They will not stop unless we stand up to them. If I lived in the UK I would make an official complaint to the police and force the police to take action. Please do so if you can. Send the message to these scum that we will fight them. It is because we do nothing that they get braver and braver every day and this will result in easier recruitment for them and eventually more death and suffering.

Behead those who insult Islam? Fuck Islam and fuck those who threaten freedom!

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Monday, September 18, 2006

BBC Bias

In reporting about Islam foaming at the mouth over the Pope's comments it's interesting to note that in the two top stories the BBC carry they use the same readers comment along side the stories. The readers comment they use is this:

"Pope Benedict probably should self-criticise Christianity's violent past before commenting on the other faith"
John Lin, Illinois

And the stories they use this comment along side are these:

So what's wrong with this? Well, take a look at the "Have your say" thread that this comment is taken from and look at "Readers Recommended". I'm up to the end of page six of the comments sorted by those most recommended by the readers and the above does not appear yet. Not only that but absolutely every single comment so far, and there's 15 per page, including comments from Muslims clearly say that the Muslims are out of order with their outrage and lack of respect for others freedom of speech.

So why do the BBC ignore the vast majority of their readers opinions when selecting their readers comments to show along side their stories? It couldn't be that they are trying to missrepresent the truth by any chance?

This is far from the first time I have seen this. The BBC consistently use reader comments that match their biased spin and ignore the readers comments that do not gel with their bias, despite the fact that these comments are consistently voted the most recommended by the BBC websites readership.

Keep that in mind whenever you read, hear or watch anything that comes out of the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. They tax the British people to deliver lies to the world. They are consistently biased, fail to report the facts, often report lies and just incase you didn't know they hired the ex-head of al-Jazeera to train their reporters. Do not trust these criminals.

Check here and here for more details.

And in case you are wondering, whilst the BBC ask has the Pope offended Muslims the photograph (top right) is what they fail to report. That's a band of Muslims standing outside Westminster Cathedral carrying signs about sending the Pope to hell, calling Catholicism evil, accusing Bush, Blair and the Pope of being in some sort of unholy conspiracy and just generally offending the shit out of Catholics.

In response not one catholic has burnt an effigy, burnt a mosque, shot any old ladies in the back or painted up any banners calling Muhammad the psycho child molesting terrorist thief and murderer he was.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Sunday, September 17, 2006

Fuck Islam

I’m not a catholic or any flavour of theist and so I have absolutely no interest in defending the Pope. As far as I’m concerned he’s one of the kings of the idiots and every single time I see him on TV waving or smiling I think how cute it is for the world to swoon over grandpa there whilst utterly ignoring the two million AIDS deaths in Africa each year which grandpa’s policy choices contribute to. But when I read the news today about the world going mad yet again because Islam has been offended then I find myself thinking how great it would be if someone with such a huge press following as Der Papst were to tell it how it is.

Unfortunately, he only went half way and now he’s backing down again like a scared dog with his tail between his legs. But what are the Muslims up to? Hmmm, let’s see.

Well, in Somalia the Muslims have bravely voiced their outrage by shooting a 70 year old Italian Nun three times in the back in a Children’s hospital. So it’s a huge offence to the Muslims to draw a cartoon or quote some long dead man, but it’s supposed to be no offence to the West to kill old women in front of the children they were saving – Muslim children!

In Palestine, 5 Churches have been destroyed. Effigies are being burnt, Muslims are screaming for blood, Imams are making calls to kill those that insult the Prophet (even though in this case the one that actually insulted their paedophile prophet has been dead for centuries) but all of this is fine. There’s no offence to the West in this?

In Saudi school books still describe Jews and Christians as apes and pigs. In Iran, their wonderful President is screaming out the same as he always has done. Muslim clerics the world over are teaching their faithful to hate and inciting them to violence and yet absolutely none of this is considered an offence. We’re supposed to think the best of them whilst they bomb us, execute teenage girls, execute rape victims, kill apostates, oppress women and behave with absolute hatred and disdain for anybody and everybody that doesn’t share their vicious and spiteful view of the world.

Well, fuck Islam.

You bastards have absolutely no control. You are savages not because of your race but because of your ideology in which you see fit to answer the slightest comment with violence and the sword. You are simply not fit to live on a civilized planet and I don’t see why we should continue to tolerate your barbarity disrupting our ability to live and progress in peace.

So fuck Islam. Fuck your prophet. Fuck your Imams; Fuck your Qur’an, which is a filthy rant of evil and oppression. Fuck you personally. Yes, fuck each and every Muslim that uses their faith as an excuse to be wickedly intolerant, incapable of allowing others freedom, murderous, oppressive and basically vacant of intellectual or moral resource.

We may offend you sometimes, which doesn’t seem to be hard to do, but you are an offence. Your vicious ideology is an offence. Your murderous violent ways are an offence. Your inability to enter dialogue, your incapacity to show any of the respect you demand and your absolute hatred of all things un-Islamic is an offence. And so I have only this to say.

Fuck Islam and fuck you.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Saturday, September 16, 2006

Powa Kuri

I’ve decided to share a recipe which is a modification of the base for Thai Green Curry.


½ Cup Fresh Coriander *
3 Table spoons oil (vegetable is best) *
2 Tablespoons soy sauce. *
½ Lime *
1 Onion *
A large lump of fresh ginger *
5 Tablespoons fresh cumin *
15 to 20 Fresh Black pepper corns *
12+ Fresh Red Chiles (to taste) *
A handful of pine nuts. *
4 Table spoons curry powder. *

1 Can of Coconut milk.
1 cup of lentils.

Chopped lamb (as much as you want)
Some mushrooms, cauliflower, red pepper and aubergine all cut into large chunks.

How to make it:

First make the curry paste. Put everything above marked with an * into a blender. Blend it until it is a smooth paste. Then you can make the curry.

Take a big pot, put some oil in the bottom and get it fairly hot. Throw in all of the paste and cook on a fairly high heat for a couple of minutes. It should change colour and darken a little bit.

Chuck in the lamb and the veg and stir it all up so that everything is covered in the paste. Let it all cook for a few minutes. Turn down the heat a little then chuck in the coconut milk and stir. Chuck in the lentils and add 1 or 2 cups of water. Bring it to a simmer, cover it and cook for 30 minutes stirring regularly to prevent the lentils from sticking to the bottom and burning. Remove the top and cook gently for another 30 minutes to let sauce reduce and the flavour build.

Stick some rice on a plate, Chuck Powa Kuri on it. Coarsely chop some fresh corriander and sprinkle it on top.

Eat. Mmmmmmmmmmm, yummy :P

Caution, if you are not accustomed to spicey food please be aware that it doesn't just burn on the way in - do not be alarmed. You are safe.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Friday, September 15, 2006

UK: Muslim lies distort honour killing truth.

I stumbled upon this report focusing on discussion of honour killings in the UK. The report expands upon the news I previously posted about 1 in 10 Asians in the UK supporting honour killings. Within the report are some comments from Muslim community leaders which are highly inaccurate and deserve to be highlighted.

First, let’s look at statements from Khadim Hussain, the president of the Bradford Council of Mosques.

"Mr Hussain said he did not believe most Muslims in Bradford would condone honour killings."

And neither do the survey results. The survey results said 1 in 10 not "most". Statements like this are misleading as they do not answer the point raised and are intended to suggest that the actual point made was in some way discriminatory. No body said "most". No body was labelling most Muslims. But instead of objecting to the "1 in 10" suvery results he shifts the focus to "most" hiding the actual assertion being made within a far broader statement that looks more like a prejudice.

And he said forced marriages were against Islam.

"Forced marriages are not acceptable, and arranged marriages are the most successful marriages in the Asian community," he said.

Well, perhaps Mr. Hussain is not familiar with the ahadith, the sayings of Muhammad, in which you will find such gems as this:

Bukhari:V9B86N98 "The Prophet said, ‘A virgin should not be married till she is asked for her consent.’ ‘O Apostle! How will the virgin express her consent?’ He said, ‘By remaining silent.’"

Perhaps he’s also unaware that the age of consent under Shariah law is 9 years old thanks to the fact that Muhammad consummated his marriage with Aisha , his child bride, when she was just 9 years old (he was 53).

Tabari VII:7 "The Prophet married Aisha in Mecca three years before the Hijrah, after the death of Khadija. At the time she was six."

Tabari IX:131 "My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old."

So, in Islam forced marriages are unacceptable but that definition of "forced" excludes children who keep silent when they are told to – all following the fine example of their illustrious paedophile prophet.

Now onto Bary Malik, president of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association in Bradford.

"I'm shocked because those youngsters were born in Britain and live in this civilised society but still hold these backward views," he said.

Yes, that’s truly shocking. We thought they were all progressive, well integrated, law abiding citizens like the British born and well educated 7/7 bombers for instance. But lets’ not forget that 25% of UK Muslims thought the 7/7 bombings were justified. So bombing people isn’t a backward practice, but we are expected to believe that these self appointed community leaders are really telling the truth when it comes to other Muslim crimes?

"I think it's not acceptable in any society, and those who do it cannot use the name of religion because no religion would allow a person to take the life of another."

Of course, no religion would allow a person to take the life of another. Unless of course that religion was Islam, Christianity, Judaism or pretty much any of the other which don’t just allow killing but command it. You don’t believe me? OK, here goes…

Qur’an 9.5: "When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, beleaguer them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."

New Testament, Luke 19:27, Jesus says "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." – So much for the other cheek!

Old Testament, Numbers 31:17 -18, Moses orders murder of babies and sexually active women and gives the virgin girls as sex slaves to reward his troops, "17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

But of course Mr. Malik, "no religion would allow a person to take the life of another". Where would anybody ever get such an idea?

Now on to our next outright liar or misinformed fool, Councillor Naveeda.

"Councilor Naveeda Iqram (Lab, Little Horton) said the figures were not representative of the views of many Muslims in Bradford. She said in Pakistan the law was very strict with regard to honour killings."

Yes, Pakistan, the bastion of moral decency in the Muslim world. That must be why Pakistan has just put of rape reform plans again due to complaints from Islamic parties leaving them with their existing laws in which rape cannot be tried in a civil court, only under Islamic law. The particular law, the Hudud Ordinance, criminalises all sex outside of marriage and requires a raped woman to provide four male witnesses of the rape or she will herself be prosecuted and punished for sexual crimes whilst her attackers go free. But that’s rape, not honour killings so let’s see how strict the law in Pakistan is when it comes to honour killings. No so great it turns out, and even in violation of a UN treaty they signed.

From Amnesty International’s report on Honour Killings of girls and women in Pakistan.
Government indifference to honour killings
The Government of Pakistan has not shown any determination to bring violence against women on grounds of honour to a halt, thus virtually signalling official indifference if not approval of the system.

Government inaction received more public exposure after the honour killing of Samia Sarwar in Hina Jilani's office in April 1999. A representative of the government condemned the killing before the UN Human Right Commission in Geneva. But in Pakistan, where attitudes need to be changed, the government three weeks after the killing declared it a 'dishonourable' act without ensuring that adequate action would be taken. The accused have not been arrested and no action has been taken against those who issued death threats against Asma Jahangir and Hina Jilani for protecting women's rights.

The government's disregard for its obligations to take measures to alter public perceptions involving gender bias, to which it committed itself when ratifying the UN Convention on the Elimination on All Forms of Discrimination against Women, is partly responsible for the persistence and indeed increase of honour killings. When the 1998 annual report of the HRCP was released in March 1999, Information Minister Mushahid Hussain reportedly said about allegations of violence against women and of child labour: "These are a feature of Pakistan feudal society, they are not part of any government policy or a consequence of any law..."

You’re not full of shit by any chance are you Councillor Iqram?

Well, if you are then you are in good company. Not only do you have all those I’ve already listed but you can also count on Councillor Shamim Aktar.

"The research is representative of a very small percentage of the Muslim population. I'm not aware of any honour killings in Keighley, furthermore they have no religious basis. The Quran teaches individuals to be tolerant and understanding, and the majority of Muslims would not condone that kind of thing."

Which Qur’an is this? Oh, my mistake. Actually the Qur’an does teach individuals to be tolerant and understanding. The only problem is that it only teaches this when the people you have to be tolerant and understanding of are also strict Muslims. For everyone else it’s a different story:

Qur’an 3:28: "Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.

Qur’an 5:51: "O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

Qur’an 8:12: "Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

Qur’an 9:29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Yep, that sounds pretty tolerant and understanding, but what about tolerance and understanding for women?

Qur’an 4:34: "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."

The 12th century renowned Islamic philosopher Averroes had this to say on the subject and nothing has changed:

"There is a general consensus among the jurists that in financial transactions a case stands proven by the testimony of a just man and two women on the basis of the verse: ‘If two men cannot be found then one man and two women from among those whom you deem appropriate as witnesses’. However; in cases of Hudud, there is a difference of opinion among our jurists. The majority say that in these affairs the testimony of women is in no way acceptable whether they testify alongside a male witness or do so alone. The Zahiris on the contrary maintain that if they are more than one and are accompanied by a male witness, then owing to the apparent meaning of the verse their testimony will be acceptable in all affairs. Imam Abu Hanifah is of the opinion that except in cases of Hudud and in financial transactions their testimony is acceptable in bodily affairs like divorce, marriage, slave-emancipation and raju‘ [restitution of conjugal rights]. Imam Malik is of the view that their testimony is not acceptable in bodily affairs. There is however a difference of opinion among the companions of Imam Malik regarding bodily affairs which relate to wealth, like advocacy and will-testaments, which do not specifically relate to wealth. Consequently, Ash-hab and Ibn Majishun accept two male witnesses only in these affairs, while to Malik Ibn Qasim and Ibn Wahab two female and a male witness are acceptable. As far as the matter of women as sole witnesses is concerned, the majority accept it only in bodily affairs, about which men can have no information in ordinary circumstances like the physical handicaps of women and the crying of a baby at birth."

So a woman’s testimony is either worthless or worth half that of a mans testimony. And of course we have the centuries old traditional law of Diyat, which Muhammad told Muslims to obey , which prescribes that a woman’s life is worth half that of a mans.

I hope that I have managed to shed a little light on the misinformation that Muslims use to hide their crimes and misrepresent their religion. The Qur’an actually promotes lying to non-Muslims as a strategy for defeating them. All too often, Muslim community leaders make claims that have absolutely no relationship to Islam because they know that most people don’t have a clue that they are lying and that the cowardly and biased mainstream media wouldn’t dare to question their statements.

Don’t be fooled by this nonsense. Learn the truth. Honour killings will continue and the Muslim community by themselves will do absolutely nothing to prevent these tragic crimes. Their only objective is to hide the truth of Islamic brutality, not change it.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Honour killings on the rise

"My husband treated me like an animal, not as a human, with daily beatings and torture and locking me indoors. I know he is pursuing me to kill me because he thinks I have disgraced him but God knows it is he who was guilty."

These are the words of Bebi, a 15 year old girl now on the run in Afghanistan trying to avoid the brutal old man she was engaged to at just six months old and later forced to marry. The UN Report that features Bebi's story goes on to describe the sorry state of human rights in Afghanistan as a culture in which honour killings are seen as acceptable - even by the police.

"The increase in such crimes against women has also been explained by the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan’s southern provinces. The killing, maiming and beating of women were practically institutionalised during their ultra-conservative rule from 1996 until late 2001."

The Taliban, who implemented the sort of strict Shariah law that more than 40% of UK Muslims want implemented in Britain, represent Islam by the book. The result is the wide spread abuse, beating, rape and murder of women whilst the perpetrators of these crimes get off absolutely free and even with the support and approval of their communities.

Where are the women's rights group?

Where are the feminists?

Why are they so silent on such wide spread horrors?

Why does political correctness prevent them from attacking this brutal practice from a brutal religion?

For that matter, why are we still listening to the whinging Muslims from terrorist linked lobby groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR, complaining to us about how we don't show enough respect? Why should we show any respect? They show absolutely none to their women or to individual freedoms. Why should we respect people that support killing apostates and murdering children because they were raped?

Why should we be tolerant of those that are totally intolerant of our democratic values and the freedoms?

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Monday, September 11, 2006

In memory of Charles Frank Burlingame III

I’ve never written a tribute before. I don’t recall reading many either. So when I came to write this, a tribute to Charles Burlingame III who died on September 11 2001, amongst the things I found myself worrying about was whether or not there’s a particular format I should use. I’ve still not cleared that worry, but there are more piled up on top. In writing a tribute for a man I never knew and never will I find myself struggling with a deep sense of responsibility to do a good job. If it was a tribute for one of my family at least they would know me well enough to expect and forgive my mistakes, but in writing for a stranger – really writing with the family of that stranger in mind – the necessity to be as close as possible to perfection is so strong. Perhaps it is linked to the strength of the desire to let his family know that I care. Perhaps it is the link to the strength with which I feel we should all care. Perhaps it’s just because I do care – about Charles, about his wife and his daughter, his grandson, and all who knew and needed him in their lives. Whatever the reason, the truth is that I cannot write anything that can possibly convey the true meaning of a life that was taken. All I can do is write a few lines to prove that we still care for a stranger and those he left behind.

So this is a tribute to the life of Charles Frank Burlingame III and those lives that with his were intertwined.

Charles Frank "Chic" Burlingame III

Legend has it that Charles was mad about aviation from an early age. At just six years old he created his first plane out of some wood he found in an alleyway behind his home in England. His dreams were to be realised.

Chic attended the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis. He learned to fly F-4 Phantoms and experienced the thrill of taking off and landing from an aircraft carrier.

Through determination and joy he realised his dreams, serving 25 years of active and reserve service as a U.S. Navy jet fighter pilot. Even after the Navy, less than a year before that tragic day, Chic continued as a pilot for American Airlines. As pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, which was crashed into the Pentagon, he is known to many for the day he died at just 51 years of age. For those that knew him he is known not for one day but for thousands and the place he filled within those lives on every single one – A loved son, husband, father, grandfather, brother, uncle and friend.

Let us never forget that on September 11th 2001 it was not just a list of names that died. It was real people with real families. Remembering these people as individuals is how we must pay tribute. Remember who they were to those that partook in their unique experience of life. Chic was a much loved father who inspired the strength to take up the fight after he had fallen. He was not just a name but a very real and necessary set of heart felt connections in the lives of many. He was a child who grew to realise his dreams. He was alive. He was needed.

Now, he is missed.

On this day it is an honour for me to be entrusted to say a few words for a man I never knew. I reach out to those Chic left behind and I want you to know that I can never know what was taken from you on that day but that I feel very deeply for your loss. All I know is that for you he was someone irreplaceable. I know that, for you, Chic was so much more than a name and a photograph and a history. For you he was and will always remain a vital part of your lives.

I want you to know that I and many millions across the world today are thinking of you and a life that was cut short. My thoughts are with you. My hope is that as time goes by you can remember the joy of Chic within your lives. We will remember your loss.

We will never forget.

Chic's tribute on the Arlington cemetary web site can be read here

This tribute is just one of many organised as a tribute to the victims of 9/11. The 2,996 Project, which features links to a tribute for each and every victim of that awful day, can be found here. Please take some time in your day to visit and read. Remember those that were taken and the families and friends they left behind. Let them know that they are still in our hearts and minds. Let them know that we will not forget.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

A request to bloggers.

A while back I posted about google bombing Intelligent Design. Basically, what this entails is linking the term Intelligent Design to a page about Intelligent Design that you think should appear high in the natural search results returned by Google when someone searches for "Intelligent Design". If enough people do this the result is that the page you choose gets a hell of a lot more visitors and pages that support Intelligent Design get less.

All good news, right :)

At the time of my last article I suggested that we cooperate to expand the practice to other search terms such as Islam. No body commented on this and so I assumed that no one would take me up on the offer to organise. So I dropped the idea. But I have decided to adopt it again but this time in a much more natural way. I think this will be more readily adopted and have far greater power.

Instead of us organising and writing specifc posts intended to g-bomb certain words and phrases I'm instead suggesting that what you do is the following:

For each phrase that you use regularly on your blog, such as Islam or Intelligent Design, find a page somewhere out there on the web that you think that term should link to. Then every single time you use that term instead of typing just the word, copy and paste the link. The result will be that just as part of your natural blogging you will be adding a great amount of keyword rich and unique content for google to index and that every single time you use the term you will be contributing to the effecitveness of your campaign.

Other bloggers may also decide to use the same words and links as you. The result will be a natural and ever increasing effectiveness in promoting the content about any specific word or phrase that you think needs to be promoted.

So any bloggers reading this, I'm asking you for one favour. Please suggest the same in a post on your blogs and take up the habbit yourself. It's a very simple practice and before long you will build up a library of words with links that you can copy and paste as appropriate in your writing and it won't even slow you down.

Thanks for taking up the idea if you do.


Update 2006-09-07 11:20 (and 2006-09-07 17:31)

This time there has been some response and some suggestions of viable links to use, so I'm going to create a list and maybe we can reach a concensus to make this more effective and help it to spread. Here's what has been suggested so far.

Islam: - a very good site documenting the retarded evil we call Islam.

Intelligent Design: - New and very good (hat tip Roya). - this one is an interesting idea from BEAJ. It is a page about birth defects and does not mention intelligent design, so it it either shows any proposed intelligent designer to be an unintelligent designer or an asshole.

Thanks to BEAJ and Roya for suggestions.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

A short rant about Intelligent Design

I was reading a site containing a letter about Intelligent Design that started as follows:

"I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design."

In fairness, this letter is actually a spoof, but the first paragraph here is something I have read again and again in serious communications and it really pisses me off, but perhaps it shouldn't. That's because in this one paragraph is yet another wonderful reason why Intelligent Design should not be taught in science class. The key is this phrase:

"I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them."

Well, I don't agree and neither does the scientific method. Students don't get to choose the theory of thermodynamics that makes the most sense for them. They don't get to choose the theory of gravity that makes the most sense for them. Instead they must learn the theory that actually fits observable reality - the theory that actually fits the evidence.

When students take their physics or chemistry exams they don't get to opt out of Boyles law and instead opt for some theory that makes more sense to them. The idea of option based on preference in science is astoundingly absurd and ridiculously stupid. The job of making a theory make sense to a student is why we have teachers and education in the first place.

I would argue that teaching Intelligent Design in science does not just undermine science education, it undermines education as a whole. The idiots championing Intelligent Design, and yes I do mean idiots, are a corrupting force against all of education by championing the idea that unsupported personal preference, read evidence free bias, is comparable and even more worthy than evidence and demonstrable fact. These dangerous loons need to go back to school themselves and get an education.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.

Monday, September 04, 2006

UK: 1 in 10 "Asians" Support Honour Killings.

The BBC has published some results of a survey into the practice of honour killings in the UK. Let’s face it; we can’t expect any reliable information from the BBC since they are a bunch of biased liars so if they say 1 in 10 you can expect the real figure to be higher. But it is interesting none the less.

For those that are new to the concept of honour killing, it is the practice of murdering, usually a family member and usually a woman, for insulting the honour of the family. The insult may be the way she dresses, the person she falls in love with, the career she chooses, being disrespectful, avoiding her religion or any number of other “crimes” that the rest of us consider to be basic human freedoms.

Honour killings are not rare, even in the western world. Many are covered up as suicides and the police themselves, who cite 12 per year in the UK, have at times also suggested that the real figure may be much higher. It is no coincidence that the suicide rate amongst Asian women is almost three times that of the general population.

There were 5,906 adult deaths recorded as suicide in the UK in 2004. Working using the statistics for female deaths, the previously stated fact that suicide is three times as common in Asian females and that the UK population of Muslims is about 1.59 million, that means that we can estimate 286 "suicides" within that demographic when only 95 would be expected if inline with the national average.

It’s nice to see the BBC actually take an interest in the subject but a shame that they don’t publish it more prominently. It would also be nice to see some differentiation amongst the various Asian communities, but this is just the BBC’s standard ploy. The BBC has a strong tendency to avoid using the word Muslim with any negative connection. This has angered other Asians within the UK as they are understandably tired of Muslim terrorists being repeatedly called Asian terrorists since otherwise peaceful communities are being tarred with the same brush. Having lived in India I will not pretend that honour crimes are a uniquely Muslim affair because they are not. But having also lived in the UK I am aware that the Hindu and Sikh communities are really much more integrated so I’d like to see what percentage of each faith approve of honour killings. I’ll give you a clue. Every UK honour killing that I am aware of since 1999 was a Muslim crime. That doesn’t mean that all were and I don’t have the figures. But that, the BBC’s well known bias, and the fact that the BBC didn’t care to add more detail could be indicative.

Round up of recent high profile UK honour killings:

Samira Nazir (Pictured above, right.)
Was stabbed 18 times and had her throat cut by her brother and cousin in Southall, London because her boyfriend was from the wrong caste.

Sahjda Bibi
Stabbed to death by her cousin on her wedding day because she was marrying a divorced man.

Name unknown
A girl from West Yorkshire was taken abroad by her father and killed after a love song was dedicated to her on a radio station.

Name unknown
A girl from Newham, East London was killed by family after they accused her of bringing dishonour on the family by being raped!

Honour killing is a massive crime globally. I will probably write a more in-depth article on this sick practice very soon.

If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.