Islamic Caliphate in Britain? Dominic Whiteman - 9/25/2006 http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2184 <http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2184&cid=3&sid=74> &cid=3&sid=74 An interesting week in the War on Terror in London. On Wednesday, the British Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, addressed Muslims in a run-down part of East London, warning them to be watchful of their children, who may fall into the hands of radical preachers and end up going the sorry way of British-born Mohammed Siddique Khan (a 7/7 suicide bomber) and other terrorists. "These fanatics are looking to groom and brainwash children, including your children, for suicide bombings, grooming them to kill themselves in order to murder others," he said. As Reid was starting to speak, up popped one of Britain's most recognizable radical preachers themselves from the back of the crowd, named Abu Izzadeen, also known as Omar or Trevor Brooks. (Mr Brooks is a leader of the now banned Al Ghurabaa, an offshoot of the terrorist entity Al Mujahiroun - a man who regularly glorifies terrorism and incites racial hatred during nightly rants to other radicals, often using the nom de plume Abu Baraa, on a New-York based chatroom service). Brooks heckled Reid, making clear that he was "furious" with "state terrorism by British police". Brooks had the gall to say, in the British capital, that Reid was not welcome "here on Muslim land." He was then unceremoniously bundled out of the hall in which Reid was speaking. Cameras flashed as journalists present realised that here was a radical Islamist face to face with the British Home Secretary. "How could this have happened?" was the question on everyone's lips. Britain seemed, just for a while, to have gone quite mad. Later on Wednesday the freak show continued, when even George Galloway, the "Respect" Party MP, seemed to be talking sense in his open letter to Dr Reid. Galloway asked how such a "well-known extremist... was allowed within punching distance of the British Home Secretary?" Those savants present saw the irony in Brooks' words, as he slammed Reid and the British government for arresting "one thousand Muslims", breaking into British Muslims' houses and taking men from their beds while their wives lay beside them (yet 3,000 British Muslims resident in Britain have been through Osama Bin Laden's terror-training camps in Pakistan). Those same savants would have known about the British Crown Prosecution Service's current investigation into Brooks' criminal activities and recordings of his recent speeches, exhorting terrorism in the name of his sick brand of Islam - that he will be one of the next terror suspects removed from his bed. They would also have known that Brooks is actually an unemployed dependent of the "terrorist" British state, relying on state welfare payments for food and housing for himself, his wife and three young children. John Reid's speech was both potent and relevant. The fact that Brooks made an appearance actually exposed the speech more than it would otherwise have been exposed by the media. But Brooks needs media exposure too. (It helps recruit terrorists). On Friday, Brooks attended the flagship breakfast radio show "the Today Programme" on BBC Radio 4, coming up with the usual Al Mujahiroun mendacity - in effect justifying 9/11 and other terrorist atrocities by judging their human losses as minimal compared to the numbers of Muslims killed by "Blair and Bush." As usual he failed to point out the shocking number of Muslims recently killed by Muslims (not to mention pre 9/11 Muslim slaughter, for example in Algeria or Iraq), or that he was part of an Islamonazi plan to establish a worldwide caliphate, with Shariah law - in all its freedom-stealing glory - as its legal code. The formidable Radio 4 interviewer, John Humphrys, ended the interview by asking him - "why not leave Britain - or attempt to establish your Shariah law by becoming an MP and winning the support of others, as that's how we do things in this country?" - crunching Brooks' "I speak for Islam in Britain" argument. Brooks had no answer and avoided the question altogether, muttering something about Allah and then stuttering further non-sensical abstract - using one of his pre-prepared soundbites in completely the wrong place, saying "What's British? fish and chips". In Britain there is only one Islamist, caliphate-seeking political party and it is MPACUK - a group whose open and private forums are full of kufr (disbeliever)-hating comments and Islamist rants, not to mention anti semitic comments snatched, seemingly, off SS-Obersturmbannfuhrer Adolf Eichmann. More worryingly, its private, password-protected discussion forums are the scene now of more sinister exchanges. A colleague just pointed out to me that if today you type MPACUK into a Google Image search, worryingly several privately-taken photographs of planes at British airports appear, taxying within RPG distance of hangars and terminals. MPACUK, like Hizb ut Tahrir, espouses a non-violent approach, but what it says in public is another thing altogether from what goes on privately within its extremist membership. But at least MPACUK tries to work within the established British democratic system - putting up candidates at the last general election and urging British Muslims to "get a voice in Britain" by engaging in the British political process. For all the talk of Islamonazis in Britain, the facts show that the popular support these individuals require to take over Britain is never going to materialise, even if they believe that their prophet Mohammed promised a Shariah-run planet to them. You can see why individuals like Brooks don't stand for office - the British Monster Raving Loony Party would humiliate him at the polls. British Muslims make up less than two percent of the population (the extremists perhaps 0.002%), they have zero control of the British military, Shariah law is about as attractive to Brits as eating sweaty, old socks, and the caliphate-seeking doyens are - to most Brits - bearded, blanket-wearing, hothead, God-bothering ranters (the likes of which a relieved British society escaped from when it moved, enlightened, into the eighteenth century). Britons do not take kindly to outsiders threatening them with conquest - recall images of female farmworkers in the 1940's and their pitch forks pressed down on the necks of Nazi parachutists. Modern British women reach for more than pitch forks when you threaten them with taking away their careers, fashion, independence, vote and the myriad aspects of freedoms they have died in Britain in the past to earn. The quickest way to start a fight you are going to lose is to take away a British man's pint of beer - let alone attempt to replace it with a glass of milk and honey. But this is what the Syrian Omar Bakri and the Egyptian Abu Hamza - not to mention Hizb ut Tahrir, MPACUK, Al Mujahiroun and its offshoots, and other such individuals and groups - are focused on doing. The key point the Islamonazis fail to address in their planned takeover of Britain is the inherent, warlike nature of Britons (visible only intermittently these days, whether in the car park battleground of a Celtic versus Rangers football match or in the metamorphosis of even the most civilised city gents at a Twickenham rugby international when an Englishman puts in a bone-crunching tackle). Britain is essentially an island of warriors, not dissimilar in innate belligerence, perhaps, to Japan. The Islamonazis seem to brush aside the history of the British people as if it never existed - as if military success was something that came to the British by chance rather than through concerted prowess in battle, displayed repeatedly from Plessey to Port Stanley. Though they are a new transnational enemy, at some point in their attempt to establish the caliphate in Britain they would have to come face to face in violent confrontation with the Briton - after one thousand years of failed invasion, they think they stand any better chance? As a retired British General recently told me, "they'd be turned into mincemeat within hours". It is part of the British-based Islamonazis' plans to have Britons separate from British Muslims. To have British Muslims alongside them in their attempts to establish the caliphate. It is also part of their plan to use terrorist events, like 7/7, to inspire the far right white extremists in Britain like Combat 18 to rise up against Muslims, so Muslims feel oppressed in Britain and have no choice but to club together with the Islamonazis' as Muslims. Combat 18 is one thing - like the Islamonazis, part of the lunatic fringe of British society - but the British people themselves? Really who are they kidding that they can get the British people to roll over and let them govern? They may be able to brainwash the weakest amongst them to go out and kill themselves for Allah, but just how do they intend to brainwash a whole population? Sir Oswald Mosley failed to convert the British to fascism - he would not have even bothered showing up for his first speech if the damaged merchandise he had to peddle was Islamofascism. Trevor Brooks' outburst this week should be interpreted as the last squeals of a C-rated, dying malefactor. The last whimper of a sad caricature who knows that the closest he will get to his children in future will be at visiting time in HMP Belmarsh. Should one feel sorry for him? This is the man who, as recently as June, mimicked, in front of an audience of extremists, the dying words of the beheaded Korean hostage in Iraq, Kim Sun Il. This is the man who is repeatedly guilty of unacceptable behaviour including preaching to foment, justify and glorify terrorism while fostering hatred. This is the man who described the 7/7 suicide bombers in London as "completely praiseworthy". This is the same man who talked of 7/11 as an Al Qaeda attack date - weeks before 7/11 when the Mumbai attacks actually occurred. Personally, I do not feel sorry for Abu Izzadeen/Trevor Brooks/Omar Brooks /Abu Baraa - the man with many names and, like most Islamonazis, two faces. Indeed, I look forward to walking down the free streets of Victoria in London on Thursday morning, in the free country that is Great Britain, as a free man - freedoms I owe my grandfathers, who, on the Normandy beaches, were part of the last generation called upon to defend freedom-loving Britain from totalitarian darkness. And I look forward to walking freely into Scotland Yard with a briefcase of DVD's and transcripts, which will surely once and for all take Abu Izadeen out of free British society for good. The organisation, VIGIL, which I am proud to represent as spokesperson, has recorded hour after hour of Abu Izadeen's mistakes. Hour after hour of his misinterpretations of Islam. Hour after hour of his exhorting terrorism, both in Britain and abroad. Hour after hour of hatred spewing forth from his lips. Hour after hour of cowardly rants he must now go to jail for. I do not know which pub I shall stop in on the way to Brooks' nemesis for a celebratory pint, or which beautiful women I shall pass in the streets as they walk freely by. I do not know which policeman or policewoman will greet me at reception. I look forward to glancing over at the Union Jack flying proudly on Buckingham Palace and catching a glance at the Union Jacks flying high over nearby Westminster and Downing Street before I deposit the DVD's and transcripts with one of the highest ranking police officers in the land. Then I might take in some art at the National Portrait gallery, meet my girlfriend for a public kiss and a drink, and even put some money on the 3.30 at Kempton. Farewell Trevor. On behalf of the ears of VIGIL's recorders - phew. On behalf of Britain - for the record, owned by Britons - good riddance. And from a liberal conservative Briton - neither neo-con or Islamophobe - let me say, you chose the wrong country, Trev, in which to peddle your odium. And to the rest of you Islamonazis hoping to darken this great country, first sit and think for a long, long time in a quiet room where you will not be disturbed - away from the hate-preachers and your deluded colleagues intheir collaborative confusion. Consider how you will react personally to the British farmer's pitchfork. Wake up and you smell the coffee. Islamonazism, nor Islamonazis, have any future in Britain. We are watching you. We are all over you. We can smell your rotten plans a mile down-wind and they are not bright. Great Britain is a very clever country and you are bound to fail. Dominic Whiteman is spokesperson for the London-based VIGIL anti-terrorist organization - an international network of terror trackers, including former intelligence officers, military personnel and experts ranging from linguistic to banking experts. (F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with "Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976. The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
