Showing posts with label 911-excuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 911-excuse. Show all posts

Saturday, January 21, 2017

The coming of Donald Trump: The future is anybody's guess!

Make no mistake about this: Donald Trump is an autocrat and a potential dictator of America. He has appealed to nationalism, engaged in blaming various ethnic and religious groups for America's, troubles and declared himself the solution to these troubles. It is said that Russia "hacked" the 2016 presidential election, that "hidden, racist voters" turned out to vote, and that the mass media has now "normalized" Trump and his offensive rhetoric and gave him billions in free advertisement.

 Whatever,,,Trump is now King of the United States...what is going to happen next with this American autocrat is anybody's guess. America has never had a real autocrat as president.

I told you all, on the various forums, to watch out for Russia and to not count Russia out in the international.system. The expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia, to include provocative air patrols, massive military maneuvers, and perhaps the stationing of nuclear missiles, are all actions that Russia must respond to for the protection of it's national security. Part of the blame for provoking Russia to take cyber-hacking to counter the perceived and real threats in its "near-abroad" can be laid at the feet of those East European leaders in Baltic countries and Poland too, and of the desire by neo-cons to dismember Russia?

Fuck the Baltic Air Policing!

Affecting Western national elections through cyber activities and "hacking," underhanded political and social attack messages, are sheer genius on the part of Putin and the Russians...and demonstrates that national security is about more than just military power.  They are also a statement that Russian concerns about activities related to NATO expansion and inclusion in a European security system should have been taken more seriously. Russian security needs should have also been a part of a European security system that includes Russia.   (see Senate Intel Report on Russian influence in 2016 election for more).

Expect increased violence and oppression from American police and oppression - including increased abuse of the labels "terrorism" and "anarchists" - against those who oppose government abuses from a Trump regime.  Expect so-called "Islamic extremism" to fuel more Islamophobia and ignore the fact that "Islamic terrorism" that is "inspired by ISIS" is nothing more than violent crimes by trouble individuals. We know that there is a different reaction from Western governments to violent crimes by non-Muslims (criminal justice) and violent crimes by criminals claiming some inspiration from "Islamic faith" (national security and oppression of the Islamic faith).   We can also expect increased spying, oppression and violence against Black activists opposing police violence, expanded abuse of the label "anarchists" by police to justify oppression and criminalization. Funny how support for Black Lives Matter "anarchists" include elected leaders and how the Movement has engaged in our democratic process for an end to police brutality against black people.. 

+++
Note: 1. I voted for Clinton and for Bernie Sanders in the Wisconsin Primary.  My views line up with Bernie Sanders the most, but Donald Trumps observations on the economic and social hardships faced by many  Americans rang true and were probably a main driver of his election. An autocrat like Trump does better appealing to those who are hurting, angry and in need of relief.  If Trump does not deliver, (and hateful nationalists never had good economic policies), he will be bounced out too...

Note 2. Russia Today (RT) is not "propaganda" anymore than CNN is "propaganda." The label "fake news" has been applied to just about any written and spoke word - including academic written works and peer-reviewed articles. RT has told the truth about the American life, especially the criminal justice system and the struggles of working people.  Sure, RT gets government funding, but CNN appeals to the US government for access to government leaders, including the US president.

Note 3. I will be blogging mostly at my Home Sweet Home blog and the topics will be short and varied.  I will be expressing my sympathies for Russia as well as outrage for possible Trump policies in other forums. I am both pro-Russia and anti-Trump.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

One year after Breivik and nothing has changed

















[caption id="attachment_2267" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Breivik: A terrorist and enemy to Western democracy and freedom!"]Anders Behring Breivik[/caption]















Norway after Breivik. It was one year ago when right-wing terrorist, Anders Behring Breivik, committed the "twin terrors" on his own nation of Norway. "The bomb and the shots were intended to change Norway. People responded by embracing our values. He failed, the people won" said Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Rather than allow the tolerance and democratic society of Norway to change, Norwegians have embraced more democracy and values of openness.  In his "sanity trial" Breivik rants about the court in which he is being tried as "supporting multiculturalism," and therefore "illegitimate."   What the so-called "terrorism experts" in Western security, intelligence and law enforcement fail - utterly - to realize is that Breivik and his sympathizers are actually opponents and enemies of their own liberal democratic nations, they are also enemies of freedom, individual liberty, as well as equality before the law and the rule of law in liberal democratic nations. Breivik and those of his ilk are anti-democratic  and have placed themselves as enemies of Western liberal democracy!

[youtube id="VoiXqU_NgxE" w="250" h="250"] [youtube id="HiSM6obdlMQ" w="250" h="250"]

Yet - Norway has now taken the footsteps of anti-Muslim, oriented counter-terrorism in outlawing "training in a terrorist camp" (what ever that means) - while Breivik never "trained in terrorist camp."  This is a sure sign that we are back to the notion that Muslim communities are "threatening," even in Norway. Yes - one year after Breivik mercilessly butchered teenagers at the Utøya summer camp - Western security, intelligence and law enforcement act as if Norway, July 22, 2011 never happened - or was not as bad as it really was - compared to the mere presence of bearded, dark-skinned Muslims with loud, "anti-Western views" living in their own "suspect communities" in our countries.

Right-eye blindness continues to be a real problem with Western security. In other European countries, "political leaders" holding Breivik's views sit in parliaments and in security and intelligence agencies. Breivik and his sympathizers have nothing to fear from Western security, intelligence and police agencies, in contrast to outspoken Muslims and the political left engaging in legally protected speech acts, the targets of Breivik terrorism. "Terrorism" continues to be something that only Muslims do and violent criminal acts by suspects of a Muslim background are now "lone-wolf jihad."  Violence and suspicion of violence by Muslims is still viewed, in a discriminatory and Islamophobic sense, as more dangerous than the prospect (or likelihood) of another Norway attack. We still see discourses out of agencies, like Europol and the Dutch AIVD, that actually downplay the attacks in Norway and the security threat from the radical, dangerous European right-wing.

Over this past year, we have seen the unchecked growth of the radical, and possibly dangerous right, with several violent acts by members of the English Defense League, the most serious threat to the security of the UK. A couple of weeks ago, and EDL member was sentenced to prison for a knife attack on his neighbors. This week convictions were secured against EDL members for breaking the jaw of a Muslim man who was attacked while walking near his home with his brother.

In November, we have learned of the killings of mainly Turkish shopkeepers in Germany by the National Socialist Underground and that German intelligence may have know about this terrorist group.  As I have demonstrated, German intelligence has a blind right eye, as the victims of the NSU are Muslims and, therefore, "deserving victims." The NSU was believed to have carried out the murders of nine shopkeepers between 2000 and 2007 and a nail bomb attack against Cologne’s Turkish community. There was a German intelligence officer known as “little Adolf” who was believed to be present, or at least nearby, when one of the murders took place. This right-wing terrorist group was allowed to terrorize at liberty because, as I demonstrate, some in Germany police and intelligence may have viewed the Turkish-Muslim victims as "deserving victims" and not deserving of equal police protection.

"Terrorism" that is viewed as acceptable by a larger society (terrorism against Muslim communities) tends to provide tacit support for the terrorist groups that perpetrate terrorist violence against "deserving victims." The reality is that the EDL is the Number One threat to the security of the United Kingdom, yet, we still see Muslims "arrested" under the so-called "Terrorism Act" of the UK - which - as in the Netherlands - appears to be a law that only Muslims can be charged with ...


Yes - police DO, indeed, make up "terrorist plot" evidence. We know how British police made up "evidence" against a graduate student of terrorism studies, Rizwaan Sabir, at Nottingham University and levied  accusations of a "terrorism plot" (yep - here we go). Sabir obtained a document about al-Qaeda terrorism from a US government website. It's not what happened to the student, who was also being slandered  by Nottingham University - but what happened to his professor, Rod Thornton, a former intelligence officer in the British Army and terrorism expert, who became outraged by the student's treatment by British police.  Professor Thornton spoke out and authored a paper about the ill treatment his student received from British police - and was essentially persecuted and punished (in violation of academic freedom rights) for his noble efforts. Professor Thornton said of the ordeal he and his student were put through by British police:
"The police were totally unprofessional. After their mistakes they tried to cover them up. I've seen some altered police notes, I've seen evidence made up. The whole thing seems to be a complete tissue of lies, starting from the cover up of their mistakes in the first place."

"What should raise alarm bells is how and why the police think it is acceptable to make up information to send innocent Muslims to prison as terrorists. The onus is now on the IPCC to conduct a full and proper investigation into this matter."

Even after the the lies of the British police were exposed, Rizwaan Sabir continued to be stopped and has been stopped numerous times since his 2008 "arrest."
In June 2011 for the Equality and Human Rights Commission found that “for some Muslims, these stops have become a routine part of their travel experience, and that―this power is silently eroding Muslim communities ‘trust and confidence in policing.’”

Those on the receiving end of Schedule 7 stops report: intrusive questioning over social, religious and political views or community activities; the taking of their bio-data despite not being under arrest; officers refusing to wait the arrival of a solicitor before conducting the search and questioning; the stress caused to the person stopped and to those travelling with them, as they worry about missing flights or losing baggage; and the seizure of mobile phones and credit cards.

And - do they seriously think this tyrannical and utterly useless busy-work is  "keeping us safe from terrorism?" What rubbish! What outrage! How stupid! How counter-productive!!!

[youtube id="nKsFQYGiqGE" w="250" h="250"] [youtube id="ZUK1KsrcttQ" w="250" h="250"]

Well - this week we were shown just how safe the "counter-terrorism practice" in the Western world keeps us. Unless you were sleeping in a cave this week, you know that there was the massacre at a movie theater in Colorado. The accused in is James Holmes a white, upper-income "good kid" - non-Muslim- which is what makes him totally undetectable for "terrorist activity."   Holmes is a brilliant  bomb-maker as he was a neurobiology student - as he booby-trapped his apartment so well that police bomb experts had to do a lot of careful work to defuse his handiwork.  Holmes was described as having ordered 6000 rounds of ammunition from the Internet. Where did he get his ballistic vest, helmet and the smoke grenades?  Isn't James Holmes a terrorist who perpetrated a terrorist attack - in a "Mumbai style" of shooting people with firearms in a movie theater?

Nope - as the saying goes: Not a Muslim, not a terrorist!

[caption id="attachment_3589" align="alignright" width="150" caption="Holmes: Not a Muslim, not a terrorist!"][/caption]

Western counter-terrorism efforts continue to be backwards oriented and utterly useless in protecting us. There is plenty of other evidence that Western security and counter-terrorism efforts have forgotten about Norway and have gone back to chancing the phantoms of "Islamists and jihadists" - and perhaps fabricating evidence or exaggerating "terrorist plots."   In fact - it is quite arguable that the Western security and law enforcement agencies charged with protecting us from real terrorism are utterly useless and serve as nothing more than agencies to chill religious freedom and speech of Muslims and the political Left.

If the victims of terrorism are Muslims or their "leftist allies" - then this is hardly "terrorism," but something else less than "terrorism" - as Muslims and the "leftist allies" are deserving victims of "terrorism."

Yes --- what we don't hear about the Colorado movie theater murderer is the T-word, either in the media or from the FBI. Mohammad... uhhh ... James Holmes is a brilliant bomb maker and in the spread of his message - what ever message that is supposed to be. But - wait - what if the alleged killer's name was Mohammad Holmes? Why - we'd be talking about "possible links to al-Qaeda" and Holmes "radicalization process." We'd also hear about "radical imans" and "lone wolf jihad." Since James Holmes is a "good" -  white - upper-class kid and non-Muslim (like Breivik) he cannot possibly be branded as a "terrorist" and his killings at the movie theater are never "terrorism."  "Terrorism" is something only Muslims do...just ask any terrorism expert in any Western security and intelligence agency.

See/zie:

Trying to Forget Breivik: One Year After the Norway Massacre

Utoya remembers one year after Anders Behring Breivik massacre

Norway tries to put pain of Breivik behind year on

Anders Behring Breivik

A year after Breivik's massacre, Norway tightens antiterror laws

Rod Thornton's suspension is a serious attack on academic freedom

Sabir on Security | Police fabricated evidence against me but civil liberties concern us all

 

Monday, July 9, 2012

Muslim round ups in the UK ahead of Games

[caption id="attachment_3549" align="alignleft" width="206" caption="Why the way he's dressed and his obnoxious views - he must be planning a terrorist attack!"][/caption]

British police have no idea what a "dangerous individual" looks like, but think it looks like a Muslim. There is NO better demonstration of the dubious security, intelligence and police "work" than what we are currently seeing in the UK in the run up to the Olympic Games.  We see round ups of Muslim individuals on rather dubious "terrorist plots" while members of the English Defense League (EDL) remain highly radicalized and dangerous - and on the loose in the community.

At the same time, a member of the English Defense was sentenced to 9 years in prison for a knife attack against his neighbors ... we have round ups of Muslims with dubious and questionable police and intelligence work ... including accusations of unstated "terrorist plots" ... while the EDL remains at large to carry out violent "demos" against communities through out Britain.

The real threat to British security does not come from the Muslim community, but from the EDL, however, to the British police and MI5, a "dangerous terrorist" has nothing to do with an actual plot of real violence- but what a religious Muslim says and how the religious Muslim dresses. If actually plots of real terrorism were the goal of British security and intelligence - members of the EDL would have been put in prison a long time ago.

The "arrest" for "terrorism" appears to fit the NYPD profile: It is now criminal in the UK and elsewhere to appear as a devout Muslim with "anti-Western views." A devout Muslim who is outspoken and politically active, but a lacks a real "terrorism plot,"  is viewed as "radicalized" and is a "criminal."  As  I have predicted, the NYPD profile is now being used to arrest people for both their religious devotion and their political and social views. When we take a look at the articles over this "plot" we see very little evidence of violent planning, and this means justification for their arrests are probably based on legally protected religious and political viewpoints.   When we see the picture of Richard Dart above - we see the same long beard and dress that was highlighted in the NYPD "profile" - but these are legally protected activities and not "dangerous" and "violent."

We see that Richard Dart is a Muslim convert who adapted "anti-Western" views, and said that he would encourage others to go to Afghanistan to fight against British troops.

My response is sooooooooooo what! Such a statement is highly offensive - but these are words - not actions or behaviour!  Words are not bombs! Show us the evidence - as all we have are statements from police and government. So far - from current reports - Richard Dart does not appear to have engaged in ANY criminal activity!

Richard Dart should have the right to his religious freedom and freedom of speech - including obnoxious view - and be free from this kind of UK government harassment. "Extremist views" are not grounds for arrest and prosecution in  democratic societies with individual liberty. The manner of one's dress and speech maybe unusual and obnoxious, but people living in democratic societies with individual liberty - have a right to their manner of dress and views - without harassment of the likes of Scotland Yard and  MI5. UK Muslims now live in fear, thanks to British unchecked Islamophobia as "free speech" and personal abuse of Muslims now includes having their doors smashed in by British police:
Have you ever been called an Islamist? How about a jihadist or a terrorist? Extremist, maybe? Welcome to my world. It's pretty depressing. Every morning, I take a deep breath and then go online to discover what new insult or smear has been thrown in my direction. Whether it's tweets, blogposts or comment threads, the abuse is as relentless as it is vicious.

To say that I find the relentlessly hostile coverage of Islam, coupled with the personal abuse that I receive online, depressing is an understatement. There have been times – for instance, when I found my wife curled up on our couch, in tears, after having discovered some of the more monstrous and threatening comments on my New Statesman blog – when I've wondered whether it's all worth it. Perhaps, a voice at the back of my head suggests, I should throw in the towel and go find a less threatening, more civilised line of work. But that's what the trolls want. To silence Muslims; to deny a voice to a voiceless community. I shouldn't have to put up with this abuse. But I will. I have no plans to let the Islamophobes win. So, dare I ask: who's with me?

The "arrest" of Richard Dart and his friends shows that European security and intelligence remain focused on largely made up threats from the Muslim community - while highly dangerous and radicalized members of threat groups, like the EDL, do not get the same treatment police gave to  Richard Dart.  There needs to be a growing protest against this type of tyrannical and abusive police and security activity - along the lines of religious and political rights, human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human rights, as well as the European Conventions - and there needs to be some kind of world protest against these dubious and outrageous activities by the British State.

We need to start to realize that much of Western police and security, post-September 11, does very little to protect Western society from actual terrorist threat - note the attacks in Norway, July 22, 2011 and the Doner murders in Germany - and serve more as a tyrannical form of Muslim community control and to put on a brutal show to the rest of the world.

Now - last question: What makes the United Kingdom no better than rogue regimes, like Cuba, which also "arrests" its "troublemakers" before high profile events?

Instead of being "impressed" with British security - we need to be outraged and take vigorous actions against British security!

 

---

See:

We mustn't allow Muslims in public life to be silenced

East London EDL supporter threatens Muslims

Mosque protest leader guilty

Man arrested after demo by South Wales National Front in Swansea

EDL thug gets 9 years in prison for racist attack on neighbours

More time for 'terror plot' quiz

6 Muslims arrested in UK terror raid near Olympic Stadium

Muslim arrested under anti-terror laws

White Muslim one of six arrested over ‘terror plot'

Police may be arresting marginal terror suspects to clear decks for Olympics says watchdog

ANTI-MUSLIM VIOLENCE: PICTURE ACROSS UK from TELL MAMA

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Terror cells in the Netherlands? BULLCRAP! AIVD show us the evidence!

[caption id="attachment_3461" align="alignleft" width="208" caption="AIVD: Handen af​​!"][/caption]

While many Dutch people expressed sympathy was for the Somali asylum seekers, the AIVD had yet another “terrorist alert.” In a “false flag” and faked “terror alert” fashion that we here in America know too well, the Dutch media posted a narrative about alleged Somali al-Shabaab terror cells in the US, Britain and the Netherlands.

Supposedly, a former al-Shabaab fighter, now with the army, told a BBC reporter in Somalia that there are al-Shabaab terror cells just waiting to spring, including in the Netherlands.  This former fighter, who vanished before he could be interviewed by intelligence agents, told the reporter that “al-Shabaab had recruited expatriate Somalis in Somalia and had trained them for terror attacks.” (Volkskrant)

Yea (roll your eyes!) right!

Now – a reality check. It has been widely reported that the BBC has engaged in this type of faked and false flag reports in the past. The FBI is well known to have paid informants. Was this fighter tortured or embellishing?  If there are terror cells in our countries, we should demand that they be arrested, but there is the greater chance that the “informant” was paid to say these things. Where are the arrests of the “terrorists” and where is the evidence? Before we allow intelligence and security agencies – like the AIVD – to run amuck among religious and ethnic minority communitieslet’s see the evidence!

Why the AIVD could be doing this…

  1. Muslim control. Remember,  this type of report also serves the political interests of some people in the Dutch State, and not just to justify the AIVD’s “Muslim control” activities.

  2. Maintaining the “jihad in the Netherlands” narrative. The creation of “terror alerts” by the elements of the Dutch State, as with “security interests” of all State governments serves some purpose of the State and/or its political apparatuses.

  3. FEAR! We can suspect that the purpose is to – as it has been in the Netherlands since the antics of Fortuyn, to create fear in the Dutch people.

  4. Justify surveillance. The purpose is to justify the surveillance of groups and individuals involved in efforts to help in Somali asylum seekers in the Netherlands. To further demonize and allow for police sweeps against the Somali asylum seekers.  After all, the AIVD is out to protect the Netherlands, or more likely, protect against “illegal persons.”

  5. Keep Wilders happy. To serve the political and social interests of various actors in Dutch State, including the PVV and others who want conflict with the Islamic “civilization.”


Sharia4Holland is not a “national security threat!” There is also the establishment of the Sharia4Holland – a rather obnoxious band of religious lunatics that is supported by nobody – into a “national security threat against the Netherlands."  The other day, a passerby was arrested for engaging a debate with this pack of lunatics when a supposed threat to Geert Wilders was uttered. Keep in mind that death threats can be uttered against left political figures, like Job Cohen - and nobody is arrested - even after Anders Breivik’s rampage in Norway last summer.  It’s “free speech” to threaten Left politicians, but a criminal act to threaten the radical right thug, Geert  Wilders. Free speech my ass!

Don’t believe it! Expect a report of the AIVD’s activities against Somali asylum seekers and that band of lunatics called Sharia4Holland. When we see these reports, we will then know that the purpose of the Dutch State’s security apparatus is more about “Muslim control” than real security work. There appears to still be a lot of interest of the Dutch State and its intelligence and security apparatuses in maintaining the “jihad in the Netherlands” narrative. Even the head loon of Sharia4Holland, who stated that Geert Wilders “should have learned from what happened to Theo van Gogh” is playing the AIVD’s game and echoing the “jihad in the Netherlands” narrative. What is probably true is that murder of “Theo” was by a street gang member, Mohammed Bouyeri, to serve the purposes of Mohammed Bouyeri. This includes advanced status among his criminal peers.

Yes – Geert Wilders will die someday! We will all die someday, but I hope that Wilders can turn his life around before then and realize that he is wasting his obvious talents pursuing hate and destroying his own country’s culture, traditions and national identity.  But – I suppose that someday Wilders will make a death bed confession that he was wrong and regrets his wasted political career. What a pity!

Well – I promise you that the AIVD’s activities will, indeed, be dissected this summer.  It will have a TOUGH discourse analysis! Sunlight is the best disinfectant against the toxic activities of the AIVD!

Saturday, March 31, 2012

The French State and its abusive reactions to Toulouse shootings.

Going after the French State and its abusive response to the aftermath of the shooting by a "lone wolf," a lone gunman at Toulouse. The response of the French State is now one of an iron fist, which now includes "arrests" of "Islamists" in the phony problem of "Islamist network."  The misguided and anti-Muslim response to the shootings by a lone gunman, Mohamed Merah, also now include denying imams who have never preached violence entrance to the country for an annual Islamic Conference.

There is now the added element of the French elections and Sarkozy is looking for a bump in the polls. Sarkozy has traveled the road of persecution of with regard to the Roma which was followed by a rebuke from the European Union. The French State responded in a positive manner when it came to the presence of the Roma - it is unbelievable how the EU cannot come to the rescue of Muslim EU citizens that have to endure post-violence attacks on human rights and civil freedoms.

Islamist networks and the "threat" is probably a made up "threat." We now seen the "arrests" is "Islamists" by the French State. If these "Islamist networks" were such a danger - then why not close them down before this "lone wolf" shooting? It is quite possible that the people being arrested are being arrested for their religious faith and perhaps their political opinions - not their actual threat of "terrorism." These arrests, including of Merah's mother - should be closely followed by European and international human rights institutions.

Much to their credit, French police now believe that Mohamed Merah was not some "al-Qeada mission" - but was quite alone in his actions. That is not hard to understand, as anybody can claim to be an "al-Qeada operative" and this has been done by individuals in the past. Yet - we see the usual dubious claim of "an Islamist network" and the usual "clash of civilizations" response in collectively blame and punishment of the entire Muslim community. This misguided response is something we simply do not see against radical right networks, but only with "Islamist networks" (which may be nothing more that religious study groups. Expect Rob Wainwright and his Europol to explot the notion of "Islamist networks." Yes - I hope that "Islamist networks" do exist and that the limit their activity to discussion only.

In fact - now we are finding out that the Islamist group - the members that have now been arrested - had NO connection to Mohamed Merah. So - why on God's Green Earth are they being arrested?! What of THEIR freedom of expression and religion? What are the French State's obligations to the human rights of the Knights of Pride Islamist group!

That we will study...

That we will learn about...

That we will raise awareness about!

In a the ideal world, the French State lets the members of the Knights of Pride  go and leaves then alone - or suffers international rebuke and consequense for its actions against the Knights of Pride Islamist group as it did in its actions against Roma people!

So - some people like al-Qaeda  - so what - liking al-Qaeda has nothing to do with a person's involvement in "terrorism" -whatever the defination. Some people also think that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were also really great, but we don't see many arrests of Nazi networks around Europe. People that think that the Nazis were great are - well - ignored by Euroepan states and Rob Wainwright and his Europol. There is something very wrong here - in terms of equality before the law in the EU and in European states, as well as equal enforcements of the laws!

That will change, as the case study of the French State's abusive responses to the  Toulouse shooting is underway.The misguided and openly anti-Muslim response by the French state to the shootings by a lone gunman is now forming a case study that will lay the ground work for an even larger study of the Dutch Nation and its responses to the Theo van Gogh murder.  What appear to be constancies are that any violent act by someone of a Muslim background is now "terrorism":

1. then followed by claims of "our 9-11";

2.  then collective punishment, including "arrests" of "an Islamist network."

3.  Also throw in the claim that the attack by a lone perpetrator of Muslim background is "an attack on our values. 

Violent crimes by Muslims are now "terrorism," but beyond the collective punishment that follows is the unwillingness to include the voices of opposition to these abusive policies on the part of the "victim" State. The Muslim communities that fall victim to post-violence policies appear to be excluded from any debate about security issues and criminalization of the community appears to also occur.

The study framework - emancipation-advocacy approach from Critical Terrorism studies.  The framework I will be using uses a rational actor, "the French State" and what is referred to as emancipation-advocacy approach from Critical Terrorism studies. The approach includes removing the state centric approach and the view of the "French State as victim," used by orthodox terrorism studies and the global mass media’s coverage of the Toulouse shooting. The approach is from the view of the French Muslims who are now enduring oppressive measures and arrests in the aftermath of the shooting. Also a part of the approach will be the French State's obligations under European and human rights conventions, these "arrests" as part of an "Islamist network" as part of limits on religious freedom and expression, which is a part of the limits on freedoms of French Muslims, including attempts to close an up coming Islamic conference.

Question: What are the reactions of the French State after the lone gunman shootings at Toulouse and how do they square with the French State’s as a democratic, pluralistic society and international obligations to its Muslim citizens?

A couple of hypotheses:

  1. The responses of the French State to the shooting by a lone gunman amount to violation of human rights: freedom of speech, freedom of expression, religious freedom, among other possible violations.

  2.  "Islamist networks" are actually religious networks and  "arresting members" in the aftermath of violence is due to associations (real and over the Internet) the religious network has with the perpetrator.

  3. Violence by anyone of Muslim background is always branded as "jihad" and "terrorism."


Something will be done about these abuses of the French State. I will be mailing through standard posts this report to international institutions, including the United Nations,  and hope that awareness can be raised and actions taken against misguided and anti-Muslim responses by European nations in the aftermath of "Muslim violence." Again - this case study will lay the ground work for a larger study of the Dutch State. While Sarkozy intends to abuse the human rights of Muslim in the aftermath of this horrible shooting for his own political gains - I also intend to take full advantage in the name of advocacy for French Muslims, raise awareness of how much work needs to be done in Europe to advance human rights and frame proper responses to violence that do not collectively punish whole communities and criminalize the practice of religious faith or speech.

The paper will make recommendations for individuals and international organizations to get involved and to raise awareness that will based on study findings. Since European Union institutions, as well as other international institutions (like the United Nations) are not doing their jobs – we must do their jobs for them. The European Union, through Europol,, will probably join in efforts to collectively punish French Muslims from the crimes of a single person. There are important issues in terms of human rights, the rule of law and basic justice the French State must anser for in terms of its highly misguided and anti-Muslim response from the violent crimes of a single person.  This must not be allowed to continue!

[caption id="attachment_3387" align="alignleft" width="150" caption="Sarkozy, the French State's anti-Muslim thug. (From Wiki)"]Sarkozy, the French State's anti-Muslim thug. (From Wiki)[/caption]

 

---

NL - Gaan na de Franse staat en zijn misbruik reactie op de nasleep van de schietpartij door een "lone wolf", een eenzame schutter bij Toulouse. De reactie van de Franse staat is nu een van een ijzeren vuist, die nu ook "arrestaties" van "islamisten" in de nep probleem van de "islamistische netwerk." De misleide en anti-moslim reactie op de beschietingen door een eenzame schutter, Mohamed Merah, nu ook onder meer het ontkennen van imams die nog nooit geweld gepredikt ingang naar het land voor een jaarlijkse Islamitische Conferentie.

Er is nu de toegevoegde element van de Franse verkiezingen en Sarkozy is op zoek naar een hobbel in de peilingen. Sarkozy reisde de weg van de vervolging van met betrekking tot de Roma, die werd gevolgd door een berisping van de Europese Unie. De Franse staat reageerde op een positieve manier als het ging om de aanwezigheid van de Roma - het is ongelooflijk hoe de EU niet kan komen tot de redding van de islamitische EU-burgers die moeten na het geweld aanvallen op de mensenrechten en burgerlijke vrijheden te doorstaan.

Islamitische netwerken en de "dreiging" is waarschijnlijk een verzonnen "bedreiging." We hebben nu gezien dat de "arrestaties" is "islamisten" door de Franse staat. Als deze "islamitische netwerken" waren een dergelijk gevaar - waarom dan niet sluiten, voordat deze "lone wolf" schieten? Het is goed mogelijk dat de mensen die gearresteerd worden gearresteerd omdat hun religieuze geloof en wellicht ook hun politieke opvattingen - ". Terrorisme 'niet hun werkelijke dreiging van Deze arrestaties, onder meer van de moeder van Merah's - moeten nauwgezet worden gevolgd door Europese en internationale instellingen voor de mensenrechten.

Tot hun krediet, Franse politie nu van mening dat Mohamed Merah niet een of andere "al-Qeada missie" - maar was helemaal alleen in zijn acties. Dat is niet moeilijk te begrijpen, omdat iedereen kan beweren dat een "al-Qeada operatieve" en dit is gedaan door personen in het verleden. Maar - we zien de gebruikelijke dubieuze claim van "een islamitische netwerk" en de gebruikelijke "botsing der beschavingen 'reactie in collectief schuld en straf van de gehele moslimgemeenschap. Deze misleidende reactie is iets wat we gewoon niet zien tegen de radicale rechts-netwerken, maar alleen met "islamitische netwerken" (die wellicht niet meer dat religieuze studiegroepen. Verwacht Rob Wainwright en zijn Europol tot het begrip explot "islamitische netwerken." Ja - ik hoop dat 'islamitische netwerken' bestaan ​​en dat het hun activiteit te beperken tot discussie alleen.

In feite - nu zijn we uit te vinden dat de islamitische groepering - de leden die nu zijn gearresteerd - GEEN verbinding met Mohamed Merah had. Dus - waarom op Gods groene aarde worden ze gearresteerd? Welke van hun vrijheid od meningsuiting en godsdienst? Wat zijn de Franse staat de verplichtingen om de mensenrechten van de Ridders van Pride islamistische groep!

Dat bestuderen we ...

Dat leren we over ...

Dat zullen we de bewustwording over!

In een de ideale wereld, de Franse Staat laat gaan de leden van de Knights of Pride en laat vervolgens alleen - of lijdt internationale berisping en consequense voor zijn acties tegen de Ridders van Pride islamistische groep als zij heeft gedaan in haar acties tegen Roma!

Dus - sommige mensen, zoals al-Qaeda - zo? - liking al-Qaeda heeft niets te maken met betrokkenheid van een persoon in "terrorisme"-ongeacht het Begrip. Sommige mensen vinden ook dat Adolf Hitler en de nazi's waren ook echt geweldig, maar we zien niet veel arrestaties van de nazi-netwerken in Europa. Mensen die denken dat de nazi's groot waren zijn - goed - genegeerd door Euroepan staten en Rob Wainwright en zijn Europol. Er is iets heel erg mis hier - in termen van gelijkheid voor de wet in de EU en in Europese landen, en de gelijke versterkingen van de wetten!

Dat zal veranderen, aangezien de case study van misbruik van de Franse Staat reacties op de Toulouse-opnamen zijn underway.The misleid en openlijk anti-moslim reactie van de Franse staat aan de opnames van een eenzame schutter is nu de vorming van een case study die leggen de grondwerk voor een nog grotere studie van de Nederlandse natie en haar antwoorden op de Theo van Gogh moord. Wat lijkt te zijn constanten zijn dat elke gewelddadige handeling door iemand van een moslim achtergrond is nu "terrorisme":

1. dan gevolgd door claims van "onze 9-11";

2. dan collectieve bestraffing, met inbegrip van "arrestaties" van "een islamitische netwerk."

3. Ook gooien in de bewering dat de aanval door een enkele dader van islamitische achtergrond is "een aanval op onze waarden.

Gewelddadige misdrijven door de moslims zijn nu "terrorisme", maar verder dan de collectieve straf die volgt is de onwil om de stemmen van de oppositie tegen deze onrechtmatige beleid van de kant van het "slachtoffer" staat te nemen. De islamitische gemeenschappen die slachtoffer zijn van post-geweld beleid lijken te worden uitgesloten van elke discussie over veiligheidskwesties en criminalisering van de gemeenschap lijkt zich ook voordoen.

De studie kader - emancipatie-advocacy aanpak van kritische Terrorisme studies. Het kader dat ik zal gebruiken maakt gebruik van een rationele actor, "de Franse Staat" en wat wordt aangeduid als emancipatie-advocacy aanpak van kritische Terrorisme studies. De aanpak omvat het verwijderen van de staat centric aanpak en de visie van de "Franse staat als slachtoffer," wordt gebruikt door de orthodoxe terrorisme studies en de mondiale massamedia de dekking van de Toulouse schieten. De aanpak is vanuit het oogpunt van de Franse moslims die nu doorstaan ​​onderdrukkende maatregelen en arrestaties in de nasleep van de schietpartij. Ook een deel van de aanpak zal zijn van de Franse Staat verplichtingen op grond van Europese en mensenrechtenverdragen, deze "arrestaties" als onderdeel van een "islamitische netwerk" als onderdeel van de beperkingen op de vrijheid van godsdienst en meningsuiting, dat is een deel van de beperkingen van vrijheden van de Franse moslims, met inbegrip van pogingen om een ​​up komende islamitische conferentie af te sluiten.

Vraag: Wat zijn de reacties van de Franse staat na de eenzame schutter schietpartij in Toulouse en hoe ze zijn vierkant met de Franse staat is als een democratische, pluralistische samenleving en de internationale verplichtingen aan haar islamitische burgers?

Een paar hypotheses:

1. De reacties van de Franse Staat aan de beschieting door een eenzame schutter bedrag aan schending van de mensenrechten: vrijheid van meningsuiting, vrijheid van meningsuiting, godsdienstvrijheid, naast andere mogelijke overtredingen.
2.  "Islamitische netwerken" zijn eigenlijk religieuze netwerken en "arresteren leden" in de nasleep van het geweld is het gevolg van verenigingen (echte en via internet) de religieuze netwerk heeft met de dader.

3..Geweld door iedereen van islamitische achtergrond is altijd gebrandmerkt als "jihad" en "terrorisme".

Iets zal worden gedaan over deze schendingen van de Franse staat. Ik zal mailing met behulp van standaard berichten in dit verslag aan de internationale instellingen, waaronder de Verenigde Naties zijn, en hopen dat het bewustzijn kan worden verhoogd en de acties tegen misleidende en anti-moslim reacties van Europese landen in de nasleep van "moslim geweld." Again - dit geval studie zal de grondslag worden gelegd werk voor een grotere studie van de Nederlandse Staat. Terwijl Sarkozy is van plan de rechten van de mens van de islamitische misbruik in de nasleep van deze verschrikkelijke schietpartij voor zijn eigen politiek gewin - ook ik ben van plan om optimaal te profiteren in de naam van belangenbehartiging voor de Franse moslims, bewust te maken van hoe veel werk moet worden gedaan in Europa om de mensenrechten te bevorderen en kaderen de juiste antwoorden op het geweld die niet collectief te straffen hele gemeenschappen en criminaliseren van de praktijk van het geloof.

Het papier zal aanbevelingen doen voor individuen en internationale organisaties om betrokken te raken en het bewustzijn dat zal op basis van bevindingen van de studie te verhogen. Aangezien de Europese instellingen, en andere internationale instellingen (zoals de Verenigde Naties) zijn niet hun werk te doen - we moeten doen hun werk voor hen. De Europese Unie, via Europol, zal, waarschijnlijk aansluiten bij de inspanningen om gezamenlijk Franse moslims te straffen van de misdaden van een enkele persoon. Er zijn belangrijke kwesties op het gebied van de mensenrechten, moet de rechtsstaat en de fundamentele recht van de Franse staat anser in termen van de zeer misplaatste en anti-moslim reactie van de gewelddadige misdaden van een enkele persoon. Dit moet niet worden toegestaan ​​om verder te gaan!

 

L'Etat français et ses réponses abusives à terroriste Al-Qaïda à la suite de l'Toulouse

Sarkozy, the French State's anti-Muslim thug. (From Wiki)Après que l'État français et sa réponse abusive à la suite de la fusillade par un «loup solitaire», un tireur isolé à Toulouse. La réponse de l'Etat français est aujourd'hui l'un d'une poigne de fer, qui comprend désormais "arrestations" de "islamistes" dans le faux problème de «réseau islamiste». La réponse erronée et anti-musulmane aux fusillades par un tireur isolé, Mohamed Merah, comporte désormais des imams nier qui ont jamais prêché la violence d'entrée dans le pays pour une conférence annuelle islamique.

Il est désormais l'élément ajouté des élections françaises et Sarkozy est à la recherche d'une bosse dans les sondages. Sarkozy a parcouru la route de la persécution de ce qui concerne les Roms, qui a été suivie par une réprimande de l'Union européenne. L'Etat français a répondu de manière positive quand il est venu à la présence des Roms - il est incroyable de voir comment l'Union européenne ne peut pas venir à la rescousse des citoyens de l'UE musulmans qui ont à endurer la violence post-attaques sur les droits de l'homme et des libertés civiles.

Réseaux islamistes et la «menace» est probablement un composé "menace". Nous avons maintenant vu les "arrestations" est "islamistes" par l'Etat français. Si ces «réseaux islamistes» ont été un tel danger - alors pourquoi ne pas les fermer avant cette «loup solitaire» de prise de vue? Il est fort possible que les gens qui sont arrêtés sont arrêtés pour leur foi religieuse et peut-être de leurs opinions politiques - ". Le terrorisme" ne pas leur menace réelle de Ces arrestations, y compris de la mère de Merah - devrait être suivie de près par les institutions européennes et internationales des droits de l'homme.

Une grande partie de leur crédit, la police française croient maintenant que Mohamed Merah n'était pas un "al-Qeada mission» - mais il était tout seul dans ses actions. Ce n'est pas difficile à comprendre, comme n'importe qui peut prétendre être un «al-Qeada opératoire» et cela a été fait par des individus dans le passé. Pourtant, - nous voyons la demande habituelle douteuse d'un «réseau islamiste» et l'habituel «choc des civilisations» dans la réponse collective blâme et la punition de toute la communauté musulmane. Cette réponse erronée est quelque chose que nous n'avons tout simplement pas voir contre radicales bons réseaux, mais seulement avec les «réseaux islamistes» (qui peut être rien de plus que les groupes d'études religieuses. Attendez-vous à Rob Wainwright et son Europol à explot la notion de «réseaux islamistes». Oui - J'espère que «les réseaux islamistes" existent et que la limite de leur activité à la discussion seulement.

En fait - maintenant, nous constatons que le groupe islamiste - les membres qui ont été arrêtés - n'avait aucun lien avec Mohamed Merah. Alors - pourquoi sur Terre verte de Dieu sont-ils arrêtés?! Qu'est-ce de leur liberté od expression et de religion? Quelles sont les obligations de l'État français aux droits de l'homme des Chevaliers du groupe islamiste fierté!

Que nous allons étudier ...

Que nous en apprendre davantage sur ...

Que nous sensibiliser!

Dans un monde idéal, l'Etat français permet aux membres des Chevaliers de la fierté aller et laisse alors seulement - ou souffre réprimande internationale et consequense pour ses actions contre les Chevaliers du groupe islamiste fierté car il a fait dans ses actions contre les Roms!

Donc - certaines personnes comme Al-Qaïda  - aimer Al-Qaïda n'a rien à voir avec la participation d'une personne dans le «terrorisme»-quelle que soit la defination. Certaines personnes pensent aussi que Adolf Hitler et les nazis étaient également très intéressant, mais nous ne voyons pas de nombreuses arrestations de réseaux nazis à travers l'Europe. Les gens qui pensent que les nazis étaient une grande sont - bien - ignoré par les Etats Euroepan et Rob Wainwright et son Europol. Il ya quelque chose de très mal ici - en termes d'égalité devant la loi dans l'UE et dans les Etats européens, ainsi que l'égalité de renforts des lois!

Cela va changer, que l'étude de cas des réponses abusives de l'État français à la prise de vue Toulouse. The erronée et ouvertement anti-musulman de réponse par l'Etat français à la fusillade par un tireur isolé est en train de former une étude de cas permettra de jeter les travail sur le terrain pour une étude encore plus grand de la nation hollandaise et ses réponses à la assassiner Theo van Gogh. Ce qui semble être constances sont que tout acte de violence par une personne d'une origine musulmane est maintenant le «terrorisme»:

1. ensuite suivie par les revendications de «notre 9-11»;

2. puis une punition collective, y compris "arrestations" de "un réseau islamiste."

3. Aussi jeter dans l'affirmation selon laquelle l'attaque par un seul auteur d'origine musulmane est «une attaque contre nos valeurs.

Les crimes violents par les musulmans sont maintenant «terrorisme», mais au-delà de la punition collective qui suit est la réticence à inclure les voix de l'opposition à ces politiques abusives de la part de l'État «victime». Les communautés musulmanes qui sont victimes de la violence post-politiques semblent être exclus de tout débat sur les questions de sécurité et de la criminalisation de la communauté semble également se produire.

Le cadre de l'étude - l'émancipation-plaidoyer approche à partir d'études critiques contre le terrorisme. Le cadre que je vais utiliser utilise un acteur rationnel », l'État français» et ce qui est visé à l'émancipation-plaidoyer approche à partir d'études critiques contre le terrorisme. L'approche comprend la suppression de l'approche centrée sur l'État et la vue de «l'État français en tant que victime," utilisée par études sur le terrorisme et la couverture orthodoxes les médias mondiaux populaire de la fusillade Toulouse. L'approche est du point de vue des musulmans français qui sont maintenant supporter des mesures oppressives et des arrestations à la suite de la fusillade. Aussi une partie de l'approche sera obligations de l'État français en vertu de conventions relatives aux droits européens et humaines, ces "arrestations" dans le cadre d'un «réseau islamiste» dans le cadre de limites sur la liberté religieuse et d'expression, qui est une partie des limites sur les libertés des musulmans français, y compris les tentatives de fermer une conférence à venir jusqu'à islamique.

Question: Quelles sont les réactions de l'État français après la fusillade tireur isolé à Toulouse et comment font-ils place avec l'Etat français est aussi une société démocratique, pluraliste et obligations internationales à ses citoyens musulmans?

Un couple d'hypothèses:

1. Les réponses de l'Etat français à la fusillade par un tireur isolé à montant violation des droits de l'homme: la liberté d'expression, la liberté d'expression, la liberté religieuse, parmi d'autres violations possibles.

2.  «Réseaux islamistes» sont en fait des réseaux religieux et "membres" d'arrêt à la suite de la violence est due à des associations (réel et sur Internet), le réseau religieux entretient avec l'auteur.
3. La violence exercée par toute personne d'origine musulmane est toujours stigmatisés comme «djihad» et «terrorisme».

Quelque chose va être fait au sujet de ces violations de l'Etat français. Je serai de diffusion à travers les postes standards dans ce rapport à des institutions internationales, y compris l'Organisation des Nations Unies, et nous espérons que la sensibilisation peut être soulevée et les actions prises à l'encontre des réponses erronées et anti-musulman par les nations européennes à la suite de "la violence musulmane." Encore une fois - cette étude de cas permettra de jeter les bases d'une étude plus vaste de l'État néerlandais. Alors que Sarkozy a l'intention d'abuser des droits de l'homme de musulmans à la suite de cette fusillade horrible pour ses propres gains politiques - J'ai également l'intention de tirer pleinement parti au nom de la défense des musulmans français, de sensibiliser le volume de travail à faire dans l'Europe pour promouvoir les droits de l'homme et définir des réponses appropriées à la violence qui ne sont pas punir collectivement des communautés entières et de criminaliser la pratique de la foi religieuse.

Le document fera des recommandations pour les particuliers et les organisations internationales à s'impliquer et à faire prendre conscience que sera fondé sur les conclusions de l'étude. Depuis institutions de l'Union européenne, ainsi que d'autres institutions internationales (comme l'Organisation des Nations Unies) ne font pas leur travail - nous devons faire leur travail pour eux. L'Union européenne, par le biais d'Europol,, sera probablement unir leurs efforts pour punir collectivement les musulmans français des crimes d'une seule personne. Il ya des questions importantes en termes de droits de l'homme, la primauté du droit et de justice fondamentale de l'État français doit anser en termes de sa réponse très erronée et anti-musulmane des crimes violents d'une seule personne. Cela ne doit pas être autorisé à continuer!

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Schietpartijen in Frankrijk te worden natuurlijk "terrorisme?" - Alleen moslims plegen "terrorisme!"

Zo zeker als de zon opkomt in het oosten, zal de moorden op kinderen in een joodse school veranderd worden in "daden van terrorisme" door de Franse autoriteiten. Omdat de dader Mohammed Merah, kunnen we verwachten dat de Franse regering om nu beweren dat deze eenzame gek is "verbonden met al-Qaeda terrorisme", net als Mohammed B. is "gekoppeld aan het internationale terrorisme", toen hij vermoord Theo van Gogh. Merk op dat alleen de Nederlandse Staat de naam Mohammed B. een "terrorist" en alleen de Nederlandse Staat heeft de naam Hofstadgroep een "internationale terroristische groepering." Er is eigenlijk geen bewijs buiten de Nederlandse Staat dat de moord op Theo van Gogh was "een daad van Al -Qaeda terrorisme "en Mohammed Bouyeri waarschijnlijk handelde alleen voor zijn eigen verdraaide redenen. Ook deze moordenaar waarschijnlijk handelde alleen voor zijn eigen verdraaide redenen, net als de Amerikaanse soldaat 16 burgers, 9 van hen kinderen die in een door Afghanistan dorp of wanneer Gianluca casser handelde alleen toen hij neergeschoten Senegalese straatverkopers in Italië in december vorig jaar. De bovenstaande handelingen niet "terrorisme" en geen van beide werd het Alphen aan den Rijn een jaar geleden aan te vallen door een native Nederlander met een liefde voor wapens.

Wat wel en wat niet "terrorisme" op basis van religieuze achtergrond van moord verdachten. Net als in een vorige post, de Orthodoxe terrorisme veld sterk verstrengeld met overheden en uitzicht deze regeringen als "onschuldige slachtoffers." De Orthodoxe terrorisme veld gebruikt slordige wetenschappelijke methoden en orthodoxe terrorisme studies ontbreekt studie kaders en over-zich overgeeft aan aanvechtbaar labels en categorieën, vaak verpakt in anti-moslim verhalen. Een van de orthodoxe terrorisme onderzoeken gebied is dat het niet is aangekomen bij een definitie van "terrorisme", dus niemand die in de orthodoxe terrorisme studies gebied, vooral als ze zijn aangesloten op de Franse Staat, heeft elk bedrijf noemen dit "het terrorisme. "

We kunnen ook zien hoe "het terrorisme" is geoperationaliseerd om te zien dat "terrorisme" geldt alleen voor geweld door moslims. Ik heb veel op gewezen dat de meest afschuwelijke terroristische aanslag in Nederland was in 2009, Koninginnedag Parade aanslag in Apeldoorn door Karst Tates tegen de Nederlandse koninklijke familie (direct de aanval op het Nederlandse volk) waarin 8 mensen omgekomen en 10 raakten gewond.

[caption id="attachment_2105" align="alignleft" width="203" caption="Tristan van der Vlies was een shooter als Mohammed Merah - maar niet van een "terrorist" omdat hij geen moslim!"][/caption]

Zowat een jaar geleden, een andere jonge man met een interesse in wapens, Tristan van der Vlies, ging op een schietpartij in een winkelcentrum Alphen aan den Rijn, een stad gelegen tussen Leiden en Utrecht. Naast het doden van zichzelf: "Tristan" doodde zes mensen en injuried 16 anderen. "Tristan" werd gezegd dat het een PVV-kiezer te zijn en had een geschiedenis van psychische problemen.

We weten ook over de dodelijke schietpartij aanval in Florence, Italië in december, door een rechts-radicale extremistische, Gianluca casser, gericht op Senegalese straatverkopers. Ook dit is niet beschreven als "terrorisme" door de Italiaanse regering of de orthodoxe terrorisme studies veld - maar deze schieten in Frankrijk zijn "terrorisme?"

So-een lange kijken naar wat is "terrorisme" en je zult zien dat verschrikkelijke crimineel geweld is "terrorisme" omdat de verdachte afkomstig is van een moslim achtergrond. Deze schietpartijen in Frankrijk als "terrorisme" betekent dat de operationalisering van het "terrorisme"-label is gebaseerd op de religieuze achtergrond van de verdachte - wat betekent dat de bestrijding van terrorisme de praktijk is partijdig en discriminerend tegen moslims.

De schietpartijen in Frankrijk zijn "jihad terrorisme" omdat "een moslim het deed." Dit zijn verschrikkelijke moorden, criminele handelingen, (geen terrorisme) en een individueel moord pleegt strafbare feiten als individu waarvoor het individu gestraft voor. Maar - u kunt wedden dat deze "daad van jihad terrorisme" zal worden, zoals in Nederland, de motivering bij het religieuze geloof en de politieke opvattingen van de moslimgemeenschap te criminaliseren. De Franse moslimgemeenschap niet heeft begaan deze aanval op een joodse school, maar Mohammed Merah alleen verantwoordelijk is. Ook - etiketteren van dit (ten onrechte) als "terrorisme" zal dan rechtvaardigt het opstellen van een profiel van dit individu en probeert te pinnen op anderen - die misschien helemaal niet zijn na te denken over moord. De meeste van allemaal, zullen deze gruwelijke moorden worden gebruikt om de voortdurende vooruitgang van de 'clash van de beschaving "als een buitenlands en binnenlands bestuur paradigma, dat zal leiden tot meer geweld en oorlogen, meer verlies van vrijheid en sociale cohesie te rechtvaardigen.

We moeten werken om dit en eisen dat de "jihad terrorist" label niet worden gevestigd op alle gewelddadige crimineel met een moslim achtergrond weerstaan. We moeten werken tegen de gekke neiging om niet alleen deze moorden te bestempelen als "terrorisme", maar de neiging om deze daad wegwaaien in geen verhouding tot andere soortgelijke handelingen of slechter werkt gepleegd door niet-moslims.

Regeringen, vooral westerse regeringen, hebben veel te winnen door "met daden van Al-Qaeda gelinkte terrorisme" op hun grondgebied, en ze kunnen winstgevend zijn. Voor de Nederlandse Staat, de moord op Theo van Gogh als 'terrorisme' gerechtvaardigd is de criminalisering van het religieuze geloof en politieke overtuiging tot een systeem van "moslim control" in Nederland. Het heeft ook geleid tot een geheel "jihad in Nederland 'genre van boeken en papieren - die allemaal een echokamer voor claims van de Nederlandse Staat dat Mohammed Bouyeri was een" Al-Qeada terroristen "en Hofstadgroep een' al-Qaida terroristische cel . "de Nederlandse Staat van de betrekkingen met de Verenigde Staten en andere landen zijn nu gedefinieerd op" het voorkomen van radicalisering "uitsluitend gericht op religieuze radicalisering van moslims.

De moord op Theo van Gogh is nu het visitekaartje voor de Nederlandse staat en zijn onechte "veiligheidsbelangen" op het internationale toneel. Yep - het doden van "Theo" is de aflossing voor de Nederlandse Staat.

Dit is geen "terrorisme", maar een enkele, misschien wel zeer verstoord, mensen die graag Karst Tates, Tristan van der Vlies, Gianluca casser - Staff Sgt. Robert Bales-- behoefte hebben aan een aantal ingrijpen voordat je op een Schietpartijen. Deze interventie moet ook niet gericht zijn tegen religieuze geloof of poilitical meningen. Een killing spree heeft echte slachtoffers, ongeacht whet de motivaties van de moordenaars zijn - maar voor de behandeling van het doden van sprees door verdachten op basis van de religieuze achtergrond van de verdachte is discriminerend en worden gebruikt om dan te rechtvaardigen collectieve straffen en schendingen van de mensenrechten van hele gemeenschappen.

Dus - zien we "terrorisme" geoperationaliseerd als "iets wat alleen moslims doen." Dit is de reden waarom de ergste terroristische-type aanslag in Nederland, de 2009 Koninginnedag aanslag in Apeldoorn tegen de koninklijke familie (8 doden, 10 gewonden), noch de Alphen aan den Rijn winkelcentrum aanval vorig jaar. Omdat noch de aanvallers waren moslims - dit zijn geen terreur aanslagen - en dit geeft ons een goed idee van hoe 'terrorisme' wordt geoperationaliseerd in Nederland.

Om nu te labelen deze afschuwelijke moorden 'terrorisme' zal bouwen steeds meer aanwijzingen dat "terrorisme" is iets dat "alleen moslims doen." Dit betekent dat westerse regeringen (Frankrijk, Nederland, het Verenigd Koninkrijk, de Verenigde Staten) op het etiket "terrorisme" te gebruiken wanneer een persoon doodt voor zijn eigen persoonlijke redenen is een moslim. Dit betekent dat de westerse regeringen bezighouden met discriminerende praktijken in de strijd tegen het terrorisme - en dat schendt de verschillende internationale en Europese mensenrechtenverdragen en conventies.

We moeten werken tegen de demonisering en criminalisering van religieus geloof en politieke standpunten. We moeten een soort van pushback tegen het discriminerend gebruik van het "terrorisme"-label lijkt alleen worden toegepast om gewelddadige handelingen door mensen met een moslim achtergrond. Deze zaak uit Frankrijk zullen worden behandeld als "terrorisme" als andere soortgelijke misdrijven door niet-moslims zijn geen "terrorisme" en worden steeds meer bewijs dat de westerse strijd tegen het terrorisme studies en de praktijk een vooringenomen tegen moslims hebben - en we moeten werken tegen deze anti -moslim, terrorismebestrijding bias.

 

 Zie:

Dutch Mall Shooter Fired More Than 100 Times

7 killed, 15 wounded in Dutch mall shooting

'No contact' with French shootings suspect

Florence street vendors shot dead by lone gunman

Merah: From petty criminal to killer

Shootings in France to become “terrorism?!” Of course – only Muslims commit "terrorism!"

As sure as the sun rises in the east, the murders of children in a Jewish school will be turned into “acts of terrorism” by French authorities. Since the perpetrator is Mohammed Merah, we can fully expect the French government to now claim that this lone crazy is “linked to al-Qaeda terrorism,” just as Mohammed Bouyeri is “linked to international terrorism” when he killed Theo van Gogh.  Note that only the Dutch State called Mohammed Bouyeri a “terrorist” and only the Dutch State has called Hofstadgroep an “international terrorist group.”  There actually is no evidence outside of the Dutch State that the Theo van Gogh killing was “an act of Al-Qaeda terrorism” and Mohammed Bouyeri probably acted alone for his own twisted reasons. Likewise, this killer probably acted alone for his own twisted reasons, just as the US soldier slaughtered 16 civilians, 9 of them children in an Afghanistan village or when Gianluca Casser acted alone when he gunned down Senegalese street vendors in Italy last December .  The above acts are not “terrorism” –and neither was the Alphen aan den Rijn attack a year ago by a native Dutchman with a love for weapons.

What is and isn’t “terrorism” based on religious background of murder suspects. As in a previous post, the Orthodox terrorism field is largely entangled with governments and views these governments as “innocent victims.”  The Orthodox terrorism field used shoddy scientific methods and Orthodox terrorism studies lacks study frameworks and over-indulges in disputable labels and categories, often wrapped in anti-Muslim narratives.   Another of the Orthodox terrorism studies field is that it has not arrived at a definition of “terrorism,” so nobody who is in the Orthodox terrorism studies field, especially if they are connected to the French State, has any business calling this “terrorism.”

We can also see how “terrorism” is operationalized to see that “terrorism” applies only to violent acts by Muslims. I have extensively pointed out that the most horrible terrorist attack in the Netherlands was the 2009, Queen’s Day Parade attack in Apeldoorn by Karst Tates against the Dutch royal family (directly attacking the Dutch people) in which 8 people died and 10 were injured.

[caption id="attachment_2582" align="alignleft" width="259" caption="Tristan van der Vlies was a shooter like Mohammed Merah - but not a "terrorist" because he was not a Muslim!"][/caption]

Just about a year ago, another young man with an interest in weapons, Tristan van der Vlies, went on a shooting rampage at a shopping mall Alphen aan den Rijn, a town located between Leiden and Utrecht. Besides killing himself, “Tristan” killed six people and injuried 16 others. “Tristan” was said to be a PVV voter and had a history of mental health problems.

We also know about the deadly shooting attack in Florence, Italy in December, by a radical right extremist, Gianluca Casser, directed at Senegalese street vendors.  This also has not been described as “terrorism” by the Italian government or the Orthodox terrorism studies field – but these shooting in France are “terrorism?!”

So– take a long look at what is “terrorism” and you will see that horrible criminal violence is “terrorism” because the suspect comes from a Muslim background.  These shootings in France as “terrorism” means that the operationalization of the “terrorism” label is based on the religious background of the suspect – meaning that counter-terrorism practice is biased and discriminatory against Muslims.

The shootings in France are “jihad terrorism” because “a Muslim did it.” These are horrible murders, criminal acts, (not terrorism) and an individual murder commits criminal acts as individuals for which the individual is punished for. However – you can bet that this “act of jihad terrorism” will become, as in the Netherlands, justification to criminalize religious faith and political opinions of the Muslim community. The French Muslim community did not commit this attack on a Jewish school, but Mohammed Merah alone is responsible. Also – labeling this (wrongly) as “terrorism” will then justify the drawing up of a profile from this single individual and attempting to pin it on others – who may not at all be thinking about murder. Most of all, these horrible murders will be used to justify the continued advancement of the “clash of civilization” as a foreign and domestic governance paradigm, which will lead to more violence and wars, more loss of freedom and social cohesion.

We must work to resist this and demand that the “jihad terrorist” label not be pinned on every violent criminal from a Muslim background. We must work against the mad tendency to not only label these killings as “terrorism,” but the tendency to overblow this act out of proportion to other similar acts or worse acts committed by non-Muslims.

Governments, especially Western governments, have a lot to gain by “having acts of Al-Qaeda linked terrorism” on their soil, and they can be profitable.  For the Dutch State, the murder of Theo van Gogh as “terrorism” justified the criminalization of religious faith and political opinions bring about a system of “Muslim control” in the Netherlands.  It also has spawned a whole “jihad in the Netherlands” genre of books and papers – all of which are an echo chamber for the Dutch State’s claims that Mohammed Bouyeri was a “Al-Qeada terrorists” and Hofstadgroep an “al-Qaeda terrorist cell.” The Dutch State’s relations to the US and other nations are now defined on “preventing radicalization” exclusively focused on religious radicalization of Muslims.

The Theo van Gogh murder is now the calling card for the Dutch State and its phoney "security interests" on the international stage. Yep - the killing of "Theo" has been paying off for the Dutch State.

This is not “terrorism,” but a single,  perhaps highly disturbed,  individuals who like Karst Tates, Tristan van der Vlies, Gianluca Casser - Staff Sgt. Robert Bales-  – are in need of some intervention before going on a killing spree.  This intervention must also not be biased against religious faith or poilitical opinions. A killing spree has real victims no matter whet the motivations of the killers are – but to treat killing sprees by suspects based on the religious background of the suspect is discriminatory and used to then justify collective punishments and violations of the human rights of whole communities.

So - we see "terrorism" operationalized as "something only Muslims do." This is why the worst terrorist-type attack in the Netherlands, the 2009 Queen's Day attack in Apeldoorn against the royal family (8 dead, 10 injured) nor the Alphen aan den Rijn shopping mall attack last year. Since neither the attackers were Muslims - these are not terrorist attacks - and this gives us a good idea of how "terrorism" is operationalized in the Netherlands.

To now label these horrible murders "terrorism" will build mounting evidence that "terrorism" is something that "only Muslims do." This means that Western governments (France, the Netherlands, the UK, the USA) use the label "terrorism" when a single person kills for his own personal reasons is a Muslim. This means that Western governments engage in discriminatory practices in counter-terrorism - and this violates various international and European human rights treaties and conventions.

We must work against the demonization and criminalization of religious faith and political viewpoints. We must provide some kind of pushback against the discriminatory use of the “terrorism” label appears to be applied only to violent acts by those with a Muslim background. This case out of France will be treated as “terrorism” when other similar crimes by non-Muslims are not “terrorism” and become mounting evidence that Western counter-terrorism studies and practice have a biased against Muslims – and we must work against this anti-Muslim, counter-terrorism bias.



See:

Dutch Mall Shooter Fired More Than 100 Times

7 killed, 15 wounded in Dutch mall shooting

'No contact' with French shootings suspect

Florence street vendors shot dead by lone gunman

Merah: From petty criminal to killer

 

 

 

 

Monday, August 16, 2010

Religious Freedom, the Radical Right and the New York Mosque

This Author is 200% in favor of the construction of Cordoba Mosque and Islamic community center a few blocks from "ground zero" of the 9-11-2001 attacks. The Cordoba House could serve as a beacon of much needed reconciliation and help combat the notion (also promoted by al-Qaeda) that "Islam is at war with the West" and challenge the image that "Muslim=terrorist." What an asset such a community center could be to combat Islamophobia in America and the Western world! What a stand for religious liberty in the face of both the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Western Taliban here at home that oppose it![youtube id="JfIPO7CVflA" w="200" h="200"]There are several very good articles in major newspapers in defense of religious freedom and the right of the Muslim community to build the Cordoba House, the "Project 51," the so-called "New York mosque" and "Ground Zero Mosque." The first is from the Washington Post by Susan Brooks, who congratulated President Obama for his strong convictions on religious liberty of Muslims:
It is crucial that Americans show the world that we have the courage of that conviction, especially when it comes to a plan to build an Islamic Center in lower Manhattan. Religious diversity is, as the President noted, not a national weakness, but "a strength," perhaps more so when controversial as it is a way, if "we can work through these issues, and stay true to our core values" that "we can emerge stronger for it."
It is not weakness to stand for religious liberty - and President Obama is absolutely right in his convictions and should NEVER apologize or change his statements. It is about time that a Democrat somewhere get some kind of spine and stand up to the radical Right and the threat it holds for our future. The center Left, both in America and in Europe - could become champions of freedom and human rights. Advocacy for freedom and human rights could have a reinvigorating effect on the center Left in the Western world.[youtube id="vvFUakL-bqw" w="200" h="200"] According to Doug Thompson of the Capital Hill Blue not accepting President Obama's statement on religious freedom of Muslims make you are a bit un-American:
If you don’t accept Barack Obama’s statement that religious freedom gives Muslims the right to erect a mosque in downtown Manhattan then you don’t accept one of the basic tenets of America.Freedom is not, and cannot be, selective. Blocking construction of a mosque is a threat to the freedoms that once defined this nation. If it is blocked, we will become the tyrants that our forefathers founded this country to defy.
How true - and the un-American Tea Party, Republicans, and Islamophobic nutcases like Pamela Geller are exploiting wide-spread Islamophobia in America (and Islamophobia is a huge problem in the Western world).[caption id="attachment_857" align="alignright" width="224" caption=""Our liberty of worship is not a concession nor a privilege, but an inherent right.""]Worship-monument photo by David Ball from Wikipedia[/caption]There are two rather obvious points that are coming out is the so-called "New York Mosque" debate. The first is that the American right has little respect for our freedoms and liberties and the rule of law. The Islamophobic radical Right has little respect for the concept of "all men are created equal" - as Muslims are not created equal in the empty heads of the radical Right. We need to also keep in mind that the Civil Rights Movement to bring equal liberty to African Americans mirrors this fight to bring full liberty to Muslims living in the Western world.All authors, add to that the USA Today, believe this this "controversial Ground Zero mosque issue" was manufactured by the Republicans and the radical Right and Islamophobic nutcases like Spencer and Geller for exploitation:
The argument over building a mosque and Islamic center near Ground Zero is mostly a sorry exercise in political exploitation. For all the attention the issue gets, there is no national decision to be made. New York, like other localities, regulates how land in the city is used, and even if it wanted to block the mosque, which it doesn't, finding a legal way to do so would be tough. The Constitution doesn't let governments treat one religion differently from another.Republicans, seizing on the gaffe and antipathy about the mosque in polls, then sought to whip up a frenzy, giving lip service to religious freedom but offering no solution that wouldn't offend it. Former House speaker Newt Gingrich, who has been setting new lows for dialogue on this issue, even accused Obama of "pandering to radical Islam," as if any president would do such a thing.
The radical Right, including in Europe and the Netherlands, has more in common with our enemies in the Taliban and al-Qaeda.  They are the Western Taliban. They are also composed of Geert Wilders' and his personal political  party, the "Freedom Party," that want close Muslim schools in the Netherlands just as much as the Taliban want to close schools for girls in Afghanistan. They are also composed of Mark Williams and the racists of the Tea Party, who state that Muslims "worship a monkey god."  They are NOT for freedom and they are thoroughly anti-freedom to the core,  and just as the Taliban and al-Qaeda want to impose an exclusive social-religious order, so too the Tea Party and  "Freedom Party" want their exclusive social-religious order.  An excellent article by Liam Fox in the News Junkie Post makes obvious connections between the Taliban and the radical Right that oppose Project 51 and find American freedom offensive:
Not in the sense of a murderous group of black-cloaked men as we’re shown on television, but as a group of social conservatives who have proclaimed themselves to be divinely-ordained, and are intent on imposing religious doctrine on an entire society, and are willing to use ‘Second Amendment Remedies’ in order to get their way.A disturbing number of American politicians, and political celebrities, have demonstrated their willingness to repeal the rights of American citizens in order to further a political agenda based on a particular religious doctrine and the preference of one religion over any other. Whether they are true believers themselves, or simply attempting to pander to a very assertive portion of their base, the result is the same. The current platform of many conservative politicians threatens the fundamental rights of all Americans.
Keep in mind also the Geert Wilders wants to change the Dutch Constitution to make Dutch Muslims second class citizens in their own country. The Taliban also destroyed historical Buddha statues dating to the fifth century BC for "not being Islamic enough." The idea that religious freedom is also for Muslims and that freedom is made manifest in the Cordoba House is something whole offensive to the Western Taliban.  The real threat - again - is less these days from Islamist terrorism and more from those of the Western Taliban that abuse people's fears and seek control of governments. From New Amsterdam to old Amsterdam - this ilk is the real threat to our way of life !See also Loonwatch - Barack Obama in Freedom of Religion Speech: Muslims Have a Right to Build in NYCGod's Politics blog - Forgiveness, Fear, and the Mosque at Ground Zero

Saturday, July 10, 2010

How the SWIFT Agreement could be used against human rights activists

From yesterday's blog we see that a European institution is willing to stand up against some of the ugly and unacceptable doings of the United States in its mad dog "war on terrorism." By standing against the extradition of four men who could be subjected to the abuse of  solidarity confinement for the rest of their lives - the European Court of Human Rights has, at least, decided that this form of penology should be examined in relation to higher standards of European human rights.BRAVO! This development from the ECtHR is a great victory for those of us who long for international intervention in the American domestic order, most especially in the area of human rights in the criminal justice system. It is also a great victory for those of us who would like Europe to stand on its own and impose European values - especially in its relations with the United States.The SWIFT Agreement and its potential to go after human rights activists... However, on the same day, we saw the SWIFT agreement of US access to private banking data -agreed for so-called "counter-terrorism" pass through the European Parliament. The first question is what kind of arm-twisting did US "war on terror" mad-dog do against MEPs?  Jerzy Buzek "points out 'institutional lessons' that "have been learned" since the European Parliament acquired its new oversights in CFSP from the Lisbon Treaty. What lessons? How to allow the US to get what it wants?We see the US claim that "terrorism continues to be a threat" (the 9-11 excuse) which is waning for its justification for this "search for terrorist financing," but would most certainly be used against human rights NGOs that seek to give legal advice to a US-defined "terrorist group." The SWIFT agreement on bank data, some MEPs claim, is going to be supervised and have oversight.  No "data mining" is allowed and only justifications based on "terrorism and terrorist groups," but given recent developments in US case law, peace groups, like the Humanitarian Law Project, could be targeted, meaning that the European Union could be participating in the prosecution of human rights activists.The most obvious is that MEPs, like other European leaders, still do not know what their decisions on this kind of "please America first" policy have for potential embarrassing disasters for the European Union. The potential embarrassment this Agreement could pose to the European Union could even undermine its foreign policy and place on the world stage.  This Agreement clearly could mean  SWIFT Agreement-enabled "aid for terrorism" investigations of peace-loving Americans, human rights activists and NGOs that want to aid in preventing and curbing terrorism! Now - those that are involved in courageous work of human rights and conflict resolution NGOs who could risk 15 years (perhaps at a supermax) for "giving advice" to a US branded "terrorist group." This advice need not be on how to be a better terrorist, or how to build bombs - but the advice could be on how to take grievances to the UN and used peaceful, non-violent means.Would the financial transactions of NGOs that are advising US-branded "terrorist groups" to give up terrorism and peaceful seek solutions, such as at the United Nations - also now be subjected to the use of the SWIFT Agreement by US investigators in order to prosecute and imprison them?
"The supreme court has ruled that human rights advocates, providing training and assistance in the nonviolent resolution of disputes, can be prosecuted as terrorists...In the name of fighting terrorism, the court has said that the first amendment [on free speech] permits congress to make it a crime to work for peace and human rights. That is wrong."
The answer is YES - and this could represent a embarrassment for the European Union, as well as violate its own values - but this would be like cooperation with the CIA renditions program and be VERY harmful to the European Union's place on the world stage![Sighs of relief as EU parliament approves 'Swift' deal - US supreme court: Nonviolent aid to banned groups tantamount to 'terrorism' - Court Affirms Ban on Aiding Groups Tied to Terror ACLU: Supreme Court Rules "Material Support" Law Can Stand - Supreme Court Rules "Material Support" Law Can Stand]At least the Green Party group has some vision to see this - but what would MEPs that voted for this say to human rights activists that will be criminalized for "aiding a terrorist group" in getting terrorist to give up terrorism and seek non-violent means to address grievances. Will the European Union now be participating in the prosecution of human rights activists? The one man who is proud of himself is a German MEP  the name of  Alexander Alvaro - the one who appears to have engineered this potential nightmare. Well - his name will be kept for future reference! The European Union should be kept out of America's "war on terrorism" and this could have bben the chance to stand up for European values. Again - MEPs chose instead to cower - and now we have the frightening prospect of the European Union aiding the US' prosecution and imprisonment of human rights activists.