Monthly Archives: April 2012

In February, 2012, CAIR produced a 38-page legislative lobbying kit to help Muslims lobby against “American Laws for American Courts” legislation that is being considered in 22 states. It can be downloaded from the Internet at:

300pxs (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
CAIR’s recommended tactics and talking points reflect an effort to obscure the true nature of Sharia Law and, instead, to smear the proposed legislation as a violation of their religious freedom and a racist or bigoted attack on Muslims.

The Arab word “nakba” means catastrophe. Because the Palestinians live in an endless self-inflicted catastrophe, they have now been ordered to make “nakba” their word for Israel’s Declaration of Independence.

But Jews living in their land is not a disaster for Arabs. On the contrary, it could be a bonanza if Muslims could ever tolerate Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Bahá’ís, atheists, or each other. Muslim tolerance is on display today in Syria, where Sunnis and Shi’ites are killing each other. No Arab regime in history has been peaceful for long, because Islam means holy war !!!

Qaradawi calls for holy war to destroy Israel,
April 2012

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an influential preacher whose sermons are seen by tens of millions of people, has once again called on Muslims and Arabs to rise up to destroy Israel.

In his sermon last Friday, Qaradawi called on all Arabs and Muslims to be “mujahideen” and urged them not to accept “humiliation and disgrace.”

He also said that Muslims would be victorious and the Israelis should return to the “land where they come from. “By adding that Muslims are on the lookout for that day arrives.

He further stated that Jews support Israel and the need for Muslims to support the destruction of Israel.

Qaradawi, Muslim brother is often portrayed as “moderate” by Western media.

Espace détente, poésie, judaïsme et lutte contre la désinformation


Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi,  prédicateur influent  dont les sermons sont vus par des dizaines de millions de personnes, a une fois de plus  appelé  les musulmans et les Arabes à se soulever pour détruire Israël.

Dans son sermon de vendredi dernier, Qaradawi a appelé tous les Arabes et les musulmans pour qu’ils soient  des « moudjahidin » et les a exhorté à ne pas accepter « l’humiliation et le déshonneur ».

Il a également ajouté que les musulmans seraient victorieux et les Israéliens retourneraient sur les  » terres d’où ils viennent. » En  ajoutant que les musulmans sont à l’affût pour que ce jour arrive.

Il a en outre déclaré que les Juifs soutiennent Israël et qu’il  est nécessaire pour les musulmans de soutenir  la destruction d’Israël.

Qaradawi, frère musulman est souvent dépeint comme  »modéré » par les médias occidentaux.

Adapté par Aschkel – elderofziyon

je rajouterai ce petit commentaire

Depuis 1948 jusqu’à aujourd’hui, les Etats arabes ont été en état de guerre avec Israël.

On voit aujourd’hui la situation des pays arabo-musulmans  et celle du seul pays démocratique du Moyen-Orient.

Il y a eu quatre grandes guerres (1948-56-67-73) et de nombreux autres…

View original post 169 more words

“Martin Luther” of Islam …

Talk about tomorrow like it is yesterday
Talk about yesterday like it is tommorow
Some call him the “Martin Luther” of Islam. Last year, “British Prospect” and the U.S.’s ” Foreign Policy” magazines ranked him number 8 out of the world’s top 100 contemporary intellectuals; Time Magazine went as far to say that he is one of the top 100 innovators of the 21st Century.

Tariq Ramadan is an advisor to the UN on Islam and secular issues,

and currently serves as a professor of Islamic Studies at Oxford University in England.

He is also the author of books such as “Western Muslims, and the Future of Islam”, “To Be a European Muslim “,

and “Jihad, Violence, War and Peace in Islam”, and “Radical Reform: Islamic Ethics and Liberation”;

he’s contributes to the UK’s Guardian newspaper, as well.

Ramadan speaks of his varied background – his great-uncle is a reformer of Islam, and his grandfather, a slain founder of the Muslim Brotherhood.

He shares his own thoughts on Egypt and why it’s not a democracy, but why creating sustainable “democracies” is the ultimate solution for the Muslim World.

Ramadan asks citizens of the Middle East to stop pleading victimhood, and start demanding free and fair elections.

He declares that Turkey is “a European country”, though he’s not optimistic that Turkey will accede to the EU in the next 10 years.






Back to Egypt…

Back to Egypt

Making bla bla, for who want really read then read. Just wake up watching Star Wars or was it Stars War ??…


In a City of Light many years ago born a child, with around him, all things to make him the true carrier of his ancestors.

Protected and Educated to All is to Know on earth and some of the above.

Wearing the light as it were is own.

A brother before him, study complexity of the words to guide him in his path. To refer as like a scribe to his lecturer..

The servants went to bring the news to the world, preparing his ascension to the place made for him.

Soon is the time when his day come to speak of peace.
Among Nations
Soon the Recognition..
Among Nations!

So many even among the less blinded by this light think they have time and no they don’t..

Not 2038, not 2083 ! That is just to go back to sleep !

The road of Damascus will open, and be open by man created light..

Many will follow that light for peace sake

For the Nations to peacefully open their Arms

And they will..

Back to Egypt ?


H/T : Theonlywhoknowsistheonewhocrossedthewateronewayoranother

An Inquiry Into Islam

In that Enormous Silence, Tiny and Unafraid
The following was written by Henry Rochejaquelein, a community organizer based in the Vendée region of France.

Anders Breivik
THE WORLD’S long wake for Norway has been hard for every friend of freedom. We should avoid self-pity by remembering those who suffer much more than we: the family members of those unarmed civilians murdered by a drug-addled, video-game obsessed plagiarist who still lived at home with his mother. There are a few sick souls out there who have expressed admiration for Anders Breivik; some racialists at the anti-Semitic site Occidental Dissent have taken to comparing Breivik to Batman — a self-made millionaire who bravely took action to save Gotham City. The fact that these people, like Breivik, take their inspiration from comic books speaks for itself. Like him, these cranks raise their sedentary pulses through boyish revenge and power fantasies. Like him, they should stick to dressing up like Jedi knights and dueling with plastic light sabers. They should leave questions of life and death, culture and the future, to those whose emotional age has at some point exceeded sixteen.

But once we have prayed for the dead, and grieved with the living, we have every reason to consider the implications of this slaughter — not so much for ourselves, since most of us are doing fine, but for the next generation of Europeans and Americans who will have to face a continuous escalation of Islamic self-assertion. The signs are clear: In just one day, the New York Times reported that (as columnists here had glumly predicted) politicized, intolerant Muslims now dominate the Egyptian revolution, and that the last batch of secular officers had resigned from the Turkish military, freeing its pro-Sharia president to remake that NATO member (and would-be EU member) as a militant Muslim state. Two countries which the U.S. had counted on bastions of moderation and allies in the “war against terror” are now being transformed in the image of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Syria, whose despotism for self-serving reasons has long protected some religious minorities, is sliding toward the brink of collapse, whose outcome will be a Sunni sharia state. Terror attacks continue to escalate throughout the world, from Nigeria to Pakistan, while radical clerics exploit Western liberties to remain at large.

Meanwhile, the peaceful efforts of patriotic citizens of Western countries to limit the assertiveness of orthodox Muslims who favor sharia have come under a terrible, blood-red cloud thanks to the actions of a single, vain pseudo-intellectual, who was willing to kill in order to draw attention to himself and happy to tarnish the reputations of dozens of non-violent writers and activists, whose ideas he shoplifted to provide himself with a manifesto. Just as Nat Turner’s (much more justified) rebellion set back by decades the cause of anti-slavery activists in the South, so Breivik’s murders have for the moment threatened to smear us all with his gore.

Robert Spencer has shown by example the right response: Express honest horror at the attacks, point out how they were in no way grounded in anything any reputable counter-jihad scholar or activist has ever written, and refuse to play the game of media hacks who are trying to silence us. Just as Martin Luther King did not fold up his non-violent movement when some black nationalists shot at cops, so we will not shelve our pens because some sociopath took up his gun.

Does the fact that some maniacs will murder for a cause spoil it? Think back to John Brown, who butchered pro-slavery activists in their beds; to the U.S. soldiers who as they crushed the army that raped Nanking collected human skulls as souvenirs; to the anti-Communist death squads funded by the CIA; to the city-busting thermonuclear missiles that targeted hundreds of millions of Russian civilians, preventing Soviet conquest and deterring World War III. Men have used dubious means to promote every cause in human history; was every cause thus unjust?

One of the things we so object to about Islam is that its own sacred scriptures endorse, even enjoin, the use of such evil means. To reject them for a Muslim is to make himself a heretic. That simple, ugly truth is so shocking to Western sensibilities that slothful citizens and cowardly politicians find it more convenient to pretend it isn’t so — to claim that when freedom-fighters like Robert Spencer, Bat Ye’or, and Geert Wilders simply report on acts of violence or their origins, they are inciting similar violence. Afraid of the mortal message, dhimmis would kill the messengers. In fact, they know perfectly well that real counter-jihadists aren’t dangerous. (No editor lives under 24-hour guard for publishing a Robert Spencer cartoon.) We are, in cold fact, a religion of peace — and we won’t kill you for saying otherwise.

I have seen some men on our side slide close to despair, or calculate that they must save their skins in the current purge by denouncing innocent allies. Some commenters on this site (Jihad Watch, where this article first appeared) have openly wondered if Islam might not be doomed in fact to win. So Whittaker Chambers feared of Communism during the Cold War. When our own society is fractured and unsure of itself, and its elites are dominated by those who seem sympathetic to the enemy, it is easy to conclude that the totalitarians will prevail. They are so much more disciplined and motivated. They are willing to die for their cause; on our side, men are frightened to write a letter.

But consider how hopeless the following good men’s causes seemed at various low points:
William Wilberforce, as he fought entrenched financial interests, attempting to end the British slave trade, only to be slapped down again and again in parliament and find himself vilified as the enemy of his country’s prosperity.
Ludwig von Mises, who had demolished socialism intellectually in the 1920s — as he watched the Soviet Union expand, and new forms of collectivism rise to power all across Europe, while “planned economics” became the new orthodoxy in the democracies.
Charles de Gaulle when France surrendered, and Britain sank its fleet in 1940.
Cardinal Mindzenty, after the Soviets crushed the Hungarian revolution, who sat for decades watching Communist tanks from the windows of the U.S. Embassy.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, as he wrote little scraps of The Gulag Archipelago in a Soviet labor camp.
Lech Walesa, when the Polish army cracked down on Solidarity.
Ronald Reagan, who began fighting Communism among the Hollywood labor unions in the late 1940s—and was ridiculed, blackballed, and shunned for his efforts without ceasing, right up through the second term of his presidency. (Remember how “mainstream” analysts denounced his “Evil Empire” speech as a piece of warmongering madness?)

The strength of totalitarians is always much more brittle than it seems. Also, and this is central to remember: Our goal is not to persecute Muslims or drive them out of their faith. If demolishing a 1.5 billion man world religion were our goal, we might indeed be right to throw down our arms. By contrast with Islam, Communist ideology was always a fragile fantasy. Marx’s messianic dream was incompatible with our species. In its promises to blow up the cornerstones of human society—private property, religion, the family, the nation and the state — it wrote its own epitaph. Islam is a profoundly corrupt theological compromise with the vices of Wrath, Vanity, Greed, and Lust — all of which it “baptizes” and directs against unbelievers, promising jihadists rewards for conquest, subjugation, looting, and the taking of sex slaves. In this sense, it is far less delusional than Communism, and more resembles the Nazi ideology — which promised its adherents not an earthly utopia but piles of loot and peasants to plunder. The Communist ideal demanded that man (at the point of a bayonet) remake himself as an angel. Islam reaches down to groom and congratulate the thuggish primate inside each one of us. It will likely prove as stubborn as slavery.

But our success does not depend on reforming Islam from the outside, or winning Muslims for Christ or Richard Dawkins. We simply seek to contain it, in the hope that its adherents in the West will somehow make their peace with pluralism and learn how to live in our midst as non-aggressors.

What we fight is something much more bizarre, unnatural and fragile than Islam: We are fighting Western dhimmitude, and the multiculturalism that enables it. It is not in fact natural for men of one race and religion to surrender their country to another. It is profoundly uncharacteristic of Frenchmen, Germans, Englishmen, Dutchmen, etc., to pervert their legal systems to suit the crude mores of alien colonists. It is not typical of Christians to water down their creed to the point where they imagine real common ground with intolerant, apostate-murdering Muslims. It does not come naturally to feminists to cooperate with wife-beating, honor-killing polygamists, nor for Jews to apologize for defending themselves from mobs intent on pogroms. The psychological games such people are playing on themselves are surely exhausting — as wearisome, finally, as denying Stalin’s terror famines and defending his purge trials proved to Western Communists. As pessimistic as Orwell’s 1984 was, doublethink is not sustainable for the masses over the long haul. It cannot even endure forever among elites. Just as so many liberals “mugged by reality” turned into neo (or even real) conservatives, and so many Communists hit the breaking point and “flipped,” so we will keep on reaping a steady stream of educated defectors to freedom’s cause. Meanwhile, the voters in one Western country after another will get their fill of national masochism, and rally for faith and fatherland.

We must soldier on, keeping our hands clean and our hearts pure. We must preserve and pass along a sane and humane movement of Western self-defense that can channel popular feeling in peaceful directions that honor the rule of law. When madmen (or simply bad men) arise and do evil acts, allegedly in our name, we must simply denounce them and keep marching forward. We should treat the smears as what they are: psychological warfare. The sheer baroque complexity of the lies required to believe the dhimmi viewpoint metastasizes with every jihad attack, every “hijacking” of a “democratic revolution” by sharia. In the long run, it will prove as impossible for honest men to accept as the fabrications of Holocaust deniers, or the economics of Karl Marx. And as each such man wakes up, we will be waiting, to welcome him home.

From :

A non-racist, unbigoted inquiry into the core teachings of Islam and what it all means (if anything) for non-Muslims

H/T :

H/T :



Atlas Shrugs : — Truth Gets A Hearing In Dearborn


Atlas Shrugs : Victory: Full House In the Belly of the Beast — Truth Gets A Hearing In Dearborn


(Pictures above are my own responsability : Swiss Defence League : Wilhem)

I am still traveling and so this can’t be extensive — look for my full report on tonight’s Jessica Mokdad Conference on Honor Killing in Dearborn, Michigan this week in World Net Daily, but here is the 411. The day started with an anti-truth, pro-honor killing rally under the deceptive guise of “Islamophobia.” According to infidel infiltrators, it was nothing but a stealth fundraiser for the stealth jihadis, using our conference as a fundraising tool. The irony is thick here, because their talking point was that we were doing the work and fighting for freedom just to “get rich.” Really? I must have missed that course in the University of Monetizing Islamophobia. They cited the bogus propaganda “research” of “Fear, Inc.,” fallaciously asserting that I was the recipient of some of the $42 million distributed to several anti-jihad organizations over the last ten years. We barely can rub two nickels together. But truth has no price. It takes guts for the recipients of millions in Saudi petrodollars to make a claim like that.

They went on to exploit the fictitious narrative of the fear and paranoia that counter-jihadists “exploit,” without ever addressing honor killings, FGM, or the millions slaughtered in 1,400 years of jihad warfare, cultural annihilation, and enslavement. The irreligious imam who incited his herd to hatred against me during Friday prayers assured that crowd that “Geller and Spencer will fail because they are against God, they are against America, and people will not get with them.” Apparently he was also selling pieces of the Brooklyn Bridge.

What is noteworthy is that the mayor, several local politicians, and Congressman Conyers were there. Is it any wonder that they feel empowered? They intend to create a “superfund” to defeat the evil Republicans. The main thrust? The left, the Democrats, and the Islamic supremacists must get together to defeat the forces of good. I will have video of these remarks within the next couple of days. Stay tuned.

But all of this nonsensical rhetoric disappeared into the ether when hundreds converged upon the Hyatt, a full capacity crowd, to join Robert Spencer and me and a full roster of luminaries to educate, elucidate, and shine a light on the ugly and brutal atrocities under the Sharia. I explained the reasons why we came to Dearborn to stand against honor killing, and why all free people need to stand against this atrocity. Then Darwin Jiles, a close friend and confidante of Jessica Mokdad, exposed the mainstream media lie that she was not killed in an honor murder: Darwin spoke movingly of how Jessica confided in him of her fears that she would be harmed for not following the rules of Islam, and how her worst fears came to pass.

Robert Spencer then provided facts about why 91% of all honor killings occur among Muslims: its sanction in Islamic law, the relaxed penalties for honor killings in many Muslim countries, and more. Then followed Nonie Darwish with harrowing firsthand accounts of the mistreatment of women in Muslim societies. David Wood then explained how Sharia is also leading to oppression in the United States, detailing his experiences being bullied, silenced, and unjustly arrested for preaching Christianity to Muslims in Dearborn. Robert Muise, his lawyer, showed riveting film of the case, in which David’s colleague Nabil Qureshi was arrested for “breaching the peace” simply for discussing Christianity with Muslims at the Arab American Festival in Dearborn.

Michael Coren then offered accounts of how the same spread of Sharia is happening in Canada, as well as in his native Britain, while the mainstream media remains silent, indifferent, and/or complicit. James Lafferty told tales from the trenches in Northern Virginiastan and offered practical tips for how free people could fight to defend freedom, coinciding with the advice I give in my book Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Simon Deng then rounded out the program by elucidating just what Sharia can do to a society, and to a human being — as he saw, and lived, and suffered through in Sudan.

The crowd was rapt. No one left during the entire three-hour program, and no one’s attention was ever diverted. The questions that followed were informed, pointed, and illuminating. The crowd left energized to stand against the barbarity of honor killing, and the infringements upon freedom that Sharia is bringing to our nation. It was, against all odds and fierce opposition, a victory for freedom.

It was historic, gamechanging moment for those who love freedom and the unalienable rights of every free individual.

La Chaim!

From : Atlas Shrugs



Dinner Address delivered on 31 August 1995

Ladies and gentlemen:

My subject this evening is “Myths and Politics: Origin of the Myth of a Tolerant Pluralistic Islamic Society”. 

 Ten years ago when I came to America for the launching of my book The Dhimmi: Jews and Christians under Islam, I was struck by the inscription on the Archives Building in Washington: “Past is Prologue”. I had thought – at least at the beginning of my research – that my subject related to a remote past, but I realized that contemporary events were rapidly modernizing this past. Muslim countries, where Islamic law – the shari’a – had been replaced by modern juridiction imposed by the European colonizing powers, were abandoning the secularizing trend, replacing it with Islamization in numerous sectors of life. This impression of the return of the past became even more acute when I was working on my next book, published in 1991, whose English edition will appear in early 1996 under the title: The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam – 7th to 20th century: from Jihad to Dhimmitude (Associated University Presses).

* Author of Le Dhimmi, Profil de l’Opprimé en Orient et en Afrique du Nord depuis la conquête arabe (Paris, Anthropos, 1980). Enlarged English edition, The Dhimmi: Jews & Christians under Islam, preface by Jacques Ellul (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press/Associated University Presses, Cranbury, N.J./London/ Toronto, 1985); Les Chrétientés d’Orient entre Jihad et Dhimmitude: VIIe-XXe siècle, préface de Jacques Ellul (Paris, Le Cerf, 1991) English edition, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam. From Jihad to Dhimmitude, AUP, 1996; Juifs et Chrétiens sous l’Islam: les dhimmis face au défi intégriste (Paris, Berg international, 1994) 

  In this study, I tried to analyze the numerous processes that had transformed rich, powerful Christian civilizations into Islamic lands, and their long-term effects, which had reduced native Christian majorities into scattered small religious minorities, on the way to total disappearence. This complex Islamization process affecting Christian lands and civilizations on both shores of the Mediterranean – and in Irak and Armenia – I have called: the process of “dhimmitude”; and the civilization of those peoples who underwent such transformation, I have named the civilization of “dhimmitude”. The indigenous native peoples were Jews and Christians (Orthodox, Catholics, or from other Eastern Christian Churches). They are all referred to by Muslim jurists as the “Peoples of the Book” – the Book being the Bible – and they were subjected to the same condition according to Islamic law. They are called by the Arabic term, dhimmis: “protected peoples”, because Islamic law protects their life and goods on condition that they submit to Islamic rule. But it is this very Islamic law that generates the processes of dhimmitude and of self-destruction. 

 I will not go into details here for this is a very long and complex subject, but in order to understand the Serbian situation one should know that the Serbs were treated during half a millenium just like the other Christian and Jewish dhimmis. They participated in this civilization of dhimmitude. It is important to understand that the civilization of dhimmitude grows from two major and interconnected religious institutions: jihad and shari’a, which establish a particular ideological system that makes it mandatory – during the jihad operation – to use terror, mass killings, deportation and slavery. And the Serbs – because I am speaking of them tonight – did not escape from this fate, which was the same for all those peoples around the Mediterranean basin, vanquished by jihad. For centuries, the Serbs fought to liberate their land from the laws of jihad, and dhimmitude, which had legalized their condition of oppression on their own lands.

 So while I was analyzing and writing about the processes of dhimmitude and the civilization of dhimmitude – while listening to the radio, watching television, reading the newspapers – I had the uncomfortable feeling that the clock was being turned back. Modern politicians, sophisticated writers – using phones, planes, computers and all the modern techniques – seemed to be returning several centuries back, with wigs or stiff collars, using exactly the same corrupting arguments, the same tortuous short-term politics that had previously contributed to the gradual Islamization of numerous non-Muslim peoples. I had to shake myself in an effort to distinguish the past from the present.

 So, is the past always prologue? Are we doomed to remain perpetually prisoners of the same errors? Certainly, if we do not know the past. And this past – the long and agonizing process of Christian annihilation by the laws of jihad and dhimmitude – is a taboo history, not only in Islamic lands, but above all in the West. It has been buried beneath a myth, fabricated by Western politicians, religious leaders and scholars, in order to promote their own national, strategic, economic and personal interests.

 Curiously, this myth started in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 19th century. It alleges that Turkish rule over Christians in its European provinces was just and lawful. That the Ottoman regime, being Islamic, was naturally “tolerant” and well disposed toward its Christian subjects; that its justice was fair, and that safety for life and goods was guaranteed to Christians by Islamic laws. Ottoman rule was brandished as the most suitable regime to rule Christians of the Balkans.

 This theory was advanced by European politicians in order to safeguard the balance of power in Europe, and in order to block the Russian advance towards the Mediterranean. To justify the maintenance of the Turkish yoke on the Slavs, this yoke had to be presented to the public opinion as a just government. The Ottoman Empire was painted by Turkophiles as a model for a multi-ethnical, multi-religious empire. Of course, the reality was totally different! First the Ottoman Empire was created by centuries of jihad against Christian populations; consequently the rules of jihad, elaborated by Arab-Muslim theologians from the 8th to the 10th centuries, applied to the subjected Christian and Jewish populations of the Turkish-Islamic dominions. Those regulations are integrated into the Islamic legislation concerning the non-Muslim vanquished peoples and therefore they present a certain homogeneity throughout the Arab and Turkish empires – and, apparently, in Muslim Asia too.

 The civilization of dhimmitude, in which the Serbs participated, had many aspects that evolved with changing political situations. They suffered from the same oppressive laws and prejudices that concerned all Christians and Jews in the Islamic Empire. From the 1830s, the Ottomans embarked on reforms (Tanzimat), aimed at the emancipation of their Christian raya (dhimmi) populations. They didn’t act on their own volition, rather they were forced to accept them by the European powers. It was not out of humanity that European politicians wished to abolish the degrading condition of the Christians; they promoted these reforms in order to prevent their seeking Russian help to liberate themselves from Ottoman oppression. 

 In the Serbian regions, the most fanatical opponents of Christian emancipation were the Muslims Bosniacs. They fought against the right of Christians to possess lands, and – in legal matters – to have rights equal to theirs. They opposed these reforms on the bases that under the old system, which gave them full domination over the Christians rayas, Muslims and Christians had lived for centuries in a convivial fraternity. And this argument is still used today by Bosniac President Izetbegovic, and others. He repeatedly affirms that the half millenium of Christian dhimmitude was a period of peace and religious harmony. 
 Let us now confront the myth with reality. I shall now quote a few facts from some of the documents in my forthcoming book.
 A systematic enquiry into the condition of the Christians was conducted in the 1860s by British consuls throughout the Ottoman Empire. Britain was then Turkey’s strongest ally; it was in its interest to see that oppression of the Christians was eliminated, in order to prevent Russian or Austrian interference. 
 On July 22, 1860, Consul James Zohrab sent a lengthy report from Bosna-Serai (Sarajevo) to his ambassador in Constantinople, Sir Henry Bulwer, in which he analyzed the administration of the provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He stated that from 1463 to 1850 the Bosniac Muslims enjoyed all the privileges of feudalism: “During a period of nearly 300 years Christians were subjected to much oppression and cruelty. For them no other law but the caprice of their masters existed.” 

 Here we should remember the devshirme system, which is well known. Initiated by the Ottoman Sultan Orkhan (1326-1359), it existed for about 300 years. It consisted of a regular levy of Christian children from the Christian population of the Balkans. These youngsters, aged from fourteen to twenty, were Islamized and enslaved for military purposes. The periodic levies, which took place in contingents of a thousand, subsequently became annual. To discourage runaways, children were transferred to remote provinces and entrusted to Muslim masters, soldiers who treated them harshly, as slaves. Another parallel recruitment system operated: It provided for the levy of Christian children aged six to ten (ichoghlani), reserved for the sultan’s palace. Entrusted to eunuchs, they underwent a tyrannical training for fourteen years. In Africa, a system of enslaving Black Christian and Animist children, similar to the devshirme existed, as is shown from documents to be published in my book. A sort of devshirme system still exists today in the Sudan and has been described and denounced by the United Nations Special Rapporteur Mr Gaspar Biro in his 1994 report, and by an article in The Times of London (Sudanese Christians ‘sold as slaves’, August 25, 1995) 
 In 1850, the Bosniac chiefs opposed the authority of the Porte and the reforms. They were defeated by the Sultan’s army commanded by Omer Pasha, aided by the Christians. The corvées imposed by the Bosniac lords over their subjected Christian populations  were abolished, as well as their feudal privileges. The Christians hoped that the direct administration of the Porte would ameliorate their position, but they hardly benefited from it. Moreover, in spite of their assistance to the sultan’s army they were disarmed, while the Muslims who fought the sultan could retain their weapons. Christians remained oppressed as before, although it was not permitted to treat them as formerly. Referring to the reform, Zohrab states: “I can safely say, (it) practically remains a dead letter”.

 Discussing the impunity granted to the Muslims by the sultan, Consul Zohrab writes in the same report:
 “This impunity, while it does not extend to permitting the Christians to be treated as they formerly were treated, is so far unbearable and unjust in that it permits the Mussulmans to despoil them with heavy exactions. False imprisonments (imprisonment under false accusation) are of daily occurence.  A Christian has but a small chance of exculpating himself when his opponent is a Mussulman (…) Christian evidence, as a rule, is still refused (…) Christians are now permitted to possess real property, but the obstacles which they meet with when they attempt to acquire it are so many and vexatious that very few have as yet dared to brave them.” 
 “Such being, generally speaking, the course pursued by the Government towards the Christians in the capital (Sarajevo) of the province where the Consular Agents of the different Powers reside and can exercise some degree of control, it may easily be guessed to what extend the Christians, in the remoter districts, suffer who are governed by Mudirs (governors) generally fanatical and unacquainted with the (new reforms of the) law.”

 Concerning the acquisition of land – a new right for the Christians – he states:
 “(Although) a Christian can buy and take possession; it is when he has got his land into order, or when the Mussulman who has sold has overcome the pecuniary difficulties which compelled him to sell, that the Christian feels the helplessness of his position and the insincerity of the Government. Steps are then taken by the original proprietor, or some relatives of his, to reclaim the land from the Christian, generally on one of the following pleas: (…) that the deeds of transfer being defective, the sale had not been legally made. Under one or other of these pleas the Christian is in nineteen cases out of twenty dispossessed, and he may then deem himself fortunate if he gets back the price he gave. Few, a very few, have been able to obtain justice; but I must say that the majority of these owe their good fortune not to the justice of their cause, but to the influence of some powerful Mussulman.”
 “Christian evidence in the Medjlises (provincial councils) is occasionally received, but as a rule is refused, either directly or indirectly, by reference to the Mehkemeh. Knowing this, the Christians generally come forward prepared with Mussulman witnesses. The cases in which Christian evidence has been refused are numerous”. But, comments Zohrab, “twenty years ago, it is true, they had no laws beyond the caprice of their landlords (…) Cases of oppression are frequently the result of Mussulman fanaticism, but for these the (Turkish) Government must be held responsible, for if offenders were punished, oppression would of necessity become rare.”

 By proclamation, in the spring of 1861, the sultan announced new reforms in Herzegovina, promising among other things freedom to build churches, the use of church bells and the opportunity for Christians to acquire land. Commenting on this from Bosna-Serai, Consul William Holmes wrote to Sir Henry Bulwer on May 21, l861, that those promises had been given often, without being applied. He mentions that the Serbs, the largest community, were refused the right to build a church in Bosna-Serai. 
 Concerning the right to buy land, he wrote: 
 “Every possible obstacle is still thrown in the way of the purchase of lands by Christians, and very often, after they have succeeded in purchasing and improving land, it is no secret that on one unjust pretext or another, it has been taken from them.”
 From Belgrade, Consul Longworth wrote to Sir Henry Bulwer on July 14, 1860: “The Government may by its Edicts and Hatti-humayouns hasten and advance such a reform; but I question very much whether more evil than good will not arise from proclaiming a social equality which is, in the present stage of things and relations of society, morally impossible.”

 “Equality before the law is that which must be first established; the only sort of equality, in fact, which can under existing circumstances, be realized. And in connection with this, we come to the complaint in the petition – the only tangible point in it – relative to the rejection of Christian evidence in the Ottoman tribunals. In this respect, it cannot be denied there is room for amendment, not only at Widdin, but in every province of the Empire.”

 He then comments on “(…) the lax and vicious principle acted upon in the Mussulman Courts, where, as the only means of securing justice to Christians, Mussulman false witnesses are permitted to give evidence on their behalf. The abolition of this practice would do more than anything else to purify these tribunals; but this can only be effectually accomplished by the admission of Christian evidence, instead of Mussulman perjury, as a matter of legal necessity.”

 He goes on to say that the forcible abduction of Christians girls by Mahometans, “and the question of Christian evidence are the two main points to which, as sources of bitter feeling and discussion, the attention of the Porte should now be directed.”

 Comparing the condition of Christians in the different provinces, he states, ” but in Bosnia the question of privilege was complicated by religious considerations, the nobles having, at a former period, embraced Mahometanism to preserve their estates, which were thus conditionally assured to them. Each of the other provinces had passed through its peculiar ordeal.”

 From Consul Blunt – writing from Pristina on July 14, 1860, to his Ambassador, Sir Henry Bulwer, about the condition of the province of Macedonia – we learn that: “For a long time the province (of Uscup:Skopje) has been a prey to brigandage: Christian churches and monasteries, towns and inhabitants, are not now pillaged, massacred, and burnt by Albanian hordes as used to be done ten years ago.” (…) “They (the Christians) are not allowed to carry arms. This, considering the want of a good police, exposes them the more to attacks from brigands.”
 “Christian evidence in law-suits between a Mussulman and a non-Mussulman is not admitted in the Local Courts.” 
 With a few examples, he then illustrated the consequences of such a system in everyday life:
 “About seventeen months ago a Turkish soldier murdered a Mahometan, an old man, who was working in his field. The only persons, two in number, who witnessed the deed are Christians. The Medjlis of Uscup would not take their evidence.”
 “About the same time, a Zaptieh (soldier) tried by force to convert a Bulgarian girl to Islamism. As she declared before the Medjlis of Camanova (Kumanovo, near Skopje) that she would not abjure her religion, he killed her in the very precincts of the Mudir’s house. This tragedy created great sensation in the province. The Medjlises of Camanova and Prisrend (near Kosovo) would not accept Christian evidence, and every effort was made to save the Zaptieh.”
 “Six months ago a Bulgarian in the district of Camanova was attacked, without provocation on his part, by two Albanians. They wounded him severely; on the case being referred to Prisrend, the Medjlis refused to take congnizance of it, as the only evidence produced was Christian.”

 Ten years ago, writes the consul: “Churches were not allowed to be built; and one can judge of the measure of toleration practised at that time by having had to creep under doors scarcely four feet high. It was an offence to smoke and ride before a Turk; to cross his path, or not stand up before him, was equally wrong.”
 In his report from Constantinople of October 10, 1873, Sir Henry Elliot wrote to Foreign Secretary Earl Granville, “that the nominal equality of Mussulmans and Christians before the law, which had never thoroughly existed in practice, was now in most provinces more illusory than it had been a few years ago.”

 In another report from Consul Edward Freeman in Bosna-Serai, dated December 30, 1875, we learn that the Bosnian Muslims had sent a petition to the sultan stating that, before the reforms, “they lived as brothers with the Rayah (Christian) population.  In fact their aim appears to reduce the Christians to their former ancient state of serfdom.” So once again we are brought back to the myth. The situation didn’t change, and in 1875 the Grand Vizier Mahmed Pasha admitted to the British ambassador in Constantinople, the “impossibility of allowing Christian testimony at courts of justice in Bosnia.” Thus, the ambassador noted: “The professed equality of Christians and Mussulmans is, however, so illusory so long as this distinction is maintained.”

 This juridical situation had serious consequences due to the system of justice, as he explained: “This is a point of much importance to the Christians for as the (Muslim) religious courts neither admit documentary nor written evidence, nor receive Christian evidence, they could hope for little justice from them.”

 The difficulty of imposing reforms in such a vast empire provoked this disillusioned comment (December 12, 1875) from Sir P. Francis, consul-general and judge at the British Consular Court in Constantinople: “Indeed, the modern perversion of the Oriental idea of justice is a concession to a suitor through grace and favour, and not the declaration of a right, on principles of law, and in pursuance of equity.” 

 When reading the literature of the time, we see that the obstruction to Serbian, Greek and other Christians movements of liberation was rooted in two main arguments:

 1) Christian dhimmis (rayas) are congenitally unfitted for independance and self-government. They should therefore remain under Islamic rule.

 2) The Ottoman rule is a perfect model for a multi-religious and multi-ethnical society. 

 Indeed, these are theological, Islamic arguments that justify the jihad, since all non-Muslim peoples should not retain political independance because their laws are evil and must eventually be replaced by Islamic rule. We find the same type of  reasoning in the Palestinian 1988 Covenant of the Hamas movement, which affirms that only Islamic rule can give peace and security to Jews and Christians. Those arguments are very common in legal and theological literature and are advanced by modern Islamists. 
 We have seen the origin of the myth, its political function and usefulness – and we have confronted this myth with the reality, described by contemporary observers in the nineteenth century. It is interesting to note the collusion between – on the one hand, the European powers defending the territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire, for their own national interest; and on the other hand, the Muslim policy aiming at keeping under subjection the Christian population.

 The myth didn’t die with the collapse of the Turkish Empire after World War I. Rather, it took another form: that of the National Arab Movement, which promoted an Arab society, in which Christians and Muslims would live in perfect harmony. Once again, this was the fabrication of European politicians, writers and clergyman. And, in the same way as the myth of the Ottoman political paradise was created to block the independence of the Balkan nations, so the Arab multi-religious fraternity was an argument to destroy the national liberation movements of non-Arab peoples of the Middle East (the Kurds, Armenians, Assyrians, Maronites, as well as that of the Jews). 

  And although from the beginning of this century until the 1930s, a stream of Christian refugees were fleeing massacres and genocide on the roads of Turkey, Irak and Syria, the myth continued to flourish, sustained mostly by Arab Christians writers and clergyman. After the Israelis had succeeded in liberating their land from the laws of jihad and dhimmitude, the myth reappeared in the form of a multi-cultural and multi-religious, fraternal Palestine which had to replace the State of Israel (Arafat’s 1975 UN speech). Its pernicious effects led to the destruction of the Christians in Lebanon. 
 One might have thought that the myth would end there, but suddenly the recent crisis in Yugoslavia offered a new chance for its reincarnation in a Muslim-dominated, multi-religious, multi-ethnic state. What a chance! A Muslim state again in the heartland of Europe. And we know the rest, the sufferings, the miseries, the trials of the war that this myth once again brought in its wake. The 1992 UN decision to recognize a “multi-ethnic”, “multi-religious”, Muslim state in the former Yugoslavia appears to have been a compensation offered to the Islamic world for the devastating 1991 Gulf War. The destruction of Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and bacteriological arsenal, as well as its economic infrastructure, appears to be “equitably” counterbalanced by NATO’s massive bombing of the Bosnian Serbs, even though the two situations cannot be compared. 

 To conclude, I would like to say a few last words. The civilization of dhimmitude does not develop all at once. It is a long process that involves many elements and a specific mental conditioning. It happens when peoples replace history by myths, when they fight to uphold these destructive myths, more then their own values because they are confused by having transformed lies into truth. They hold to those myths as if they were the only garantee for their survival, when, in fact, they are the path to destruction. Terrorized by the evidence and teaching of history, those peoples prefer to destroy it rather than to face  it. They replace history with childish tales, thus living in amnesia, inventing moral justification for their own self-destruction.

© Bat Ye’or 2001


The Public Burning of the Koran: Western Civilization’s People are Fighting Back Because the Western Politicians Refuse To!

World Of Music 5

World Of Music 5

Punk Wave 80’s From Israel :
But the last two








“It’s all about long term goals and gradual Islamization of America. The groups such as SIOA, EDL etc… Are all mainly groups to be used to create enough hype in society, psychologically and naturally any hype dies off after some time but this in itself creates curiosity and an opportunity to explain Islamization convincingly.”





























Hard to tell for me about this :












Just the flag of the U.N.  is unfortunatly in a place that I see more and more his own.

But still NOT EVERYBODY in the U.N. is Corrupt sort of speak.. The Battle for (in) the U.N. from due sources is on, but far at this moment to have capitulate to A World Caliphate. I believe something like that is in the HOPE of a FEW but a few only..unless thing goes quicker then we think.

To Resume I’m no convinced by this, but still find it very interesting reading.

From :

See the videos I put in Comments and Comment if you like… There is something that touch some Center of our Islamization..

The Conservative-Patriot Christian Right

Operation Crossed Swords Double Cross sm

Today is your lucky day…

The UMN Intl, is a political group and is linked in the American Govt. System.

The CIA is headed by a devout Muslim codenamed (roger) ask Pamela Geller even she will confirm it (no jokes), “agent roger” he is also a member of the United Muslim Nations International and forms part of their UIA agents (short for United Intelligence Agency aka “The Anonymous Group”)

You have to understand geo-politics and the global financial situation to understand it all but anyway it all boils down to the 21st Century Caliphate (see CIA and MOSSAD official publications about the inevitable Caliphate). American society is being prepared for the establishment of the Islamic State of America via a strategic plan using the Anti-Islam groups to create enough fear of Islam and Muslims so that the Govt. can get the public to freely give away more rights and freedoms…

View original post 3,124 more words

Espace détente, poésie, judaïsme et lutte contre la désinformation


A Moscou seulement, la population musulmane est estimée entre 2,5 et 3,5 millions.

Le ministère russe de l’Intérieur étudie l’interview de l’avocat moscovite Daguir Khassavov accordée à la chaîne REN TV, dans laquelle celui-ci a plaidé pour l’instauration de la charia en Russie, rapporte mercredi le service de presse du ministère.

Dans son interview, M.Khassavov a affirmé que la diaspora musulmane pourrait procéder à “une riposte sanglante” si l’on l’empêchait d’imposer ses normes.

Nous estimons que nous sommes ici chez nous. Peut-être est-ce vous qui êtes les étrangers. Nous sommes chez nous, et nous allons instaurer les règles qui nous conviennent, que cela vous plaise ou non. Toute tentative pour l’empêcher entraînera une riposte sanglante (…). Nous noierons Moscou dans le sang“, a déclaré l’avocat.

“Nous allons étendre notre réseau (…). On commencera par la Russie, puis on passera à l’Asie, pour englober au bout du compte l’ensemble du…

View original post 162 more words

La laïcité n’est pas un rempart à l’islam (redif)

Video:Rumors of War III
1 Hour 14 Min
Here It is at last : Good Watch

Unity Will Defeat the Attack on Religion


Unity Will Defeat the Attack on Religion in This Country

People of faith across the globe have been under attack for many years. The Obama Administration has ramped up the attack in this country over the past three years.

In the face of this increased attack on religion, the United States Catholic Bishops have released a Statement calling for “A Fortnight of Freedom.” From June 21 to July 4 of this year, events will be held across the country to highlight the need for all Americans to defend our religious liberty.

The obvious impetus for the Bishops’ action is the recent mandate by the Obama Administration that requires employers to facilitate and fund abortion-inducing drugs and sterilization for their employees. The American Center for Law & Justice is challenging this mandate in court on behalf of a St. Louis business owner.

Americans sometimes take for granted the rights we have…

View original post 36 more words

Look how islam slowly has turned Italy into a islamic country

U.N. Fails Kurds

The Kurds Might Be the Only True Freedom Fighters In the Area !!!
As Armenians They are denied the Right to Exist!

And doesn’t goes into the Plan neither of The Arab Spring (Muslim Brotherhood) Neither To The UN plan ( of which believe that the Arab Spring is Good For World Peace).


The Kurd : Very Good Overview :

The Kurd had received Promises’ during the Iraq Conflict
..Where are those ?

 U.N. Fails Kurds
By Hans Modlich

The root of the Kurdish dilemma lies in the fact that the U.N. has nothing in its Charter to recognize the right of the Kurds to a homeland.

The Security Council member nations, who know this and who could act to amend the U.N. Charter, are unwilling to do so each for their own self-serving reasons.

•The Americans are afraid to recognize any Kurdish nation because of the obvious question it raises of statehood for the Palestinians. This would bankrupt Israel’s policy of non-recognition. Turkey would also have to be divided up.
•France and Britain are largely responsible for gerrymandering the Mid-East borders. They split up the Ottoman Empire between them at the end of World War I to make it easier to divide and rule the region and its black gold. This is how the archaic fiefdom of Kuwait was created in the first place.
•The Soviet Union has explosive national problems looming in the Baltics, Caucasus and the Ukraine. Gorbachev is very happy when George Bush refers to these as internal affairs of a sovereign state. So was Stalin at Yalta when Roosevelt and Churchill laid the foundations for the ‘new world order’ of their day’.
•China would hardly embrace self-determination for Tibet.
•Canada, former member of Council, faces an embarrassing question mark in the form of Quebec.
In the wake of its unprecedented scale of intervention in the Gulf War, and its tragic aftermath of Kurdish exodus and rebellion, the United Nations must urgently examine its conduct .

We must tackle some basic issues in the U.N. Charter itself and look at what it has to say on the subject of national minority rights. How do we deal with nations held captive within
present-day boundaries of other states?

Is it correct, as initially stated by George Bush, and echoed by Canada’s U.N. ambassador Yves Fortier, to stand aside from Saddam Hussein ‘s persecution of the Kurds as an ‘internal affair’ of a sovereign state? The present Charter can be cited to say so, but the Geneva Convention maintains the opposite.

Germany’s foreign minister Hans Dietrich Genscher explicitly disagreed with Washington, stating that the world community has every right to get involved, out of concerns about genocidal persecution. The European Community proposal for a U.N. supervised security zone in northern Iraq not only has the support of the heads of state of Germany, Britain and France but it clearly has in it the seeds of territorial recognition for the Kurdish nation.

The plight of the Kurds demands a review of the basic tenets of the U.N. as to what constitutes a nation.

Two million of Iraq’s population of seventeen million live in the major Kurdish cities of the north. Three million more are integrated in the rest of Iraq. Kurdistan as a whole has a population of twenty million. It is a nation spread over five adjacent states and has a history and culture older than that of the United States. Like Armenia and Palestine-and the world’s Jewry of a half-century ago-the Kurds are a nation without a homeland, without recognition by the international community.

If we look closely at other current crisis hot spots around the world, we find that the most prevalent threat to peace emanates from unresolved national questions within the boundaries
of existing nation states-all members in good standing of the U.N. Since Glasnost, especially in the absence of the Cold War polarization, a legion of formerly colonized nations around the globe from East Timor to Quebec is emerging to demand self-government. Kurdistan, Palestine and the Balkans, Kashmir, the Soudan, Eritrea and even Scotland are waiting in the wings.

Yet George Bush’s new world order offers little in the way of a consistent vision let alone principled guidelines to resolve these so-called internal conflicts.

Now that the need to reform the U.N. has been raised, we must come to grips with the void in the Charter on the contentious subject of national minorities.

One obvious solution is to expand the U.N. Charter Statement of Principles expressly to recognize that national minorities within member countries must have the right to self-determination and self-government if they choose to exercise that right. U.N. peace-keepers must then be provided to conduct plebiscites or referendums in the affected state or states.

Nationalism in the era of high-tech multi-national capitalism is no longer a divisive economic issue. With increasing prosperity, as we can see in the European Common Market, nationalism in fact recedes.

If we are to usher in a new post Cold War era of peace, stability and North/ South reconciliation then we must first prepare a political framework acceptable to everyone in such a new world order. U.N. reform is that vehicle.

Bolstered by a renewed political and diplomatic authority, a reformed United Nations must outline a step by step process to allow for redrawing of state boundaries. This procedure-like a Family Court for nations-must enable new states to emerge wherever this is justified and verified to be the democratic will of the national minority living in that region. This must be done on the basis of secular linguistic and ethnic make-up, in short national rather than religious criteria, so as to avoid the tensions which still loom for example in the Indian subcontinent or in present day Israel and Iran where church and state are not clearly separated.

It seems apparent that only a series of U.N. supervised plebiscites in Kurdistan can relieve these political faultlines which criss-cross the entire Middle East.

A re-invigorated U.N., freed from the suspicion of being merely an instrument of U.S. foreign policy, can then begin to undertake the long postponed task of a Middle East Peace Conference.
Posted: April 27, 2012 in News Feed
1Turkish Kurd militants threatened on Thursday to turn all Kurdish populated areas into a “war zone” if Turkish troops entered Syria, a sign the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) which has allies in Syria may be taking sides in the conflict there.

A renewed alliance between Damascus and the PKK would anger Turkeyand could prompt it to take an even stronger line against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over his brutal repression of anti-government protesters.

PKK field commander Murat Karayilan said Turkey was preparing the ground for an intervention in Syria.

“The Turkish state is planning an intervention against our people,” the Europe-based Firat news agency, close to the militants, quoted him as saying.

“Let me state clearly, if the Turkish state intervenes against our people in western Kurdistan, all of Kurdistan will turn into a war zone,” he said.

Western Kurdistan is the term Kurdish nationalists use to describe Kurdish areas of northeast Syria, while by Kurdistan they mean the Kurdish areas of Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said last week that setting up a “safe zone” or a “buffer zone” along the border with Syria to protect civilians from Assad’s forces was among the options being considered should the stream of refugees turn into a flood.

Setting up such a zone would involve troops entering Syria to secure territory. Turkey has turned sharply against its former friend Assad and has taken a lead in trying to forge international agreement on the need for stronger action on Syria.

While Syrian government forces are clashing daily with insurgents demanding the downfall of Assad, Syrian Kurdish areas have remained relatively calm, despite many Kurds’ long-standing opposition to the government.

Some Syrian Kurdish groups opposed to Assad have formed their own umbrella group after complaining of being sidelined by the main opposition Syrian National Council (SNC), which they say is dominated by Arab nationalists.

But the comparative calm in Syria’s Kurdish northeast may also be related to what some Kurdish analysts say is the growing influence of the Democratic Union Party (PYD), a Syrian Kurdish group allied to the PKK which has kept away from the opposition.


The PKK, set up in 1984 to fight for Kurdish home rule in southeast Turkey, is commanded from bases in the remote mountains of northern Iraq, but was once backed by Syria.

Though Turkey has the second biggest army in NATO, it has failed to quash the PKK in 27 years of bitter fighting. More than 40,000 militants, soldiers and civilians have been killed in the conflict. Turkey, the United States and the European Union all list the PKK as a terrorist organization.

Turkish officials say they are watching closely for signs Syria may renew its support for the PKK, which it dropped in late 1998 after Turkish tanks massed on the Syrian border. Damascus was forced to deport PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan who was later seized by Turkish special forces in Kenya.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has repeatedly said Syria “would not dare” make such a mistake again.

Kurds make up at least 10 percent of Syria’s population. Like the majority of Syrians, they are Sunni Muslims, but have struggled to assert their ethnic identity under 40 years of Arab nationalist Ba’ath Party rule.

The Assad regime had denied some stateless Kurds Syrian nationality documents but it has made concessions since the start of the uprising to ease unrest in Kurdish areas.

Some Arabs are concerned that the Kurds, mostly based in northeast Syria on the borders with Turkey and Iraq, secretly seek a separate state that includes cross border territories.

Syrian Kurd opposition groups deny wanting a separate state, but say they want autonomy similar to that of the Iraqi Kurds.
The Kurds Might Be the Only True Freedom Fighters In the Area !!!
As Armenians They are denied the Right to Exist!

And doesn’t goes into the Plan neither of The Arab Spring (Muslim Brotherhood) Neither To The UN plan ( of which believe that the Arab Spring is Good For World Peace).


So Now You can understand better those declarations :


Wilhem T.Knox

Syria accuses U.N. chief of encouraging ‘terrorists’

Syria accuses U.N. chief of encouraging ‘terrorists’

(But WHO will ear that ???) It is Months..and no one dare

Thank You :

BEIRUT (AP) — A Syrian state-run newspaper accused U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Saturday of encouraging “terrorist” rebel attacks by focusing his criticism on the government, while other government media reported that the navy foiled an infiltration attempt by gunmen who tried to land on the Syrian coast in rubber boats.

The editorial in Tishrin daily came a day after Ban said Syrian President Bashar Assad’s continued crackdown on protests has reached an “intolerable stage.” It also followed what the state media said was a suicide attack in Damascus that left 10 dead.

Ban said the U.N. will try to speed up the deployment of up to 300 monitors to Syria. Only 15 are there now.

The Syrian comments were the harshest against the U.N. since a plan brokered by special envoy Kofi Annan proposed an April 12 cease-fire to be followed by peace talks. Since that date, the U.N. has said the regime has broken many of its truce promises, such as withdrawing forces from towns and cities. Rebel fighters have also kept up attacks on Syrian security forces.

Annan’s plan aims to end the country’s 13-month crisis that has so far killed more than 9,000 people according to the U.N..

Tishrin said Ban has avoided discussing rebel violence in favor of “outrageous” attacks on the Syrian government. “The continued disregard of the international community and its cover for armed groups’ crimes and terrorist acts … is considered as direct participation in facilitating and carrying out the terrorism to which Syria is subjected,” the editorial said.

“Such a stance seemingly encourages those groups to go on committing more crimes and terrorist acts,” Tishrin said.

The Syrian capital was hit by four explosions Friday that left at least 11 people dead and dozens wounded. Assad’s government blamed the blasts on “terrorists,” the term the government uses to describe opposition forces that it says are carrying out a foreign conspiracy.

On Saturday, the country’s state-run news agency said military units stationed off the Mediterranean foiled an infiltration attempt by “armed groups” from the sea in the early hours of the day. SANA said the navy forced the boats to flee, but a Syrian service member was killed and several others wounded.

Saturday’s attempt was the first reported rebel infiltration from the sea. Syrian authorities have said in the past that they clashed with infiltrators trying to cross from neighboring Lebanon or Turkey.

In Lebanon, military prosecutor Saqr Saqr told the Associated Press that the army confiscated weapons that were found aboard a ship off the Lebanese coast. Saqr added that an investigation is under way, adding that the 11 crew members are being questioned by the Lebanese military police.

On Friday’s Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency said Lebanese authorities intercepted a ship off the coast near the northern city of Tripoli called “Lutfallah II” suspected of carrying the weapons.

The ship was coming from Libya, via Egypt and then to the port of Tripoli apparently on its way to Syria, NNA said.

The ship was taken to the port of Selaata, north of Beirut, where three containers where the weapons were believed to be hidden were seen being placed on Lebanese army flatbed trucks and taken away Saturday morning.

The ship was coming from Libya, via Egypt and then to the port of Tripoli apparently on its way to Syria, NNA said.

My Comments still :

More carnage has spilled onto the streets of Syria after a ‘suicide bomber’ blew himself up yards from a mosque in Damascus

<<It’s not clear who is behind the string of recent suicide attacks and bombings.>>

<<IS IT ? I don’t defend the government of Syria. But It is clear that The “Arab Spring” want that Country. Who are the “Arab Spring” : The Muslim Brotherhood. What does the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt ? What are they trying to sell us ? What New Lies in the U.N. ? Once Again I don’t defend The Syrian Government but the People in Power seems to disturb a Plan, that if it doesn’t take place, ..or the longer it will not take place …safer be the earth ! And that I support! >>


Obama embraces Islam – If Islamism is OK for Egypt, why not America?

CBN’s Erik Stakelbeck was on hand for the launch of the Center’s Muslim Brotherhood in America Course launch at the National Press Club in Washington, DC

CBN’s Erik Stakelbeck was on hand for the launch of the Center’s Muslim Brotherhood in America Course launch at the National Press Club in Washington, DC

 Have you ever asked yourself why, despite more than ten years of efforts –involving, among other things, the loss of thousands of lives in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, well-over a trillion dollars spent, countless man-years wasted waiting in airport security lines and endless efforts to ensure that no offense is given to seemingly permanently aggrieved Muslim activists – are we no closer to victory in the so-called “war on terror” than we were on 9/11?

Thankfully, we have been able to kill some dangerous bad guys. The sad truth of the matter is that, by almost any other measure, the prospect of victory is becoming more remote by the day. And no one seems able to explain the reason.

In an effort to provide the missing answer, on April 24, the Center for Security Policy is making available via the Internet a new, free ten-part video course called “The Muslim Brotherhood in America: The Enemy Within.” This course connects the proverbial dots, drawing on a wealth of publicly available data and first-hand accounts to present a picture that has, for over a decade, been obscured, denied and suppressed:

America faces in addition to the threat of violent jihad another, even more toxic danger – a stealthy and pre-violent form of warfare aimed at destroying our constitutional form of democratic government and free society. The Muslim Brotherhood is the prime-mover behind this seditious campaign, which it calls “civilization jihad.”
…     …..

H/T :

%d bloggers like this: