Monday, 30 April 2012

London Olympics Website Lists Jerusalem as “Palestine” Capital, Israel – No Capital

This year’s Summer Olympic Games in London will take place almost 40 years after the murder of Israeli Olympic athletes by Islamic terrorists.  The anti-Israel International Olympic Committee still refuses to memorialize the Israeli athletes who were slain there, lest it offend Muslims. And, yet, the Palestinian terrorists were rewarded with a UN mission not long after the murders.  And, now, they have an official Olympic delegation, which they’ve had for years, despite the fact that there is no official country called, “Palestine.”  

The Olympics have even dropped the bikini requirement from women’s beach volleyball to appease Muslims. And to add insult to injury, until this morning, the London Olympics website listed Jerusalem as the capital of “Palestine” and listed Israel as a country with no capital at all.  (Now, neither has a capital listed.)  Here is the screenshot:

- Jewish Defence League UK -

Muslim Councillors in Britain - Firearms, Sickening Behaviour and Blunt Disrespect

When it comes to Muslim councillors in Britain, you will need to dig pretty deep to find something to praise them for, here is just four examples of what Muslim councillors in the UK get up to:

Bradford Councillor Amir Hussain pictured holding an RPG whilst on an "Aid Mission" to Afghanistan:

A Councillor in Bradford was exposed recently after a photograph depicting him holding a rocket-propelled grenade launcher was sent to the UK press.

Councillor Amir Hussain, executive member for health and social care, said he believed the picture was taken 20 years ago when he was on a "charitable trip to Afghanistan" before his time on Bradford Council.

Amir Hussain with RPG
The photograph also shows two fire arms propped up against a wall next to him.

Muslim pawn Respect MP for Bradford West George Galloway said: “Respect was vehemently attacked by the Labour party after they made public a Facebook photograph of one of our candidates with a rifle on a charitable aid mission in Afghanistan. Labour claimed he was unsuitable to stand for office. What will Labour say or do now about Councillor Hussain? It would be completely hypocritical of them if they don't immediately suspend him and demand that he steps down from the Council.”

Well George, although whenever members of the Respect Party are exposed you spit your dummy out and play the "Islamophobic" card or accuse the exposer of being behind a conspiracy. But there is nothing charitable about holding a rifle in a region that is locked in conflict with the country you are from, there is nothing charitable about holding an RPG which, at the time, was probably used to shoot Russian troops in the Afghan War of the late 1980's.

Councillor Hussain said he had been on a trip to Afghanistan 20 years ago, as a "local businessman", to distribute funds raised as part of a Bradford radio appeal.

"It is a photo which was taken around 20 years ago by a friend who I understand has recently joined Respect. I have never owned a copy of this photo, far less paraded it on any social media site and would never consider such behaviour as acceptable.

So the person who took the photograph also joined an extreme Left Respect party? Why do the Leftist run organizations always attract wannabe Taliban fighters?

"I am extremely sorry for any offence this photo causes and would like to stress my opposition to firearms of any sort and the need for the gun crime problems Bradford suffers to be confronted and dealt with."

No apology for his past would have been made if the picture had remained hidden, gun crime must be ok when it is aimed at shooting "Infidel Troops" but when the Muslim youth of Bradford are shooting each other left, right and centre over various drug and territory feuds it is a sorrowful event.

Asif Khan pictured holding a Military Assault Rifle in 2002 whilst on an aid mission to Afghanistan:

Asif Khan (left) with a Military Assault Rifle

last week the Labour party drew attention to a photograph on Facebook showing Respect Party candidate Asif Khan holding a gun. It was said to have been taken on an aid mission to Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan in 2002. Asif did not apologize, instead he called those who uncovered the picture "Childish and desperate"

Asif Khan is standing in a ward of Bradford, Respect Party figurehead  George Galloway has just became MP for.

Khan also had many pictures of himself posing with shotguns from when he attended a shooting range in Skipton.

It is frightening how many Muslim figures in the British political scene may have had access to arms training and have slipped under the radar. You tell me how many non Muslim political figures in the UK have had first hand access to military firearms training, there is a serious Muslim agenda behind this.

Muslim Councillors refused to stand to honour Afghan War hero who was awarded the George Cross:

When a 26 year old Afghanistan war hero appeared before a city council, it seemed the least worphy thing anybody could do was to give him a standing ovation.

Lance Corporal Matthew Croucher, had been awarded the George Cross for throwing himself on a Taliban hand grenade to save his comrades. He survived only because his backpack took the force of the blast.

But to the horror of the rest of the council chamber, while most leapt to their feet to applaud him, two Muslim councillors remained firmly in their seats. Salma Yaqoob and Mohammed Ishtiaq, both from the Respect party, what a suprise, insisted that their refusal to clap the Royal Marine was a point of principle.

Following the meeting at Birmingham City Council, fellow councillors said they had grossly disrespected the soldier.

I would place a wager that 100% of those who support the Respect party could not compare one event in their lives were they could come close to what LC Matthew Croucher did that day, he showed disregard for his own life to save the lives of the men around him and he is more of a good hearted human being than any member of the Respect Party.

This event turned the Respect Party into the Dis-respect party.

Two Muslim Councillors give their support to child grooming suspects:

Two Muslim councillors have told a court that a taxi driver accused of grooming under-age girls for sex is a "hard-working family man"

Abdul Qayyum
Members of Rochdale council and a solicitor spoke in support for Abdul Qayyum, 44, one of 11 men accused of sexually abusing girls as young as 13.

The married father-of-two, who is from Rochdale, denies one count of conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child.

One of the five girls to have given evidence during the trial at Liverpool Crown Court has said she had sex with Mr Qayyum, who she knew as "Tiger".

His barrister read out a series of references speaking up for his client to the jury.

One of them from Councillor Aftab Hussain said: “I have known Abdul Qayyum for the last 10 years as a local resident in the area. He lives with his wife and two children. Mr Qayyum is a hard-working person. He has worked hard throughout his life. Within the community, he comes across very well and I have never seen or heard of any wrongdoing before this case. I personally was shocked to hear about this news.”

Councillor Zulfiqar Ali, a former Mayor of Rochdale, wrote: “I have known Mr Abdul Qayyum since the 1990s when he arrived in Rochdale.

“All the years he has lived in Rochdale he has always been involved in community activities and always makes time to help others, for example cleaning the neighbourhood, helping out in the local youth club and most importantly he looks after his family."

Yes, after all why would a suspected Peadophile want to work in a Youth Club were there are children!! Those who allowed him to work in a Youth Club should be under investigation also!

“Abdul is one of those men the community has really taken to – they are really proud to have him as part of the wider family. He is hard-working and dedicated.”

“He has fully adopted the British way of life and has made many friends because of this.

If these are the type of people British Muslims vote into the political scene, I do not believe Muslims should hold the right to vote any longer until they clean up their act, which will take a good few hundred/thousand years!

Feel free to share this article.

- Jewish Defence League UK -

Everything You Know About Islamic History Is Wrong

In light of comments we received about a post we did on Islam, we decided to write a separate post collecting some of the real facts about Islam's history together.

First up is Spain, and Islam's occupation there for some 700 years.

Some user posted a video which raves about this period, essentially peddling the usual bilge about how wonderful Islam was and how it was 'light years' ahead of anything in Europe.

Screen Shot

Link to the vid

The first thing I noticed was the thumbnail of the vid. It shows the presenter sitting in a relaxed, funky pose, something she'd never be allowed to do were Spain still occupied by the Muslims!

But here's the text:

In 711 AD, a tribe of newly converted Muslims from North Africa crossed the straits of Gibraltar and invaded Spain. Known as The Moors, they went on to build a rich and powerful society.
Its capital, Cordoba, was the largest and most civilised city in Europe, with hospitals, libraries and a public infrastructure light years ahead of anything in England at the time. 

- And the most probable reason it was "so far ahead of anywhere else in England" is because A) Islam all but destroyed the Christian empire, causing complete economic ruin wherever it conquered (by killing and/or enslaving all the tradesmen), and B) by blocking most traditional trade routes, it decimated trade in places it hadn't physically conquered.

- Also this description of the Islamic invasion is deceptive. You could easily get the impression that the Muslims simply invaded Spain, and that was it. But the reality was that for the entire time Spain was occupied by Islam, it was at war, and having a foothold in Spain meant the jihadists were able to reach places in Europe they wouldn't have been able to otherwise. But internally, with the Muslims getting a foothold in the land (in Cordoba), they then had a base from which they could launch raids (razzias) on neighbouring towns and villages, killing or taking captive any enemies they wished, as well as young children, either to become sex slaves or for the boys, brought up as Muslims and later used as soldiers. (All of this, and much more, comes from Andrew G Bostom's The Legacy Of Jihad, quoted later.)

But in a Machiavellian kind of way, it makes sense to kill tradesmen such as ironmongers and farmers. Because ironmongers makes shields and swords, and farmers provide food. The less of these (especially food), the harder it is to fight...

In John J O'Neil's amazing 'Holy Warriors' the author systematically dismantles much surrounding the claim of a golden age. He writes:

"...what archaeology tells us has been devastating to the traditional view [of a golden age]. On the word of the written histories... archaeologists expected to find, from Spain to eastern Iran, a flourishing and vibrant culture. An Islamic world of enormous cities endowed with all the wealth of antiquity and the plunder gathered in the Muslim wars of conquest. They hoped to find palaces, public baths, universities and mosques; all richly decorated with marble, ceramic and carved stone. In fact, they found nothing of the sort..."

Then O'Neil then states, quite incredibly, that virtually NOTHING was found:

"The archaeological non-appearance of the Islamic Golden Age is surely one of the most remarkable discoveries to come to light in the past century. It has not achieved the sensational headlines we might expect, for the simple reason that a non-discovery is of much less interest to the public than a discovery."

Back to the video text::

Amongst the many things that were introduced to Europe by Muslims at this time were: a huge body of classical Greek texts that had been lost to the rest of Europe for centuries (kick-starting the Renaissance); mathematics and the numbers we use today...

- And what about these famous Greek texts introduced to the West via Arabic translations? If the Arabs and Muslims had really been as great as we're being told, why didn't they amount to anything? Look at what the civilised world has become in a few hundred short years with these texts (including mathematics). This is simply more proof that Islam was no different then, as it is now.

- The Muslims in Spain did not kick-start the Renaissance! If anything, the Renaissance happened in spite of Islam, not because of it!

In actual fact, the Renaissance started after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 (now Istanbul, capital of Turkey). Bat Ye'or writes in 'The Decline Of Eastern Christianity Under Islam' that it was when the writers, thinkers and artists from Eastern Christendom fled the conquest of Constantinople and went to Western Europe and Venice etc. that the meeting of these minds sparked off what was to become the Renaissance.

But what of the many things in the Christian world, such as the Spanish Inquisition, the ruthless puritanical way in which the Church, during the dark ages enforced it's teachings?

Again, these were all a result of the Christian world's contact with Islam. The Inquisition started in 1492, the same year Spain liberated itself from Islam.

The whole period of history where Islam was subjugating Christendom, was a time where the Christian world copied many Islamic practices. Not only this, but the launching of holy wars (Crusades, which in this case was justified wars of defence after Islam conquered Jerusalem), and the idea that ANY sin would be forgiven upon liberating Jerusalem (redemption through conquest), is not much different to the ideology of jihad...

In an excerpt from Andrew G Bostom's weighty tome "The Legacy of Jihad" Jacques Ellul has a short essay writing about Islam's influence on the Christian world. In Islam there was no separation of Mosque and state. Religious rules were not just spiritual, but every day commandments. Thus with Islam being a political religion (much like Nazism or communism), the word of god was no different to the rule of law. Thus the Christian world, with its pleading of hell-fire for eternity for all sinners seemed at somewhat of a disadvantage.

But in John Alimbillah Azumah's excellent book, he writes much more extensively about this, as well as another piece of hidden history, Islam's colossal slave trade in Africa, of which the trans-Atlantic slave trade was only a small part.

All this was a convulsion in the history of Christendom. The various authors here write that the Christian world strayed far from the teachings of Christ during this period. Yet ironically, one of the key reasons most people claim themselves to be atheist today is exactly because of this period of history, and the marriage between Church and State.

As for the Church's persecution of the Jews, this is not attempting to excuse anything, but to study the history. After this phase, the Christian West went on to do such things as ban slavery (Britain). And as an important footnote, the campaign to ban it was led by what many today would call Christian 'fundamentalists'. It was free-trade capitalists who engaged in slavery, but this is not to suggest communism as an alternative (!) but to emphasize the need for Judeo-Christian values to guide democracy within a free-market. That lesson is as relevant now, as it has been at any time in the West.

But finally in this long list of what should be HOWLERS to any half educated Westerner, the writer of the video lets their hair down revealing what they really wanted to say all along:

[Islam introduced to Spain] fine dining; the concept of romantic love; paper; deodorant; and even erection creams. 

This wasn't the rigid, fundamentalist Islam of some people's imaginations, but a progressive, sensuous and intellectually curious culture. But when the society collapsed, Spain was fanatically re-Christianised; almost every trace of seven centuries of Islamic rule was ruthlessly removed.

Clearly those erection creams are beginning to get to the author. Again, from Bostom's 'Legacy Of Jihad' on Spain: 
"Ibn Abdun also forbade the selling of scientific books to dhimmis under the pretext that they translated them and attributed them to their co-religionists and bishops. (In fact, plagiarism is difficult to prove since whole Jewish and Christian libraries were looted and destroyed.) 

Another prominent Andalusian jurist, Ibn Hazm of Cordoba (died 1064), wrote that Allah has established the infidels' ownership of their property merely to provide booty for Muslims.

In Granada, the Jewish viziers Samuel Ibn Naghrela and his son, Joseph, who protected the Jewish community, were both assassinated between 1056 to 1066, followed by the annihilation of the Jewish population by the local Muslims. It is estimated that up to five thousand Jews perished in the pogrom by Muslims that accompanied the 1066 assassination. This figure equals or exceeds the number of Jews reportedly killed by the Crusaders during their pillage of the Rhineland, some thirty years later, at the outset of the First Crusade.

The Granada pogrom was likely to have been incited, in part by the bitter anti-Jewish ode of Abu Ishaq, a well-known Muslim jurist and poet of the times..."  

- 'Only' five thousand killed? I shan't quote what Bostom writes about the Islamic conquest of the Holy Land (Israel), but suffice it to say that in Cesaria alone, some 40,000 were butchered.

- Also we find that elsewhere in Bostom's book, the Nazis received the idea of Jews having to wear a yellow star came from the Muslim practice in Spain.

So "not the fundamentalist Islam of some people's imaginations"? You be the judge.

Another reason for posting this article is after having a discussion with an alarmingly ignorant Israeli student about Islam's history. If they're teaching students the kinds of trash we've seen above, it's no wonder we're in such dire straits when it comes to tackling Islam... 

These students are our future journalists, politicians, and citizens. When you see the difference between what the media peddles, and fact, you'll understand that these myths simply cannot be left unchallenged any longer. With millions of Muslims pouring into Europe, we are sowing the seeds of a devastating future for us all.

Caped Crusader

More reading on other websites:

Islamic Golden Age

Islam The Real Cause Of The Dark Ages

How Islam Breathed New Life Into Slavery And The Slave Trade In Europe

A History of Astronomy

Here is a video about the Islamic slave trade in Africa narrated by the historian John Alimbillah Azumah

Please share this post with any Islam apologist you come across, let them try and explain their way out of this lot. Heh.

Sunday, 29 April 2012

The Evolution of European Gaza Strips

Example of Jihad In Europe

In countries all over Europe, Islamic parallel societies are developing. Many of them seem to move towards becoming Gaza-like areas, characterized by overpopulation, an extremely low level of education, high crime rates, racism against Jews and other non-Muslim groups or groups that do not fit the Muslim agenda, an Islamic political and economic infrastructure, and a general hateful and often violent attitude against non-Islamic authorities and the surrounding non-Islamic areas.

This is the five-step evolution model of how European areas develops into violent areas violently fighting for autonomy and secession. Each steps naturally leads to and supports the next.

1) Social housing areas: Low income and the natural wish to live with people of same faith and culture lead Muslims to move together into areas with cheap apartments. Social housing areas thus develop into Muslim areas. 

2) Muslim areas: Muslim culture and religion become dominant in the areas, which allows Islamic values to take root. Muslim areas develop into Islamic areas.

3) Islamic areas: Homemade sharia courts, police-like groups of adult men, imams, and Islamic havala banking appear. An unofficial political and economic Islamic infrastructure is in place, and its political identity and influence grows.

4) Political areas: Demands for official recognition of the unofficial religious infrastructure appear. Islamic areas develop into political forces that are steering towards conflict with secular laws.

5) Violent areas: Religious fanatics see it as their religious right to use threats and violence in order to get their demands fulfilled. They are born and raised in the country, they have citizenship, and they feel they have just as much right to live as they wish to as democratic-minded citizens feel. Besides: According to the Quran, it is a sin to submit to secular law and non-Islamic authorities. Islamic politics have developed into a continuous conflict, that often erupts into violence.


Islamic areas in China, Thailand, Russia, the Balkans and Africa already reached step five many years ago. Dozens of countries surrounding the birthplace of the Muslims' prophet were once Christian, Hindu, Buddhist etc. but have now reached step 6: Severe lack of human rights especially for women, no free speech, no real democracy, no scientific development etc. In short: they have become Islamic countries.

In Europe, thousands of cities already have Muslim areas. Hundreds of European cities have Islamic areas. Islamic organisations already made political demands that a handful of European areas should receive autonomy under Sharia law. A scenario in which Islamic supremacists will forget about their demands and not use undemocratic methods in order to reach their goal is unlikely.

There are a few reasonable solutions:
  • Immigration from non-Western style countries must be stopped.
  • Illegal immigration must be punished with prison and fine.
  • Repatriation (state-paid emigration and resettlement) should be
  • offered to all Muslim immigrants from non-Western countries.
  • Islamization must be stopped, in order to make resident Islamic supremacists feel homesick and to counter development of Islamic areas and values in our societies.
  • The crushing power of secular law, secular police and secular Justice must be enforced in order to by all means reinstate law and order in lawless areas.
  • All who are voluntarily involved in the use of Sharia courts and honour-related crimes must be punished.
  • Lack of will or ability to integrate must be made so unpractical and economically non-beneficial that repatriation will be the only tempting offer (immigrants should: pay for their own interpreters; earn their right to free medical care, education, social benefits, etc.; pay for special education for their children if they as parents cannot speak the language, and thereby support their childrens' schooling, etc.).
  • Immigrants should only be offered citizenship if at least one of their parents have citizenship. They can stay as long as they can support themselves and obey the law, but we have enough citizens already.
  • Refugees should be offered safety, food and medical care in refugee camps close to their home country. A Western level of living standard in Western countries for refugees is far too expensive and not necessary.
Europe is a fortress, but it is built on strong rock that will keep Europe erect and weak sand that will cause Europe to collapse from within. The people who wish to see Europe survive are the rock, the Leftists and Liberals are the sand. The Islamic doctrine of Europe is creeping into our way of European life and ideals and the Liberal Left are gladly helping them, fortress Europe is certainly collapsing, from within. Just look at the how the Serb’s lost Kosovo: Through Demographic development and the assistance of the North American Terrorist Organization (NATO). This established the first official Islamic state on European soil.

When faith and resistance to an invading force collapses, the civilization goes with it.That is the main cause of the death of civilization in Europe, Islamization is simply the consequence. The actual word Islam translates as “submission” and the Leftists, Liberals and Secularists have submitted already. Many Europeans have already become Muslims, even though they do not realize it or do not want to admit it.

Jewish Defence League UK

British Supermarket Bows To The Left And Boycotts Israeli Goods

Britain's fifth largest supermarket chain the Co-Op is extending a boycott of goods from Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria and will now shun any supplier known to source from these areas.

The Co-Operative Group said, "Following an audit of the Group’s supply chain, it will no longer do business with four companies, accounting for £350,000 worth of sales, as there is evidence that they source from the Israeli settlements in the "Palestinian occupied territories."

They added that The Co-Op Group will also continue to actively work to increase trade links with "Palestinian" businesses in the occupied territories.

Boycotts of Israeli products made in Judea and Samaria are nothing new. A major Norwegian pharmaceutical retail chain recently announced that it will be stopping the sale of all products originating from settlements in the West Bank, including Ahava Dead Sea cosmetics.

Leftist protesters in London who ironically call themselves "working class" forced the closure of the Ahava beauty store and the job loss of its employee's by continually hassling and organizing protests outside the shop, although they are not keen to put as much effort into protesting the various Islamic bookshops in Tower Hamlets that sell Homophobic and Racist Muslim propaganda. 

In February, the anti-Israel Boycott, Dives
tment and Sanctions (BDS) movement invaded the Tesco supermarket in Birmingham, removing Israeli goods from the shelves, labeling them with stickers that read "Boycott Israeli Goods," and urging customers to refrain from buying products made in Israel.

If the Co-Op group want to turn their Racist noses up at £350,000 worth of sales proft because they are from Jewish owned land in Judea and Samaria I welcome them too as their business will take a severe loss as a consequence.

I urge all Pro-Israel standing people to boycott this supermarket chain, which is not hard in this day and age. There are 5 supermarkets within 2 miles of my home and Co-Op is one of them, If Co-Op is your supermarket I urge you to change your decision, they boycott our goods, we will boycott theirs and hit them were it hurts, their wallets.

The Boycott has the backing from members of the Muslim Bloc:

Let the Co-Operative know how you feel about the boycott of Israel goods by emailing or writing a letter of complaint via free post to them:

Feel free to use this example or modify it to send: 

It has come to my attention that your company the Co-Operative Group is boycotting Israeli goods. I want you to know the decent citizens of the world will not stand for this disgusting and frankly racist stance you have taken, and I will urge the general public to boycott you in return. We will make sure the word gets out by the thousands, every single day, until this Fascist Boycott of Israeli made goods stops. You rely on sales to people just like me to survive, let's see who's boycott has the greater effect.


And to think that I thought that Fascist Boycotts on Jewish Goods died in 1945, I can't believe a modern Supermarket Chain in the UK has dug the disgusting idea up again, You should be utterly ashamed of yourselves, I will urge everyone to boycott the Co-Operative chain and along with everybody else who is planning to do the same, you are going to lose a lot of business. Maybe you should look up the riots incited by Arabs in 1929 in Judea and Samaria when innocent Jews were beaten and murdered, 29 alone were murdered in Hevron, and you dare to call Jewish Settlements in the West Bank "illegal?" 


So is the co-op also going to boycott China over their occupation of Tibet? Turkey for their genocide against the Armenians and their occupation of Cyprus and Kurdistan ? Spain and France for occupying the Basque territories? Russia for their occupation of Chechnya? The US and UK for their occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan?How about boycotting Syria and Iran for persecuting their own populations?!

Why is it that with all the myriad of conflicts, persecution, human rights abuses and occupations going on all over this world of ours, the one country in the world you choose to boycott is the only Jewish state in the world?
Nazism cannot hide its ugly face for too long. 

Postal Address: 
The Co-Operative Group
Customer Relations
Freepost MR9473
M4 8BA

Co-Operative Facebook Page

Below is a picture of the Nazi Boycott of Jewish goods and business' in 1930's Germany, I wonder why the SA thug about to punch a Jewish woman is not wearing his Co-Operative employee badge? Make no mistake, times have not changed, Boycott the Co-Operative Chain!

Written by Jewish Defence League UK

On Israel's 64th...

Israelis Celebrating 64 Years Of Independence

Following the 64th birthday of the modern state of Israel, there is a great misunderstanding that needs to be corrected about the founding of Israel; Israel was not created by the UN or Ben Gurion, or the British. The modern state of Israel was reborn when the British decided to leave. They only decided to leave when Jewish freedom fighters (yes, real freedom fighters, not terrorists), made life too much trouble for the British to continue occupying the land of our forefathers.

The Jews fought with the British against the Nazis during the war, but the British authorities didn’t feel the need to return the favour. As always, the British elites thought it better to keep their new friends in Arabia happy (where oil had just been discovered), than to honour their word of the Promised Land for the Jews.

Chaim Weizmann
In fact, the British promised the Promised Land to the Jews, in part, because Chaim Weizman (later to be first president of Israel) helped develop explosives the British used during WWI (Weizman was a chemist). Also, the Jews already living in Palestine provided intelligence for the British during WWI, which facilitated Britain's entry into Ottoman controlled Palestine.

But no sooner had they laid in law the foundations of the State of Israel, did they renege on their offering and gave 70% of the Jewish people’s home to the Arabs. That’s how Jordan was born. Nevertheless, the Jews accepted. But that wasn’t the only slap in the face the Jews took.

As tension and Anti-Semitism heated up in Europe prior to WWII, more and more Jews started leaving for Palestine. The British, worried about the upset this might cause the Saudis, sought to allow illegal Arab immigration from all over the Mideast into British Mandate Palestine, in order to keep the Jews a minority. When WWII came, and millions of Jews from around Europe were being sent to gas chambers, the British passed the notorious White Paper, which halted Jewish immigration altogether.

From Myths &
Had the British not done this, many millions of Jews could have been saved. But the British were worried by the violence caused by the Arabs. So during WWII, when the British were stretched to the limit, the Muslims throughout the Mideast and British occupied India were threatening mass violence over the Jews in Palestine. In other words, the Arabs manipulated the British with the threat of violence.

For the world, the war ended in 1945, but not for the Jews. In British occupied Palestine, they were just beginning to turn the screws. There were millions of Jewish refugees in Europe which nobody knew what to do with, and in Palestine, the British were implementing policies more and more favourable to the Arabs, such as limiting Jewish immigration even more, jailing Jews found in possession of arms and giving them to the Arabs.
Menachem Begin

It was with this history and backdrop that Jews such as Menahem Begin and others felt they had no other choice but to take up arms. WWII was over, the Jews had done everything to help the British but received nothing but disdain in return, even while the Arabs had been allied with Hitler. It was in this environment that the King David Hotel bombing occurred. In fact, Begin, leader of the Irgun, later expressed his sorrow over that episode and it wasn’t until 1979 that a British official acknowledged that warning telephone calls had been made by the Irgun about the bomb in the hotel, which were ignored by various British officials.

That is the sad truth. But the Jewish people owe more to groups such as the Irgun, and the Palmach, than we do to the UN and Ben Gurion!

A short video of the Rav Kahane on the unfortunate necessity of violence (can't embed this video, sorry).

However, the Jewish elites in Israel and elsewhere don’t want you to know this version of how Israel was liberated because they are against that approach. They don’t want you to understand this version of events because they don’t want you to think that their current approach, the approach of the good Jew, the well behaved Jew, doesn’t work.

It doesn’t matter whether the the JDL has supporters of all faiths and from all backgrounds; it won’t matter how many people you represent, you’ll be branded an ‘enemy of the state’ and treated as such, because you’re in the way of political interests. The reason the great Rav Kahane was also expelled from Israel (in 1988) was not just because of what he said, but because of his popularity and opposition to the grovelling Jew mentality. Kahane would’ve taken away power from the current vagabond of mediocre tyrants occupying our Knesset, who were soon to betray the most fundamental requirement of any government: to protect the people, because they wanted to implement the dangerous and degrading Oslo Accords on the Jewish people.

But it wasn’t only ‘extremists’ who were removed from power by the grovelling Jew, Israel’s very own Prime Minister at the time, Yizhak Shamir, was also taken out of office because he wouldn’t entertain the idea of negotiating with terrorists such as Yasser Arafat. Shamir was also a former member of one of Israel's underground freedom fighting organisations: Lehi.

Again, as one of the interesting ‘coincidences’ when going against the beliefs of righteous men like Rav Kahane, following the signing of the Oslo Accords more Jews died from terror attacks in six years then they did since the founding of the State of Israel, 45 years before. And that was even before the 2nd intifada started...

But this is not to say the establishment are refrained from violence. On the contrary, when it came to violence these elites had no problem dishing out punishment to Jewish 'trouble-makers', with the most infamous incident being the sinking of the Altalena ship. On the shores of Tel Aviv, the Altalena filled with arms and Holocaust survivors ready to fight the impending invasion of Arab armies in 1948, they were shot at even while in the water attempting to swim ashore. This was done with David Ben Gurion's approval and carried out by Yizhak Rabin.

After 64 years, Israel is still at war. These appeasers of ours will continue to look for 'peace' because their masters tell them to keep going, despite the reality and despite their duty to protect the people of Israel. The Allies didn't negotiate with the Nazis, they crushed them. And until Israel and the West wake up to the fact that this is also what they must do, this war will continue indefinitely while we do barely enough to contain Islam, but not enough to defeat it.

While the left will continually attempt to exploit this sad fact and push to effectively weaken our defences (military cuts/pulling Jews out of their homes), we have to wake up and understand that in the Philippines jihad has been ongoing since the 14th Century (and they have recently suffered a huge set back by foolishly ceding some territory), and the West fought against Islam for many centuries. In fact as many have recently learned, the Crusades were launched not as wars of aggression, but as wars of defence after 450 years of Islamic colonialism; rape, pillage, and the destruction.

To use the peace process terminology, we have to accept that the current status quo, where Israel not only keeps its head above water, but thrives, is to win.

However, we must also know that the greatest danger to ourselves is not from the outside...

Caped Crusader

Friday, 27 April 2012

Islam and Homosexuality

These are the words from a famous Arab poem by poet, Abu Nuwas.

'Perfumed Garden' by Abu Nuwas:

O the joy of sodomy!
So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
Turn not away from it--
therein is wondrous pleasure.
Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
twisting on his temple
and ride as he stands like some gazelle
standing to her mate.
A lad whom all can see girt with sword
and belt not like your whore who has
to go veiled.
Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
very best to mount them,
 for women are
the mounts of the devils


For the last 1400 or so years, the Muslims and their ancestral tribal sects have practiced pederasty. When Muhammad formed the Muslim cult he took pederast practices of the region, mixed it with the Ancient Greek pederast views and formed a cult.

That is,
 the Muslim's have practiced 'same sex pedophilia'. While their beliefs regulate that a woman must be a virgin at marriage, sex is not forbidden to either men or women. That is, sex between same sex is encouraged, as long as it is done it the 'proper Muslim' way. As with the Ancient Greek culture, adult men are encouraged to form relationships with young men just reaching puberty. These adult men, are then encouraged to form a sexual relationship with these young men.

The whole system 'stinks', since the adult Muslim men are taught to perform homosexual sex upon the young men, which in reality is rape. It is so warped, in that, as long as an adult male 'gives' sex to the younger man, it is accepted. The younger man, is then expected to do the same to a young man, once he reaches maturity. Homosexuality is separated into compartments within the Muslim "culture". If an adult male sodomizes (rapes) a younger male (8-14), then he is still in control, and not committing a sex crime according to their warped scriptures. And once the 'sodomized young male' reaches maturity, he must also continue with the tradition, sodomizing (raping) younger males.

Since we have all heard about the 'beheading' aspect of the Muslim cult regarding homosexuality, let me explain. If an adult male decides that he likes to have sodomy performed on him, he is now considered 'gay', and not 'homosexual'. If a man is considered 'gay', he will be 'beheaded' or killed in some other warped manner, like in Iran for example, where they hang them from cranes. It is all about control, and some warped concept of 'manhood'.

Looking at the women of the Islamic cult, many women belong to harems. The rich sheiks of Islam also have a 'control issue' going on with the women of the region. Women are purchased from families, in order to control the bloodlines. Unless a man of this region has money or power, he must choose from the lowliest and plainest of women to marry. This further enhances the 'elitist regime' the Muslims are so fond of…

Sheiks are known to have dozen's of wives and even more concubines in which to have sex with. This would leave the 'wives' with many nights that they would not see their husband, and therefore their only source of sexual pleasure.
 (Adultery is punishable by death, and even the accusation holds the death penalty).

And yet, adultery in Islam is only concerned with heterosexual sex. Women in harems are known to learn lesbian ways. So much so, that the men of the Muslim cult, began to perform the clitoridectomy (Female Genital Mutilation or FGM), to keep the women from practicing lesbian relations. These evil and warped people are so messed up that they show complete disregard not only for human nature, but also for people's feelings.

I would like to take you into the Islamic "culture", and show that for the last 1400 years or more, this abhorrent cult has promoted homosexual rape/pederasty, as a way to retain Virgin women to marry.
What we have here, is some 'highly sexed' individuals (goats, donkeys and camels are not enough), that refuse to curtail their behaviour, rather they will force sex upon young people, in order to retain their 'so called' strict regime of 'sexual doctrine' of the Muslim faith.


Firstly, the Muslim rulers sincerely held that faith in Islam meant the guarantee of houris, the most beautiful virgins that one can imagine.
 Paradise is the abode of polygamy where men have all the rights to sexual indulgence and women are loaded with the obligations to please them. Thus, the Muslim rulers and nobles treated sexuality as a form of worship without having any moral qualm at all.

Islam maximises the sexual scope not only in this world but also declares carnal enjoyment as the goal of life-after-death, which can be achieved by gaining entry into paradise through the agency of the Prophet Muhammad only.
 This philosophy has devastated the Muslim mind all over the world: It is opium which keeps believers in a state of insensibility; they forget all about realities of life and moral obligation to enjoy the delightful vagaries of make-believe saturated with sexual sweetness.

The cosmic order of the Quran is intentionally incomplete.

Man needs to engage in holy war to make other men submit to the will of G-d to complete the order. It is the duty of Muslim men to initiate non-Muslims into Islam by method of submission.
 The Nafs (non-Muslims) are conceptualized as passive males. This implies an erotic element of the holy war of submission. In a sense, initiation and submission into Islam entails conquering non-Muslims by sexual aggression. Fighting passive sodomy with active sodomy. This is obviously a contradiction and supports keeping silence on the issue.

To encounter effects of feminine charm, Islam has exploited man's dominance urge, which demands sexual gratification by command (instead of solicitation), and thus stimulated the male behaviour, leading to harem-building.

To understand their old views of homosexuality, it is imperative to understand that the ancients distinguished:

A) sexual penetration of "non-males" (i.e., men who were either naturally impotent with women or castrated) from (B) sexual penetration of "males" — maleness being defined as the capacity to play the male role in procreation. 

Before rational philosophy and their capacity to differentiate, the ancient world generally considered the first category (A) to be acceptable, in some cases even sanctified, while on the other hand, sexual penetration of adult free males was universally condemned as being opposed to and destructive of the nature of the male. The sexual use of free boys and beardless youths was controversial because of their ambiguous status as pre-males, and where it was allowed it was strictly controlled, as in ancient Greece. The sexual use of male slaves was permitted because slaves were not accountable for and had no rights regarding the use of their bodies, which belonged to their masters.

Of course, human history is full of predators known as conquerors, who carried out murder, persecution and abduction of women to satisfy their lust for power, plunder and prestige. They knew that their misdeeds were sheer acts of barbarity dictated by personal ambitions,  but Jihad, the behest of Allah to destroy non-Muslims, not only sanctified these atrocities, but also raised them to the apex of piety, purity and probity." 


The Muslim rulers of India were determined to impress the Hindus with their power, pomp and prestige.

They wanted to appear as extraordinary kings, whose might, magnificence and martial excellence must be acknowledged by their Hindu subjects. After all, running harems of several thousand women bubbling with beauty and zest, is not a child's play.
 Of course, the Hindu Rajahs also had their seraglios but they ranked as sinful brothels because the Vedas do not stamp lust, lechery and lewdness with piety, purity and probity.

However, in Islam the situation is totally different;
 it is morally and legally right to murder non-Muslims and abduct their women with a view to turning them into concubines. Having sexual intercourse with them (Rape) is no sin; even flogging and selling them at will is permissible. 

This points to the fact that the term "homosexuality" is used with many different meanings, and it is indeed very important to expose and overcome an underlying confusion of terms which goes unnoticed here as well, and which is firmly rooted in the popular imagination and has not been thoroughly abandoned even by science. It has enormous impact, because it causes barriers to understanding and communication that may even have disastrous practical consequences.


Note: Some minor parts of this article were taken from:  and for informative purposes only.

The Qur'an generally scorns "approaching males in lust", as well as the castration of males, as the sin of the people of Lot (Qur'an 7:81, 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29).

7:81:  Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people." 
 Arabic: "Innakum lata'toona ar-rijaala shahwatan min doon in-nisaa'i."

26:165- 26:166: "You approach the males of the worlds and forsake those whom your Lord has created for you for your mates."
 Arabic: "Ata'toona adh-dhukraana min al-'aalameena, wa tadharoona ma khalaqa lakum Rabbukum min azwaajikum."

27:55: "Will you indeed approach males in lust excluding women?"
 Arabic: "A 'innakum lata'toona ar-rijaala shahwatan min doon in-nisaa'i?"

29:28-29:29 "Most surely you are guilty of an indecency which none of the nations has ever done before you; 
Indeed, you approach men and obstruct the road and commit in your meetings [every] evil."

 Arabic: "Innakum lata'toona al-faahishata ma sabaqakum biha min ahadin mina al-'aalameena. Innakum lata'toona ar-rijaala wa taqta'oona as-sabeela wa ta'toona fee naadikumu?"

But the Qur'an does not prohibit using, as passive sex partners, the ancient category of men who by nature lacked desire for women, since such men were not considered "male" as a result of their lack of arousal for women.

This kind of man is often known as "gay" in modern times, but in the ancient world he was identified as an anatomically whole "natural eunuch."
 And a
lthough the Qur'an never uses the word eunuch [khasiyy], the hadith and the books of the legal scholars do. 
Furthermore, the Qur'an recognizes that some men are "without the defining skill of males" (24:31: "ghair oolaa il-irbati min ar-rijaali" - or those male attendants having no physical desire) and so, as domestic servants, are allowed to see women naked. This is a reference to natural eunuchs, i.e. gay men.


Homosexual activity by homosexuals (eunuchs) is not spoken of in the Qur'an,
 which mentions only the unjust homosexual rape perpetrated by straight men against other straight men. 

But the Qur'an and hadith also have traces of the permitted homosexual desires of straight men. There is even a hadith in Bukhari, admittedly giving not the Prophet's opinion but that of Abu Jafar, according to which a paedophile is prohibited from marrying the mother of his boy-beloved if there is penetration:
Bukhari LXII, 25 As for whom(ever) plays with a boy: if he caused him to enter him, then he shall not marry his mother.
Arabic: feeman yal'abu bis-sabiyy: in 'adkhalahu feehi falaa yatazawwajanna 'ummahu.

(This rule is accompanied in the same chapter by prohibitions against a man marrying both a mother and her daughter.) Apparently according to this hadith, even sexual penetration of a boy is not considered sodomy, because if it was, surely the sodomite would have more worries than whether he could marry the boy's mother!

Like whether he preferred to die by fire, stoning, or falling from a high tower! These are some of the punishments mentioned in the hadith for "doing as the people of Lot did."

The distinction between pederasty (sex with boys) and sodomy (penetration of "males") was commonly, albeit not universally maintained throughout the ancient world, and indeed survived throughout most of the history of Islam until at least the nineteenth century (in spite of the futile objections of some medieval scholars). Apparently, boy-love was considered okay by many people because, like "natural eunuchs," underage boys also lacked the "defining skill of males" (sexual potency with women).
 The Qur'an itself gives support to pederasts in its glimpses of paradise:

52:17-29 And they shall have boys [ghilmaan] circulating among them as if they were hidden pearls.

56:22-23 and dark-eyed ones [hoorun 'eenun], the like of hidden pearls

76:19 And immortal boys [wildaanun mukhalladoona] will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls.

2:25 And they shall have immaculate partners [azwaajun mutahharatun] in [the gardens] …

4:57 And they shall have immaculate partners [azwaajun mutahharatun] in them …

Give or take the translations may vary but they all mean pretty much the same thing.

One of the great male Sufi contemporaries of Rabi'a al-'Adawiyya provided a divine justification for a pederastic relationship, which was repeated without a hint of disapproval in a 10th century book about great Sufi women:

One day Rabi'a saw Rabah [al-Qaysi] kissing a young boy ["huwa yuqabbil sabiyyan"]. 'Do you love him?' she asked. 'Yes,' he said. To which she replied, 'I did not imagine that there was room in your heart to love anything other than G-d, the Glorious and Mighty!' Rabah was overcome at this and fainted. When he awoke, he said, 'On the contrary, this is a mercy that G-d Most High has put into the hearts of his slaves.'

(Quoted from as-Sulami, Early Sufi Women = Dhikr an-niswa al-muta 'abbidat as sufiyyat, translated by Rkia E. Cornell, Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999, pp. 78-79.)

Besides boys, straight Muslim men were occasionally interested in grown adults as well, provided they were not "male." There is a hadith in which the Prophet's companions asked whether they were allowed to use men (presumably prisoners of war) as "eunuchs" to fulfill their sexual urges, since they were far from their wives.

Bukhari LXII 6:9 [Narrated by ibn Mas'ud:] "We used to fight [in battle] together with the Prophet, peace be upon him. There were no women with us. We said: O Messenger, may we treat some as eunuchs [a laa nastakhsii]? He forbade us to do so."

The version in Bukhari LXII 8:13 says that rather than let the companions "treat [some] as eunuchs" in the absence of their wives, the Prophet "allowed them to marry corrupted women" [rakhasa lana an nankih al-maraa bil-shaub] from the vicinity, and he recited to them from the Qur'an: "O ye who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression."

The fact that Muhammad forbade the companions from designating men as eunuchs is not the point here. Of course, using a straight male as a eunuch was wrong — that was essentially the sin of the people of Lut. But what about using a eunuch (i.e. one who permanently lacks arousal with women) as a eunuch? Given that ibn Mas'ud made reference to the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification, and given that the Prophet understood what he meant, that indicates that the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification was known in Arabic society, and was considered a use that was appropriate to eunuchs.

Since eunuchs were not considered male, there was no prohibition against it, not even in the Qur'an.

Eunuchs were still sex objects for straight men in the Mamluk dynasty, according to David Ayalon in Eunuchs, Caliphs, and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships (Jerusalem, 1999). They not only served to prevent older Mamluks from having sexual access to younger trainees:

The eunuchs seem to have served as a shield against homosexual lust in yet another way. They themselves formed the target of that lust, thus diverting it from the youngsters. They are described as being womanly and docile in bed at night and manly and warlike by day in a campaign and in similar circumstances
 (hum nisaa' li-mutmainn muqeem wa rijaal in kaanat al-asfaar; li-annahum bin-nahaar fawaaris wa bil-lail 'araa'is). [Arabic quoted by Ayalon from Abu Mansur al-Tha'alibi, Al-Latâ'if wal-Zarâ'if, Cairo 1324/1906-7, p. 79, lines 1-7; and the same quote from Tha'alibi in his Tamthîl wal-Muhâdara, Cairo 1381/1961, p. 224.]

As for the issue of whether Muhammad himself expressly acknowledged that some people by nature refrain from heterosexuality, thus being natural eunuchs, consider the following hadith.

It is related that one of the Prophet's companions, Abu Huraira, went to the Prophet, saying that he was a "young male" who "feared torment for his soul," but that he "did not find the wherewithal to marry a woman" [innee rajulun shaabbun wa ana akhaafu 'alaa nafsee al-'anata wa laa ajidu ma atazawwaju bihi an-nisaa'a].

The Prophet remained silent, even after Abu Huraira repeated his statement three times. Finally after 
the fourth time, Muhammad said: "O Abu Huraira, the pen is dry regarding what is befitting for you. So be a eunuch for that reason or leave it alone." [ya Abaa Hurairata, jaffa al-qalam bimaa anta laaq fa'akhtasi 'alaa dhalika au dhar] (Bukhari, LXII 8). (For comparison, consider that when Uthman came to Muhammad asking if he could be permitted to live a life of abstinence, he was rebuffed.)

These historical facts conform to the highly erotic Koranic description of the paradisaic boys, who are ever-young, pretty like pearls, dressed in silk and brocades, and wear bracelets. Above all, like Ganymede they serve wine in cups of crystal. These boys are not servants as the Muslim scholars pretend because a servant can be old, ugly and poorly dressed.

The Persians (Iranians) had acquired love of homosexuality from their conquering master, Alexander the Great and his Greek soldiers. This practice was made lawful among the Arabs by the Koranic description of the beautiful boys: al-Rashid and al-Amin were prominent rulers and leaders of the Muslim world, which treated them as the Model of Behaviour.

This is the reason that the Qazis (Muslim judges) who were expected to live, and dispense justice according to the principles of Islam, kept harems of boys unashamedly.

And this is the reason why Muslim still abuse boys and use them for their own sexual gratification. Islam is a morally corrupt cult, that strives to deflect criticism of its ways by covering up their own perverted sexual fantasies, with claims of being a "religion of peace" and "equality".

Many Muslims may not know of these sick perversions but the information is widely available in their own books. If only they knew how to read them. 

We wish to point out to the reader that the JDL is PRO-LOVE, PRO-GAY, supports justice and supports the same rights for all consenting adults no matter what sex they are.  The above article was written merely for education purposes and to point out that Muslims are ok with raping but not ok with two adults of the same sex living in a loving relationship. Their sick minds cannot comprehend love and instead, strive to control and subjugate others.