I didn't feel any better off under Labour. All I saw was money thrown at the NHS which was then used to bring more foreign babies into the world (well, our part of the world).

I saw uncontrolled immigration at the expense of the indigenous population.

I saw expense scandals, and Mandelson... three times!

I saw our sovereignty signed over to an unelected group in Brussels in a shady back room deal where our own Prime Minister signed the Treaty away from the cameras.

I saw taxes rise. I saw petrol prices hit their highest ever. I saw petrol stations jammed and oil refineries blockaded.

I saw us enter wars we had no place being in - just to appear pally with an American Idiot.

But last of all, I saw an end to it because I didn't vote Labour.

Oh hai. We've just had an election in the UK. I know how other counties don't really care about the UK's political shenanigans, given that US TV didn't mention it at all while I was there. So, the Conservatives got in, but don't have a majority and will have to form a coalition with someone like the Liberal Democrats. I don't care as long as my taxes stay low or go lower, and I get equal rights as a human being who just happens to be gay.

Oh, and if we could remove religion from politics that'd be great, kthnxbai.

Okay, so my 8-day holiday to New York turned into a 15-day trip due to someone in Iceland lighting the blue touch paper and standing back. Grrr.

Still, I could've been stuck in somewhere really nasty, like India, or Pakistan, or Romania... Like my friend was! :-)

From BBC News:
A Christian nurse moved to a desk job after refusing to remove her crucifix at work has lost a discrimination claim against her employers.

Shirley Chaplin, from Exeter, said the cross ban prevented her from expressing her religious beliefs.

But an employment tribunal ruled that the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospitals NHS Trust, where she worked, had acted in a "reasonable" manner. It said the damage to Mrs Chaplain had only been "slight".
---

Boo hoo squish squish. You do NOT have to wear a crucifix to express your religious beliefs. Where in the Bible does it say to wear a crucifix? Nowhere.

To quote Bill Hicks: "If Jesus ever comes back, do you think he's ever going to want to see another fucking cross?!"

From BBC News:
The lawyer for a Lebanese man sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia for witchcraft has appealed for international help to save him. Ali Sabat was the host of a popular Lebanese TV show in which he predicted the future and gave advice. He was arrested by religious police on sorcery charges while on a pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia in 2008.

His lawyer, May el-Khansa, says she has been told Mr Sabat is due to be executed this week. Ms Khansa has contacted the Lebanese president and prime minister to appeal on his behalf.

There has been no official confirmation from Saudi Arabia, but executions there are often carried out with little warning.

Mr Sabat did make a confession, but Ms Khansa says he only did so because he had been told he could go back to Lebanon if he did.

Human rights groups have accused the Saudis of "sanctioning a literal witch hunt by the religious police".

An Egyptian working as a pharmacist in Saudi Arabia was executed in 2007 after having been found guilty of using sorcery to try to separate a married couple.

There is no legal definition of witchcraft in Saudi Arabia, but horoscopes and fortune telling are condemned as un-Islamic. Nevertheless, there is still a big thirst for such services in the country where widespread superstition survives under the surface of strict religious orthodoxy.
---

Hang on a sweet minute... By the very fact that there's no legal definition of witchcraft in Saudi Arabia, doesn't this mean that the 'prophet' of Islam, Muhammad, was also a sorcerer? I mean, didn't he attempt to predict the future?

Surely the law should provide evidence that ANYTHING he said in these sessions actually came true? They should ask him to predict the future and then check to see if it happens. Currently, he's being put to death because the Saudi Arabian religious police (welcome to 1984...) CLAIM he can predict the future.

A fucking barmy state of affairs from a fucking barmy state.

From BBC News:
The Vatican has attacked the media over charges that the Pope failed to act against a US priest accused of abusing up to 200 deaf boys two decades ago. A Vatican newspaper editorial said the claims were an "ignoble" attack on the Pope and that there was no "cover-up". The head of the UK Catholic church said the Pope had made important changes to the way abuse was dealt with.

The Catholic church has been hit by a series of allegations in Europe and the US over the past months. The latest allegations stem from the US, after it emerged that Archbishops had complained in 1996 about a priest, Fr Lawrence Murphy. Their complaints went to a Vatican office led by the future Pope Benedict XVI, but apparently received no response. One victim told the BBC the Pope had known of a cover-up "for many years".

Arthur Budzinski, now 61, said Pope Benedict should confess about what he knew. He said through an interpreter: "It goes all the way up to him - he was in charge of these types of cases."

The recent allegations against the Catholic Church echo paedophilia scandals that rocked the institution in America eight years ago. Allegations of the abuse of deaf children have also resurfaced in Italy, where interviews with several victims were due to be broadcast on national television on Friday. At least 14 former pupils at the Antonio Provolo Institute for the Deaf in the northern city of Verona say they were abused between the 1950s and the 1980s. They complained to local Church authorities as early as 2008. The diocese of Verona said this week that it intends to interview the victims following a request from the Vatican to do so.

And in a separate case, the Legionaries of Christ, an ultra-Conservative congregation within Catholicism, condemned the "reprehensible" actions of their Mexican founder, the late Fr Marcial Maciel Degollado, who sexually abused a number of children in the 1940s and 1950s.

'No cover-up'
Fr Murphy is suspected of abusing some 200 boys at St John's School for the Deaf in St Francis, Wisconsin, between 1950 and 1974. According to Church documents, an archbishop wrote in 1996 to a Vatican morals watchdog led by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to complain about Fr Murphy. A canonical trial was authorised by the future pope's deputy, but was later halted, despite objections from a second archbishop. Fr Murphy had written to Cardinal Ratzinger saying he was ill and wanted to live out his life in the "dignity of my priesthood".

The Pope's official spokesman, Federico Lombardi, said the Murphy case had only reached the Vatican in 1996 - two decades after the Milwaukee diocese in Wisconsin first learned of the allegations, and two years before the priest died. The diocese had been asked to take action by "restricting Father Murphy's public ministry and requiring that Father Murphy accept full responsibility for the gravity of his acts", Fr Lombardi said. "Father Murphy died approximately four months later, without further incident," the statement said. The papal spokesman also noted that police at the time investigated the allegations, but did not bring charges.

A strongly worded Vatican newspaper editorial said there was "no cover-up" over the case, which was reported in Thursday's edition of the New York Times. L'Osservatore Romano labelled the allegations "clearly an ignoble attempt to strike at Pope Benedict and his closest aides at any cost".

Meanwhile, one of the Pope's top aides, Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, told reporters there was "a conspiracy" against the Church, without specifying who was responsible.

The Pope was also supported in the UK by the Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, who said the then Cardinal Ratzinger had not been an "idle observer" in the case. Writing in the Times, the Archbishop also said the Pope had introduced changes into Church law to protect children.

The BBC's Robert Pigott in Milwaukee says the US case is particularly shocking, not only because the priest abused boys but because he was allowed to go on to another diocese where he had access to children all over again. Our correspondent says that although there is no direct evidence against the then Cardinal Ratzinger, this is an uncomfortable confluence of events for the Vatican. This is a case of concealment, he says, and that is where the Pope will have a case to answer.

Ireland letter
Fr Murphy - who admitted abusing boys before he died in 1998 - is said to have targeted victims in their dormitory beds, on school trips and even at confession. Lawsuits have been filed on behalf of five men alleging the Archdiocese of Milwaukee did not take sufficient action against the priest.

Last week the Pope issued an unprecedented letter to Ireland addressing the 16 years of clerical cover-up scandals. He has yet to comment on his handling of a child sex abuse case involving a German priest, which developed while Benedict was overseeing the Munich archdiocese. Fr Peter Hullermann had been accused of abusing boys when the now Pope approved his 1980 transfer to Munich to receive psychological treatment for paedophilia. The disgraced priest was convicted in 1986 of abusing a youth, but stayed within the Church for another two decades.

Sir Ken Macdonald, former Director of Public Prosecutions in England and Wales, said the Vatican ought to report all abuse cases to the police. "If teachers in a school commit abuse against children, we don't say it's for the school to resolve that issue," Sir Ken told Radio 4's Today programme.
---

Oh look, the Vatican is attacking the media rather than the FUCKING CHILD-MOLESTING PRIESTS THEY'VE BEEN TEACHING IN THEIR OWN FUCKING INSTITUTION! Seriously, el Poperino, clean up your fucking house and stop blaming everyone else for your fucking massive mistakes.

I know Catholic doctrine says the Pope is infallible, but seriously, that's like the Italian PM passing laws that prevent the prosecution of the PM in fraud cases...

The facts are that the Pope was in charge of making sure this kind of thing stopped. He failed. He is not and has never been infallible. He is a dickhead who decided that protecting the church of Catholicism was more important than protecting the rights and lives of children in the church's care.

Whenever someone mentions paedophilia, I immediately think "Catholic priest". They will have to do a lot more than a wishy-washy letter and an attack on those reporting on the failures of the Pope to reverse that situation.

I suggest the Pope disbands the church for ever.

From BBC News:
Pope Benedict has written a pastoral letter to the Catholics of Ireland with guidelines on preventing and punishing sexual abuse of children by priests.

Scandals involving Roman Catholic priests have been reported recently from a number of countries, including the Pope's native Germany.

It is unknown if the letter, to be read at Sunday Mass, includes an apology.

The Vatican recently denounced attempts to link the Pope to a child abuse scandal in Germany. In recent months paedophile scandals have also rocked the Church in the Netherlands, Austria and Switzerland. The BBC's David Willey in Rome says that by implication, the measures decided by the Pope will have a much wider application than Ireland alone.

'Healing process'
The Pope has announced he will sign the letter on Friday and it will be sent immediately to the bishops of Ireland in preparation for it to be read out in churches there on Sunday. The text will be published by the Vatican on Saturday. The Pope has said he hopes it will "help in the process of repentance, healing and renewal". The message is expected to express contrition for what he himself has already described as shameful and hateful behaviour by some priests.

What was first perceived in Rome as a series of local scandals has now escalated into a worldwide problem for the Catholic Church with new allegations emerging each week from Catholics claiming they have been victims of sexual abuse by priests. The implications for the Vatican are serious, our correspondent says. The credibility of the Church as a guardian of morals is at stake. And there is the prospect of an avalanche of claims for compensation by victims. That could lead to financial ruin in some dioceses, as has already happened in the US, where the greatest number of cases has been reported.
---

"guidelines on preventing and punishing sexual abuse of children by priests": Simple. There are already laws to deal with this. I hope this letter basically says, "If you find out about abuse, or are abusing yourself, you will go directly to the police and you will own up to it or provide details about it." I bet it won't though. I bet it'll go along the lines of, "Cover your backs, there's a shitstorm coming!"

"It is unknown if the letter, to be read at Sunday Mass, includes an apology.": Of course it fucking won't. What? You think the Pope is sorry for anything that's happened to his priests' victims? You think he's sorry that numerous victims have committed suicide because of it?

I truly hope that the Catholic church never recovers from this. Anyone thinking that the Catholic church is a guardian of morals has had their moral compass well and truly fucked with... by the church.

From Jihad Watch:
Geert Wilders
Speech House of Lords, London
Friday the 5th of March 2010

Thank you. It is great to be back in London. And it is great that this time, I got to see more of this wonderful city than just the detention centre at Heathrow Airport.

Today I stand before you, in this extraordinary place. Indeed, this is a sacred place. This is, as Malcolm always says, the mother of all Parliaments, I am deeply humbled to have the opportunity to speak before you.

Thank you Lord Pearson and Lady Cox for your invitation and showing my film 'Fitna'. Thank you my friends for inviting me.

I first have great news. Last Wednesday city council elections were held in the Netherlands. And for the first time my party, the Freedom Party, took part in these local elections. We participated in two cities. In Almere, one of the largest Dutch cities. And in The Hague, the third largest city; home of the government, the parliament and the queen. And, we did great! In one fell swoop my party became the largest party in Almere and the second largest party in The Hague. Great news for the Freedom Party and even better news for the people of these two beautiful cities.

And I have more good news. Two weeks ago the Dutch government collapsed. In June we will have parliamentary elections. And the future for the Freedom Party looks great. According to some polls we will become the largest party in the Netherlands. I want to be modest, but who knows, I might even be Prime Minister in a few months time!

Ladies and gentlemen, not far from here stands a statue of the greatest Prime Minister your country ever had. And I would like to quote him here today: "Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. No stronger retrograde force exists in the World. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step (...) the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." These words are from none other than Winston Churchill wrote this in his book 'The River War' from 1899.

Churchill was right.

Ladies and gentlemen, I don't have a problem and my party does not have a problem with Muslims as such. There are many moderate Muslims. The majority of Muslims are law-abiding citizens and want to live a peaceful life as you and I do. I know that. That is why I always make a clear distinction between the people, the Muslims, and the ideology, between Islam and Muslims. There are many moderate Muslims, but there is no such thing as a moderate Islam.

Islam strives for world domination. The Quran commands Muslims to exercise jihad. The Quran commands Muslims to establish shariah law. The Quran commands Muslims to impose Islam on the entire world.

As former Turkish Prime Minister Erbakan said: "The whole of Europe will become Islamic. We will conquer Rome". End of quote.

Libyan dictator Gaddafi said: "There are tens of millions of Muslims in the European continent today and their number is on the increase. This is the clear indication that the European continent will be converted into Islam. Europe will one day soon be a Muslim continent". End of quote. Indeed, for once in his life, Gaddafi was telling the truth. Because, remember: mass immigration and demographics is destiny!

Islam is merely not a religion, it is mainly a totalitarian ideology. Islam wants to dominate all aspects of life, from the cradle to the grave. Shariah law is a law that controls every detail of life in a Islamic society. From civic- and family law to criminal law. It determines how one should eat, dress and even use the toilet. Oppression of women is good, drinking alcohol is bad.

I believe that Islam is not compatible with our Western way of life. Islam is a threat to Western values. The equality of men and women, the equality of homosexuals and heterosexuals, the separation of church and state, freedom of speech, they are all under pressure because of islamization. Ladies and gentlemen: Islam and freedom, Islam and democracy are not compatible. It are opposite values.

No wonder that Winston Churchill called Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' "the new Quran of faith and war, turgid, verbose, shapeless, bur pregnant with its message". As you know, Churchill made this comparison, between the Koran and Mein Kampf, in his book 'The Second World War', a master piece, for which, he received the Nobel Prize in Literature. Churchill's comparison of the Quran and 'Mein Kampf' is absolutely spot on. The core of the Quran is the call to jihad. Jihad means a lot of things and is Arabic for battle. Kampf is German for battle. Jihad and kampf mean exactly the same.

Islam means submission, there cannot be any mistake about its goal. That's a given. The question is whether we in Europe and you in Britain, with your glorious past, will submit or stand firm for your heritage.

We see Islam taking off in the West at an incredible pace. Europe is Islamizing rapidly. A lot of European cities have enormous Islamic concentrations. Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels and Berlin are just a few examples. In some parts of these cities, Islamic regulations are already being enforced. Women's rights are being destroyed. Burqa's, headscarves, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honour-killings. Women have to go to separate swimming-classes, don't get a handshake. In many European cities there is already apartheid. Jews, in an increasing number, are leaving Europe.

As you undoubtedly all know, better then I do, also in your country the mass immigration and islamization has rapidly increased. This has put an enormous pressure on your British society. Look what is happening in for example Birmingham, Leeds, Bradford and here in London. British politicians who have forgotten about Winston Churchill have now taken the path of least resistance. They have given up. They have given in.

Last year, my party has requested the Dutch government to make a cost-benefit analysis of the mass immigration. But the government refused to give us an answer. Why? Because it is afraid of the truth. The signs are not good. A Dutch weekly magazine - Elsevier - calculated costs to exceed 200 billion Euros. Last year alone, they came with an amount of 13 billion Euros. More calculations have been made in Europe: According to the Danish national bank, every Danish immigrant from an Islamic country is costing the Danish state more than 300 thousand Euros. You see the same in Norway and France. The conclusion that can be drawn from this: Europe is getting more impoverished by the day. More impoverished thanks to mass immigration. More impoverished thanks to demographics. And the leftists are thrilled.

I don't know whether it is true, but in several British newspapers I read that Labour opened the door to mass immigration in a deliberate policy to change the social structures of the UK. Andrew Neather, a former government advisor and speech writer for Tony Blair and Jack Straw, said the aim of Labour's immigration strategy was, and I quote, to "rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date". If this is true, this is symptomatic of the Left.

Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: The left is facilitating islamization. Leftists, liberals, are cheering for every new shariah bank being created, for every new shariah mortgage, for every new islamic school, for every new shariah court. Leftists consider Islam as being equal to our own culture. Shariah law or democracy? Islam or freedom? It doesn't really matter to them. But it does matter to us. The entire leftist elite is guilty of practising cultural relativism. Universities, churches, trade unions, the media, politicians. They are all betraying our hard-won liberties.

Why I ask myself, why have the Leftists and liberals stopped to fight for them? Once the Leftists stood on the barricades for women's rights. But where are they today? Where are they in 2010? They are looking the other way. Because they are addicted to cultural relativism and dependent on the Muslim vote. They are dependent on mass-immigration.

Thank heavens Jacqui Smith isn't in office anymore. It was a victory for free speech that a UK judge brushed aside her decision to refuse me entry to your country last year. I hope that the judges in my home country are at least as wise and will acquit me of all charges, later this year in the Netherlands.

Unfortunately, so far they have not done so well. For they do not want to hear the truth about Islam, nor are they interested to hear the opinion of top class legal experts in the field of freedom of expression. Last month in a preliminary session the Court refused fifteen of the eighteen expert-witnesses I had requested to be summoned.

Only three expert witnesses are allowed to be heard. Fortunately, my dear friend and heroic American psychiatrist dr. Wafa Sultan is one of them. But their testimony will be heard behind closed doors. Apparently the truth about Islam must not be told in public, the truth about Islam must remain secret.

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm being prosecuted for my political beliefs. We know political prosecution to exist in countries in the Middle East, like Iran and Saudi-Arabia, but never in Europe, never in the Netherlands.

I'm being prosecuted for comparing the Quran to 'Mein Kampf'. Ridiculous. I wonder if Britain will ever put the beliefs of Winston Churchill on trial... Ladies and gentlemen, the political trial that is held against me has to stop.

But it is not all about me, not about Geert Wilders. Free speech is under attack. Let me give you a few other examples. As you perhaps know, one of my heroes, the Italian author Oriana Fallaci had to live in fear of extradition to Switzerland because of her anti-Islam book 'The Rage and the Pride'. The Dutch cartoonist Nekschot was arrested in his home in Amsterdam by 10 police men because of his anti-Islam drawings. Here in Britain, the American author Rachel Ehrenfeld was sued by a Saudi businessman for defamation. In the Netherlands Ayaan Hirsi Ali and in Australia two Christian pastors were sued. I could go on and on. Ladies and gentlemen, all throughout the West freedom loving people are facing this ongoing 'legal jihad'. This is Islamic 'lawfare'. And, ladies and gentlemen, not long ago the Danish cartoonist Westergaard was almost assassinated for his cartoons.

Ladies and gentlemen, we should defend the right to freedom of speech. With all our strength. With all our might. Free speech is the most important of our many liberties. Free speech is the cornerstone of our modern societies. Freedom of speech is the breath of our democracy, without freedom of speech our way of life our freedom will be gone.

I believe it is our obligation to preserve the inheritance of the brave young soldiers that stormed the beaches of Normandy. That liberated Europe from tyranny. These heroes cannot have died for nothing. It is our obligation to defend freedom of speech. As George Orwell said: "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear".

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe in another policy, it is time for change. We must make haste. We can't wait any longer. Time is running out. If I may quote one of my favourite American presidents: Ronald Reagan once said: "We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow". That is why I propose the following measures, I only mention a few, in order to preserve our freedom:

First, we will have to defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. In Europe and certainly in the Netherlands, we need something like the American First Amendment.

Second, we will have to end and get rid of cultural relativism. To the cultural relativists, the shariah socialists, I proudly say: Our Western culture is far superior to the Islamic culture. Don't be affraid to say it. You are not a racist when you say that our own culture is better.

Third, we will have to stop mass immigration from Islamic countries. Because more Islam means less freedom.

Fourth, we will have to expel criminal immigrants and, following denaturalisation, we will have to expel criminals with a dual nationality. And there are many of them in my country.

Fifth, we will have to forbid the construction of new mosques. There is enough Islam in Europe. Especially since Christians in Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Indonesia are mistreated, there should be a mosque building-stop in the West.

And last but not least, we will have to get rid of all those so-called leaders. I said it before: Fewer Chamberlains, more Churchills. Let's elect real leaders.

Ladies and gentlemen. To the previous generation, that of my parents, the word 'London' is synonymous with hope and freedom. When my country was occupied by the national-socialists the BBC offered a daily glimpse of hope in my country, in the darkness of Nazi tyranny. Millions of my fellow country men listened to it, underground. The words 'This is London' were a symbol for a better world coming soon.

What will be broadcasted forty years from now? Will it still be "This is London"? Or will it be "This is Londonistan"? Will it bring us hope? Or will it signal the values of Mecca and Medina? Will Britain offer submission or perseverance? Freedom or slavery? The choice is yours. And in the Netherlands the choice is ours.

Ladies and gentlemen, we will never apologize for being free. We will and should never give in. And, indeed, as one of your former leaders said: We will never surrender.

Freedom must prevail, and freedom will prevail.

Thank you very much.
---

True.

From BBC News:
Four Islamists have been convicted by a court in Germany of plotting to attack US facilities in the country. The men, two of whom were German-born converts to Islam, were given prison sentences of between five and 12 years.

The judge said they had dreamed of "mounting a second September 11 2001" by killing US civilians and soldiers by bombing targets like Ramstein Air Base. They were accused of operating as a German cell of the radical al-Qaeda-linked group, the Islamic Jihad Union. According to the US state department, the Islamic Jihad Union was responsible for co-ordinated bombings outside the US and Israeli embassies in July 2004 in the Uzbek capital, Tashkent.

'Mistake'
The two German converts to Islam - Fritz Gelowicz, 30, and 24-year-old Daniel Schneider - were sentenced to 12 years in jail. Adem Yilmaz, 31, a Turkish citizen, was given 11 years, while Atilla Selek, a 25-year-old German of Turkish origin, was sentenced to five years.

During the 10-month trial, all four admitted to belonging to a terrorist organisation, plotting murder and preparing explosive devices. Schneider also admitted to attempted murder for grabbing a handgun from a police officer while attempting to evade capture and firing a shot. No-one was wounded in the incident. He, Gelowicz and Selek renounced extremism and described their actions as a "mistake".

Announcing the verdict, Judge Ottmar Breidling said the men had dreamed of "mounting a second 11 September 2001. If the accused had managed to do what they planned, it would have led to a monstrous bloodbath, primarily among US army personnel and also civilians," he added. The judge added that there were now "many impressionable young men and men who have already been led astray, ready to kill for notions of jihad".

"Violent Islamism has penetrated our society and turned young men against it."

'Profound hatred'
Known as the "Sauerland group", after the area of western Germany where three of them were arrested in September 2007, the men had trained at camps in Pakistan and procured some 700kg (1,500lbs) of chemicals to produce 410kg (900lbs) of explosives, prosecutors said. Such a quantity would have been 100 times the amount used in the 2005 London bombings, which killed more than 50 people.

They had allegedly planned to use vehicles loaded with the explosives to kill or injure large numbers of people at locations visited by Americans, the US military base in Ramstein and Frankfurt airport. But the security services uncovered the plot in December 2006 and conducted one of the biggest surveillance operations in post-war German history. The men's movements were monitored around the clock for nine months, until it became clear that they were planning to move their huge stores of hydrogen peroxide and an attack was imminent.

Gelowicz, Schneider and Yilmaz were arrested at a rented cottage in Sauerland on 4 September 2007, while Selek was detained in Turkey in November 2007 and later extradited to Germany. At the time, they were described as "very dangerous terrorists" with a "profound hatred of US citizens", acting on the orders of an "international network".

The BBC's Steve Rosenberg in Berlin says the participation of Gelowicz and Schneider in the plot has shocked Germans and raised concern that militant groups abroad are actively seeking out and signing up Muslim converts to attack the West.

Germany, which has soldiers in Afghanistan as part of Nato but did not send troops to Iraq, has been largely spared militant attacks. But nine years ago, it emerged that an al-Qaeda cell had used the city of Hamburg as a base for planning the 11 September attacks.
---

Muslims, again. Don't they know Islam is a religion of peace? (That was sarcasm, by the way.)

At last a judge has pointed out that, "violent Islamism has penetrated our society and turned young men against it." I'm happy to see that the judiciary in Germany actually have their heads screwed on correctly instead of screwed up like the heads of our judges in the UK.

Just the other day that bearded pig on a stick, Anjem Choudary, said that Islam contains many violent passages that exhort its followers to fight and kill non-Muslims. What are our police and judges doing about this obvious threat to our country? That's right, they're giving him POLICE PROTECTION in case someone decides to beat him up. Ludicrous.

Well done, Germany!

From BBC News:
A top UN official has condemned as "inadmissible" Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's call for a jihad, or holy war, against Switzerland. "Such declarations on the part of the head of state are inadmissible in international relations," said Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the UN chief in Geneva.

Col Gaddafi criticised a Swiss vote against the building of minarets and urged Muslims to boycott the country. Libya and Switzerland are embroiled in a long-running diplomatic row. The dispute dates back to 2008, when one of Mr Gaddafi's sons was arrested in Geneva, accused of assaulting two servants.

A Swiss foreign ministry spokesman declined to comment on the jihad call.

The Libyan leader made his comments while speaking at a meeting in Benghazi to mark the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad. "Let us wage jihad against Switzerland, Zionism and foreign aggression," he said. "Any Muslim in any part of the world who works with Switzerland is an apostate, is against Muhammad, God and the Koran."

Mr Ordzhonikidze, director-general of the UN mission in Geneva, said the UN's security in Switzerland was very professional and well-prepared for any incident. He was responding to questions from journalists about Mr Gaddafi's "jihad" call. In a referendum last November, 57.5% of Swiss voters approved a constitutional ban on the building of minarets. An appeal against the ban has been submitted to the European Court of Human Rights.

Tit-for-tat quarrel
Earlier this month, Libya stopped issuing visas to citizens from many European nations - those in the Schengen border-free travel zone. That drew condemnation from the European Commission. Libya's move came after Switzerland allegedly blacklisted 188 high-ranking Libyans, denying them entry permits. The Swiss ban is said to include Mr Gaddafi and his family. The row began after the arrest of Mr Gaddafi's son Hannibal and his wife, Aline Skaf, in Geneva in July 2008. They were accused of assaulting two servants while staying at a luxury hotel in the Swiss city, though the charges were later dropped. Libya retaliated by cancelling oil supplies, withdrawing billions of dollars from Swiss banks, refusing visas to Swiss citizens and recalling some of its diplomats.

In the same month that the Gaddafis were arrested, Libyan authorities detained two Swiss businessmen, in what analysts believe was a retaliatory move. One was finally allowed to leave the country earlier this week but the second was transferred to jail, where he faces a four-month term on immigration offences.
---

I'm sorry, ageing rockstar Mr. Gadaffi, but you simply cannot make proclamations like that and expect to get away with it.

The Swiss voted DEMOCRATICALLY to ban the building of minarets. They are symbols of Islamic power and supremacism, and the Swiss people voted not to have them in THEIR COUNTRY. I hate to go back to this oft-brought up point, but tell me, when was the last time Christians were allowed to build a church in a Muslim country? Muslims aren't banned from building mosques in Switzerland (yet), but they are banned from building minarets.

When the appeal goes to the European Court of Human Rights, then they MUST base their decision on the human rights of the indigenous people living in Switzerland. They voted - as is allowed in their constitution - and they chose to ban minarets. If the fucking Muslims don't like that, then build your symbols of Islamic power and supremacy SOMEWHERE ELSE. I suggest you take your butt-ugly mosques back to the Islamic countries you came from.

At some point in the near future, the indigenous populations of western countries are going to rise up and demand that the creeping Islamisation of our countries is stopped. WE also have human rights. My human rights are infringed every time one of you pinheads claims victim status for some perceived slight against your long-dead, warmongering, violent 'prophet'. You follow a thoroughbred cult of death, intent on forcing the conversion or subjugation of the entire world. You have to be stopped. If you think you have the right to believe in your religion, then you have to accept that we the right to NOT believe in your religion.

While we're at it, Gadaffi, shove a minaret up your arse.