Monday, 2 May 2011

Osama bin Laden is Dead! Long Live MCB, MPACUK, Respect, etc...



There is a terrible possibility that there may be an Islamoterrorist attack or bombing in the next few days - or weeks - to show the infidel that the Islamic Jihad is not yet dead. Of course it’s not dead! It’s been going on for over 1,300 years. It won’t suddenly end even if a man, who was seen as a great and powerful man by many millions of Muslims, has been killed. If anything, this may inspire many Islamoterrorists to kill yet more infidels. After all, despite the requirement to kill infidels simply because they are infidels, many Islamists and Islamoterrorists still feel obliged to rationalise and justify their deeds by talking about ‘offences and crimes against Muslims’, whether that be Afghanistan, Iraq and now the killing of Bin Laden. This is not new. The Muslim Brotherhood (now popular again in Egypt!) legitimised and rationalised its own terrorist campaign in the 1920s and 1930s in terms of other ‘occupations’ or ‘misdeeds against Muslims’. (Yes; there were ‘occupations’ before the platonic Occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.)

Osama's Spritual Life Before 9/11



Osama Bin Laden wasn’t the oddball exception that many ‘moderate’ Muslims claim him to have been. (That’s if some of - or many - of them didn’t secretly admire or support him anyway.)



Bin Laden began life as a Wahhabite Muslim. This Islamic sect is very similar to the Salafi sect. (Salafist Muslims run a stall every weekend in the middle of Birmingham.)



Bin Laden came from a very rich Saudi family and became a multi-millionaire himself. That was after he had gone to university, which very many Islamists (like the ones just mentioned in Birmingham) and Islamoterrorists have also done.

He read the works of the extreme Islamic theorists (as well as supporters of Islamoterrorism) Muhammad Qutb and Mawdudi (which the Brummie Salafists distribute from their stalls in Birmingham).

One of Laden’s first political or military actions was to go to Peshawar - in Pakistan - to fight the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. He was given the blessing of Pakistan’s Islamist party, Jamaat-e-Islami (which has close relations with our very own Respect Party and Birmingham’s Salma Yaqoob - the ‘UK branch of Jamaat-e-Islami’).

Despite the fact that bin Laden was accused of masterminding 9/11, this Muslim had been committing dirty deeds against the West since 1992 - if not before. He was thought to be behind the massacre of 18 US Marines in Mogadishu in 1993 (while he had sanctuary in Islamist Sudan).

In 1996, four years later, a US military camp in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, was attacked. This resulted in 19 dead Americans. That was also suspected to have been planned by bin Laden.

Two years later, in 1998, two huge explosions simultaneously destroyed the US embassies in Nairobi (Kenya) and Dar-es-Salaam (Tanzania). The first left 213 dead and the second left 11 dead. Bin Laden, again, was thought to be behind these atrocities as well.

Why Did Osama bin Laden Plan Islamoterrorist Attacks?
But none of those acts above were

‘acts of desperation against the oppression of Muslims throughout the world’.

They weren’t

the last cry of those whom had no other voice’.

If anything, they were acts of desperation felt exclusively by the Islamists who carried out the atrocities. They were desperate because the rise of Islam, and its eventual control of most of the planet, wasn’t really going according to plan in 1992, 1996, 1998 and 2001. Even states which had, or had had, Islamist regimes were facing hard times and both inner and outer conflict.

Not only that. The Islamists (some terrorists, and some 'only' defenders of terrorism) were also loosing the support of many Muslims - even in, of all places, Afghanistan - where the Taliban and other Islamists weren’t having it all their own way.

To put all this another way. The Islamists had come to be seen as the vicious murdering fanatics that they were - even by many of their fellow Muslims. They, quite simply, came to be seen as the real aggressors or attackers; not the infidel. So what to do?

The Islamists decided that in that climate it would be a good move to portray, if not themselves as passive victims, then their fellow Muslims as that. The victims, or the Oppressed, always get a good hearing, not only amongst Muslims but, perhaps more importantly, in the West as well. I mean; think of what that well-known killer-group, Hamas, has done on this front in Palestine!

Firstly, the Islamists asked each other: How best to achieve this massive task? The answer was: Well, why not with a massive event? A massive act of terrorism?

That event was 9/11 – and in many ways it worked for the Islamists.

It worked? But the US invaded Afghanistan and carpet bombed civilians?

Exactly. Let me explain some more. Let’s put it simply.

Osama bin Laden and the bombers wanted the US to invade Afghanistan. They knew, before the actual bombing, that such an Islamoterrorist biggie, which was known, or would become to be known, to have been carried out by bin Laden’s al-Qaeda, and therefore to have had Afghan connections, would almost of necessity force the US Government to ‘invade’ Afghanistan and destroy al-Qaeda, the Taliban, etc.

In other words, the terrorist attackers or aggressors turned, if not themselves, then ‘their people’, Muslims, into passive victims: almost within two or three months of 9/11/2001.
(Of course, the flip side of this is that the former victim, the US, then became the aggressor or attacker in Afghanistan.)

There was still a problem for both the original planners of the attack, and bin Laden’s al-Qaeda generally. What if the US did ‘invade’ Afghanistan and, terror upon terror, successfully identified all its targets, destroyed them and thus limited ‘collateral damage’? That is, what if, contrary to the wishes of the Osama bin Laden and the Islamoterrorists, not many Afghani Muslim civilians actually died as a result of the US attacks on Afghanistan?

The Islamists could of course use the native Afghans as human shields, as they had already done and Hamas still does (as do many Islamic regimes – something Colonel Gaddafi seems to have picked up on recently). Using human shields certainly works and has worked very well for Hamas because many rather brainless, or Leftist, commentators simply look at what’s in front of them without analysing why what’s in front of them is in front of them.

The problem was that not even the humans - in the human shields - were guaranteed to be slaughtered by the American planes (or, I should say, by the Islamists).

The Islamist and Leftist propaganda has of course been, since 9/11, that the Americans have slaughtered Afghans en masse. But, as everyone else knows, this has not happened. Yes, many Afghan civilians have been killed (not all because they were parts of Taliban human shields). And there have even been a few rogue elements within the US army. Of course there have been! This is a war. No war is ever fought with the choreographed precision of a ballet. Civilians have indeed been killed. Some US soldiers have gone mad and probably even killed Afghani old-aged pensioners and perhaps they might have raped civilian – Muslim! - women.

(If Muslims and Leftists want to know about genuine mass slaughter and the mass abuse of civilians, endorsed by the state itself - which is the important point! - then look at what the Islamist Sudanese Government did to the Christians and the animists - and even to non-Arabic Muslims! - in the south of the Sudan. Look what Somalian Islamists did and still do to everyone who is not an Islamist – even to ‘conservative Muslims’. Indeed look at what the Taliban has done in Afghanistan.)

Yes, the Taliban and the Islamists didn’t need their own Guantanamo Bays because they killed all their enemies straight off. They didn’t have their own versions of Shami Chakrabarti and Liberty because such ‘man-created’ institutions and 'atheistic' individuals are not allowed to exist in the first place in that country - and in nearly all other Islamic countries.

So for every Moazzam Begg here and in the US, there are a hundred dead versions of him lying in unmarked graves in the wildernesses of Afghanistan – all killed by Islamists and Muslims of some persuasion. Get to work on that Shami! Or is the Brown Exotic always without guilt and always a Victim?

2 comments:

  1. The story of Osama bin Laden's death is not without its oddities.

    The only photo confirming his death available to date is fake. The MSN published
    Osama's earlier photo which is an exact copy of his postmortem image. Now, the
    death photo is unofficial - but why haven't the US government publish a credible
    photo on its own?

    The official line has it that the commandos identified Osama by multiple means,
    including some hinted-at high-techies like facial recognition. Wait, facial
    recognition does not work reliably with such a heavy beard.

    Hasty 'burial at sea' is the worst way to do a PR. It made every sense to show
    the corpse to journalists instead of creating Osama-is-alive myth.

    The story of Osama's pursuit, as told by the government, is incredible.
    Supposedly Obama procrastinated since February before giving the order to
    assassinate bin Laden. The CIA often acts in Pakistan on flimsy evidence
    targeting wrong people, so just to be on the safe side they would have acted
    against Osama's likely hideout quickly.

    Sending two US helicopters in a Pakistani garrison town is a strange idea. Not
    only tens of thousands people there are armed, but there must be basic
    anti-aircraft weapons. Sending loud choppers in the middle of the night would be
    absurd, warning inhabitants and bin Ladens alike. Such operations are done with
    ground teams or bombs/missiles.

    Osama supposedly lived for six years in a heavily populated area in a country
    where everyone knows his face. Should we believe that he had never left his
    villa? Or that the neighbors weren't flabbergasted by such a secluded nuovo
    riche?

    Osama lived in the Pakistani garrison town through the years when he had pretty
    bad relations with Gen.Musharaff. The general well-controlled Pakistani
    intelligence service, and it is highly unlikely that the ISI protected the man
    who called and worked to oust Musharaff.

    Overall, the impression is that Osama's death is Obama's PR trick.

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://youtu.be/Aqz3mL37Xbc

    British Women Forced to Wear Veil - Muslim Inmates Running the Asylum

    ReplyDelete