Islamist hatred and anti-semitism produces an unending stream of vicious
young jihadist men
who, like Nazi camp guards,
are unable to see even innocent Jewish children as human beings.
The Islamist way of war:
The jihadist killer at the French school
this little Jewish girl,
8 year old Miriam Monsonego,
and shot her dead at close range.
He shot dead
a 3 year old boy and a 6 year old boy
at the gates.
"CCTV footage from a camera at the gates reportedly showed that one of the boys was executed as he crawled away on his hands and knees while his father and brother lay dying on the pavement."
A local Jewish leader,
Nicole Yardini, saw the CCTV footage:
"It was like a horror film, something unreal. I can't say more. He shot a little girl in the head in cold blood.
When I say it I want to vomit."
Many on the left
jumped to the wrong conclusions about the attacks.
Because the attacks were against Jews and against non-white French soldiers (some Muslim),
many thought this might be a
neo-Nazi terror group.
Christian Fraser of the BBC
getting the analysis wrong,
But it turned out to be Islamic terror again.
The Muslim soldiers were targeted because they were soldiers, and hence traitors to Islam
in the eyes of the jihadis.
"Hunting a French Breivik."
The Danish media
gets it wrong.
Mark Steyn, 21 Mar 2012, explains why the media got it wrong, and will get it wrong again.
Michael J. Rosenberg
of Media Matters has form.
He is a Jew
who is anti-Israel
and compares Israel to Al Qaeda, 15 Nov 2012.
When Israel killed Hamas leader
on 14 Nov 2012, Rosenberg compared this to Nazi killings:
"Israel's tweets celebrating killing makes me glad Germany didnt have twitter in 1942."
With this kind of confused moral compass, it's no wonder he blamed the wrong target for Toulouse.
Trust the Guardian, of course, to go a step too far in blaming the wrong culprit for Toulouse.
Writing in what is the most pro-jihad newspaper in the English-speaking world,
Fiachra Gibbons, 19 Mar 2012, rushes to blame the jihadist attack not on, say, his own newspaper,
but rather on ... statements by centre-right French politicians about immigration and multiculturalism.
Unfortunately for Gibbons, it turned out to be Islamic terror.
Almost every word of this ludicrous article is wrong:
"Today in Toulouse we have been given a horrific illustration of where such delirious cynicism can lead."
Rubbish. This is a horrific illustration of where Islamist rhetoric can lead.
"All of those who have been shot or killed in and around the city in the past eight days have had one thing in common. They are from visible minorities."
The one thing they have in common is they are all enemies of Islam
in the jihadi worldview.
"As one father said this morning as he hugged his son to him outside the school, "They are attacking us because we are different.""
No, they are attacking you because you are kuffar - non-Muslims.
"Police are a long way yet from catching, never mind understanding, what was going through the head of someone who could catch a little girl by the hair so he wouldn't have to waste a second bullet on her."
I think many of us understand it very well.
It is lefties like
who have a hard time understanding it.
"He shouted no jihadist or anti-Semitic slogans, going about his grisly business in the cold, military manner oddly similar to Anders Behring Breivik".
And yet he was a jihadist and an anti-semite, not like Breivik.
he did shout "Allahu Akbar"
as he slaughtered.
"A black man or a Muslim, particularly one of Algerian origin, in a paratrooper's uniform touches a raw nerve among the old guard of the far right."
So you say.
But it was a Muslim fighting for the kuffar that was the problem for the Algerian Muslim jihadist killer,
who bears the name "Mohammed".
(That is, using the Gates of Vienna terminology, this attack has a
of 100 percent.)
cracking comments attacking
Fiachra Gibbons, as his prejudices all turned out to be wrong.
"French Spree Shooter is a Muslim Named Mohammed Who Fought With the Taliban in Afghanistan. Other Than That He Fits The Media’s ‘Far-Right’ Profile Perfectly".
They imply that centre-right language encourages killers,
even though the killer here was a Muslim.
They never mention the Islamist hate speech that actually encouraged the killer.
They attack the "far right", even though the Islamic killer is exactly what the "far right" predicted
and warned about.
They charitably consider that the killer might be a "lone wolf",
but their examples oddly spin to the left.
They do not mention the Fort Hood shooter,
the Times Square bomber,
the Frankfurt shooter,
the Beltway sniper,
or indeed any Islamic killer at all.
EU "Foreign Minister"
compared the attack to Israel's attacks on Gaza.
Her world view - promoting or implying the idea that Israel targets children
- is in fact quite similar to that of the Toulouse Muslim terrorist.
If the Irish Times wants an example of the kind of speech that
"oxygenates the water in which killers swim freely",
To prove my point,
Hamas defends Ashton's comments.
The Jew killing scum of Hamas,
who are no different themselves from the Jew killer of Toulouse,
say Ashton deserves thanks for her:
"mention of the children in Gaza
She deserves thanks, appreciation, and support
in the face of Zionist attempts to terrorize and pressure her".
It turned out to be Islamic terror again.
The killer was a Muslim jihadist,
for whom all Jews, anywhere, are targets.
In contrast to the above idiots,
understands the killer:
"For these murderers, wherever a Jews walks, every centimetre of land he walks on, is occupied territory. From their perspective, Jews have no place in the world. They want to murder Jews wherever they are, and for that reason the state of Israel was established."
"Finger-pointing at Islam by Sarkozy ... and by his far-right rival Marine Le Pen, has not helped calm tensions, said Jean-Paul Makongo, who works for the Toulouse local authorities on promoting diversity.
"If we don't want to produce more Mohamed Merahs," Makongo warned, "We are going to have to work a lot harder to reach these kids through dialogue - and find them jobs.""
Because anyone without a job
would hunt down terrified small children and shoot them in the head.
We would all do it.
CiF Watch, 22 Mar 2012, on the creepy attempts by the Guardian and the Irish Times to blame the centre-right rather than Islamism:
"the murder of four innocent Jews is not “the product of a sick society.”
Only a very particular individual, who possesses free will and moral agency, blinded by murderous racism, can engage in such sociopathic behavior.
Such callous disregard for Jewish life .. was the product of a very particular, and especially odious, brand of religious extremism.
A seven-year-old Jewish girl by the name of Miriam Monsonego wasn’t murdered by France, or Nicolas Sarkozy.
The man who cornered a no-doubt petrified little girl, grabbed her by the hair and fired a bullet at point-blank range through her brain was named Mohammed Merah."
The New York Times has been particularly disgusting on Toulouse.
Jewish children are slaughtered in the most heartless, sadistic way by a Muslim fanatic.
There are many like-minded Muslim fanatics in France.
There has been a steady stream of
Islamic terror attacks on France
every year or two since 1975,
many of them targeting Jews.
Future slaughters are likely.
It is unlikely that
Muslim attacks on Jews
will ever end in France.
And yet for the New York Times
the main story is the fears of Muslims!
Yes, after a Muslim slaughter of Jews,
the main story is the fears of Muslims, not of Jews!
Apparently "increasing xenophobia" radicalises young Muslim jihadists to kill Jews:
"Muslims in Europe wonder whether they are caught in a vicious cycle in which increasing xenophobia helps radicalize a generation of Muslims born in France, and they ask whether attacks like Mr. Merah’s will further increase Islamophobia."
And there I was thinking it was Islamic jihadist supremacism that radicalises jihadist killers!
Little did we know that it was "xenophobia" doing it.
Is Souad Mekhennet
an Islamist of some sort herself?
One wonders because she casually quotes as an authority the fanatic
without mentioning the latter's all-out support for Islamic terror.
"The case garnering the most attention .. is that of
[Al Qaeda terrorist]
Mrs. Khan and Yvonne Ridley,
a journalist based in London .. have researched the case and said it had generated intense anger among Muslims."
Intense anger among jihadists like Ridley surely?
"They kill sweet innocent little children because they are angry
about the jailing of an Al Qaeda member."
How can anyone respond to that except by vomiting.
What a squalid, morally debased article.
Yvonne Ridley, Sept 2010, openly supports Hezbollah and Hamas Islamic terror (see end).
She mocks the
killing of 4 Jews,
including a pregnant woman,
saying they "paid the price for stealing Palestinian land".
"The Battle of Toulouse".
Jihadists celebrate the killing of Jewish children at a primary school in Toulouse.
Attacking tiny children with guns constitutes a "Battle"
if you are an Islamist!
Who I block:
I will debate almost anyone.
I love ideas.
I will not debate (and will block) people who do the following:
(a) Make threats.
(b) Accuse me of crimes.
(c) Comment on my appearance.
(d) Drag in stuff about me not related to the topic. (My professional career, my personal life.)
(e) Complain to my employer.
Yes, people do all these things.