Saturday, July 07, 2007

Jihad Bobby, just a guy.

My doctor scares me because he's a Muslim. Maybe I'm wrong to feel that he's a potential killer. But I found out for sure, to the point I have good cause to inform the police. I call, I tell, I tell a Muslim police officer. I tell him my Mulsim doctor is a killer, a jihadi terrorist. I go home to wait for some response, to see my doctor taken down by the ERT, hauled away in a body bag, captured, anything.

I get a knock at the door, and there I find eight policemen who want to take me and my mates downtown for further questioning....
[Of course, only four shown above.]

Eight Al Qaeda fanatics working for the police (but they don't dare sack them). London: 7th July 2007

Up to eight police officers and civilian staff are suspected of links to extremist groups including Al Qaeda. Some are even believed to have attended terror training camps in Pakistan or Afghanistan. Their names feature on a secret list of alleged radicals said to be working in the Metropolitan and other forces.

The dossier was drawn up with the help of MI5 that fears that individuals linked to Islamic extremism are taking advantage of police attempts to increase the proportion of ethnic staff. Astonishingly, many of the alleged jihadists have not been sacked because - it is claimed - police do not have the "legal power" to dismiss them. We can also reveal that one suspected jihadist officer working in the South East has been allowed to keep his job despite being caught circulating Internet images of beheadings and roadside bombings in Iraq. He is said to have argued that he was trying to "enhance" debate about the war. Classified intelligence reports raising concerns about police staff's background cannot be used to justify their dismissal, sources said.

Instead, the staff who are under suspicion are unofficially barred from working in sensitive posts and are closely monitored. Political correctness is blamed for the decision not to sack them. It is widely feared that "long-term" Al Qaeda sleepers are trying to infiltrate other public sector organisations in the UK. In November last year, it was revealed that a leading member of an extremist Islamic group was working as a senior official at the Home Office.


Suspicions are growing that the gang behind the failed London bomb attacks could have received inside information about rescue procedures in the aftermath of an atrocity in the capital. The Daily Mail can reveal that the second device parked near Haymarket was left at a designated "evacuation assembly point" where civilians and the emergency services would have gathered had the first bomb gone off. Investigators are trying to establish whether the bombers knew the significance of the location.

Sources said it is unlikely that the Met is the only force which may have been infiltrated by Al Qaeda sympathisers.

[I] is understood that a policeman was removed from his post after concerns about his conduct in the aftermath of a major anti-terrorist operation in the past two years. For legal reasons, the Mail cannot reveal any more about the case.


The disclosure will raise concerns about the system for vetting new recruits, each of whom is the subject of counter-terrorism checks to ensure they are suitable to join the police. Scotland Yard's vetting unit is regarded as one of the best in the country. But sources said it is often impossible to carry out satisfactory checks on recruits who were raised overseas or who have spent considerable periods out of Britain before applying to join the Met. In such cases, the Met has to rely on overseas agencies to carry out intelligence checks on their behalf. Privately, officials doubt whether certain countries in Africa, Middle East or the Indian sub-continent are able to carry out meaningful vetting.

As a result of the Stephen Lawrence public inquiry report, which accused the Met of being "institutionally racist", Scotland Yard has in recent years employed thousands of officers and civilian staff from the ethnic minorities in an attempt to reach recruitment targets.

[Full story here. ]

I go to my accountant to have him confer with my lawyer over a major business deal involving a lot of money, serious money, and a deal involving some specialized equipment for the defense industry. Both men are Muslims....

But no, I'm just an I'm just an ordinary guy who gets a pay cheque every two weeks, and I put it in the bank, a bank owned by Muslims from the Gulf of Arabia, as it turns out....

No, I don't even do that, to tell the truth. I duck into a corner store for a loaf of bread and a quart of milk, a corner store owned by Muslims....

MIM: The Association of Muslim Police in the UK encourages Muslim officers to do Jihad through conversion and try to recruit non Muslims to Islam and more co-religionists to the police -- in order to continue their Islamist propagation on the taxpayer's dime. The AMP openly proclaims that their mission is to "circulate books and pamphlets about Islam to members of the MPS who genuinely want to improve their knowledge and awareness of Islam and Muslims".

... Since 2002 the Metropolitan Police Service has amended its dress code to allow female Muslim officers to wear the hijab. The Head of the Met's Human Resources, Bernard Hogan-Howe, has said: "It is only right that the Met. ensures that its uniform is appropriate for all its staff."

... Tarique Ghaffur highest ranking UK police chief blamed "Islamophobia" for terrorism a month after the London bombings.

... Ghaffur constantly undermines the police counter terrorism efforts by joining forces with his co-religionists complaining that his colleagues and the government's efforts to thwart attacks are discriminatory, and victimise Muslims.
More at MEMRI...

But that last piece was from Oct. 2006.

Does anyone recall what happened two years ago today in London? should I go to the Muslim-owned kiosk to buy a paper to find out if there's a commemorative story? Go by Muslim-owned taxi? Or walk, whistling as I pass the mosque?


Always On Watch said...

Doctors, police, politicians, neighbors, certain lobbying groups--the West is infiltrated by these jihadomaniacs or by Muslims easily started up for jihad.

How far are we from the hate-crimes legislation which will shut down the blogosphere?

Dr C. Riyal Kilah said...

Following recent adverse reactions in Glasgow, Muslim doctors should perhaps avoid Scotland and consider moving to Wales.

Wales is a land of opportunity and reservoirs. It is the ideal place for a young Muslim doctor with an interest in microbial pathogens to gain his first practical experience.

However, as well as opportunities there are risks, such as the dangers of seduction by the lustful Welsh sheep, goats and cows. Muslim pedoetricians should also be warned about the sex-mad Welsh toddlers who will lead them astray and then complain to their Islamophobic parents that they started it.

But most of all, as trainee doctors, they must be made aware of the filthy Kuffar slags known as nurses.

My Muslim colleagues - Dr Leeth al-Dohs, Dr Homi Saeed and Dr Aggun I. Singh-Deth - received an invitation from the dirty-dancing clitorally-intact nurse bints to attend a disco where these gyrating slags pulsate their uncovered meat to the lustful rhythms of their accursed infidel music.

(Please excuse me a moment while I massage my trouser-minaret. - Ahhhh... that's better!!!!)

I was unable to attend because I was involved in certain experiments regarding new uses for nitroglycerin, Dr Leeth al-Dohs was working on Kuffar infant mortality, Dr Homi Saeed was spending most of his time in the microbiology lab following the untimely deaths of his two technicians, and Dr Aggun I. Singh-Deth was designing an advanced type of ambulance which can get to places where no jeep would be allowed to enter.

Luckily, Dr Homi Saeed's younger brother, Sewi, said he would go to the disco, and had a special jacket made for the occasion, full of king-sized Lebanese party-poppers. He said he expects have a good bang with the nurses before the night is over.

- Dr C. Riyal Kilah
Secretary, Muslim Medical Malpractitioners' Association

truepeers said...

The above commenter has a certain sense of humour, but he has a point: "We have argued before in these pages that Islamic terrorists should be seen as serial killers. The masterminds and handlers are just that. The body parts (of one human being, usually female) that serial killers carefully display at the crime scene are being taken to new levels here with hundreds of people's body parts on display, although scattered to the winds. (We do not have the time in this piece to explain how woman-hating and woman-murder relates to a shame and honor culture in which such murder is normalized, not criminalized.)"

See also David Warren: "One really has to wonder about the efficiency of the British National Health Service, after seeing how incompetently a group of Islamist doctors carried off their weekend car-bombing and fire-throwing attacks in London and Glasgow. Not one death; not even a successful suicide.
In general, all these terror attempts were a brilliant success. The BBC and the rest of the British mainstream media immediately piped out sympathetic pieces about the poor beleaguered Muslim community, and aired demands for withdrawal from Iraq. In other words, exactly the publicity the Islamists wanted. And the new British prime minister, though he sounded firm and resolute, is understood to be looking for ways to get out of Tony Blair’s unpopular war.

We can safely assume that the timing of the British terror attempts was intended to coincide with the change in government leadership, in exactly the same way as the terror hits on the Madrid railway system were timed for the Spanish general election in 2004. The tactic works. The terrorists successfully swung that election, to the party that would cut-and-run from Iraq. And had several hundred Britons been killed, as the NHS doctors intended, demands for British withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in both the media and Parliament, would have been overwhelming.

The problem with defeatism is that it leads to defeat -- not to peace. Ask the Spaniards whose tour bus convoy was driven into by an exploding car in Yemen over the same weekend. At least, ask those who survived. They may well have thought they could safely visit that country’s archaeological sites, since Al Qaeda must appreciate the lengths to which Spain has gone to make herself inoffensive. But no: Al Qaeda considers not the behaviour of Spain, but the existence of Spain, to be offensive. Their propaganda is unambiguous: the terror will stop when “Al Andalus” returns to Shariah.

It is ridiculous, to imagine that the West will somehow surrender to the Islamists, from fear of (often slapstick) terror attacks. Or even, from fear of the luckier terror strikes, that have happened, and are sure to happen again -- for even a portable nuclear device, or packed biological weapon, is unlikely to kill more than a small proportion of a big city’s population. Life could go on.

And yet, when one looks at the response to an attack in which there were no fatalities, the idea ceases to be ridiculous. For the prevailing view among our self-sainted elites, in media and government, is that we must always reward a terror strike with new concessions, and always retreat where the enemy confronts us. And among the deracinated urban masses who vote the latter into power, the demand is for safety, even at the price of slavery. This is perfectly expressed in the public outpouring of obeisance to Islam, after each Islamist hit.

Such spineless whimpering is, in turn, a powerful inspiration to the more ardent Islamists, to try further terror strikes. We might as well unroll a huge banner, that reads, “Please! Hit us again!” "

dag said...

Yes, the trendies are oh so sophisticated, but the subtleties seem to escape them essentially every time. Gay activists and 'gay friendlies' flock around any group they can in support of seemingly any issue in which Muslims are targeted as a problem for our general world, for example, if only one, this business of jihadi doctors in Britain. The sophisticated view of the jihadi is today... well it's not what it was yesterday. Yesterday the cause of jihadi terror was poverty and violence perpetrated against the starving, huddled masses; but doctors are usually able to huddle together at relatively nice restaurant to steal from the tables of others to the point they aren't really starving. And the humiliation? Yes, doctor, I agree totally. It's...? American aggression? That works if one knows no history of Islam, and particularly if one knows no history at all. That's sophisticated.

The most sophisticated approach to the whole business of having an opinion of world affairs is simply to ask what ones friends say. Doing that is good but then to turn it up a notch and say what others say in a clever way, to conform to the norm even more cleverly than ones friends is to suddenly become popular, meaning, of course, getting laid once in a while if not more often. And really, isn't that what voicing an opinion in public is all about for most? Who wants to have sex with a dud? (I mean twice.)

It's all the fault of (insert here) because of (insert here). There you go, off to the bushes with you. But mention the two boys hanged in Iran, those two boys locked in cages and then hanged when the pick-up truck moved off and left them choking to death with their hands tied behind their backs, their legs jerking in the air, well, they were gay but that was in Iran and it's all the fault of (insert here). Nevermind that it was right fuckin' evil to hurt those boys, let alone kill them, it won't get anyone any sex partners to say so in public. It ain't sophisticated to say anything about those boys. Better to say nothing or to come up with some distraction, however stupid, so one will find a friend in the dark.

Forget that Muslims have as much right to live as anyone else and that they will lose their lives as sure as those hanged boys, boys also perhaps hung, boys certainly dead regardless, because their are truly evil people in this world who just don't care if the dumpster is lavender or chartreuse or flaming puce, people who only care about order and conformity to their own narrow and psychotic vision of perfection, Islamic, theirs alone.

And now for something completely sophisticated: "(Insert something glib, preferably about Christian bigots.) Sophisticated, oh so! But the subtleties, not so much. And who has time for that kind of work anyway when one is really only driven by the urge to be loved by the crowd?

for our out-of-date upscale workingclass heroes who just don't know things much, let us take a short stroll down Memory Lane, not quite so far as where it meets Death Row: in the 19th century there was a famous and fine retort that summed up all arguments with pith and panache, a retort one used when all else failed and one that gained the speaker immense social wealth in the lower quarters of the clerks and box-boys: "Quaz." Say that and all would laugh and sneer at the victim of it. We should consider bringing it back, it being sophisticated and time-saving. That subtle stuff? No, let's leave that for the subtle, for those who actually spend the time and energy and even the money to learn the details and the depths of the jihadi mind and reason within.

You say America. I say puce. You say Said. I say so long.

No, sophisticated persons, it's not "sed", it's that subtle difference between knowing and having an opinion: it's Sa-eed. It's the difference between being popular and being informed. Informed. That means I'm a lonely guy.

Thanks, but I prefer it. I prefer people to cartoons, sophisticated or no, people being very subtle things sometimes, and enjoyable at many levels.

dag said...

No, I'm not going to apologize for the typos. If the guy who invented the typewriter was smart he would have invented it in the shape of a crayon so people could use it properly.

truepeers said...

So we may serve our community better, would visitors here please tell us what an ordinary reader of is likely to know or think about Islam and terrorism?

Sean Orr said...

You want people who read Beyond Robson to qualify themselves before posting a comment? Wow. How democratic. I'm sure you'd get along great with a certain other group who wish to silence rational thought.

truepeers said...


that was actually an invitation for people to leave a comment; I am curious about this blog that is linking to us and want to get a feel for the kind of traffic we are getting. BUt my words often fail me. I have no diplomacy, I admit it. guess I'm just not sufficiently sensitive for this hyper-victimary younger generation who fear criticism like the plague. I have no problem with rational thought; please show us some.

truepeers said...

What is that other group btw?

dag said...

Sean is a fucking moron.

Jessica said...

"Sean is a fucking moron".

Dag's Interests:

* Much the same as Socrates'.