Posts Tagged 'Terrorism'

Squandering taxpayers’ money – let me count the ways… NI special

In 2010, a man by the name of Kieran Doherty was found shot dead in Londonderry, Northern Ireland, naked and bound and dumped by a roadside.  It was a heinous crime.

After following the process that exists in such circumstances, Doherty’s mother and grandmother have now been awarded an undisclosed sum by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel, described by Doherty’s uncle as a ‘substantial’ amount.

It all sounds quite reasonable, until you realise that Doherty was a member of the terrorist Real IRA and the killing was carried out by his own terrorists-in-arms. He was also a convict who had served time in prison.

So what we have is a man who opposes Northern Ireland being part of the UK, who resents the British and views them as an occupying force and therefore joins a terrorist organisation to take up arms in support of Irish unification, because at this time the majority of people in the country want to remain part of the United Kingdom.  He falls foul of his fellow men of violence and is ‘executed’.

Not only has the British taxpayer funded the murder investigation by the PSNI and an additional investigation and report into unfounded allegations of MI5 collusion in the killing, but we are now also having our pockets picked pay the family of this worthless terrorist scumbag compensation for his murder – which was brought about because of his fetish for the bomb and bullet and his desire for violence over democracy.

Our money should not be squandered in this way.  Doherty bit off more than he could chew and deserved to pay the price.  We should be pleased there is one less gun toting bomber to contend with in Northern Ireland, not handing out compensation for his killing.  His family almost certainly knew of his involvement in the Real IRA, yet they will now benefit financially from the consequences of that membership at our expense?

Their compensation claim was an insult and should have been thrown straight into the nearest bin.  Clearly it is we taxpayers who really end up paying the price, of the stupidity of officials who fall over themselves to make nice with terrorists and their families by wasting our money to reward their criminality and hatred of this country, and treating us as a bottomless pit to do it.

The face of Britain in 2013… how long will we tolerate this?

One cannot help but think this scene would not have occured if this country had maintained a selective immigration policy and retained the ability to remove from these shores anyone who abuses our hospitality and forments division and violence.  The image captures a situation borne of fear, which will conveniently propagate more FUD among us so fearful people in desperation plead for our useless and irrelevant politicans to do something.

The fact is, instead of only encouraging and accepting foreigners to come to these shores – yes there absolutely is a place for settlers here – who wish to contribute to our society, be a net producer rather than a net consumer, and respect and emulate the values that made this country attractive to them in the first place, we would not be seeing the kind of upsurge in religio-political violence fanned by people whose families have been allowed to settle here but not integrate.

Instead too many of them foster a cultural and religious superiority complex that results in the terror we have witnessed and subsequently necessitates our police to cover themselves like the terrorists of the past out of fear of their identity becoming known.  The bobby on the beat, the community policeman, has been replaced by intimidating and sinister paramilitary police units to respond to the consequences of government policy none of us was asked to approve.  The political class failed us.

This is not the way Britain should be.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions and now the chickens hatched by the political class are coming home to roost – with ordinary British people paying the price in treasure and blood.  We have been betrayed and compromised by the political class and as a result we experience ever more efforts to turn the population into the property of the state where we are monitored, treated by default as suspects, have our lives and finances intruded into, see a desire for privacy treated as suspicious behaviour and any dissent against the government’s actions viewed as harmful and summarily demonised.

The political class has learned nothing and has no interest in learning anything.  As such is continues to fail us.  How much longer will we tolerate this?

Another Patriots Day, another murderous attack

It was unsurprising to see the BBC news team on Radio 4 executing the usual contortions this morning in their efforts to play up the possibility of ‘home grown’ domestic terrorism that stems from hatred of the US Federal government being behind the twin bomb attack at the Boston Marathon.

Memories of Waco and the Oklahoma bombing were dragged up as part of the BBC effort to enjoin people to not jump to an immediate conclusion that the bombing was the work of foreign or religiously inspired terrorists.

Even more curious was the attempt to conflate the timing of the attack with shooting massacres carried out by gunmen who were clearly insane or plain evil, and had no motivation or cause, save murderous destruction of human life.

If the BBC’s disciples of apologism had stopped to think for a moment, they would have realised that Waco stemmed from a desire by David Koresh, a religious fanatic, to resist the state’s efforts to interfere in his affairs – albeit many of them being criminal in nature.  Further, the Oklahoma City bombing was a direct attack on government structures, with Timothy McVeigh’s target being a Federal government building in the city.

There is no evidence to support the BBC’s desperate attempt to play down the possibility of an Islamist or Middle Eastern dimension to what happened by linking the attack in Boston to domestic terrorism directed against the US Federal government.

The signature has all the hallmarks of a planned and coordinated attack on a soft target, designed to kill and injure people and sow terror, in the manner so ruthlessly employed by Al Qaeda and their affiliates.  That doesn’t mean it can’t be an individual or group copying Islamist methods, but the effort to make people think this twin bombing is somehow comparable to Waco and Oklahoma City is a red herring and a disservice to the public.

The thoughts and prayers of this blogger are with the innocent victims and their families.

Gilad Shalit, Hamas and the BBC-Guardian axis of bias

I intended to write a detailed blog post about the release of Gilad Shalit and the consequences of the prisoner swap in return for this kidnapped Israeli soldier.  But again the bias of elements of the British media dictate a change of focus.

That said it is wonderful that this young man is free again after being held hostage for so long and denied visits from the Red Cross.  But that said, Israel has just turned free a battalion of hardened terrorists who will resume waging death and destruction as soon as they can.

One wonders if those people who constantly accuse Israel of of human rights violations and mistreatment of Palestinians stopped for one moment today to compare and contrast the sight of the malnourished Gilad Shalit who has been violently kidnapped, with the fit and healthy Palestinian terrorists and criminals who has been arrested and put on trial before being sentenced.  One measure of a people is how it treats those in its prisons, and the Palestinians prisoners have clearly been well looked after.

The scene underlined the sheer inhumanity of Hamas. Yet here in the UK, the BBC and the Guardian, both of which publish so many stories that portray Israel in a negative manner while turning a blind eye to the viciousness and violence of Hamas, this was ignored.

Meanwhile, as Gilad Shalit was explaining how he hoped this exchange would help to bring about peace, the people responsible for snatching him from inside Israel and mistreating him for the last five years led the crowds in Gaza and the West Bank in chanting:

“The people want a new Gilad!”

And less than a week ago Khaled Mashal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau, told the media:

“Those released will return to armed struggle.  It is a great national achievement.”

You will not find either quote anywhere on the BBC or in the Guardian.  They don’t want to show the true nature of Hamas, for whom they act as cheerleaders and propagandists.

Peace was what Gilad Shalit and many Israelis continue to hope and pray for.  But violence, terror and death is all Hamas are interested in as they pursue their aim of destroying the nation of Israel and driving the Jews out of the Middle East again.

Peace seems as far away as ever, and the BBC and Guardian will do their best to ignore the evidence in front of them to lay the blame for that at the door of Israel.  It is hard to feel anything other than utter disgust.

Putting the threat to our freedom into context

In a private exchange with a fellow blogger several days ago he speculated that the Anders Breivik mass murder would bode ill for dissenters.  Well, one assumes it was private, but who knows what is being monitored and by whom…

Anyway, being a ‘glass half full’ kind of chap I replied that seeing as the Norwegian intelligence service has shown Breivik up to be a dangerous and well armed Walter Mitty, attempts to tar dissenters with the same brush will fail.  I stressed the importance of continuing to cite evidence and push our arguments so the powers that be will be forced to speak to them.

After all, I pointed out, 7/7 didn’t really change anything and subsequent plots haven’t really changed anything, so therefore it follows a Norwegian mass murderer will not change anything either.

At this point my blogging friend said he was not so sure.  He qualified his concern by providing me with a link to a piece on the French language version of EurActiv, translated roughly by Google.

Reading and reflecting upon it made me reconsider my inital assessment, hence my post yesterday.  All bloggers should take a few moments to take the article on board.

Mentioned in that piece is European Commission spokesman Michele Cercone (pictured).  It seems old Michele has had a fair bit to say lately – some of it extremely illuminating and far reaching.  Consider this, attributed to Cercone by

The European Commission is building a security system to issue early warnings on threats of extremism, xenophobia and other forms of radicalism

Or this quote reported by Hurriyet Daily News:

Compromises are more easily reached after shocking events like those that happened in Norway.

And International Affairs Magazine, explained that: ‘Various forces will be trying to capitalize on Norway’s bloody drama. Interestingly, the European Commission championed the cause. Breivik left a thorough description of the costs of the bomb ingredients, the result being that the EU rushed to impose regulations on the sales of chemicals that can be mold into explosives,’ and reported Cercone as saying:

The European Commission will speed up the introduction of new regulations on chemicals sales after a Norwegian extremist who killed 76 people in last week’s bombing and shooting spree admitted he used fertilizers to make explosives.

But virtually none of this has been reported by our world beating media corps, which is too busy devoted column hectares to its navel gazing over phone hacking.  Should we be worried by this?  Absolutely.

It is a fact that the European Commission, an arm of the EU, is now increasing its efforts to apply control over people in the member states.  No crisis must ever be wasted.  The EU, being unelected, unaccountable and therefore wholly anti democratic, is seizing the moment to empower itself still further at the expense of our personal freedoms.  We are being dictated to by an entity that is taking an opportunity to use the actions of one individual as justification to clamp down on anyone who opposes this essentially socialist construct – hence the focus on right wing ‘extremism’ where the EU decides what constitutes extreme.

The issue is one of mission creep.  We have seen it all before, where legislation enacted for one purpose becomes a convenient measure that is applied for a different purpose that was never intended.  The EU is engaging in naked opportunism to exert greater control, while setting itself as the sole authority to determine what dissent against it will be tolerated.

It is frightening that the EU, with its goal of eradicating the nation state, will be deciding whether its opponents are too radical, whether their views can therefore be shared on the internet, and will define what constitutes xenophobia and whether that should be punished – all backed by European courts and European arrest warrants.

In hindsight I got it wrong.  We are indeed staring into an abyss where our enemy, the EU, could take advantage of the Breivik attacks to effectively criminalise anti EU sentitment, or at the very least prevent people from sharing those sentiments with others, citing them as ‘extreme’, ‘radical’, ‘xenophobic’ or even potential ‘lone wolf terrorists’.  This response isn’t being driven simply by Breivik’s actions, but crucially the rationale he gave for them.

You asked why – here is the answer

Following the revelation that the mass murders in Norway were carried out by a white Nordic man rather than Islamists, hours of radio time and a good amount of TV broadcast time were devoted to trying to make a number of people feel stupid for having initally suggested the attack had been perpetrated by Islamist terrorists.

Plenty of bloggers and media talking heads, whose worldview favours the notion of mass immigration, seized on the news that an Anders and not an Ahmed had carried out the atrocities in Oslo and on Utoya and posed effectively the same question in a range of variations:

Why do we always assume Muslims are behind every terrorist outrage?

The idea for this was to make people feel stupid and guilty for having made an incorrect assumption, to make them feel bigoted and prejudiced for jumping to conclusions.

But the fact of the matter is the reason so many people rushed to the Islamist terrorist conclusion is that in recent years so many attacks and foiled attacks have been carried out by people citing passages from the Qur’an as justification for their attempts to kill people they view as infidels. Whether it is exploding themselves on tube trains and buses, engaging in a concerted copycat effort two weeks later, plotting to blow up shopping centres, trying to kill people outside nightclubs with car bombs, attempting to denotate explosives in shoes or ignite underpants over the Atlantic, drive a car bomb into an airport terminal building or plotting to mix liquid chemicals together in coordinated fashion on a number of jets simultaneously, the common theme of this incredibly disproportionate number of attacks and attackers is Islamism.

This has been re-emphasised today with the updated news that the two German nationals arrested at Dover and charged at City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court with collecting or possessing data likely to be useful in a terrorist act, Christian Emde, 28, and Robert Baum, 23, are fanatical Muslim converts.

So it should come as no surprise that suddenly all those ‘right on’ voices determined to apply the labels of racist, xenophobe and bigot to people less ‘internationalist’ than themselves seem to have gone rather quiet again. And they will remain so until there is another rare non-Islamist assault on civilians.  It is a safe bet that the phone ins on Five Live, LBC and other stations will not be editorially re-focused to ask why so many fanatical Muslims are hell bent on attacking western countries and killing as many people as possible. It doesn’t fit in with their narrative of telling us how wrong we are to rightly point out the Islamist threat dwarfs all others.

There are a number of threats this country faces, foreign and domestic, and it is not racist or bigoted to state the fact that the biggest and most determined of those threats comes from fanatical Muslims who subscribe to the Islamist mindset.  The evidence supports it.

What the Norway massacre is telling us

The car bombing in Oslo and depraved mass murder on Utoya carried out by Anders Behring Breivik represents the most shocking act of political violence seen for many years.  It was an act of terrorism and it was an outrage.  Particularly the murder of children which was especially heinous.

The media, in its own inimitable style, has dug up any number of angles to explain these joint incidents.  But the hacks have alighted on the ‘far right’ angle of an attack by a ‘Christian fundamentalist’ pursuing an agenda of ‘anti immigration bigotry’.

That the musings of Breivik – being taken down from Twitter, Facebook and websites as quickly as the authorities can – display his intolerance for Muslims, ‘cultural Marxists’ and the left wing Labour government in Norway amongst others is indisputable.  Breivik’s apparent claims of advising groups such as the English Defence League remain as yet unproven.  But what is notable is that the hatred and intolerance visited upon the people of Oslo was not directed against immigrants or people of the Islamic faith, as one would expect given the picture of Breivik that has been painted.

The murderous violence was directed against the government and its activist supporters.

Many commentators are describing this as the act of a madman.  That may or may not be the case.  But to commit the atrocity Breivik did certainly required him to be at the very least a person devoid of sympathy and any sense of compassion for his victims, and consumed by hatred, rage and frustration. Many of those same commentators argue that in a democracy, where people enjoy freedom of speech and the right to protest peacefully, there is no need to engage in violence.

But what about when those rights are perceived to be hollow?  What can one do when the established political parties with their secure positions and consensus views on major issues of concern actually deny a true democratic choice to the electorate?  What can one do when the apparent freedom of speech is shut down by shrill accusations of racism, xenophobia or narrow mindedness, which causes people to shy away from setting up a new political opposition, as we have seen across Europe for years?  What can one do when all forms of peaceful protest are ignored by the political class because there is no swift consequence for ignoring the people they are supposed to represent? Indeed, what can one do when the accepted media outlets choose to omit stories or ignore valid arguments in order to hold the line for the establishment?

What the mass murder in Norway is telling us is that some people have a breaking point beyond which, in the absence of any other form of recourse against the people who rule over them, they resort to extremism and violence.  This argument has been used to justify political (and religious inspired) violence in places as diverse as Gaza, Kashmir, Thailand, Libya and Syria, among others.

Calls for reform in those places swiftly follow – usually led by the political left in Europe which sees any such action as revolutionary and therefore justified – and are sometimes supported by the libertarians who see such uprisings as cries for self determination and freedom.  But when such revolutionary type violence breaks out in enlightened western Europe, where the left holds political sway, the acts are immediately labelled as right wing extremism or the actions of madmen, because the left cannot believe that anyone could disagree with their worldview – and if they do they must be inherently selfish and evil.  The contradiction is clear. The ignorance is startling.

Where security experts are stating this week that there is a rise of the ‘far right’ in Europe, perhaps they do not realise we might be looking at nothing more than the an increasingly extreme form of rejection of socialist political control and the creeping internationalism that sees the political class seeking to transform European nations while doing everything possible to avoid asking the electorates for their permission to do so.

The antidote to political violence in Europe is simple… the restoration of genuine democracy where the people, not the political class, have the power.  In many ways what happened in Norway is made all the more curious because Norway still enjoys self determination outside the EU.  But a more forensic examination of domestic politics there might throw up faultlines that could explain what Breivik felt could only be be tackled by killing the current leaders of the Norwegian Labour Party and its next generation of leaders. In other words resorting to the extreme.

There are many issues where the political class across Europe defy the wishes of the people who elect them.  Anger and frustration is growing as people realise nothing they can do within the law can sway the politicians from their chosen direction.  Protest marches, letter writing, distribution of campaign material… all can be and are routinely ignored by the politicians.  There is a sense of detachment from the people that gives the political class a false sense of security from consequences for their actions.

What happened in Norway may now shake the politicians out of their complacency.  Sadly it doesn’t appear to be in the way we would hope.

As William Hague’s comments to Andrew Marr today demonstrate the politicians remain wilfully blind to the causes of such extremism and instead they will only focus on looking at ‘the lessons to be learned’ from a security perspective – in other words they will continue as they have done and just seek to learn better techniques in self preservation.

As such they have learned nothing of value.  Without a change in approach by the politicians and a willingness to finally do what they are paid to do and listen to the people, at some point another angry person or persons will snap and go on the rampage.  These people will direct their ire against the political class, but only hurt others because of the ring of steel, bullet proof glass and bomb resistant vehicles that insulate the politicians from the people they are supposed to serve.

Breivik is not the first, and as we can see from the political class’ response, tragically he won’t be the last.  It is all so avoidable.

Osama Bin Laden killed

Osama Bin Laden has been killed in a US military operation.

At least that is what President Obama has announced.  The narrative goes that US Special Forces attacked a compound in Abbottabad, in the far north of the country, less than half a mile from Pakistan’s military academy.  Several people were killed and a helicopter was blown up after ‘technical failure’.

The bottom line is that Bin Laden was allegedly killed during the firefight and that ‘US forces took possession of Bin Laden’s body’.  There then followed exactly the kind of media frenzy that sows confusion and question what they are being told, which is strange considering the US military were given the go signal to attack the compound as long ago as the day of the Royal Wedding and have had plenty of time to plan their media operation to ensure there was no confusion…

At 5:38am Reuters was reporting that a

US official says Bin Laden’s body is being handled according to Islamic practice and tradition

At 6:38am this morning CBS tweeted that:

“Aljazeera correspondent in Kabul says Osama Bin Laden’s body taken to Bagram base. Journalists could be called in to inspect it .”

At 7:52am US General Jack Keane told the BBC’s Today programme that it was

“appropriate” that Bin Laden was killed by US forces. “I’m glad we’re bringing a body back [to the US] as to opposed to him walking back.”

By 8:45am Associated Press in Washington was

‘quoting a US official as saying Osama Bin Laden’s body has been buried at sea.’

What is clear is that until there is an independent post mortem and we have independent corroboration of the information coming from the White House along with a more clear view of the body than the image below being retailed by Associated Press (a Photoshopped image), there will always be a suspicion that we are not being told the whole truth about what has apparently been done in our name.

This rapid story and swift conclusion before all the questions have been answered would be seen by many as just a bit too convenient for a struggling President. Previously many Democrats had been claiming President Bush would do exactly this, and roll out Bin Laden’s body just before an election campaign got into gear.  How ironic that it has happened on Obama’s watch. EU Referendum makes a similar point about the paucity of hard evidence, as Dr Richard North surmises:

Nevertheless, in the absence of anything in the way of independently verifiable evidence, all we seem to have is an unsupported claim by a tarnished president. However, since US presidents never lie, and have never been mistaken about anything, we can safely believe everything we are told.

Richard Falk finally goes too far even for the UN

A tireless effort by campaign group UN Watch has led to what is being described as the unprecedented international condemation of Richard Falk, who has consistently exploited his position as a special rapporteur at the UN’s Human Rights Council to justify and deny Hamas and Al Qaeda terrorism.

As the UN Human Rights Council’s permanent investigator of alleged Israeli violations in the Palestinian territories, Falk has had a largely unscrutinised position from which to satisfy his unquestioning vilification of the Israelis.  As his target was Israel he was indulged by the left wing media as his outbursts fitted their narrative.

But it now seems that after years of Falk’s rampant Israel bashing and partisan bias towards Hamas, spreading slurs and distortions and the asserting as fact claims that have later been debunked, the penny has finally dropped among his UN colleagues and the media that he is a deluded and unreliable propagandist.  It follows his promotion of 9/11 conspiracy theories and attempts to exonerate Al Qaeda of any involvement in the terrorist atrocity, instead claiming the US government was responsible for the attack.

The cost of tackling a handful of Irish Republican terrorists

On this blog and elsewhere I have spent several years arguing that the threat from republican terrorists in Northern Ireland was being systematically downplayed to give a false impression that all in the province was well.

Despite repeated assurances from the Stormont administration that the ‘dissidents’ are only few in number; and a shocking refusal on the part of some media outlets to report some terror incidents over the last couple of years, both now seem to have come to an reluctant acceptance of the true state of affairs.

And that reality is borne out by the request from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) for an extra £245m over the next four years to combat ‘dissident’ republican violence.  An extra £61m per year is a huge some of money for a minor problem.  Clearly the number of terrorists involved with these groups, their increasing capability and enhanced reach can no longer be swept under the carpet and dismissed as a little local difficulty.

The breakneck effort to drawdown security forces in Northern Ireland and decommission assets necessary to combat terrorist activity has given the republican groups the space to recruit, train and carry out attacks.  The pandering to IRA/Sinn Fein by the Labour government, which is carrying on under the faux Conservatives, has increased the threat in Northern Ireland and restored a threat to mainland Britain.

Giving us yet another reason not to trust anything the political class say, it is clear weapons we were assured by terrorists and politicians had been put beyond use, under independent scrutiny, are being used having been transferred to these groups by the IRA.  Maybe now the political class will be hauled back into the real world to deliver on the obligations they have failed to fulfil as they engaged in spin and self congratulation. Hopefully not too many more lives will be lost while the security forces try to get hold of what they were instructed to let go of.

What the Stockholm bombings tell us

The double bomb attack in Stockholm yesterday provides us with yet more evidence that appeasement of those determined to harm us doesn’t work. Across Scandinavia there are radicalised Muslims who feel nothing but hatred and contempt for their hosts and the west in general.

This has been exhibited by reports of Islamist youths wearing t-shirts declaring that in ‘2030 Sweden is ours’, which demonstrates that integration is not the aim of those granted residence in that country.

In addition, Sweden’s intelligence service (SÄPO) has also reported that Islamist immigrants have been engaging in terrorism and attending terrorist training camps back in Somalia. SÄPO was warning as recently as the summer that young Swedes in Somalia could take part in terrorist attacks ‘in the near future.’ We shall know soon enough if that prediction came true this weekend.

Western countries have been too free and too easy doling out passports and residency permits to people claiming to be in need of asylum.  Part of the thinking is that if we show how kind and generous we are we’re less likely to come under attack from Islamists. Supposedly we are setting an example. But all the evidence shows this approach is scoffed at by the Islamists and they say it shows we are weak and deserving of attack. The only thing that gives these religio-political lunatics any pause for thought is strength, resolve and a determination to defeat the threat they pose.

All too often the intelligence services discover that many people granted asylum then pitch up in their countries of origin, from where they have supposedly fled in fear of their lives, and are engaged in fighting, terrorism or radicalisation. Instead of immediately blacklisting these people to prevent their return, thanks to the self loathing liberal elite they are still permitted freedom of movement in the countries they intend to turn into theatre of terror. So is it any wonder we end up with a fifth column within our countries that are hell bent on killing as many innocent people as possible?

If we do not wise up and change our approach in order to deal with these people in uncompromising fashion then we can expect more of the same in weeks, months and years to come.

Update: Depressingly yet unsurprisingly reports now suggest the bomber previously lived in the UK, in Luton, and studied at the University of Bedfordshire. It will be interesting to see if taxpayers subsidised his study. Thanks to our utterly useless political class, their idiotic immigration policies and their sucking up to extremist preachers of hate, this country is the rallying point for every homocidal Islamist in western Europe. Whenever an Islamist carries out an act of terror anywhere in the west it must now be par for the course to look through his history to see where in the UK he lived, studied or attended a mosque run by hatemongers, in order to piece his story and connections together.

Fighting the Islamist onslaught

A healthy dose of realism from the head of our rapidly dwindling and increasingly ineffective armed forces. General Sir David Richards has said that the West cannot defeat al-Qaeda and militant Islam. Well, yes and no.

Fighting a conventional campaign against an opponent that by necessity uses unconventional methods will result in the failure we are seeing. And it is pointless talking about defeating militant Islam when the politicians and judiciary in this country indulge their agents, and kid themselves that by appeasing them or showing benevolence we can convince them to turn their attentions away from us to something else.

The Islamists sneer at such weakness and draw strength from it because it convinces their warped minds that their aims are righteous and favoured by Allah. The only thing they understand is strength. Anything else spawns their contempt. As such we must be uncompromising in our fight against them. Our politicians do not understand this enemy. They do not understand that there can be negotiation because the only thing the Islamists want is our defeat and fealty to a global Islamic state.

We are engaged in asymmetric warfare with this aggressor. Until the politicians accept the reality and stop trying to fight symmetric battles against them, even mere containment cannot be assured. Our politicians seem incapable of learning the lessons of the past, therefore condemning us to repeat the mistakes of yesteryear. We cannot buy these Islamists off. All we can do is keep killing them so their capability is limited.

Gaza truth emerges as Hamas admits lies

It was only ever going to be a matter of time before the truth emerged. Hamas has confirmed for the first time today that between 200 and 300 members of the organization’s military wing (fighters, terrorists) were killed during Israel’s Operation Cast Lead offensive in the Gaza Strip in 2008. (Hat tip: Media Backspin)

Hamas previously denied those figures which were consistent with the numbers initially reported by the Israel Defense Forces Spokesperson’s Unit immediately following the operation. The terrorists turned dictators claimed at the time that less than 50 of its fighters had been killed and labelled all other deaths as civilian, claims that were accepted without question by the flawed and biased Goldstone Report commissioned by the United Nations.

If the first casualty of war is truth then Hamas is the go-to group for lies, distortions and fabrications. Even when finally conceding that Israel was not only targeting armed fighters but doing so much more effectively than previously admitted, Hamas’ Interior Minister, Fathi Hamad couldn’t stop himself from spouting yet another big porky. In response to a question about Al Qadea involvement in Gaza he trotted out this little gem:

“We are moderate people, and we don’t like extremists or fanatics,”

Beyond parody. Presumably the photograph above is of one of their peace campaigners, taken in between throwing Fatah members from rooftops and then sending death squads after their Fatah rivals. But perhaps Hamad became more truthful as he added:

“We don’t need weapons or Jihad fighters – anyone who wants to help us can send money.”

Indeed, Hamas is doing altogether rather too well when it comes to smuggling rockets and explosives into Gaza in readiness for yet more attacks on Israel. They just need to keep paying for them to be supplied.

Britain is now the punchline for an international joke

  • Can you imagine, just for a second, the US Navy or Russian Navy putting an aircraft carrier to sea with no aircraft?
  • Can you imagine France scrapping the Charles de Gaulle without immediate replacement and giving up its strike capability for a whole decade?
  • Can you imagine India putting its forthcoming Vikrant class carrier to sea, but with Thai rather than Indian owned aicraft?

The questions should be seen as preposterous because they are. But these are the scenarios facing our senior service, the Royal Navy, thanks to a government that is determined to make much needed spending cuts, but refusing to make them in those areas that have been soaked in additional or wasteful spending by the profligate Labour administration.

Either the government is serious about the defence of the United Kingdom and its interests overseas, or it isn’t.

The threat to this country, while recognising there are homegrown terrorists eager to attack us, originates overseas. The people who wish to harm this country and its people train overseas. Therefore we need to be able to act to defend ourselves overseas and air power is an important element in such actions.

There is no middle ground here. The government must retain a maritime strike capability until HMS Queen Elizabeth II and HMS Prince of Wales are fully operational with the proper complement of strike/fighter aircraft. HMS Ark Royal should not be retired early. And it is ridiculous that we might only have an intermittent nuclear deterrent in future because the plans for reducing the submarine fleet mean at times we will not have an attack submarine at sea.

Billions of pounds have been swallowed in welfare overpayments and the errors have still not been fixed. Billions have disappeared into the black hole of PFI projects where the taxpayer has been fleeced. Billions have been wasted on idiotic defence procurement flights of fancy. The list continues. These things should be fixed instead of degrading our military capability. Perhaps we can copy the Russians and fill the flightdeck with inflatable decoy aircraft to give the impression we are serious about defence.

Hey, heard the one about the country that had a defence strategy that allowed it to build two supercarriers but didn’t budget for the planes they’re supposed to carry…?

How is Theresa May a government minister?

Writing in that bastion of denialist socialist propaganda, Mrs Andrew Marr (Jackie Ashley, not the mother of the Marr lovechild, Alice Miles) laments the lack of women in government. Ashley argues that the government has so few women in it that it’s no surprise their interests are absent from debates about the cuts:

There are just four women cabinet ministers. One is very junior, and comes from the Lords. One is Welsh secretary. As home secretary, Theresa May has some clout, but not on economic issues. Ditto Caroline Spelman at environment.

Anyone listening to the Today programme this morning would be forgiven for wondering how on earth Theresa May is in the Cabinet at all.  Her interview with John Humphrys in the 8.10am slot was a complete and utter car crash. Listeners have rarely heard a Minister of the Crown so completely out of their depth, waffling pitifully and repeating the answers to previous questions when clearly having no grasp of their brief.

May said that cyber-attacks on vital computer networks present a ‘new and growing threat’ to the security of the United Kingdom. Not only is the threat far from ‘new’, she was incapable of articulating why cyber attacks are as serious a threat to the country as terrorism and therefore warranting serious attention in the government’s National Security Strategy. At least GCHQ was capable of explaining the nature of the cyber threat last week, while the Home Secretary was doubtless asleep at her desk.

All Theresa May is good for is insulting grassroots Conservatives by tagging them as the ‘nasty party’, signing up to every passing EU law and order power grab and acting as a clothes horse to provide the useless political media with column inches on parliamentarian fashion.

A rocket attack the BBC could not ignore

No apologies here for continuing on the theme of selective reporting by the BBC about the escalation in violence against Israel over the last 10 days.  As this blog has pointed out in recent days, the recent rocket attacks against Israel have been ignored and only referred to when the BBC reports on Israeli retaliation.

Today however the BBC rushed to report about a rocket attack on the southern Israeli resort town of Eilat.  Not because of any shift in editorial approach, but because the terrorists who launched the attack managed to hit the Jordanian port of Aqaba, injuring civilians thereby making it newsworthy.  Most likely it would have otherwise been ignored like the attacks further north.

Rockets and mortars are being launched at Israel indiscriminately from Gaza and now from the Egyptian Sinai peninsula.  These are not just of the homemade variety casually dismissed as trivial by the media, but military munitions such as the Grad.  As you can see from the damage it causes in the image above, the Grad is not to be taken lightly.

As if these attacks did not demonstrate with sufficient impact that Israel continues to suffer from murderous violence from outwith its borders, the terrorist group Islamic Jihad has now announced it is to renew suicide bombings inside Israel, attacks that are being planned in the West Bank.

Perhaps if the BBC was more willing to present the full picture of the violence being waged against Israel, people would understand the actions Israeli carries out in response.  While painted as an aggressor, the Israelis are just doing what any free state would do to neutralise the architects of the attacks and deny them materials and operating bases from which to launch their terror.

Cameron courts the Islamic street with attack on Israel

Israel can be excused for thinking that with friends like David Cameron it doesn’t need enemies.  It can also be excused for wondering how a man with an Eton and Oxford education can be so lacking in critical faculties. 

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, in his desire to cosy up to Turkey and continue the enlargement of the very EU he tries to claim he is sceptical of, has made not one but two false assertions in his speech in Ankara today. The first concerned the flotilla of vessels that aimed to break the blockade of the port in Gaza, about which he said:

The Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla was completely unacceptable.

It was not an attack at all. Israeli defence forces effected a boarding of a number of vessels to inspect their cargo. The crew of one vessel, Turkish nationals, decided to attack the boarding party with a variety of weapons. It was only when this violence continued that the Israeli personnel had to use lethal force to defend themselves.  This is borne out by video evidence.  The distinction is important and Cameron’s assertion is wrong and unjustified.  Then he continued on the Gaza theme:

Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.

The fact is aid and goods do flow into Gaza from Israel.  Israel has attempted to stop certain materials that can have military application from being channeled to Hamas – a terrorist organisation.  Perhaps Cameron has forgotten that Egypt also has restrictions on goods and people crossing its border into Gaza.  If Gaza is a prison camp, then it is remarkably well equipped if overcrowded.  The latest mobile phones, computers and consumer items are all available – although Palestinian profiteers are controlling supplies of some basics in order to drive up prices and increase their own earnings.

Cameron is either ignorant or he is peddling deliberate deceptions to ingratiate himself with the Turks.  Either way the rhetoric only serves in inflame opinion against Israel, which continues to face aggression from groups such as Hamas, countries such as Syria, Lebanon and Iran and their proxies such as Hezbollah.  Presumably Turkish aggression against the Kurds and border incursions into Iraq to attack PKK targets are fine.  It seems on Planet Cameron only Israel should be berated when it stands up to terrorism.

Notably absent from Cameron’s soft soaping of Israel’s opponents was any mention of Hamas’ criminal and terrorist behaviour.  Nothing was said about the Fatah members who were thrown from rooftops in Gaza by Hamas fighters. Nothing was said about Palestinians who fled to Israel for protection and received hospital treatment after being attacked by Hamas members.  No, the only aggressor and party worthy of vilification in that part of the world is Israel and Cameron has demonstrated he will put expediency before honesty.

According to the official record 10,726,614 UK citizens voted for a Conservative government in May.  Instead they got Cameron’s cabal of conservatives in name only. Forget the heir to Blair line. These political pygmies with their own peculiar brand of schoolboy politics are the heirs to David Owen.

Ironically Labour got it right by calling Cameron a chameleon. Unfortunately he changed colour to a pinkish yellow rather than the deep blue conservatives had hoped for. This country swapped one left of centre government for another left of centre government. The Conservative logo was a flag of convenience, nothing more.

One wonders how long the grassroots will stomach this hijack of their party and coup by the Tory wets, whose approach and behaviour handed Blair his triumph in 1997.

Martin McGuinness faces civil court action

A civil action against Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, on account of his historical leadership in the IRA is to be progressed in the High Court, according to reports in the News Letter.

The same paper reported in March claims by Willie Frazer that he had served a writ on Mr McGuinness in the Stormont Parliament Buildings for damages relating to the murder of his father by the IRA in 1975.  Mr Frazer said Sinn Fein’s reaction to the findings of the Saville Report had prompted him to progress the case, which will be progressed on Monday.

While the story itself is moderately interesting, the most notable aspect concerns a quote in the piece from Sinn Fein’s spokesman about this man whose father was murdered by IRA terrorists:

“Willie Frazer is irrelevant and a serial failed political figure. His views have been rejected by the people in the Westminster election and Sinn Fein has better things to worry about.”

As words go, callous doesn’t seem remotely strong enough an adjective.  The contempt shown for this tragic man, who had his father snatched away from him by vicious IRA murderers, is sickening.  In seeking to turn this into a matter of electoral politics, rather than a matter of accountability, McGuinness’ Sinn Fien/IRA mouthpieces demonstrate the simmering hatred they retain for those who oppose them.

Given that IRA cowards refused to give evidence to the Saville Inquiry perhaps this is the only way of getting Martin McGuinness into a court room to account for his terrorism.  Romanticised by many in the media, it sometimes takes actions like this to strip away the faux veneer of respectability around McGuinness and reveal the brutality within.

Saville Report triggers IRA apologist revisionism

One did not have to be a genius to realise that the release of the Saville Report into the events of ‘Bloody Sunday’ – 12 years in the making at a cost of over £190 million – would trigger a wave of republican and pro-IRA revisionism.  Indeed today, 30th January 1972 has become year zero in the republican version of the history of what was vicious civil conflict in Northern Ireland.

Listening to Northern Irish republicans and their fellow travellers in the media today as they take advantage of the findings for their own ends, the less well informed in our society could be forgiven for thinking that Bloody Sunday was the start of the ‘Troubles’.  People could be excused for believing that the IRA spontaneously emerged in response to a deadly and unprovoked assault on civil rights marchers In Londonderry by members of the Parachute Regiment, that left 13 dead and over 20 wounded.  People could be forgiven for thinking that if only the Parachute Regiment soldiers had not opened fire in the tense and intimidating atmosphere of the growing Bogside riot, the violence of the subsequent 26 years would not have happened.  It’s enough to make one sick.

Of course this distortion of history and lack of context of the nature of things in Northern Ireland in 1972 suits the republicans.  It enables them to feed off the ignorance of others, fuel their own sense of injustice despite their own actions, play down the atrocities committed by the IRA and its splinter groups and seek to create what Lisburn Councillor, Ronnie Crawford, recently described as a hierarchy of victims.  It is gut wrenching stuff that seeks to capitalise on the deaths of innocent people.  The fact is, despite the wrongs committed by the Paras, there was a riot in progress and armed IRA terrorists were present, stirring violence out of what was supposed to be a peaceful civil rights march.

Let’s put Bloody Sunday into greater context.  Three days before that fateful Sunday two young RUC policemen, Peter Gilgunn and David Montgomery, had been ambushed and shot dead in their patrol car on the Creggan Road by the Londonderry IRA – an attack almost certainly sanctioned by Martin McGuinness.  A day later in Belfast a young off duty RUC officer, Raymond Carroll, was shot dead at a petrol station by the IRA.  On Bloody Sunday itself, a British soldier who had been shot in Londonderry’s Bogside four months earlier by an IRA sniper during a riot, Maj. Robin Alers-Hankey, died of his injuries.

It was in this environment that the Paras arrived on the Bogside to man barricades during a lawful civil rights march, but then came under attack by rioters.  Saville tells us that the Paras opened fire on the crowd, an action that was unjustified and unjustifiable.  If Saville’s findings reflect reality, and there is no reason to suppose otherwise, there is no defence for the actions of some of the Paras on that day and I say that as someone who has served in uniform.  There is no excuse for any deliberate killing of an unarmed civilian, but it is not hard to understand how the killings took place in light of the murderous actions that took place in the days leading up to Bloody Sunday and the violence on the day itself.

Bloody Sunday was not the start of the Troubles.  It is a mere bookmark in their history.  From the start of the Troubles in 1969, no less than 226 civilians, terrorists, policemen and soldiers had died in shootings, bombings and by their own evil hand in the commission of terrorism before Bloody Sunday.

30th January 1972 is not year zero.  IRA terrorists and enablers such as Bernadette Devlin McAliskey should not be allowed to get away with such a cynical misrepresentation in their efforts to rewrite history to castigate the security forces, while airbrushing their own sickening catalogue of terror from the annals. It is beneath contempt for someone like her to call for Britain to be put in the dock for a handful of soldiers losing control on one terrifying afternoon, while acting as if her friends who waged a brutal reign of terrorism, racketeering and criminality resulting in the deaths of thousands over the course of three more decades, are saintly innocents.

As many commentators have reminded us, thousands died in Northern Ireland and across the UK and Europe as a result of republican and loyalist terrorism and the fight against it.  The families of other innocent victims will not enjoy 12 year inquiries funded by millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to give them closure or exhonerate their dead.  The apologists for terror should not be allowed to hijack Saville for their own ends and construct a revisionist version of history, but sadly this inquiry has handed them the opportunity on a plate and it seems no one has the courage or the will to stop them.  It is not just opportunistic, it is the ultimate insult.

It is also worth noting the media bias and lack of objectivity particularly prominent in the Guardian.  There is no hint of impartiality when it comes to Northern Ireland in the Guardian’s editorial creed.  The republicans are the object of sympathy, the security forces are portrayed as brutal oppressors.  As for the unionist majority that wishes Northern Ireland to remain part of the United Kingdom, they are an oddity treated with disdain.  This explains Paul Owen’s live updates earlier today where he had an exchange with Guardian’s man on the spot in 1972.  As he explained:

Simon Winchester, who reported on Bloody Sunday for the Guardian in 1972 and has returned to write about the report today, has just been speaking to me on the phone from outside the Guildhall in Derry.

For the clearest example of the Guardian’s bias and lack of context, consider one of the questions Owen poses to Winchester at 3.01pm about the scenes in Londonderry today as the crowds gathered to hear the outome of the Saville inquiry:

The question is something of an insult to unionists.  Anyone journalist worth his salt would know and faithfully report that these days there are not many protestants to be found in Londonderry – population over 85,000.  An estimated 97% of Protestants have fled Londonderry during and since the Troubles, leaving only around 500 in the city, mainly in the Fountain area.  Given that thousands of unionists have fled their homes in the city after suffering murders, beatings and sectarian intimidation at the hands of republican thugs, to ask if they are visible during a mass republican march to the Guildhall is either extreme idiocy or plain spiteful.

Egypt shows Hamas is the problem in Gaza

It is all very well Britain, the EU and the United Nations demanding an end to Israel’s blockade of Gaza.  But which of these entities will step up and ensure Hamas does not use any lifting of the blockade to smuggle yet more weapons into Gaza with which Hamas terrorists attack Israel indiscriminately?

The UN has demonstrated again its utter uselessness as it has stood by while Hezbollah re-arms in southern Lebanon, bringing in weapons and ammunition from Syria and Iran.  If Israel does not restrict the flow of materials, Hamas will re-arm just as quickly in Gaza.  Why should Israel be condemned for taking actions to prevent the attacks we all know will be launched?

While the international community and the world’s media focuses attention on Israel’s attempts to maintain the blockade following the fatal actions on the high seas, there seems to be an absence of comment about Egypt’s blockade of Gaza.  Having publicity about an Islamic nation also blockading the Hamas administration doesn’t seem to suit the anti-Israel campaigners.  But surely it is telling that a country that is effectively an enemy of Israel shares concerns about Hamas’ intentions.  Egypt proves the issue in Gaza is not Israel, but Hamas.  Since its bloody takeover, Gaza has been converted into a militarised zone where the powerbrokers are bent on the destruction of the Israeli state.

Few people seem to ask why the people of Gaza experience shortages, yet Hamas with its myriad of tunnels and smuggling routes, seems well capable of importing weaponary and ammunition.  There also seems to be no shortage of mobile phones and other mod cons in Gaza, which seems rather curious for a territory that struggles to acquire life’s basics.  Why don’t the protesters raise this and demand Hamas explain why its priority is obtaining weapons rather than acquiring much needed aid?  Perhaps because of the uncomfortable truth that Hamas is responsible for more deaths in Gaza than Israel.  Its civil war with Fatah has brought about many of the problems and its continuing aggression against Israel has resulted in restrictions of what can be imported.

It is terrible that lives have been lost as some well meaning people, manipulated and egged on by extremists, have blindly attempted to break the blockade.  It is no surprise to see appeased terrorists such as Martin McGuinness and the usual suspects from places like Northern Ireland at the forefront of the effort to prop up a violent faction that rules Gaza by fear.  But then, these important facts that put the thing into context are not helpful in winning over an ill-informed global public.

Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive

%d bloggers like this: