Thanks, and I think I’m gonna boycott this coming games and ask friends do to the same. Close TV do something else.. Sponsors into the drain, Green Field change to a Red Field, alive and kicking on skulls and bones.. that’s it ! they know where they can put it !
Noir Désir (Dark Desire) was a French rock band from Bordeaux. They were active during the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s, and have had two albums certified double platinum in France and three certified gold.
Noir Désir – L’homme pressé (Man In Hurry)
Noir Desire Aux Sombres Heros de l’Amer (To The Dark Bitterness Of Heroes..)
Noir Desir – A l’envers a l’endroit (Upside up Upside down)
Noir Désir – Le Vent Nous Portera ( The Wind Will Carry Us)
Syria Kurdish fighters seize border post from Islamists
The Yarubiya border post is one of the main crossings between Syria and Iraq
Syrian Kurds capture border crossing with Iraq after intense fighting
Militiamen capture Yaaroubiyeh post in north-east Syria after three days of clashes with several jihadist groups
Sunday 27 October 2013 00.16 BST
A Kurdish fighter in north-east Syria. Photograph: Mauricio Morales/EPA
Syrian Kurdish gunmen on Saturday seized a major border crossing with Iraq from al-Qaida-linked groups following intense infighting between rebel groups that raised concerns of a spillover, activists and an Iraqi official said.
The latest violence coincided with a visit by the UN-Arab League envoy to Iran, a staunch ally of President Bashar al-Assad’s government, to press efforts for international peace talks aimed at ending the civil war, now in its third year.
The Kurdish militiamen captured the Yaaroubiyeh post in north-east Syria after three days of clashes with several jihadist groups there, including Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.
An Iraqi intelligence official confirmed that Kurdish rebels now held the crossing point – one of two main crossings with Iraq – adding that Baghdad brought reinforcements to the area to prevent any spillover of violence.
“They were heavy battles in which all types of weapons were used,” said the Iraqi official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations. “Iraqi forces are ready to repel any attack.”
Kurdish groups control a large swath of northern Syria, and they are suspicious of Islamic groups who have moved into predominantly Kurdish areas in the chaos of the civil war. Clashes between their fighters and jihadists in northern and north-eastern areas of Syria have killed hundreds of people in the past months.
The border crossing point was under government control until March when hard-line rebels captured it. Syrian rebels, particularly the hard-line groups, are believed to draw support from insurgents in Iraq. Sunni Arabs dominate both the Syrian rebel movement and the Iraqi insurgency.
The Syrian conflict, which began as a largely peaceful uprising against Assad in March 2011, has triggered a humanitarian crisis on a massive scale, killing more than 100,000 people, driving nearly 7 million more from their homes and devastating the nation’s cities and towns.
The US, the United Nations and Russia are pushing for an international peace conference to be held in Geneva next month, bringing together the warring sides. But no final date for the conference has been set and it is unclear whether the sides can reach an agreement on the agenda.
Loay al-Mikdad, a spokesman for the rebel Free Syrian Army, said on Saturday he expected the conference to be postponed. Members of the FSA command met on Thursday with the UN-Arab League Special Envoy for Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, who travelled on Saturday to Tehran.
“As a result of the discussions, we felt that there is an international direction toward postponing the conference for some time,” al-Mikdad said. Arab League officials said earlier this month that the conference would be held 23-24 November.
Brahimi, at a joint press conference with Iran’s foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, said Iran’s participation in such a conference is “necessary”. Zarif said Iran would participate if it is invited.
Syrian rebels, meanwhile, denied government media reports that the head of the Nusra Front had been killed.
Friday’s one-line state media report, which could not be independently confirmed, said Abu Mohammad al-Golani died in the coastal province of Latakia. But rebels said they had received no word of clashes in that province.
If government reports on the death of al-Golani are correct, then the capture of the Yaarobiyeh post would be the second setback for al-Nusra and its allies in recent days.
Al-Mikdad said Syrian rebels did not report any recent clash in Latakia province. He says his group is unsure if al-Golani even exists.
“This is part of the regime’s lies. Our information from the ground says that this is not true and not accurate,” al-Mikdad said by telephone.
The Nusra Front has emerged as one of the most effective among rebel groups fighting Assad, and it has claimed responsibility for numerous suicide bombings against government targets. The US state department put the group on its list of terrorist organisations for its connections to al-Qaida.
In Daraa province in the south of the country, rebels captured the town of Tafas after weeks of fighting that left scores of people dead, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. Syrian state media did not report on the battle.
Also on Saturday, the Observatory reported that three more women detainees were being released. They included Tal al-Mallohi, a prominent young Syrian blogger convicted of spying for a foreign country and whose prison sentence ended two months ago.
The release would bring to 64 the number of female detainees recently freed by Syrian authorities. It is likely part of a complicated, three-way hostage swap last week brokered by Qatar and the Palestinian Authority during which Syrian rebels freed nine Lebanese Shiite Muslims while Lebanese gunmen released two Turkish pilots.
The Syrian government has not commented on the swap or the prisoner releases.
Saudi Arabia’s rejection of a term on the UN Security Council likely reflects its view of itself as helping to establish an alternate international order based on Sharia law. The 56-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation is already the largest international organization after the UN. For Islamists, the UN, like all secular international organizations, lacks legitimacy.
A stated Islamist goal, to replace Western civilization’s liberal democratic order with a Sharia-governed Ummah [community of Muslims], now seems to involve an effort to delegitimize Western international organizations, as seen this week by Saudi Arabia’s refusing a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Saudi Arabia’s refusal likely reflects its view of itself as helping to establish an alternative international order based on Sharia law. For Islamists, the United Nations, like all secular international organs, lacks legitimacy.
OIC vs. UN
The Islamic world threw down the gauntlet to the secular international order in 1990 when it drafted an alternative declaration of human rights, the Kairos Document, based on the Sharia law. The 56 countries of what was then called the Organization of Islamic Conference, since renamed the Organization of Islamic Cooperation [OIC], criticized the UN’s 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights as being insensitive to religious concepts of the non-Western world. In Saudi Arabia’s UN Ambassador Abdallah al-Mouallimi’s October 13, 2013 statement, explaining the sudden and unprecedented rejection of a seat on the Security Council, he cites Saudi Arabia’s “historical responsibilities toward its people, Arab and Islamic nations as well as toward the peoples aspiring for peace and stability in the world.” The Saudi explanation continues by enumerating a litany of UN failures to solve problems in the Mideast. This statement underscores Saudi Arabia’s role as the capital of a shadow-caliphate alternative to the current liberal democratic international order.
Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (L), Secretary-General of the OIC Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu (2nd L), Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu (3rd L) and EU High Representative Catherine Ashton (4th L) participate in the OIC conference on “Building on the Consensus” in Istanbul, Turkey, on July 15, 2011. (State Department photo)
Riyadh’s sentiment was preceded by last summer’s rebuttal — which revealed the global scope of Islamist objectives — by the Pakistani Taliban fugitive, Adnan Rashid[1], to the UN address by the heroic Pakistani Malala Yousafzai (then 15 years old), shot by the Taliban for having asked for women’s education. In a letter, Rashid denounced Malala’s naiveté for placing trust in an international organization that he claimed is a tool of the West with which to punish Islamic nations.
Rashid’s riposte, however, has an unwritten corollary. He and his fellow Islamists bear allegiance to an alternate network that exists in parallel with the institutions of the current international order, the most visible symbol of which is the OIC.[2] The OIC, which promotes Islamic social, economic, and political solidarity, is, in fact, already the second-largest international organization after the UN. It has not only attempted to negotiate disputes among Islamic factions in Muslim-majority countries, such as Iraq and Somalia, but has also helped to mediate disputes between non-Muslim-majority states and their Islamic minorities, as in the Philippines and Thailand. In adjudicating these disputes, the OIC has employed, as the legal frame of reference, the principles of Sharia law rather than international law.
One has only to examine the flag and the logo of the OIC to realize its ambition. A crescent moon encompasses the entire globe. The earth rests on a sea of green, the color of Islam, with the Kaa’ba in the center of the globe. The flag resembles the national banner of the al-Saud Kingdom (the only country among all the embassies in Washington D.C. that, on 9/11, did not lower its flag). The OIC, however, is just one of several all-Islamic multinational organs that parallel secular international community structures. There is also, for example, the International Association of Islamic Banks and several other organs for cooperation, such as the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the Islamic States Broadcasting Organization.
Jihadi terrorists, as a matter of targeting policy, strike at representative symbols of the existing international order. One of the initial targets of Iraq-based al-Qaeda terrorists was the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq.[3] Pakistani and Nigerian Muslim terrorists have routinely assassinated international volunteers, even those working to eradicate deadly diseases such as polio. The most extreme assassinations have occurred in Sharia-governed northern Nigeria and Pushtun tribal areas in northwestern Pakistan, where, in both places, the murders closely followed sermons that vociferously denounced ongoing inoculation campaigns. Any form of assistance from international organizations is rejected by Muslim extremists as part of a Western conspiracy to influence Muslims to abandon their faith. Inoculations against polio, for instance, have been described by Islamic extremists as a plot to sterilize Muslim children.[4] It is more likely, however, that the radical clerics who urge believers to renounce such aid efforts are more concerned about losing control of their constituency.
Allah: Chastiser of Nations
The theological rationale for replacing the Western system of the nation-state rests in the Koran. Allah made it clear to Muhammad that all nations have a term and that all nations will be judged. The Koran contains frequent references to two pre-Islamic nations who have disappeared following the judgment of God: Ad and Thamud, two Arab-related people. The citizens of Ad are described as abnormally tall and were descendent from the biblical Noah. Ad was allegedly a powerful country, which stretched from Oman to Hadramaut (the southernmost province of Yemen, and homeland of Osama bin-Laden). Allah dispatched the Prophet Hud to warn the Ad that they must abandon their worship of false gods. Unheeding of the warning, the Ad people vanished from the world stage. The Koran asserts that the Thamud people met the same fate: oblivion.
The Koran describes Muslims as the chastisers of godless nations that refuse to amend their evil ways, and who give their hearts to Satan. In a possible attempt to explain why political tyranny triumphs temporarily, Koranic scholars agree that Allah permits nations to practice their corrupt and perverse pleasures until their tyranny and transgression reach extraordinary proportions. “We (Allah) opened the gate of all things (for them) …until they rejoiced in which (what) they were given (but) we seized them suddenly; then lo, they were in despair.”[5] This reference of course is embraced by some Muslims, who may hope that eventually the scales of justice will be balanced and that even the “Great Satan” (America) will have its day of judgment when Allah decides. Osama bin-Laden used to taunt the al-Saud rulers of Arabia that, because of their illegitimate nature and having failed to adhere to the ways of Allah, they too will soon disappear. Bin-Laden would call upon the Saudi ruling clique “to fight in Allah’s way and to urge believers on because the might of Allah is stronger as is His punishment.”[6]
Some Arabs and Muslims may have derived a sense of confidence that they are Allah’s new chosen people; that they will be raised by Allah to become a great nation in a manner similar to the one God promised Abraham. The Koran, for instance, describes how Allah sent 3000 angels to bolster the outnumbered Muslims against the Mecca-based Quraysh forces at the Battle of Badr in 624 A.D.[7] Thereafter, Muhammad consolidated Muslim power throughout the Arabian Peninsula. The early Muslims were then confronted with the hostility of the world’s two greatest powers, Rum (Byzantium) and Persia (Sassanid Dynasty). Both attacked Islam first, but Allah again came to the rescue, and Rum and Persia were conquered. Muslim commentators also recall how fierce were the Mongols, who devastated the Baghdad-based Abbasid Caliphate but who ultimately were converted to Islam. These historical lessons are applied to present day enemies of Islam as well.
Shariaheston
The Umma Trumps the Nation-State
The 1648 Peace of Westphalia elevated the concept of national sovereignty above all other claims of loyalty by a country’s citizens.[8] This international agreement ended a century of warfare, which had been fueled by religious differences and the conflicting dynastic claims of the principal royal houses of Europe. The sovereignty principle was the cornerstone of the modern nation-state system, and curtailed the ability of Europe’s dynastic families to exploit religious differences within European principalities as an instrument to augment their power. The Westphalia arrangements also helped to establish Western civilization’s principle of the separation of church and state by acknowledging the political leadership as a society’s primary power rather than the officials of the dominant religious denomination of each principality. This documentary precedent ultimately facilitated the development of a liberal, democratic, and secular order in the West. And it is this order that political Islam intends to expunge, replacing it with a new global system ruled by Islamic Sharia.
Muslim states have not emulated the West’s example. In Islamic countries there is no separation of religion from politics. Moreover, the nation plays a minor role in governmental administration and legislation. Koran-based legality is the law of the land. Parenthetically, the majlis in Islamic countries is a consultative assembly lacking the authority to create law, unlike the legislatures in non-Muslim governments. In political Islam, law-making is the prerogative of Allah alone.
Islamist clerics preach that loyalty to the worldwide Muslim community, or umma, transcends any ethnic or cultural attachment to one’s native land. National borders are seen as artificial constructs of the West — certainly true of several Mideast countries, the boundaries of which were set arbitrarily by European imperial powers. This historical reality helps Islamists justify their effort to create a separate Islamic emirate that ignores the current borders between, for example, Iraq and Syria, and makes it difficult for the Islamic faithful to integrate fully into the body politic of their native lands — as in, say, the case of U.S. Army Major Nidal Hassan.[9]
Extremist Muslims occasionally boast that the Soviet Union, one of the modern two superpowers, disappeared a decade after its invasion of Afghanistan. Muslims attribute this victory to their fighting in the cause of Allah — a type of conflict that is, by Koranic definition, a jihadist-led defensive war fought by mujahedeen [freedom fighters]. To fight this defensive war is a fard, or individual obligation, incumbent upon Muslims from all over the Islamic world. It was this dynamic that energized Muslims to fight U.S. forces in Iraq, the troops of the secular dictator Qaddafi of Libya, and the forces of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The rhetoric of jihadists is replete with the same confidence in ultimate victory over the world’s remaining superpower, the United States.
Restoring Muslim Lands to Islamic Governance
Nations as diverse as Israel, India and Spain also have no legitimacy in the Islamist worldview. Many Muslims believe that these countries have been unjustly ripped from the Dar al-Islam [The Abode of Islam] by the military power of polytheists and infidels. According to this Islamist axiom, the Islamist effort to return Spain to “the glorious era” of al-Andalus is well under way; it is viewed as having been stolen from the Muslims by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella in 1492. And Israel is also regarded as land stolen from the Ottoman Turkish Muslims. Both al-Andalus and Israel are therefore viewed as forever part of the waqf [the entitlements of Allah]: land that once belonged to Allah, still belongs to Allah, and that can never revert. Northern India, condemned as being the world’s most flagrant violator of the principle of Islamic monotheism, is also seen as eventually returning to the Muslim sovereignty that once flourished under Mughal [Mogul] dynastic rule.[10]
Although Muslim numbers continue to grow, in large part through the proselytizing efforts enabled by oil revenues from the Arab Gulf states, many Muslims seem concerned about the challenge to Islamic values presented by the secular aspects of globalization, and the corrosive impact this may have on the faithful.
Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin is a former Iran Desk Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and USAF Reserve Colonel Military Attaché to the U.S. Embassy in Israel.
Should visitors to East London, especially the borough of Tower Hamlets, be warned that some residents of that area regard it as a no-go area for non-muslims or anyone displaying “un-islamic” behaviour?
WARNING: graphic picture and video contains scenes of violence.
Can you help officers from #TowerHamlets who have released CCTV footage of a violent bottle attack on a student from Florida?
Tower Hamlets CID have today, 23 October, released CCTV footage of a violent bottle attack on a student from Florida who they believe was targeted simply because he was “obviously not local”.
The detailed footage clearly shows five Asian men setting upon 22-year-old Francesco Hounye, who had only arrived in the UK three days earlier.
They smashed a bottle into his face and then chased after him to continue their assault, repeatedly kicking and punching him.
In today’s Bradford Telegraph & Argus, Prime Minister David Cameron is reported as branding “the far-right” English Defence League as “hateful”. He said the resignation of Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll proved how extremist the organisation is.
Bradford Council leader David Green has apparently written to Mr Cameron calling on him to tighten up the legislation around EDL demonstrations and, in response, Mr Cameron said: “The police are allowed to ban marches on certain grounds, that’s set in law.”
Under the glaring eye of press and television, Tommy made some blunt comments about extremist factions within the EDL. He regretted his remarks later and apologised, explaining that he had not meant to suggest that everyone left in the EDL was an extremist or a neo-nazi, but that was enough incentive for the newspapers, television, Marxist organisations and politicians, left and right, to attempt to demonise those of us who are determined to continue the fight against Islamic extremism.
We would respectfully remind Mr. Cameron that our rights to peaceful protest are enshrined not just in English law and tradition, and in that precious English heritage we are struggling to preserve, but in European and international treaties and agreements. We are not knuckle-dragging hooligans who can be slandered and pushed aside. We are ordinary people, normal people, the English people, and our voice will be heard.
This coming weekend we will take to the streets of Bradford and we will raise our banners and our voices against the child sex grooming gangs that your authorities, Mr. Cameron, would rather pretend did not exist because to investigate them might upset certain parts of the community. We are not ashamed to expose these disgusting practices and the motivation behind them.
We are not racist, not violent, just no longer silent and we will not surrender!
<<These are the people Tommy Robinson has embraced. It was good to reject anti-Semitism, racism, fascism, etc. It is not good to capitulate to forces of jihad and Islamic supremacism. In boasting that they had “decapitated” the EDL, these “moderates” showed their true colors.>> (jihad Watch)
Quilliam support the right of women to wear the hijab and the right of women to take it off. In a commentary in The Sun, Maajid Nawaz stated: “If Muslims object to the French ban on the hijab, we must also object to the ‘Islamist’ plan to impose the hijab and ban women uncovering their hair.” [14] Quilliam has also defended the right of women to wear the full face veil, in the form of the niqab or burqa.[15]
Really ?!
Funding
On the day of the launch in May 2008 the director Maajid Nawaz told Newsnight: “We have absolutely not received government money ,despite being offered it by the Preventing Violent Extremism Pathfinder Fund, and we have said that it is not appropriate for us at the moment – although I would emphasise that I don’t have a problem in principle in receiving taxpayers’ money for a good cause, as long as it comes with no strings attached.”[44]. However, according to The Times the government has underwritten the Foundation’s operations to the tune of £1 million in taxpayer money, despite the reservations of government and opposition members. According to the story, the foundation is paying ‘about £110,000 a year to rent offices at one of Central London’s most prestigious addresses, which, for security reasons, have no name plate or sign outside’. The foundation’s co-directors are believed to be receiving annual salaries of £85,000 each. [45].According to Ed Husain’s evidence given to the Select Committee Hearing on Preventing Violent Extremism, the Quilliam Foundation is in receipt of “about £850.000” of government funding, per annum. [46]
Co-director Ed Husain has stated that the Foundation is receiving private Kuwait funding.[47]
Two Tongues Foundation :
Criticism
The foundation takes its name from Abdullah Quilliam, a 19th-century British convert to Islam who founded a mosque in Liverpool. Quilliam was an opponent of the British Empire and a supporter of the caliphate. He also argued that Muslims should not fight Muslims on behalf of European powers, citing specifically Britain’s enlistment of Muslim soldiers against the resistance in Sudan.[20] In all these respects his activities correspond to those that the individuals running the Quilliam Foundation today hold up as evidence of extremism.[21]
Critics have included Azzam Tamimi, Inayat Bunglawala, Ziauddin Sardar ― who formerly criticised Quilliam but has since sided with Maajid Nawaz during a debate with Tariq Ramadan broadcast on Press TV ― and Seumas Milne of The Guardian.[22]
In an open letter to The Guardian, Anas al-Tikriti, Yvonne Ridley, Ihtisham Hibatullah, Ismail Patel, and Roshan Salih wrote:[23]
We believe this is just another establishment-backed attempt to divert attention from the main cause of radicalisation and extremism in Britain: the UK’s disastrous foreign policy in the Muslim world, including its occupation of Muslim lands and its support for pro-western Muslim dictators. The foundation has no proven grassroots support within the Muslim community, although it does seem to have the ear of the powers that be, probably because it is telling them what they want to hear.
It is quite possible to be a politically engaged Muslim without wanting to fly planes into tall buildings. Yet the (Quilliam) foundation equates all forms of political Islam with extremism and terrorism. But those misguided few who are willing to cross the line into terrorism are not driven by disfranchisement or Sayyid Qutb’s writings; they do it because they are furious about western foreign policy….
Seumas Milne argued that “all three are straight out of the cold war defectors’ mould trading heavily on their former associations and travelling rapidly in a conservative direction”.[22]
The organization has also recommended spying on Muslims unsuspected of any crimes, which led Jonathan Githens-Mazer and Robert Lambert to note:
Charles Moore and Dean Godson of Policy Exchange, have explained that this is a re-make of a 1980s Thatcherite counter-subversion strategy in which Husain is cast in the role of Frank Chapple the “moderate” trade union leader who was, they suggest, used to discredit and undermine the “extremist” miner’s trade union leader Arthur Scargill. Husain, they argue, can help defeat Altikriti, Bungalwala and their colleagues in the same way.[24][25]
“Pilgrim’s Progress” : Columbus and Islam
“Pilgrim’s Progress” 
swissdefenceleague 