Showing posts with label counterjihad terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label counterjihad terrorism. Show all posts

Saturday, December 8, 2012

Geert brings Hank and Ingrid to roost in America.

I have always advocated keeping Geert Wilders out of our country. In fact, Wilders should be keep out of all civilized and democratic countries for the sake of internal security. Since about 2009, Wilders has been making frequent trips to the US and Canada for "speaking engagements" , and this includes at the site of the World Trade Center, where on September 11, 2010, Wilders gave yet another Islamophobic hate speech. At this time, the new Dutch government had not been seated from the June election results. At that time also, the "Ground Zero mosque" (called the "Victory Mosque" by Wilders) issue was ignited and Geert Wilders was brought over by Pamela Geller and her hateful associates. Also following Wilders to New York was the Dutch newsmedia and the view of tying this trip and hate speech to a new cabinet and governemnt was repugnant and shameful!

Beating up Muslims in the streets in the Netherlands and America. The far and wide coverage of Wilders' travels and hatespeeches may be causing a spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes in especially the US.

Henk and Ingrid, Mr. and Mrs Dutch (sic), was a creation of Wilders to further his campaign of hate against especially Muslims and Moroccans. This last July, a real life Henk and Ingrid in the town of Almelo beat an elderly Turkish neighbor on the street. Aziz Kara eventually died of his head injuries. The shock of this murder also rippled through the Tweede Kamer (House) election campaign and was one of the factors that thankfully set back Wilders.
Let us hope that the Dutch people can wake up and see that Geert Wilders is not "patriotic" and that this type of speech is unacceptable and dangerous to society.  Wilders is actually anti-Dutch and opposed to his own country's proud history of religious tolerance just as much as Pim Fortuyn was. Like Fortuyn, Wilders promotes and advocates for hate of other Dutch people based on their religious faith, which is contrary to what the Dutch nation actually stands for!

In New York we have  Muslim men almost killed on the street after being asked if they were Muslim. In August 2010, about two weeks before Wilders hatespeech in New York, a cab driver  was viciously slashed and stabbed by a passenger after he was asked if he was Muslim.   On November 24 of this year, a 72-year-old grandfather almost ended up like Aziz Kara, beaten almost to death in the streets of Queens, New York. The men savagely beat this well-liked grandfather after he answered that he was, indeed, a Muslim. This follows the stabbing of another man outside of a Queens mosque on November 19. The victim was called anti-Muslim slurs as he was being punched and stabbed.  Some are willing to act based upon their hate of Muslims, like hate that is promoted by Geert Wilders.

 Rather than be a great shame for the Dutch people, rather than spit on the grave of William of Orange, rather than a sledgehammer to the great nation the Dutch people have built for 450 years - suffered, shed blood and died for - Geert Wilders's "Victory Mosque" hatespeech on September 11, 2010 was viewed as some sort of statement on a new Dutch government in 2010 (especially the second video) by the Dutch newsmedia. This was repugnant and every patriotic Dutchman should have been upset! 


Anti-Muslim "free speech" and spike of anti-Muslim hate crimes.  This situation has been further aggravated by Wilders' acquittal on hate speech charges last year. Hate speech has consequences and one of these consequences is that some people will act on hateful messages partly promoted by Geert Wilders' trips to the US since 2009. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, anti-Muslim hate crimes in 2010 were 50% higher than than the previous year - and the SPLC cites the hate built up around the "Ground Zero mosque" protest, which Geert Wilders as a key speaker at.  As Hansdeep Singh and Simran Jeet Singh at the Daily Beast point out - these attacks have not declined a decade after the 9-11 attacks - but have gone up - and I would contend, especially after 2009, the year that Geert Wilders began most of his trips to North America (emphasis mine):
 For example, from 2005 to 2010, hate crimes motivated by religious bias show a consistent upward trajectory—whereas hate crimes against religious communities constituted 17.1 percent of all bias-based crimes in 2005, that number has reached 20 percent in the most recent report published in 2010. This is the highest rate of hate crimes motivated by religious bias in the 18 years since the FBI started tracking hate crimes nationwide in 1992.

Furthermore, while one might assume that the pattern of anti-Muslim violence would have decreased a decade after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, official statistics show that hate crimes against Muslims are at their highest levels since 2001. The most recent FBI data indicates that in a one-year period, from 2009 to 2010, there was a staggering 42 percent increase in hate crimes against Muslims in this country.
Here's what we should do: Send the 72 year-old grandfather's medical bills (and the medical bills of other hate crime victims) to the Dutch government. In the future, send the Dutch government your medical bills, property damage bills and other expenses that are probably a result of allowing Geert Wilders to travel about teaching people to hate Muslims in North America. The spike in hate crimes against Muslims appears to coincide with both the "Victory Mosque" hate campaign and Geert Wilders' own travels to North America. This problem was created in the Netherlands long before the September 11, 2001 attacks (Rotterdam, 1991), fueled today by the anti-Muslim counter-terrorism industry - and somewhere along the line a message needs to be sent to the Dutch governemnt that it is their responsibility to clean up this mess!  Take this hateful poison back to Rotterdam - where it came from!

Crossposted from Burning Tulips: Have Henk and Ingrid moved to New York?

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.


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


Thursday, April 19, 2012

Breivik in court: The real threat to freedom, democracy and security

[caption id="attachment_98" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Wilders: The one who radicalized Breivik?!"][/caption]

Bare naked Islamophobia is anti-democratic and anti-freedom. Those that espouse Islamophobia actually oppose the freedoms and civilization they claim to be defending and fighting for.  To want to ban Islamic practice, deport people based on their religious faith, and punish and sanction people for their political views are as anti-freedom and anti-democratic as it gets. For all their accusations that "Islam is uncivilized and backwards," the fact is that the "new" violent Islamophobia of the "new Crusaders" is every bit as uncivilized and backward.  On top of that, we get the promotion of myths about Muslims in Europe, "they are invading," "they are imposing," as if "Muslims" are non-humans robots that all think the same.  Also regarded as "enemy" is the political Left that is viewed as "enabling  Islamisation" and "wanting to destroy Western Christian civilization."  This also implies that the political Left is a monolithic enemy to "western Christian civilization."  The component of "poisonous multiculturalism" comes to us out of the Dutch Islamophobia of Pim Fortuyn and some of Breivik's other accusations come out of the most radicalized individual in the Western world: Geert Wilders .

Like the majority that believe in the Islamisation myth, Anders Behring Breivik regards  "Muslims and Leftist enablers" as non-human beings and "enemies of his nation." He claims "self defense" because he is a kind of soldier defending his country. Soldiers are never prosecuting for killing in battle. Never mind the fact that the victims who were shot at point blank range with explosive ammunition had fathers, mothers, and families, these political opponets were "enemies of Norway." Anders Behring Breivik does not see the Norwegian court as legitimate because it is of the"multicultural political system," perhaps meaning that a Muslim would be regarded as just as equal before the law as he and the democratic political system is what created the laws that he now is being tried under. Anders Behring Breivik hates his own country.

Anders Behring Breivik actually hates Western civilization and his own country, as do all of those who hate the idea that Western democracy allows Muslims religious and political freedom. Here in lies the aspect of the "new" anti-Muslim, "Crusader" terrorism that is anti-freedom, anti-democratic and anti-Western civilization.  Not only does Anders Behring Breivik feel his victims are not human beings, but the vision held by him and the majority of Muslim haters (espically Geert Wilders) is one that seeks to destroy the liberal democratic order  that Western civilization has built:  religious freedom, equality before the law, free speech and expression, political freedom and political systems where political opponents are respected and challenged, not shot dead. Those who claim to be defending Western civilization and want to outlaw the practice of Islam, criminalize the political Left, deport and strip citizenship of millions of people based on their religious faith are actually quite opposed themselves to Western civilization and what it has given the world. Anders Behring Breivik and those who identify with his message are actully a vastly greater threat to Western civilization than the handful of phantom "Islamists and jihadists" alleged by European security services and actually hate their own countries, as well as Western civilization itself.

What we also need to know is: Who and what radicalized Breivik to hate his country and civilization so much to kill almost 80 people?!

[youtube id="lGwRKY0NzKM" w="250" h="200"] [youtube id="AuzLB_Ddc2o" w="250" h="200"]

Bare naked islamofobie is anti-democratisch en anti-vrijheid. Degenen die islamofobie aanhangen eigenlijk tegen de vrijheden en de beschaving die zij zeggen te verdedigen en vechten voor. Te willen islamitische praktijk te verbieden, te deporteren mensen op basis van hun religieuze geloof, en te bestraffen en te bestraffen mensen voor hun politieke opvattingen zijn als anti-vrijheid en anti-democratische als het maar kan. Voor al hun beschuldigingen dat "de islam is onbeschaafd en naar achteren," het is een feit dat de "nieuwe" gewelddadige islamofobie van de "nieuwe kruisvaarders" is net zo onbeschaafd en achterlijk. Bovendien hebben we de bevordering van mythes over moslims in Europa te krijgen, "ze plegen een invasie", "ze zijn imposante," alsof "moslims" zijn niet-mensen robots die denken allemaal hetzelfde. Ook als "vijand" is de politiek links dat wordt gezien als "mogelijk islamisering" en "willen westerse christelijke beschaving te vernietigen." Dit betekent ook dat de politieke Links is een monolithische vijand van "westerse christelijke beschaving." De component van 'giftige multiculturalisme "komt bij ons uit de Nederlandse islamofobie op Pim Fortuyn en een aantal andere beschuldigingen Breivik's komen uit de meest geradicaliseerde persoon in de Westerse wereld: Geert Wilders.

Net als de meerderheid die geloven in de mythe islamisering, Anders Behring Breivik aanzien van "moslims en linkse enablers" als niet-menselijke wezens en "vijanden van zijn natie." Hij beweert dat "zelfverdediging", want hij is een soort soldaat verdediging van zijn land. Soldaten worden nooit vervolgen voor het doden in de strijd. Vergeet het feit dat de slachtoffers die bij punt lege waaier gemaakt met explosieve munitie vaders, moeders en families hadden, deze politieke opponets waren "vijanden van Noorwegen." Anders Behring Breivik heeft de Noorse rechter niet als legitiem, omdat het van het "multiculturele politieke systeem," misschien betekent dat een moslim zou worden beschouwd als even gelijk voor de wet als hij en het democratische politieke systeem is wat gemaakt de wetten die hij nu wordt geprobeerd onder.  Anders Behring Breivik heeft een hekel aan zijn eigen land.

Anders Behring Breivik haat eigenlijk de westerse beschaving en zijn eigen land, net als al diegenen die haten het idee dat de westerse democratie moslims religieuze en politieke vrijheid mogelijk maakt. Hier in ligt het aspect van de "nieuwe" anti-moslim, "Crusader" terrorisme dat is anti-vrijheid, anti-democratische en anti-westerse beschaving. Niet alleen Anders Behring Breivik voel zijn slachtoffers zijn geen menselijke wezens, maar de visie in het bezit van hem en de meerderheid van de moslim haters (espically Geert Wilders) is er een die wil de liberaal democratische orde te vernietigen dat de westerse beschaving gebouwd heeft: de vrijheid van godsdienst, gelijkheid voor de wet, vrijheid van meningsuiting en expressie, politieke vrijheid en politieke systemen waar politieke tegenstanders worden gerespecteerd en uitgedaagd, niet doodgeschoten. Degenen die beweren dat de verdediging van de westerse beschaving en willen verbieden de praktijk van de islam, strafbaar politiek links, deporteren en strippen burgerschap van miljoenen mensen op basis van hun geloof zijn eigenlijk best tegen zich aan de westerse beschaving en wat het heeft de wereld . Anders Behring Breivik en degenen die zich identificeren met zijn boodschap zijn actully een veel grotere bedreiging voor de Westerse beschaving dan de handvol fantoom "islamisten en jihadisten" beweerd door Europese veiligheidsdiensten en eigenlijk haten hun eigen landen, maar ook de westerse beschaving zelf.

Wat we ook weten is: Wie en wat geradicaliseerd Breivik naar zijn land en de beschaving zo veel tot bijna 80 mensen te doden haten?!

Anders Behring Breivik, Norway Mass Killer, Claims 'Self Defense' As Trial Begins

Saturday, March 17, 2012

Europol against Anonymous and the real security of Europe

Europol Director Robert Wainwright thinks he’s a “security genius” (LOL!). Robert Wainwright and his Europol talk a nice talk about “cyber crime and criminals,” but if this does not includes Anonymous hactivists and their "nuisance" Internet hacking, which harms nobody. While Europol’s actions against those claiming to be Anonymous hactivists are currently confined to those who publish personal information to the Internet – harming others – it is not much of a leap to Anonymous hactivists that harm nobody. While we have real and serious threats of violence from Europe’s radical and dangerous rightwhich Europol ignores – non-violent Anonymous members could be future targets of Europol.

The needed check valves function of Anonymous hactivists. In democratic societies we are supposed to have representatives that are to listen to the needs of the ordinary citizen, not just the “1%ers.”  We now live in an age where millions of people in America and Europe are being deprived of their basic needs and useful employment – while those who make the policies in national governments and the European Union pay no attention to those who are suffering from unemployment and deprivation.  The perception, real or not, is that only the interests of Wall Street, European banking elites and 1%ers matter – not if the rest of us have jobs and our basic human needs met.  In this absence of real governmental representation that addresses basic human needs of “little people” there are two basic paths: attempts to be heard through other means (ex. hactivism) or through revolution and/or terrorism.

The  Anonymous hactivists do not have violent or threatening intentions against the people they attack, only their servers and websites, and nobody has been killed in an Anonymous attack!

That's right - nobody has been killed or injured in an attack by Anonymous hactivists, but people have been killed and injured in attacks by the radical right (Norway July 22, 2011). Anonymous hactivists and their non-violent Internet activities provide a perhaps much needed check value that perhaps prevents real terrorism and violence. In this age when out government leadership do not listen to the grievances of regular, not wealthy people – it is better to put up with DDoS (Distributed Denial-of-Service) attacks than bombs and violence. We will get – thanks partly to Europol ignoring the growing threat – enough of violence from the radical right that is now seeking to expand their potential for hate and violence across Europe.  Besides ignoring the radical right Europol is actually creating yet another security threat by removing the check value provided by Anonymous hactivists.  So, to Europol “Thunder” in Spain is a “greater threat” than the expansion of EDL-style mobs roaming European cities, posing an actual physical danger to property and EU citizens’ safety.

So, what a security genius Robert Wainwright is! Go after the Anonymous kid that spray paints dirty words on the side of the building, but not the radical right crazy that wants to blow up the building and harm people inside!

[caption id="attachment_3290" align="alignright" width="225" caption="Mr. Wainwright thinks Anonymous is dangerous to Europe. Nope, they provide with a needed voice!(Wikipedia)"][/caption]

Europol’s going after Anonymous must be limited to actual harmful Internet breaches ONLY. Maybe Robert Wainwright would like to get Europol after those who spray graffiti on walls of building in European cities, not the radical right that actually wants to blow up buildings, which is how we can describe Wainwright and his Europol’s efforts against Anonymous hactivists.  Most of Anonymous’ hactivism is limited to a non-violent nuisance activity that harms nobody and causes no damage. We here in Wisconsin viewed Anonymous hactivists as heroes when the hacked into the Koch Brothers servers last year. I will admit that I viewed Anonymous hactivists as heroes (and still do) – but more than that  Anonymous can be described as a needed check valve that prevents even someone who is very frustrated from really radicalizing (violent radicalization) and setting a bomb at someone’s doorstep.

There is a good argument to be made that when someone claiming to be an Anonymous hactivist puts private and sensitive information of other people over the open Internet, like police officers, then this is doing harm to real people. Listen to this: It is wrong to harm other people like this! (The majority of police officers are working people with families – like the rest of us - and put their lives at risk to protect us!) Anonymous hactivists generally police themselves and are good at policing themselves – but they must take their frustrations out in a way that does no harm to privacy and the lives of other people, even if they personally don’t like police officers.

What could occur under cooperate pressure from the wealthy elite is for Europol to go after Anonymous hactivists that are harmless and just deface websites and engage in DDoS attacks that do not harm people or servers. Europol is currently confining its activities to just those individuals that do actual harm – but this practice of going after Anonymous hactivists could become routine in Europol as a police organization and be shifted to those Anonymous hactivists who are doing no harm to people or servers.  Attempts by Europol to go after all Anonymous hactivists to the point of a chilling effect are, in the end, counter-productive for security and counter-terrorism.  Removing the check value effect of Anonymous’ non-violent attacks could mean that real and violent attacks that actually kill people and break things become a possibility.

Robert Wainwright needs to get a life and Europol needs to learn that there are greater security threats than Anonymous before somebody gets killed! If one actually believes that arresting every hactivists out there that causes a nuisance and nothing more – they have another thing coming. The best thing for the security of Europe is to leave these hactivists alone, they are not a security threat, and there are greater security threats out there that do want to harm people’s physical safety. The most obvious is the attempt by those who are likeminded with Germany’s National Socialist Underground, the English Defense League and Anders Behring Breivik to form a Europe-wide association of hate-mongers, racists and violent radicals with the potential to be a security threat to Europe that is simply not posed by any Anonymous hactivist!

Maybe – Robert Wainwright and his Europol would prefer that people go off and build bombs instead. Why – we could have the “Leftist terrorism” of the Cold War days again, how fun?!  Isn’t Robert Wainwright a freaking security genius?!  What Mr. Wainwright actually has in terms of education and background is not in real policing and security –nope - but economics. This is why Mr. Wainwright simply does not know what real cyber criminal and security threats really are…or the check valve function of Anonymous hactivists.

It’s expected for Europol to go after real cyber criminals that hack into personal information and steal other people’s identity, causing these victims real harm. However – we need to draw the line in the sand with Europol that its policing activities are limited to harmful behavior and not to be extended to Anonymous hactivists that do no harm to anyone. We need to be willing to stand up for the majority of Anonymous hactivists who have stood up for those of us out here without a voice of protest against elite policies that deprive us of jobs, basic needs and a decent life. We must be ready to stand up to Europol – and I am one who will – and I have a post-graduate education in the police and security field and could even the tilt of the playing field…you know…the balance of power.

We should much prefer to put up with kids, Anonymous and the radical right, that get some kick out of spray painting dirty words on the side of a building, or defacing a website. After all, we should think spray paint is better than bombs any day!

NOTE in closing that those who want to take real terrorism against mosques and Muslims – perhaps kill real people - have yet to be stopped from doing so by Europol!

[youtube id="aCW3AGJZ-oU" w="250" h="250"]

Cyber Resilience?! I say Europol Resilience! In the video, Mr. Wainwright talks about real cyber criminals – good go after those -  but this should NOT include Anonymous hactivists!

Also - thanks to Anonymous from me personally for the support and "help" for our poor State of Wisconsin last year against Koch Brothers' tyranny. This has not been forgotten-at least by me!

See: Hactivists arrested in Spain

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Poor Little Extremist Brat! Geert Wilders angry over German extreme right propaganda report!

Why Geert Wilders is a right wing extremist.  There is an idea out there that “extreme right” is only a label for those people and “political parties” that are anti-Semitic and hate Jews. It’s as if there is a checklist, and if the “requirement” of anti-Semitism is not met, the person or “party” is “not extreme right.” Well – this is wrong and the label “extreme right” also includes hate of multiculturalism and opposition to the idea of equality of all human beings before the law.

Paul Hainsworth (2008) wrote one of the most recent books on the extreme right and he devotes an entire chapter to names and label of the extreme right. “Extreme right parties” and movements can be defined as in opposition to liberal democratic values and practices of liberal democratic societies. Extreme right wing is anti-constitutional and anti-democratic, rejecting the idea of human equality before the law (12). Hainsworth also devotes some ink to Geert Wilders and the notion that he is not a right wing extremist because he embraces some liberal values, as well as the argument that Wilders' love for the Jews means he is not anti-Semitic, and therefore not "extreme right wing."  However –the defination of "extreme right" includes a larger hate that is directed at immigrants, refugees and hate of the multicultural society (73-74). Hate of multicultural society and Muslim immigrants is part of Geert Wilders' trademark, as it was for Pim Fortuyn, and the belief that “Muslim immigrants threaten Dutch values.”  Paul Hainsworth (2008) The Extreme Right in Western Europe. New York, NY: Routledge.

The Dutch are in need of a serious ear washing! Following their pro-Wilders fashion, the Dutch media, especially Volkskrant, has published Wilders rants over a German Justice ministry’s report on propaganda that has pinned extreme right activity – including radicalization of young people – on him. Wilders - behaving like a real Nazi - has now demanded that the Dutch foreign ministry “summon the German ambassador” over “slander against a major Dutch political party.” If the PVV is a “major political party” this should present a great shame on the Netherlands, as well as a major threat. Wilders – the piece of garbage that he is - rants over Twitter:
EN-se government must summon German ambassador and power wash the ears of outrageous suggestion PVV ideas.

Now – it’s the German ambassador who should go and give Uri Rosenthal a much needed ear washing over his country's allowing of Lone Loon, “political parties” that openly threaten liberal democratic values, both at home and abroad, to spread hate and help promote violence against a religious minority. The Dutch are in need of a serious ear washing and the Germans may yet save Europe from another violent dictator coming out of the Netherlands. It is the Dutch government that needs to be lectured to – not the Germans – who are rightfully protecting their country from Geert Wilders and his “Freedom Party” (not!). The perception from the Dutch media is that “Wilders right, German government wrong.”  It is the Dutch who are wrong and pro-Wilders rags (Volkskrant is a main pro-Wilders offender) continue to harm Dutch society with their irresponsible spread of anti-Left hate and Islamophobia as “news stories.”

Geert Wilders is possibly responsible for anti-Muslim violence. The main theme of the German report was the hate of multiculturalism and the “fear of the stranger.” Connected to the terrorist attack in Norway, we see the rise of hate-mongers using the term “freedom” and “pro.”  The pro-Wilders rag, Volkskrant, scoffs the idea that hateful activities in Germany have caused a rise in the radicalization of German young people.  The German report cites websites and Facebook groups that spread and celebrate hate against Muslims, featuring Wilders’ own picture on extreme right buttons, often against multiculturalism and advocating major human rights violations against Muslims and Muslim communities.  In the context of Wilders, the German report cited the radicalization of German young people to hateful associations and ideas.

Thank you Germany! First of all – as I’ve stated – there is quite a bit of a difference between how Germany views the extreme right – and how the Netherlands views the extreme right.  Allowing for “political parties” that desire to persecute and define as “enemy” a portion of a national population should be viewed a shameful by the Dutch people.  Germany has learned from its history that these types of politics must never become acceptable and legitimized in a civilized, democratic nation. The German experience of the 1930s now allows Germans to use this past historical experience to see other such threats against Europe. It is quite clear from Geert Wilders statements and actions that he intends to spread anti-Muslim hate and violence through out the Western world.

Germany could possible help save Europe (as well as the Netherlands) from Geert Wilders and the PVV’s hateful ambitions against religious minority communities in Europe and North America!

I suspected , sooner or later, Geert Wilders and his hateful ways would be discovered by German officials to have had an influence in the German extreme right. Hate of Muslims goes in hand with hate of multiculturalism and liberal democratic values, such as equality before the law, but also freedom of religion and expression. Geert Wilders and his highly dangerous PVV “political party” want a society that is contrary to liberal democratic values – and this is something that must be vigorously resisted. Lets now hope that this report on extreme right propaganda helps to send the PVV to the garbage dump of history –next to the Nazi party - and sends Wilders into a permanent retirement from politics!

[caption id="attachment_3121" align="aligncenter" width="512" caption="Wilders rightly called an influence on the German extreme right."][/caption]

Excerpts from Zwischen Propaganda und Mimikry Neonazi-Strategien in Sozialen Netzwerken (translated) :

1Anti-Muslim racism

The button recalls, with its red sun on a yellow background with the knownPins »nuclear power? No Thanks, ". This is by design and another example ofhow to take right-wing populist / right-wing extremists inside and a symbolism thatoriginally come from different political contexts. This sun peeps grim and wearing a black beard. There is still the slogan: "Islamization?No thank you, ". Right-wing populist / neo-Nazi press in and so their rejection of Islamfrom which they impute generalizing to be aggressive and hostile. Islamophobia /internal use in the social networks like lbildern buttons on their professional to share their beliefs at first sight with the world. Thus Buttons by - among others by Geert Wilders used - logo of a crossed-Mosque spread. Slogans such as "multi-cultural? No thanks!  "," No Sharia "and"All know: Sarrazin is right" are popular. Some of these users commit / inside to the NPD or the 'Autonomous Nationalist / inside out ", other right-wing populistParties as "pro Germany" or "Freedom". Many also use this Buttons, without getting too committed to a right-wing organization. Islamophobic Sayings and symbols are not only far-right and right-wing populist /inside, but apparently also in the general population (23).

2In the summer of 2011 were right-wing extremists in Berlin-Kreuzberg organize a march- Surreptitiously and made an appointment for the social networks. However, the plan also flog just on this, because a neo-Nazi was looking forward to
the Facebook wall of a "comrade" in the run-off too s to the planned
Provocation. The opening ce could still organize a counter demonstration Prevent (including over the Internet) and the final deployment.But also very off-ene Event Views find themselves in the Web 2.0. Neo-Nazi concerts like "Rock for Germany, "or the" Day of the German future, "an annual stattfi Ndende right-wing demonstration, have their own pages on social networks. There
spread with the neo-Nazi propaganda texts and videos of their network, and provide a starting point for those interested in the Nazi scene, but not yet involved. Young people. Because in addition to neo-postings fi nd there always and positive-minded contributions of users / interior, whose pro le otherwise be very
little or no evidence of partially give an appropriate disposition.
The contact is formed, because a young person a song of a band like that on a plays such a concert, or because he or she is just in general for "the future Wants to use "- perhaps without thinking about it on racist ideas.
Whether the non-user right / inside but actually corresponding to the Events are gone, can not be checked, of course.

Even right-wing populist parties are trying to use the social networks, to advertise their events - but rather counter-productive. For example, announced "Pro Germany 'on facebook its so-called" Islamisation International "In Berlin and" Freedom "applied for an event with Geert Wilders- For which they claimed (horrendous) Admission. But since even before the Event became clear that the demand would be quite low, saw the Party forced to lower the ticket prices drastically. This development also can understand very well on the whiteboard. Weak demand indicated also on the Facebook page of the "pro Germany" - Congress to: Only 32 pledges received prior to the event virtually. Ultimately found to be Congress just Islamophobe / inwards (19).

3. Islam haters / inside

In summer 2010 Anders Breivik Behring perpetrated attacks in Norway, where77 people died. His motive was hatred of a multicultural  society and Islam, which threatened to take over Europe in his  delusions.The basic assumptions of the world share many thoughts Breivik. Under the Banner of right-wing populist parties, such as "freedom" or the  "Pro"-movements,gather those who perceive Islam as a danger for Europe, with theall funds must be wards. Besides Islam, the multicultural societyand also rejected the Greens, who makes one for the present social respon-sible. A white, Christian Europe is the ideal of this movement. TheirMentor / internal write down their thoughts on blogs, on sites such as the thenBe "Politically Incorrect," compiled and linked. Supposedly
demonstratedis the racist worldview with daily horror stories about "bad" Migrants / internally and / or Muslim / inside. Racist
statements and attributionsare the rule. The sources are often quite populist and extreme right.The "Islam-critical" movement is not a closed group and the
reservationstowards Islam and the Muslim / inside are widespread in society. Accordingly accepted and widespread the issue is also on the Internet. Nextpopular Internet sites such as "Politically Incorrect" (in the summer of 2011 at number 28 The German blog charts) are available in numerous social networks corresponding groups with names like "Islamization - no thanks," "Islam does not belong "to Germany," "Stop the multicultural mania.
They serve as a Type message stream, in which the user / inside constantly get the latest newsthe imaginary revolution of Islam in Europe or the collapse of the European Cultural gathering. In comments confirmed to each other how bad the Situation was and how depraved society and government. Extreme right parties be, despite the inherent racism declined and instead right-wing populist Groups preferred. The worldview is Eurocentric and
backward-robeconservatively. Foreign users / inside against one is open, provided them an affinity for "anti-Islamic" movement have. Is the first step inthe digital world of Islam-haters / inside is done, it is at once very quickly: in thecorresponding Facebook groups with names like "better Europe", "ConservativeVoice "or "Turkey is not in the EU "will be invited as well as unsolicited otherwise you also get friend requests. (Jb)


Geert Wilders Angry at German ‘Right-wing Populist’ Label
- Loonwatch

See also (use translator):
Wilders kwaad over Duitse folder

Duitse regering waarschuwt voor Wilders

PVV wil Duitse ambassadeur laten ontbieden om anti-neonazi-brochure

Zwischen Propaganda und Mimikry Neonazi-Strategien in
Sozialen Netzwerken (DE)

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Duitsland kon les voor andere Europese landen worden

 Dit probleem van de hernieuwde opkomst van de nazi's in Duitsland heeft niets te maken met Duitsland - en Duitsland heeft zijn nazi-verleden achter zich. Duitsland is eigenlijk in een betere positie om te gaan met radicaal rechts terroristen vanwege zijn nazi-verleden dan enige andere Europese natie. Duitsland heeft beleid en wetgeving in plaats dat het land ten westen van het (raden welke) niet hebben. Hoewel ik weet niet de precieze formulering van de wetten, Duitsland op zijn minst heeft wetten die verbieden groepen die "een bedreiging voor de grondwet en de democratische orde 'van Duitsland. Dit geldt ook voor groepen die haatdragende platforms tegen minderheidsgroepen te houden.

De PVV van Geert Wilders zou waarschijnlijk niet in staat zijn om meer dan bestaan ​​in Duitsland, laat staan ​​rennen Nederland "pesten" zijn critici en tegenstanders. De PVV is zeker een bedreiging voor de grondwettelijke en democratische orde van Nederland. We weten hoe Wilders wil Hitler te volgen in het veranderen van de nationale grondwet voor de civiele bescherming te verwijderen voor "niet-westerse" religieuze-etnische minderheden.

We moeten zorgen te maken over andere Europese landen als Nederland, die geen mogelijkheid om deze gevaarlijke "politieke partijen" te verbieden en blijven toestaan ​​dat een pak van loons and crackpots noemen zichzelf een 'politieke partij. "Zoals we hebben gezien in het verleden, Europese-loon hebben , "politieke partijen" hebben voorgesteld een dergelijke afschuwelijke beleid ter bestrijding van minderheidsgroepen, als het zetten van Roma-mensen in kampen, etnische schoonmaak van minderheidsgroepen, evenals deporteren moslims en een verbod op de islam. Eenmaal op de stemming, de haatdragende en gevaarlijke advies van deze "politieke partijen" te krijgen respectabiliteit en legitimiteit.

In veel opzichten hebben we dezelfde situatie in tal van Europese landen die leiden tot de opkomst van de nazi-Duitsers. De Duitsers hebben geleerd uit hun geschiedenis en op zijn minst beleid en wetten om te gaan met gevaarlijke "politieke partijen." Duitsland heeft geleerd van zijn nazi-verleden, maar andere Europese landen hebben niets geleerd van de Duitse jaren 1930 ervaring met dit soort haatdragend en gevaarlijk politiek. Hier zijn enkele suggesties voor de Europeanen en Europese landen:

  1. Europese landen moeten verzekeren dat de democratische, vrije samenleving en de fundamentele mensenrechten voor minderheden worden beschermd tegen gevaarlijke"Politieke partijen."

  2. "Politieke partij" moet een status die wordt toegekend en alleen legitieme politieke partijen concurreren in de lokale, nationale en Europese politieke arena te worden. Dit zal ervoor zorgen dat de democratische en juridische systeem van de natie wordt beschermd.

  3. De basiswaarden politieke partijen moeten zich abonneren op te nemen (maar zijn niet beperkt tot) het respect voor de vrijheid van godsdienst, vrijheid van meningsuiting, anti-racisme, gelijkheid voor de wet, pluralistische socities. Die groepen die voornemens zijn de nationale grondwet veranderen om minderheden meer gelijk mag niet worden gegeven politieke partij status.

  4. Er mag geen absolute "vrijheid van meningsuiting" worden en politieke figuren die haatdragende mythes over vooral minderheidsgroepen te bevorderen moet een soort van berisping gezicht.

Democratie en vrijheid nodig om zich te beschermen - en vaak gaat het omhoog naar het feit dat niet alle spraak en luidsprekers moet worden toegestaan, en niet alle fracties moeten de kans om echt politieke macht toegang die ze kunnen misbruiken om anderen te schaden in de samenleving.Duitsland nam deze stap en moet voortbouwen op het verbieden van gevaarlijke "politieke partijen" en in Duitsland moeten weerstand bieden aan wat er zal worden oproepen naar gevaarlijke politieke partijen toe te staan. Het beschermen van Duitsland van gevaarlijke politieke actoren moeten worden net zo belangrijk als de fysieke bescherming van minderheden en burgers uit rechtse terrorisme. De democratische rechtsstaat bestellingen van vele Europese landen, zoals Nederland - worden direct bedreigd en we moeten hopen dat ze kijken en het kennis nemen ten oosten van Duitsland.

Ik heb twee keer geschreven over dit probleem van de "open" en niet-gereguleerde politieke systemen in Europese landen:

Voting for Hate in Hungary.

The Divine Right of European voters.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Germany's "mysterious murder series" and the "new far right terrorism."

"Baffling murders?" No - not really... What should truly be baffling (and we need to ask strong questions over) is how the radical and terrorist right get to skate under the radar for this long of a time (10 years). Why was Anders Behring Breivik able to construct the bomb he set off in Oslo and why was he able to obtain his weapons? The same questions should be asked in the "mysterious murder series" in Germany. The difference is, as I have written about in relation to the Netherlands (ex. Karst Tates), the radicalized individuals and terrorists are not Muslims. Simple: Not Muslim, not terrorist. No Islam, no radicalization.

Well, radicalized individuals and terrorists who are not Muslims?! Let’s use the definition of “radicalization” as the “willingness by a person or group to use violence for the purpose of frightening or blackmailing a target population or government.” Ok, the defining factor is “violence” and that has nothing to do with religious beliefs of the perpetrators. And – what is now coming out of Germany about the radical right killings of mainly Turkish shopkeepers are what the German interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich called  “a new form of terrorism.” And – given the 15 minute video threatening more attacks, this is indeed terrorism by radicalized, native German terrorists. Friedrich is now ordering a review of past xenophobic murders to see if they were the work of terrorists and terrorist groups.

What is “baffling” is that over a 10 year period a radicalized right-wing group in Germany was believed to have shot dead nine Turkish businessmen and one Greek national in daylight executions. These murders were at the victims’ place of business and were called “kebab murders” and occurred between 2000 and 2007 and were, in true European-xenophobic fashion, blamed on “criminal organizations” and no doubt “Turkish criminal organizations.”In 2007, these terrorists shot dead a policewoman in Heilbronn.

The connection between these murders and the shooting of the police woman were found in two pistols, a Czech made Ceska 83 and the one that belonged to the policewoman. The men, Uwe M. and Uwe B, robbed a bank a few days ago, were found dead in a burned out mobile home, along with what investigators said was “evidence indicating a right-wing extremist motivation behind the killings.” One report stated that the evidence was a DVD of neo-Nazi propaganda that was to be sent to news outlets and Muslim cultural centers. This video from a neo-Nazi group calling itself the "National Socialist Underground” called upon members to “take actions, not words” In this 15 minute video the two men admitted to the nine murders and promised more attacks.

Ummm....creating a video warning of more attacks (inciting fear), so these shootings were actually acts of terrorism by radicalized individuals intended to incite fear in the Turkish population. This is what the Dutch AIVD often accuses "Muslims" of wanting to do!

[youtube id="qwVNh-oY-P4" w="200" h="200"] [youtube id="uLzN2-Jzxkk" w="200" h="200"]  [youtube id="Ckkwvskug7g" w="200" h="200"]

Now they “want answers?!”The woman under arrest is Beate Z, and she is charged with murder, arson and belonging to a terrorist group. Apparently in Germany, unlike over the border in the Netherlands, being a Muslim is not prerequisite to being involved in terrorism or belonging to a terrorist group.

One person who wants answers includes a German Green Party member, Cem Özdemir, who could not believe that this radical, terrorist group could avoid detection by the authorities for so many years. From reading the news coverage on this “baffling murder mystery,” one gets the sense that these are ethnic Germans engaged in domestic terrorism in Germany and were never even on the national security and law enforcement radar screen. Again, the answer is simple: Not Muslim, not terrorist. No Islam, no radicalization.

Yes - we should now demand answers as to why radicalized individuals and groups that want to do harm are allowed to go undetected. The simple answer is that police and security agents don't look for "terrorists" outside of Muslim communities. Another answer, as demonstrated out of the Netherlands, what is defined as a "security threat" is defined by national politics and not real threats. It's just politically correct to look for "radicalized individuals and terrorists" in Muslim communities in the Netherlands.

And here are some answers! The first thing that should be pointed out here is that one or more or the victims of these terroristic murders are citizens of Germany and Greece – and also citizens of the European Union. The safety of the Turkish community in Germany should be of at least a little bit of a concern to German authorities. We have seen in the past in Germany, as elsewhere in Europe, Muslim communities are “terrorism suspect communities,” not victim communities. Muslim communities, in light of “clash” thesis, are “communities from an alien civilization that does not respect democracy and Western values.” Violence against these “alien” and suspect communities is just not worthy of serious investigation.

The fact is that local and national law enforcement in Germany, as well as at the European level, have a responsibility to protect minority and Muslim communities from terrorism too!

Here, as in the US, the UK and Europe, Muslim communities face a growing threat of terrorism from radicalized individuals associated with radicalized right-wing groups. As citizens and members of their local communities, Muslims and their community leaders should be working with local law enforcement for safety and security. The threat faced by Muslim communities from radicalized individuals and groups should be  among national security and counter-terrorism issues.

The reality is that this is not “baffling” at all, but a result of the narrow-minded, Islamophobic, "clash of civilizations" notion that “terrorism” is something that Muslims only do. The only threat of "terrorism" comes from "Islamists and jihadists” out of “unassimilated and culturally different” Muslim communities. As a result of this false and Islamophobic belief prevalent in Western counter-terrorism practices, millions, perhaps billions, of euros and dollars have been expended harassing, stigmatizing and taking unfair actions (“airport security” and personal disruption measures) against Muslims and Muslim communities. The often useless waste of money and man hours chasing the ghosts of “jihadists” has allowed real radicals and extremists of the radical right to fly under the radar. Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich, who appears to be "shocked" by this "new terrorism," is an Islamophobic boob himself, having made public Islamophobic pronouncements.

Friedrich may find that the road to anti-Muslim radicalization and the deeply entrenched radical right in Germany leads to his own pro-Wilders doorstep.

Let’s hope this is now a wake up call, but we thought that Norway, July 22, 2011 and terrorist attacks by a anti-Muslim radical should have been at least some kind of wake-up call across the Atlantic. Instead, Western governments returned to the old "clash of civilizations" model -- and the wasting of millions of euros and dollars in counter-terrorism overkill against Muslim communities in the pointless hunt for "jihadists in Europe" that don't exist. How many Norways will we have to face before counter-terrorism resources and efforts are redirected against this "new far-right terrorist threat?"

See :

Police Find Gun Used in Unsolved Murder Series

German government concerned about homegrown, right-wing terrorism

Germany arrests new extremist suspect over killings of 10 people in 7-year period

Germany probes suspected far-right murders

'Islam has no place in our country': New German minister sparks immigration row

New German Interior Minister Reopens Integration Debate

Duitsland: "mysterieuze moorden" en de "nieuwe extreem-rechts terrorisme. "

'Verbijsterende moorden? "Nee - niet echt ... Wat moet werkelijk verbijsterend zijn (en we moeten een sterke vragen te stellen over) is de manier waarop de radicale en terroristische goed te krijgen onder de radar schaatsen zo lang van een tijd (10 jaar). Waarom was Anders Behring Breivik in staat om de bom die hij off set in Oslo construeren en waarom was hij in staat om zijn wapens te verkrijgen? Dezelfde vragen moeten worden gesteld in de "mysterieuze moord serie" in Duitsland. Het verschil is, zoals ik heb geschreven over in relatie tot Nederland (ex. Karst Tates), de geradicaliseerde individuen en terroristen zijn geen moslims. Eenvoudig: geen moslim, geen terrorist. Geen islam, geen radicalisering.

Nou ja, geradicaliseerde individuen en terroristen die geen moslims?! Laten we de definitie van "radicalisering" te gebruiken als de "bereidheid van een persoon of groep om geweld te gebruiken voor het doel van angstaanjagende of chantage een doelgroep of de overheid." Ok, het definiëren van factor is "geweld" en dat heeft niets te maken met de religieuze overtuigingen van de daders.En - wat nu komt uit Duitsland over de radicale recht moorden op vooral Turkse winkeliers zijn wat de Duitse minister van Binnenlandse Zaken Hans-Peter Friedrich genaamd "een nieuwe vorm van terrorisme. 'En - gezien de 15 minuten video bedreigend meer aanvallen, is dit inderdaad terrorisme door geradicaliseerd, inheemse Duitse terroristen. Friedrich is nu het bestellen van een herziening van het verleden xenofobe moorden te zien of ze het werk waren van terroristen en terroristische groeperingen.

Wat is "onbegrijpelijk" is dat meer dan een periode van 10 jaar een geradicaliseerde rechtse groep in Duitsland werd geloofd te hebben doodgeschoten negen Turkse zakenlieden en een Griekse nationaliteit bij daglicht executies. Deze moorden waren bij de slachtoffers plaats van het bedrijfsleven en werden "kebab moorden" en vond plaats tussen 2000 en 2007 en waren in echte Europese vreemdelingenhaat fashion, toegeschreven aan "criminele organisaties" en zonder twijfel "Turkse criminele organisaties." In 2007 Deze terroristen doodgeschoten politieagente in Heilbronn een.

Het verband tussen deze moorden en het neerschieten van de politie vrouw werden gevonden in twee pistolen, een Tsjechische Ceska gemaakt 83 en degene die toebehoorde aan de politieagente. De mannen, Uwe M.en Uwe B, een bank beroofd een paar dagen geleden, werden dood aangetroffen in een uitgebrande stacaravan, samen met wat onderzoekers zei, was "bewijs duidt op een rechts-extremistische motieven achter de moorden.", aldus een rapport dat het bewijs was DVD van de neo-nazi-propaganda die moest worden gestuurd om nieuws verkooppunten en islamitische culturele centra. Deze video van een neo-nazi groep die zichzelf de "nationaal-socialistische Underground" riep de leden om "maatregelen nemen, niet woorden" In deze 15 minuten durende video van de twee mannen toegelaten tot de negen moorden en beloofde meer aanvallen.

Ummm .... Creëren van een video waarschuwing van meer aanvallen (aanzetten tot angst), dus waren de opnames daadwerkelijk daden van terrorisme door geradicaliseerde individuen bedoeld om angst zetten in de Turkse bevolking. Dit is wat de Nederlandse AIVD vaak "moslims" beschuldigt van het willen doen!

[youtube id="qwVNh-oY-P4" w="200" h="200"] [youtube id="uLzN2-Jzxkk" w="200" h="200"]  [youtube id="Ckkwvskug7g" w="200" h="200"]

Nu zijn ze "willen antwoorden?!" De vrouw in hechtenis is Beate Z, en zij is belast met moord, brandstichting en lidmaatschap van een terroristische groep. Blijkbaar in Duitsland, in tegenstelling tot over de grens in Nederland, als een moslim is niet voorwaarde om betrokken te zijn bij terrorisme of lidmaatschap van een terroristische groep.

Een persoon die wil antwoorden ook een Duitse groene partij lid, Cem Özdemir, die niet konden geloven dat dit radicale, terroristische groep zou kunnen opsporen door de autoriteiten voor zoveel jaren te voorkomen. Van het lezen van de berichtgeving op deze "verbijsterende moord mysterie," je krijgt het gevoel dat deze etnische Duitsers bezig met binnenlands terrorisme in Duitsland en waren zelfs nog nooit op de nationale veiligheid en rechtshandhaving radarscherm. Nogmaals, het antwoord is eenvoudig:Geen moslim, geen terrorist. Geen islam, geen radicalisering.

Ja - we moeten nu de vraag beantwoord de vraag waarom geradicaliseerde individuen en groepen die willen kwaad doen mogen onopgemerkt blijven. Het simpele antwoord is dat politie-en veiligheidsagenten niet op zoek naar "terroristen" buiten de moslimgemeenschappen. Een ander antwoord, zoals blijkt uit de Nederland, wat is gedefinieerd als een "bedreiging voor de veiligheid" wordt bepaald door de nationale politiek en niet echte bedreigingen. Het is gewoon politiek correct om te zoeken naar "geradicaliseerd individuen en terroristen" in de islamitische gemeenschappen in Nederland.

En hier zijn enkele antwoorden Het eerste dat moet worden opgemerkt hier, is dat een of meer of de slachtoffers van deze terroristische moorden zijn burgers van Duitsland en Griekenland - en ook burgers van de Europese Unie. De veiligheid van de Turkse gemeenschap in Duitsland moet van ten minste een beetje een zorg voor de Duitse autoriteiten. We hebben gezien in het verleden in Duitsland, net als elders in Europa, moslimgemeenschappen zijn "terrorisme verdacht gemeenschappen," niet het slachtoffer gemeenschappen.Moslimgemeenschappen, in het licht van de "botsing" thesis, zijn "de gemeenschappen van een buitenaardse beschaving die geen respect democratie en westerse waarden." Geweld tegen deze "vreemde" en vermoedt dat de gemeenschappen is gewoon niet waard serieus onderzoek.

Het feit is dat de lokale en nationale rechtshandhaving in Duitsland, maar ook op Europees niveau, hebben een verantwoordelijkheid om minderheid en moslimgemeenschappen tegen terrorisme te beschermen!

Hier, zoals in de VS, het Verenigd Koninkrijk en Europa, islamitische gemeenschappen worden geconfronteerd met een toenemende dreiging van het terrorisme van de geradicaliseerde personen die banden met geradicaliseerde rechtse groeperingen. Als burgers en leden van hun lokale gemeenschappen, moslims en hun leiders van de gemeenschap zou moeten werken met de lokale politie voor de veiligheid en beveiliging. De dreiging geconfronteerd door islamitische gemeenschappen geradicaliseerde individuen en groepen moet worden tussen nationale veiligheid en terrorismebestrijding zaken.

De realiteit is dat dit niet is "verbijsterend" helemaal niet, maar een gevolg van de bekrompen, islamofobe, "botsing der beschavingen 'notie dat" terrorisme "is iets dat moslims alleen.De enige dreiging van "terrorisme" komt van "islamisten en jihadisten" out of "niet-geassimileerde en cultureel anders 'moslimgemeenschappen. Als gevolg van deze valse en islamofobe geloof heerst in de westerse strijd tegen het terrorisme praktijken, miljoenen, misschien miljarden, euro's en dollars zijn uitgegeven kwetsend, stigmatiserend en het nemen van oneerlijke handelingen ("beveiliging van de luchthaven 'en persoonlijke verstoring van maatregelen) tegen moslims en islamitische gemeenschappen. De vaak nutteloze verspilling van geld en manuren achter de geesten van "jihadisten" heeft het mogelijk echte radicalen en extremisten van de radicaal recht om te vliegen onder de radar. Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich, die lijkt te zijn "geschokt" door deze "nieuwe terrorisme ', is een islamofoob boob zelf, nadat bekend gemaakt islamofobe uitspraken.

Friedrich Het kan zijn dat de weg naar de anti-moslim van radicalisering en de diepgewortelde radicaal rechts in Duitsland leidt tot zijn eigen pro-Wilders deur.

Laten we hopen dat t zijn is nu een wake up call, maar we dachten dat Noorwegen, 22 juli, 2011 en terreur aanslagen door een anti-moslim radicaal moeten zijn op zijn minst een soort van wake-up call over de Atlantische Oceaan.In plaats daarvan, westerse regeringen terug naar de oude "botsing der beschavingen" model -. En de verspilling van miljoenen euro's en dollars in de strijd tegen het terrorisme overkill tegen moslimgemeenschappen in de zinloze jacht op "jihadisten in Europa" die niet bestaan.  ​​Hoe veel van Noorwegen zullen we onder ogen moeten zien voordat terrorismebestrijding middelen en inspanningen worden doorgestuurd tegen deze "nieuwe extreem-rechtse terroristische dreiging?"

Zie ook:

Police Find Gun Used in Unsolved Murder Series

German government concerned about homegrown, right-wing terrorism

Germany arrests new extremist suspect over killings of 10 people in 7-year period

Germany probes suspected far-right murders

'Islam has no place in our country': New German minister sparks immigration row

New German Interior Minister Reopens Integration Debate

Sunday, September 11, 2011

9-11 and the fear of it in the Netherlands

The "security certificate" on the AIVD's website is total baloney. It smells fishy, like unsalted herring.

The AIVD displays its Islamophobic mentality on 9-11. Well - what is actually objectionable is that the Ghostbusters in the General Intelligence and Security Service continues to abuse language to paint "Muslims" as potential terrorists. "Muslims" in the Netherlands then become under watch, despite the fact that there continues to be little evidence that the Netherlands is under threat from "Islamists" and "jihadists."

The focus of AIVD Ghostbusters continues to be the ghosts of "Islamic terrorism" and the notion that phantom jihadists want "social change." Here is what is on the page Jihadistisch terrorisme and note that even non-threatening political activities of "peaceful Muslims" that see social change for perhaps the betterment of Dutch Muslims can be taken as just as much of a threat as terrorist violence when coupled with the AIVD's definition of "radicalization" (translated from Dutch):
What: Social change. The population serious scare. Influencing political decisions. That is the purpose of terrorist activities. Terrorists will achieve this by threatening with violence, serious violence or to prepare to commit or cause harm to one's possessions. They do this from a particular ideology.

Who: Extremist Muslims who advocate violence against "enemies of Islam '. The jihadist terrorists.

Why: For social and political changes that correspond with their radical religious (jihadist) beliefs.

AIVD Tasks: The AIVD reduces risks to national security, including preventing attacks. Additionally, the service partners to ensure timely access to a current, accurate and reliable picture of the terrorist threat. On this basis, they can appropriate (policy) measures to develop and implement the terrorist threat and its consequences to prevent or reduce. Also, the AIVD chain partners, such as the Public Ministry, to act.

First question: What is wrong with Muslims that want "social change?" Answer: Nothing, unless you're the AIVD and believe that every Dutch Moroccan should be watched for signs of either anger or religious pioty, and now want peaceful change for fellow Dutch Moroccans. Well, that Dutch Moroccan is now a "jihadist" that is "challenging the democratic and legal order of the Netherlands." Too dangerous, get the Public Prosecutor after him/her and place in a prison as a "radicalized jihadist!"

[youtube id="Oznj6AFeiRE" w="200" h="200"]

There is NOTHING (NIETS) wrong with a pious Dutch Moroccan that seeks to change the social order of his Dutch nation to gain a better position for Dutch Moroccans, or Turks, or other Dutch Muslim groups. SOMEONE needs to step up and TEACH especially young Dutch Moroccans that they need to be brave and effect social change in the Dutch society by challenging the Fortuyn-world order. First - it needs to be acceptable for young Dutch Muslims to see themselves as just as "orange" as non-Muslim Dutch.

Second question: How does the AIVD define "radical religious beliefs?" Answer:  This I discussed in the July 6 post, Questioning Dutch and American uses of Muslim “Radicalization.” I presented the three elements of how the AIVD defines "radicalization" after three days of putting together a definition from their documents and journal articles:

  1. Devout and missionary beliefs in Islam, including the spread of Islam through non-violent means, is “radicalization” and “threatening.”

  2. Youth suffering from discrimination and social exclusion, which lead to identity crisis, are “radicalized” and “threatening.”

  3. “Anti-Western” and “anti-Dutch” opinions and viewpoints are signs of “radicalization” and “threatening.”

I adorned the post page with a picture of Tristan van der Vlis, the PVV voter who shot up a shopping mall in April, killing his miserable self along with seven others, and 16 wounded - as Tristan, like Apeldoorn, 2009, Queen's Day attacker Karst Tates, are not Muslims, therefore, can never be "radicalized" and not "terrorists."  What Tristan van der Vlis did in April is Mumbai-style shoot-up, but its NOT Mumbai-style shoot-up because Tristan is not a Muslim. In the Netherlands, it's not "terrorism" unless the act is by someone who's a Muslim.

The real fear and real threat of terrorism in the Netherlands. Unlike the phantom jihadists chased by the Ghostbusters of the AIVD, Anders Behring Breivik actually did kill 77 people in Norway on July 22!

The AIVD appears to be little interested in the real threats against political figures, unless you-know-who is "threatened." Then, we hear in the mass media that some "threat" against Wilders came out of Greece, Bosnia or Tim-Buck-Two. The threats against Wilders are probably overplayed and political calculations by Wilders. Its a safe bet that al-Qeada's hit-list has higher profile targets. Since the AIVD's real tasks appeared to be like that of the Ghostbusters, hunting phantom "jihadists," along with social control of "Muslims," the intelligence and security agency is little equipped to deal with serious threats from the radical right against rational and sane political figures, like Job Cohen.

Actually, Job Cohen and his fellow social democrats in the PvdA probably face more of a threat against their lives from sympathizers of Breivik. Of course, the Left as "Muslim sympathizers" and therefore sympathizers to the jihad phantoms and Islamist ghosts that are currently threatening to destroy the Netherlands. Never consider the fact that real murder, mayhem and, yes, Mumbai-style terrorism, has in the past years been connected to those who are, well, suspected of being on the far right, from Apeldoorn, to Alphen aan den Rijn, to Oslo and on to the island of Utoya.

In an article in the Trouw, Job Cohen talked about the fear of a Breivik-type attack against his PvdA, Labour, social democrats.
"Party members still ask whether something similar could happen in the Netherlands. No one had yet considered possible in a reasonably rich and politically balanced country like Norway a ruthless, murderous attack had taken place. You think about it there yet or something this can happen."

The ruthless and threatening behavior of the PVV Thugs and Brownshirts that are loose in the Netherlands over the past year, now after Geert Wilders got to play "kingmaker," makes the PVV a potential source of violence.  As discussed in the July 8 post, Free Speech in the Netherlands – PVV style! - I tell you about threats against the publication over a cartoon of Wilders forced the publication to remove the cartoon. Also- how academic speakers who were to give speeches critical of the PVV were threatened and disinvited from speaking; and how a punk rock ban was told not to play a song that called Wilders "Mussolini of the Low Countries."  The threats to the Netherlands' democratic way of life simply don't come from politically active Muslims, but from a PVV that is growing more bold and threatening, and is the real source of potential violence in the Netherlands.

The AIVD wants to take away the rights of Muslims, their political freedom and freedom of expression, but ignores the growing danger from PVV Thugs and Brownshirts. If there is a 9-11 in the Netherlands, it will be cause by these far right elements, not "Muslims."

9-11 en de angst van het in Nederland

De "veiligheidscertificaat" op de AIVD ' s website is totaal onzin. Het ruikt verdacht, net als ongezouten haring.

De AIVD toont zijn islamofobe mentaliteit op 9-11. Goed - wat eigenlijk verwerpelijk is dat de Ghostbusters in de Algemene Inlichtingen-en Veiligheidsdienst blijft taal te misbruiken om "de moslims" schilderen als potentiële terroristen. "Moslims" in Nederland worden dan in de gaten, ondanks het feit dat er nog steeds te weinig bewijs dat Nederland wordt bedreigd door "islamisten" en "jihadisten."

De focus van AIVD Ghostbusters blijft de geesten van de "islamitisch terrorisme" en de notie dat fantoom jihadisten willen "sociale verandering." Hier is wat er op de pagina Jihadistisch Terrorisme en merk op dat zelfs niet-bedreigende politieke activiteiten van de "vreedzame moslims" zien dat sociale verandering voor misschien wel de verbetering van de Nederlandse moslims kan worden opgevat als net zo veel van een bedreiging als terroristisch geweld wanneer gekoppeld aan de definitie van de AIVD van 'radicalisering' :
Wat: Maatschappelijke veranderingen. De bevolking ernstige vrees aanjagen. Politieke besluitvorming beïnvloeden. Dat is het doel van terroristische activiteiten. Terroristen willen dit bereiken door te dreigen met geweld, ernstig geweld voor te bereiden of te plegen of schade aan te richten aan iemands bezittingen. Dit doen ze vanuit een bepaalde ideologie.

Wie: Extremistische moslims die geweld propageren tegen ‘vijanden van de islam'. De jihadistisch terroristen.

Waarom: Voor maatschappelijke en politieke veranderingen die overeenstemmen met hun radicaalreligieuze (jihadistische) overtuigingen.

AIVD Taken: De AIVD reduceert risico's voor de nationale veiligheid, onder andere door het voorkomen van aanslagen. Daarnaast zorgt de dienst ervoor dat partners tijdig kunnen beschikken over een actueel, accuraat en betrouwbaar beeld van terroristische dreiging. Op basis hiervan kunnen zij adequate (beleids)maatregelen ontwikkelen en implementeren om de terroristische dreiging en de gevolgen daarvan te voorkomen of te reduceren. Ook zet de AIVD ketenpartners, zoals het Openbaar Ministerie, aan tot handelen.

Bullshit! totaal onzin!

Eerste vraag: Wat is er mis met moslims die zich willen  "sociale verandering?  'Antwoord: Niets, tenzij je de AIVD en zijn van mening dat elke Nederlandse Marokkaan moet worden bekeken op tekenen van boosheid of religieuze pioty, en nu willen een vreedzame verandering voor collega Nederlandse Marokkanen. Nou, dat de Nederlandse Marokkaan is nu een 'jihadistische', dat is "tegen de democratische en juridische orde van de Nederland. 'Te gevaarlijk, krijgt het Openbaar Ministerie na hem / haar en doe dit in een gevangenis als een' geradicaliseerde jihadistische!"

[youtube id="Oznj6AFeiRE" w="200" h="200"]

Er is niets (nothing) mis is met een vrome Nederlandse Marokkaan die streeft naar de maatschappelijke opdracht van zijn Nederlandse natie veranderen in een betere positie voor Nederlandse Marokkanen, Turken of, of een andere Nederlandse moslim groepen te krijgen. IEMAND moet opvoeren en vooral jonge Nederlandse Marokkanen LEREN dat ze moeten trotseren en het effect sociale veranderingen in de Nederlandse samenleving door tegen de Fortuyn-wereld orde te zijn. Eerste - het moet aanvaardbaar zijn voor jonge Nederlandse moslims om zichzelf te zien als net zo "oranje" als niet-moslim Nederlanders.

De tweede vraag: Hoe werkt de AIVD definieert "radicale religieuze overtuigingen?" Antwoord: Dit had ik besproken in de 06 juli na, Nederlandse en Amerikaanse gebruik van de islamitische “Radicalisering” . "Ik presenteerde de drie elementen van de manier waarop de AIVD definieert "radicalisering" na drie dagen van het samenstellen van een definitie van hun documenten en tijdschriftartikelen:

1. Vrome en missionaire geloof in de islam, zoals de verspreiding van de islam door niet-gewelddadige middelen, is "radicalisering 'en' bedreigend '.
2. Jeugd slachtoffer zijn van discriminatie en sociale uitsluiting, die leiden tot identiteitscrisis, zijn "geradicaliseerd 'en' bedreigend."
3. "Anti-westerse" en "anti-Nederlands" meningen en standpunten zijn tekenen van 'radicalisering' en 'bedreigend'.

Ik versierde de post pagina met een foto van Tristan van der Vlis, de PVV kiezer die schoot een shopping mall in april, het doden van zijn ellendige zelf, samen met zeven anderen, en 16 gewonden - als Tristan, zoals Apeldoorn, 2009, Koninginnedag aanvaller Karst Tates, geen moslims, daarom kan nooit "geradicaliseerd" en niet "terroristen." Wat Tristan van der Vlis heeft in april is Mumbai-style schietpartij, maar het is niet Mumbai-style schietpartij, want Tristan is niet een moslim. In Nederland, het is niet "terrorisme", tenzij het besluit wordt door iemand die een moslim.

De echte angst en reële dreiging van terrorisme in Nederland. In tegenstelling tot de phantom jihadisten achtervolgd door de Ghostbusters van de AIVD, Anders Behring Breivik wel degelijk doden 77 mensen in Noorwegen op 22 juli!

De AIVD lijkt weinig geïnteresseerd zijn in de echte bedreigingen tegen de politieke figuren, tenzij je-weet-wie is "bedreigd wordt." Dan horen we in de media dat sommige "bedreiging "tegen Wilders kwam uit Griekenland, Bosnië of Tim-Buck-Two. De bedreigingen tegen Wilders zijn waarschijnlijk overspeeld en politieke berekeningen van Wilders. Het is een veilige gok dat al-Qaeda's hit-lijst grotere zichtbaarheid doelwitten heeft. Omdat echte taken van de AIVD bleek te zijn als die van de Ghostbusters, de jacht fantoom 'jihadisten', samen met de sociale controle van "moslims", de inlichtingen-en veiligheidsdiensten bureau is weinig uitgerust om met ernstige bedreigingen veel van het radicale recht tegen rationeel en gezond verstand politieke figuren, zoals Job Cohen.

Eigenlijk, Job Cohen en zijn collega-sociaal-democraten in de PvdA waarschijnlijk gezicht meer van een bedreiging tegen het leven van de sympathisanten van de Breivik. Natuurlijk, de linkse als "moslim sympathisanten" en daarom sympathisanten aan de jihad fantomen en islamitische geesten die op dit moment dreigen naar Nederland te vernietigen. Nooit rekening met het feit dat de echte moord, chaos en, ja, Mumbai-stijl terrorisme, heeft in de afgelopen jaren aangesloten is aan degenen die, goed, ervan verdacht worden aan de andere rechts, van Apeldoorn naar Alphen aan den Rijn, om te Oslo en op het eiland Utoya.

In een artikel in de Trouw , Job Cohen sprak over de angst voor een Breivik-type aanval tegen zijn PvdA, Arbeid, sociaal-democraten.
"Partijgenoten vragen zich toch af of zoiets ook in Nederland kan gebeuren. Niemand had toch voor mogelijk gehouden dat in een rijk en politiek redelijk evenwichtig land als Noorwegen zo'n nietsontziende, moorddadige aanslag had kunnen plaatsvinden. Je denkt er toch over na of zoiets hier kan gebeuren"

De meedogenloze en bedreigend gedrag van de PVV Thugs en bruinhemden die los in de Nederland in de afgelopen jaren, nu, na Geert Wilders kreeg om te spelen "kingmaker," maakt de PVV een potentiële bron van geweld. Zoals besproken in de juli-8 post, Free Speech in the Netherlands - PVV style! - ik jullie vertellen over bedreigingen tegen de publicatie over een cartoon van Wilders gedwongen de publicatie van de cartoon te verwijderen. Ook-hoe de academische sprekers die waren toespraken kritiek op de PVV te geven werden bedreigd en disinvited te spreken, en hoe een punk rock verbod werd verteld niet om een ​​lied dat de naam Wilders te spelen De bedreigingen voor Nederland "Mussolini van de Lage Landen." 'democratische manier van leven gewoon niet komen van politiek actieve moslims, maar van een PVV die groeit meer vet en bedreigend, en is de echte bron van potentiële geweld in Nederland.

De AIVD wil weg te nemen de rechten van moslims, hun politieke vrijheid en vrijheid van meningsuiting, maar negeert het groeiende gevaar van de PVV Thugs-en bruinhemden. Als er een 9-11 in Nederland, zal dit leiden worden door deze uiterst rechts elementen, niet "moslims."