UPDATED! "Allahu akbar!" in Sydney, Australia

A meme has been removed from the original version of this post, and some text deleted. Ed. 14/4/24.

Let me remind those of you who think Israel is being a bit hard on the Hamas of the ideology underlying the jihadis' attacks on Jews and other non-Muslims. Militant Islamists are enjoined by their Religion of Peace (TM) to kill all infidels -- that means us, fellow Christians, as well as Jews -- "wherever they may be found."

Many infidels may be found in the AABC countries -- America, Britain, Canada, and... oh yeah... Australia. It was in the wonderful woke Land of Oz that a man fatally stabbed six people at a Sydney shopping centre. The dead included men and women, one of whom was the mother of a 9-month-old baby who has not yet died.

According to the BBC, the "suspect", who was known to police and shot dead by police, acted alone, so there's "no ongoing public risk". So that's OK then. In an unsurprising fit of political correctness, the Aussie authorities have refused to name the "suspect", because they are "waiting for formal identification.

The Aussie authorities also say it's "too early to speculate" about Mohammed's motives. Could be he was just exacting revenge for the Jews' killings of 33,000 (and counting) of his co-religionists. Or maybe he's just calling attention to the need for a "two-state solution" in Israel, so Muslims and Jews can live side-by-side, happy forever after. Yah. Sure.

UPATE ADDED at 0910: Suspicions confirmed! We now have a picture.

 Still waiting for the name so I can pay off/collect the bets. Lifetime pct .991.

NY Jews get swart gevaar

Swart gevaar. You can look it up. It's an expression I learned over my years in southern Africa. Oxford calls it "a threat perceived as being posed by black people to whites." Negrophobia. Or in the Jewish neighbourhoods of New York City, fear of the schwartzes, the shtarkes.

But (I hear you ask), why would the Jews be afraid of blacks... or African-Americans or whatever the PC term is this week? Surely what they're afraid of is anti-Semitic racists! After all, in metro New York, police have gotten at least six reports this week (and eight since the 13th of this month) of attacks possibly propelled by what the lamestream media are calling "anti-Jewish bias".

Just last night, the last day of Hanukkah, a man attacked a Hanukkah celebration at the home of a rabbi in Monsey NY, about an hour's drive north of NYC, one of several Hudson Valley towns that have seen an influx in large numbers of Hasidic Jews in recent years. The assailant, whose colour has not yet been disclosed by the police, stabbed and wounded five Jews before fleeing in a vehicle. The attack is the latest in a string of assaults targeting Jews in the New York area, including a massacre at a kosher grocery store in New Jersey earlier this month.

Top New York state officials, including Governor Andrew Cuomo, released statements condemning the attack. The Gov called the stabbings a "cowardly act", and directed the State Police hate crimes task force to investigate the attacks. "Let me be clear," he said. [Why do all politicians use that expression? It's been done to death! Ed.] "Anti-Semitism and bigotry of any kind are repugnant to our values of inclusion and diversity [Aaaaargh! Ed.] and we have absolutely zero tolerance for such acts of hate. In New York, we will always stand up and say with one voice to anyone who wishes to divide and spread fear: you do not represent New York and your actions will not go unpunished."

The Gov, responsible only for his state, not New Jersey, didn't refer to the Jersey City murders. The perpetrators in that case were themselves vizmins from the so-called African-American community. They were identified as coming from an extremist religious group called Black Hebrew Israelites, making them a minority of a minority. The attackers in that case were described as a "militant fringe" within that minority.

The authorities are now looking at the case as "domestic terrorism fueled by anti-Semitism". But that's not how the (((controlled media))) are playing it. They're dismiss the murders as "isolated incidents" and therefore unimportant. The New York Times described the Black Hebrew Israelites as being "known for their inflammatory sidewalk ministers who employ provocation as a form of gospel." Yeah, well, there's a bit more to it than that. The Black Hebrew Israelites describe Jews are described as "white" and "fake". The way they see it, the "real Jews", and all true prophets and religious figures, are black... black as the ace of spades.

According to the (((Anti-Defamation League))), this group views itself as the real "chosen people", and sees people of colour as the real descendants of the 12 tribes of Israel. They were in the media earlier in the year in Washington DC, when they shouted insults at Catholic high school students. The lamestream media wants to call BHI's actions "provocation", because if they admit that the BHI is part of a burgeoning violent movement targeting Jews, then they would have to confront it and ask tough questions of why it is tolerated in a community.

A self-proclaimed expert on racism told AP that in fact this group takes pride in "confronting Jewish people everywhere and explaining that they are evil." The trouble is that in American society only far-right white supremacists, Republicans and conservatives can be called "racist". Everyone else gets a pass. To keep the focus on the white supremacists, the (((controlled media))) rabbits on about how "right wing terrorists" have killed more than jihadists. Other types of terrorism are watered down a bit.

While the Prez was in office, Islamist-inspired terror was even rebranded as "violent extremism" so as not to mention the religion of the perpetrators. Even though Islamist terror is also a far-right ideology, it is portrayed as something else. For instance, when Jews were targeted at a kosher supermarket in France they were called "random folk in a deli". They weren't random! They were targeted, like the Jews in Jersey City, but they needed to be "random" or else we'd have to discuss the anti-Semitism that permeates Islamist terror.

Looking at the race and the ideology of the perpetrators of the attacks on Jews makes people, especially Jews, uncomfortable. The liberals and apologists for the Islamists want all the anti-Semites to be "far-right" and "white". Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) blamed "white supremacy" for the Jersey City attack, but her tweet was deleted when it was discovered that it wasn't "white supremacists" after all, therefore didn’t fit the narrative.

The fact is that it was the Jews themselves who orchestrated and funded the "civil rights" movement of the 60s, because, after all, the Jews, like "people of colour" were the victims of centuries of discrimination of persecution. Right? Now, it seems, the beneficiaries of all that enforced diversity and inclusivity are biting the hands that fed them. What a surprise.

VIDEO: 1000+ Europeans killed/maimed by asylum-seekers since 2014

An Eritrean asylum seeker and his British Muslim partner have been found guilty of plotting an ISIS-inspired terror attack over the 2017 Christmas holiday period.

According to the Derby Telegraph, Munir Mohammed, 37, a resident of Derby, met Rowaida El-Hassan, 33, from London, on a Muslim dating website. Mr Mohammed is a devout follower of the Prophet after whom he was named. So firm in his beliefs was he that he once chastised a neighbour for wearing shorts. When arrested by Inspector Knacker in December, he was days away from launching a "Mother of Satan" a bomb or poison attack. Click on the video to get the details.



That was six months ago. My point here is that, although Mr Mohammed and Ms El-Hassan were foiled, other "radicalised" Islamic asylum-seekers have murdered or injured more than 1000 people in terror attacks in Europe between January 2014 and December 2017. In that period, 32 Islamist plots involved those who had sought sanctuary. 44 "refugees" had either carried out atrocities or been thwarted before they could bring bloodshed to the streets.

The findings echo warnings by law enforcement chiefs that some ISIS fanatics bent on killing "infidels" -- not just non-Muslims but Muslims of the wrong sort! -- posed as "refugees" fleeing war and persecution in the shithole countries of the Middle East. They exploited the "migrant crisis" by pretending to be asylum seekers, in order to sneak into Europe and cause carnage.

In an article published by the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, terrorism expert Robin Simcox says it was "disturbingly simple" for jihadists to hide among genuine refugees because Europe's borders were under huge strain. European leaders, he explains, "inadvertently increased the terrorist threat" as a direct result of their catastrophic handling of controversial immigration and open-border policies. He singles out German Chancellor [for the time being! Walt] Angela Merkel, who sparked fury by throwing open the doors to Syrian refugees, leading to an influx of more than one million people in 2015.

Mr Simcox makes clear that the fault for 11 successful attacks involving asylum-seekers, which killed 182 people and injured 814, lay with the terrorists, but "Ill-conceived immigration policies have made it easier for them to strike. European leaders were either naïve about the risks or failed to communicate honestly with the public the impact that accepting such large amounts of people would have on security.... The fall-out from the decision to take in such a large amount of unvetted people in such a short time will continue for decades to come."

Here are the key takeaways from Mr Simcox's article:

1. Islamism poses a clear and present national security threat to Europe. This threat has mainly converged on France, Germany, and the U.K.
2. Over time, the plots have increased in frequency. Defeating ISIS militarily is clearly vital. Yet such a defeat alone would not mean the danger has passed.
3. The US can and should help its friends in Europe [assuming it has any left] face these challenges. Nonetheless, a robust response to Islamism in Europe must be led from within Europe.

According to Mr Simcox, "Europe has faced a severe threat from Islamist terrorism for years. Yet Chancellor Merkel's decision to open Germany's borders in 2015 unfortunately increased that threat.... While only a minority of asylum seekers pose a security risk, the plots carried out by those exploiting migrant routes – in Paris, London, Berlin, Stockholm and elsewhere across Europe – demonstrate that even a low number of extremists can still cause huge amounts of damage."

Walt would like to be a little more specific. Let's make that "low number of extremists" one percent (1%) -- one crazy Muslim fanatic out of 100. Angela Merkel permitted the entry of a million "refugees" and asylum-seekers into Germany in just one year. 1% of 1,000,000 is... wait for it... 10,000.

10,000 potential Islamic terrorists on the loose right now. If 44 "radicalized" Muslims were responsible for murdering or injuring 1000 innocents, 10,000 jihadis could potentially kill or maim... let's see... 230,000. Does it make sense to keep letting these people into our countries? Please direct your answer to Angela Merkel, Theresa May, Justin Trudeau and all the other Islamophile "leaders" we foolishly expect to protect us.

Further reading: "European Islamist Plots and Attacks Since 2014 — and How the U.S. Can Help Prevent Them", by Robin Simcox, The Heritage Foundation.

The Economist's snarky putdown of Bono

Unlike ageing rock star and SJW Bono, I have never been to Timbuktu, although many people, including my sainted mother, have told me to go there. Timbuktu is the fabled chief city of what was supposed to be a great African kingdom, once upon a time. Today it is more or less in the middle of Mali, one of those countries President Trump rightly described as "shitholes".

Until 1960, Mali was a part of l'Afrique Occidentale Française (French West Africa), a colony of, errr, France. As in the rest of post-colonial Africa, things started to go downhill once the French let the local people run their own railroad. I'm speaking metaphorically, as to the best of my knowledge Mali doesn't actually have a railroad any more. Half of the population is under the age of 16. The average Malian woman has six children. Barely a third of the population can read.

To make matters worse, ancient divisions of race and tribe turned into a shooting war which has heated up, cooled down, then heated up again in a vicious cycle ever since independence. Seems that the Tuareg and Arab minorities, who are concentrated in the northern part of the country don't like being ruled by black Africans. Whoda thunk it? There were major rebellions in 1963 and 1990, but the most major of all occurred in 2012, when the northern rebels went from being a secular nationalist movement into a militant Islamist insurgency.

In 2015 the warring parties signed a peace deal, which has proved meaningless. Violence has continued to escalate. Just last month, four separate attacks killed scores of people. According to an article in this week's Economist (from which the previous two paragraphs were excerpted), Mali's vast northern desert is a breeding ground for jihadism. And "insecurity", as the newspaper calls it, has spread to the central part of the country, including Timbuktu.

Reporting from Timbuktu, the anonymous writer of the article -- the Economist never runs bylines -- says, in what must be the best putdown of the year, so far: "...all is not well here.... At one time tourists used to pour into Timbuktu to ride camels across the desert. Now most of the foreigners at the airport wear army uniforms. The city has said goodbye to Bono, a rock musician who once played there. But in most other respects things have got worse."

Bravo, anonymous writer! That brilliant bit of snark puts you in the lead in the competition for Walt's prestigious Golden Finger award for 2018. Keep up the good work!

VIDEO: Followers of "the religion of peace" express their opinions on American recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital... in Sweden!

Malmö used to be a Swedish city. It is still in Sweden, but now it's "home" to tens of thousands of Muslim "refugees", asylum-seekers and other poor, misunderstood followers of the Prophet. Many of them are unemployed -- living on the largesse of Swedish taxpayers -- and have nothing better to do than turn out for anti-American, anti-Western, anti-everything demonstrations, like the one shown in this video.

These Islamists were ostensibly protesting the announcement by POTUS -- see Walt's post earlier today -- that the US of A formally recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and will be moving its embassy there in the near future, as required by US law since 1995. The Islamofascists chanted anti-Semitic slogans and warned that "Jews should remember that the army of Muhammad will return."



Swedish state radio reported that the militant Muslims shoulted "We have announced the intifada from Malmö. We want our freedom back, and we will shoot the Jews." In typically Swedish politically correct fashion, Sveriges Radio broadcast only audio of the event, which would have been unintelligible to Swedes who don't speak Arabic (the country's new second language). I suppose they didn't want to show the video, or provide translations of the epithets, for fear of fanning the flames of Islamophobia. Fortunately, this video with crowd-sourced subtitles appeared on YouTube within a few hours.

Don't mention the Muslims!

One has to wonder -- perhaps not for very long -- at the reluctance of the lamestream press in the USA and Canada to identify murderers, hostage-takers, assassins and terrorists as Muslims. Could it have anything to do with political correctness, or fear of being prosecuted for fomenting Islamophobia? Errr, quite possibly. Cases in point....

Item: In the Philippines, four hostages -- two Canadians, a Norwegian, and a Filipina -- appear in a video released by their captors, appealing to authorities to stop military operations in the Philippines and to negotiate for their freedom with the Islamist militants who hold them. For details of the story, see "ISIS in Philippines: New video shows kidnapped Canadian, Norwegian hostages pleading for life", on the International Business Times website. [Funny that IBT didn't mention the Filipina. Ed.]

The video can be found on YouTube, but, curiously, is not being shown on either the Canuck government's CBC-TV or the main independent network CTV. Why would that be? The voice-over identifies the kidnappers as being linked to Al-Qaeda. ISIS flags appear behind the captives. Looks like the work of Islamic extremists, wouldn't you say? But neither CBC or CTV wants to mention that fact, in the week preceding an election in which the wearing of niqabs (headgear worn by religious Muslim women) has become a hot button, with over 80% of Canadians against the "accommodation" of the Muslim minority.

Item: Remember the Shafias? They're the Muslim man, his No. 2 wife and son -- all immigrants to Canada -- who murdered No. 1 wife and her three daughters in an honour killing which Shafia père blamed on the girls' sinful desires to wear western clothing, and date boys, just like Canadian girls. See "GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY in Shafia honour killings" (WWW 29/1/12).

The honour killings -- that's what they were -- took place on 30 June 2009, when the four women were locked in a car which was then pushed into the Rideau Canal. Convictions were registered in January 2012, and the three Muslim miscreants were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years, which is the maximum provided for in the Criminal Code of Canada.

Now, 45 months after their conviction, the killers have filed a 110-page factum with the Ontario Court of Appeal arguing for a new trial. On what grounds, you may well ask. Why, they were victims of "cultural stereotyping", of course! They say the trial judge should have intervened when the Crown presented arguments that they believe improperly swayed jurors in their decision-making.

Like what? Well, the Shafias say, the Crown was so politically incorrect as to suggest that their religion had something to do with their motivation for killing over half of their immediate family. And not only that! The document also questions the testimony of University of Toronto Professor Shahrzad Mojab -- himself a Muslim -- an "honour killing" expert who testified on for the prosecution. His expert evidence, they say, might have turned the jury against them. "Even assuming that the jury may have legitimately been assisted by evidence about Afghan cultural norms or concepts of honour, the way in which Dr. Mojab's evidence was presented exceeded that purpose and created enormous prejudice."

Item: The "progressive" parties -- Liberals and NDP -- opposing Steve Harper's Conservatives in next week's Canadian election are making a meal of the Harper government's introduction, in the last parliament, of the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, which proscribes honour killings, female genital mutilation, forced marriages and the like, even though most of those BCPs were already covered in the Criminal Code. What they don't mention, in their scathing criticisms, is that such practices do exist in Canada, mainly within the Muslim communities.

Allah forbid that anyone should suggest that the values and customs of the followers of the Prophet Mohammed are somehow different from those of the society into which they desire to insinuate themselves. Doing so would suggest that our Western Christian (?) ways are superior to theirs, which we know -- or the politicians and media would have us believe -- is untrue.

British PM sez Muslims "quietly condone" Islamic State

UK Prime Minister David Cameron was in Slovakia today for a conference on "security", which these days means protecting ourselves from militant Islamists. He charged some -- not all but some -- British Muslims with "quietly condoning" the radical ideology of ISIS: "the West is bad and democracy is wrong; women are inferior; homosexuality is evil."

Mr. Cameron urged British Muslims to do more to stop IS from recruiting young Britons. He blamed radicalization in part on "people who hold some of these views who don't go as far as advocating violence, but who do buy into some of these prejudices, giving the extreme Islamist narrative weight."

According to AP, about 2.7 million of Britain's 64 million people are followers of the Prophet. Police say at least 700 of them have travelled to IS territory. These "radicalized Muslim youths" include a 17-year-old who blew himself up in Iraq last week, and three sisters from northern England believed to have gone to Syria to become Islamist wives.

The usual suspects -- people like Tony Bliar -- condemned Mr. Cameron's remarks as racist, Islamophobic, "unhelpful", yada yada yada. But some British Muslims defended his message. Haras Rafiq, managing director of anti-extremism think-tank the Quilliam Foundation, said he didn't see the speech as anti-Islam. "He is not saying that all Muslims are the problem," Mr. Rafiq said. "He is saying the Islamist ideology needs to be tackled."

And Kalsoom Bashir, who heads the counter-radicalization group Inspire, said Cameron has a point that some British Muslims have a degree of "sympathy, empathy and envy for the people who are going out to Syria." AP quotes her as saying "We need to be back in a place where we can dismiss this ideology as a loony fringe of Islam,said. "But unfortunately it's becoming mainstream. I think that fightback has to come from within the communities as well."

Walt has no further comment except to wish Mr. Rafiq and Ms Bashir good luck in their encouragement of "moderate Muslims"... both of them!

Meanwhile, in Nigeria, militant Islamists wipe out town of 10,000

The world... well, the Western world, at least... is getting mightily exercised about the death of a dozen French men and women, executed by two Islamic extremists for "insulting the Prophet". Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, says there is no more time for denial and hypocrisy.

Fingers are being pointed at Islamic fundamentalism, and rightly so, but the problem of coping with millions of outsiders who do not (in spite of what François Hollande and the Pope keep saying) share our core values.

The politically correct message is that not all Muslims are like that. Maybe so. Maybe... maybe... 99% of the followers of the Prophet wouldn't arm themselves with AK-47s and go out hunting infidels. That would leave just 1% -- 50,000 residents of France -- who might threaten the peace of that country. Food for thought...

Meanwhile, the militant Islamists who call themselves Boko Haram -- it means "Western education is forbidden" -- are laying waste to great swathes of northern Nigeria. They control 70% of Borno, the state worst-affected by their insurgency.

Today, a senior government official in the area said that fleeing residents told him that the town of Baga, which had a population of about 10,000, was now "virtually non-existent".

Musa Alhaji Bukar told the BBC's Hausa service, the town had been burnt down. Those who fled reported that they had been unable to bury the dead, and hundreds of corpses littered the town's streets, he said, adding that Boko Haram is now in control of Baga and 16 neighbouring towns after the Nigerian military fled.

The people of northern Nigeria are predominantly Muslim. Most of the 2000 or so people massacred by Boko Haram last year were Muslims -- the peaceful, non-violent kind. The Muslims who have joined the ranks of the Islamic extremists is certainly less than 1%. More food for thought.