Those who live by the Sword

Few people today have heard of Operation Gladio  a clandestine “stay-behind” operation conducted by NATO and the CIA after WW2 in order to continue anti-communist actions.

Named from Gladius (Latin for sword) these forces continued well after the Soviet threat was extinguished – at least until 1990.

From “The CIAs Greatest Hits” by Mark Zepezauer :

The CIA was created by the National Security Act of 1947. The ink was barely dry on it before an army of spooks began marching through the law’s major loophole: the CIA could “perform such other functions and duties…as the National Security Council may from time to time direct.” This deliberately vague clause opened the door to a half-century of criminal activity in the name of “national security.”

One of the first duties the NSC deemed necessary was the subversion of Italian democracy…in the name of democracy, of course. Italy seemed likely to elect a leftist government in the 1948 election. To make sure Italians voted instead for the candidates Washington favored-leftover brownshirt thugs from Mussolini’s party and other Nazi collaborators-millions of dollars were spent on propaganda and payoffs. It was also intimated that food aid would be cut off if the election results were inconsistent with US desires.

The US got its way in 1948 without having to resort to violence but-as was discovered in 1990- the CIA had organized a secret paramilitary army in postwar Italy, with hidden stockpiles of weapons and explosives dotting the map. Called Operation Gladio (gladius is Latin for sword), the ostensible excuse for it was laughable-the threat of a Soviet invasion. But the real purpose wasn’t so funny-Operation Gladio’s 15,000 troops were trained to overthrow the Italian government should it stray from the straight and narrow.

Similar secret armies were formed in France, Belgium, the Netherlands and West Germany- often directed, quite naturally, by former SS officers. They didn’t just wait around for the Russians to come marching in; they assembled huge arms caches (many of which remain unaccounted for), compiled blacklists of leftists and, in France, participated in plots to assassinate President DeGaulle.

Wikipedia list allegations that Operation Gladio was involved in supporting right-wing terrorists, various coups-de-tat and murders of leaders.

Thus a shadowy force, a secret US police and military in league with some of the most extremist political groups and terrorists, could exist throughout most countries in Europe for 40 years without the public knowing anything.

Could the same thing happen today?…. More to come….

— Wazza2

36 thoughts on “Those who live by the Sword

  1. During WW2, the US developed the OSS – or “Other SS”, which was infiltrated by Nazis post war. It is also comically known as the Catholic Intelligence Agency.

    The Amerikans put the Gestapo back in control of West Germany post war.

    Von Braun and Satanist Jack Parsons started NASA to enable to conquest of space (first secure the high vantage).

    Vannevar Bush and Claude Shannon conceived the web to act as a global intelligence gathering tool and social engineering device.

    First Europe, zen ze vorld! Jawhol! Seig Heil!!!!! Never forget, never, ever forget…

  2. I think the fact that Nazis are Satanists who are inimical to Christ is a good starting point. And the point that so many Xians have been beguiled by “bought out” leaders to accept what ever is thrust upon us by Govts as somehow being God’s will over which we have no say. It is true that he gives us leaders after our own hearts, but He also gives us authority over serpents as sons of the Most High. The Church by and large has surrendered this authority for comfort and “legitimacy” and tax breaks.

    The whole of History is about His story and the central theme is Israel. Operation Gladio is part of the ongoing Fascist preparation for WW3 – WW2 was a dress rehearsal. The end game is DESTROY NATURAL ISRAEL AND ALSO SPIRITUAL ISRAEL so I should think that it is very relevant, in fact pivotal and that dickering over details of doctrine rather tends to cloud the core issue of Christ and the circumcision of the nations.

    Or as it says in 1 Cor 15:22 –
    For whereas through Adam all humanity died, likewise through Christ all of them shall Live.

    It is just that some of them are going to make one hell of a mess in the process…and soon.

  3. Greg, the theological implications are in the title. “Those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword”

    It follows on from the discussions of various Muslim terrorist attacks or threats on threads such as “Sheik, Rattle and Roll”

    Many people argue that if someone is a terrorist, then US is justified in deporting, killing, torturing them etc with or without trial.

    However it is not as simple as that, the US has been involved in clandestine support of terrorists including Nazis for many years. They have subverted the democratic process in all countries including our own,

    If they now are getting blow-back it may be a case of dying by the sword.

  4. So now on my next trip to Europe, I not only have to watch out for muggers but Operation Gladio agents.
    Think I’ll stick to Hawaii. (that is after I check the HAARP records in case the US causes a tsunami)
    The only safe place is the middle of Australia. except for close to Pine Gap.

    No I’ll fess up. I didn’t know about Gladio.

  5. Basically, wazza and Bones completely agree with the extreme views of the activist UK politician George Galloway.

    He blames the West, and particularly Britain for their fight against extremists in the Middle East, saying it is merely a retaliation for British support for fighters in troubled Islamic states. He claims the murderers, though their crimes are evil, are no worse than UK politicians who oppose Islamic extremists by supporting war against them. He also implies that extremists are justified in their acts because Israel dares to defend its territory against missile attacks.

    Here’s a contrary view:

    The alleged butcher of the off-duty British soldier, Drummer Lee Rigby, defended his carving up of a living human being by claiming that he was engaging in “an eye for an eye” because the British army is killing Muslims in Afghanistan.

    Normally there is no reason to respond to the justifications offered by terrorists and other murderers of the innocent. But in this case it is important to do so because much of the Muslim world resonates to this argument and because much of the world’s left offers this argument.

    This is true even though a large majority of Muslims do not support terror and even though leftists do not support it. Nevertheless, throughout the Muslim and leftist worlds it is believed — and our children are taught this at college — that America, the UK. and other countries are targeted by Muslims because we kill Muslims.

    The argument is morally perverse and a lie.

    First, the U.K. and others are in Afghanistan in order to defend Muslims. Brits and other Westerners are risking their lives, and dying, in that country on behalf of Muslims.

    Here’s a question for Muslims and leftists who buy this argument about the West killing Muslims in Afghanistan: Who are we fighting in Afghanistan?

    I thought the Brits and Americans were fighting the Taliban, the people who throw acid in Muslim girls’ faces for attending school, the people who murder nurses who inoculate Muslim children against disease. Now, if fighting the Taliban is to be equated with fighting Muslims, this is a real contradiction of everything much of the Islamic world and virtually all of the left have been contending for years — that the Taliban represent a tiny group of extremists in the Muslim world, and that they have so completely perverted Islam that they cannot even be called Muslims.

    Well, you can’t have it both ways. If killing the Taliban is the same as “killing Muslims,” then you can’t argue that the Taliban don’t represent Islam or Muslims.

    So, on the issue of the West fighting in Afghanistan, the Muslims and the left need to make up their minds: Is killing the Taliban a service or a disservice to Muslims? This is the first and last question both groups need to answer. Everything else is commentary.

  6. Yes, it’s just a lie and the devil is good at that. It’s an old tactic that he does with Christians. Attacks them and then either makes them feel guilty or gets them to fight with other Christians.

    George Galloway?

    Did you have to bring him up…..?

  7. Last comment.

    @Bones Ben Roberts-Smith is not evil.
    I’d be happy for him to talk in every classroom in Australia.

  8. Jeremiah was a bullfrog.

    For all the preaching he did against whites and capitalism it”s surprising he was happy to retire to a beautiful house in rich white suburb – four car garage, elevator etc. next to a country club. I wonder how many poor oppressed blacks will be living with him.

    At least soon he will be able to talk to Obama again.

    “Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck, or in eight years when he’s out of office.”

    Charming man. Ian, Bones and Wazza probably agree with his theory about the US govt inventing Aids I suppose.

    Them Jews…..

  9. Well, wouldn’t it just be a shame that this black man did well and retired among some white people. You accuse him of being ‘charming’ becuase of his use of the words ‘them jews’ – how is that better than you hoping HERE that you never live near a large populatoin of muslims?

    Perhpas the words of that great American abolishionist and former slave, Frederick Douglas, will be something you can resonate with? Frederick Douglass, when he described the America he lived in just before the Civil War had this to say:

    “What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelly to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy—a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour.

    “Go where you may, search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the old world, travel through South America, search out every abuse, and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me, that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without a rival.”

  10. I think it is laughable that the US is out there on a purported war on terrorism when the real facts are these:

    From THIS, site

    1. More fatalities occur “each day” from auto accidents then occur from terrorism for the “whole year”.
    (1.2 million deaths per year Worldwide)

    2. More fatalities occur worldwide each year from animal attacks then occur from terrorism.
    ( Stats for US Only 1882)

    3. More fatalities occur each year from falling down stairs (falling down) then occur from terrorism.
    ( Just for the Netherlands 1700 deaths in 1999)

    4. More fatalities occur “each day” from medical malpractice then [sic] occur from terrorism for the “whole year”.
    ( US stats Only – 120,000 deaths worldwide 1.4 million)

    The US (a nation that claims it is at its very foundation a Christian nation) has caused more deaths by its own use of terrorism than any that have been caused by so called Muslim Terrorists:

    From THIS, site comes this (which predates teh deaths of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden:

    United States Violence on Terrorism

    As the United States continues what it calls its “war against terrorism,” one can’t help but wonder if such a war is misguided. After all, if the United States is truly looking to eradicate terrorism, perhaps it should direct its attention to within its borders, or more specifically, within the confines of its government.

    In 1986, the United States was found guilty by the World Court of “unlawful use of violence” (international terrorism) for its actions in Nicaragua. The United States then promptly vetoed a Security Council resolution calling on all states to adhere to international law.

    Exactly how bad were the United State’s actions in Nicaragua? According to political scientist Noam Chomsky, “Nicaragua in the 1980’s was subjected to violent assault by the U.S. Tens of thousands of people died. The country was substantially destroyed; it may never recover. The international terrorist attack was accompanied by a devastating economic war, which a small country isolated by a vengeful and cruel superpower could scarcely sustain.” In the case of Nicaragua, we have the United States using violence to reach its goal of overthrowing the popular Sandinista movement, a coalition of Marxists, left-wing priests, and nationalists. Was the United States’ use of violence any different from Bin Laden’s?

    The United States was using violence in an attempt to influence the policy of the government of Nicaragua by intimidation and coercion. The U.S. code defines terrorism in a variety of ways. One way terrorism is described is as “any activity that appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.” Therefore, the United States, according to its own definition of terrorism, was guilty of this heinous act.

    Some will argue that 1986 is now distant history. The government has learned from its egregious mistakes and surely has not repeated them since. If only this were true. One need to only look at the Clinton administration’s 1998 bombing of the Al-Shifa plant in Sudan to find U.S. terrorism. The bombing of Sudan, a response to the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa, was responsible for an large amount of deaths. To measure the death toll, it is necessary to examine not only the amount of deaths produced by the bombings, but also those deaths directly related to the bombings, that is the deaths caused by the eradication of the Al-Shifa plant.

    In his investigation of the bombing, Jonathan Belke of the Boston Globe, regional program manager for the Near East Foundation, a respected development institution providing technical assistance to poor countries in the Middle East and Africa, found that a year after the attack, “without the lifesaving medicine [the destroyed facilities] produced, Sudan’s death toll from the bombing has continued, quietly, to rise… Thus, tens of thousands of people-many of them children-have suffered and died from malaria, tuberculosis, and other treatable diseases… [Al-Shifa] provided affordable medicine for humans and all the locally available veterinary medicine in Sudan. It produced 90 percent of Sudan’s major pharmaceutical products… Sanctions against Sudan make it impossible to import adequate amounts of medicines required to cover the serious gap left by the plant’s destruction.”

    Germany’s Ambassador to Sudan writes that “It is difficult to assess how many people in this poor African country died as a consequence of the destruction of the Al-Shifa factory, but several tens of thousands seems a reasonable guess” (Werner Daum, “Universalism and the West,” Harvard International
    Review, Summer 2001). After all, Al-Shifa “provided 50 percent of Sudan’s medicines, and its destruction has left the country with no supplies of chloroquine, the standard treatment for malaria” (Patrick Wintour, Observer, December 20, 1998).

    Additionally, Al-Shifa was “the only one producing TB drugs-for more than 100,000 patients, at about 1 British pound a month. Costlier imported versions are not an option for most of them-or for their husbands, wives and children, who will have been infected since. Al-Shifa was also the only factory making veterinary drugs in this vast, mostly pastoralist, country. Its specialty was drugs to kill the parasites which pass from herds to herders, one of Sudan’s principal causes of infant mortality” (James Astill, Guardian, October 2, 2001).

    The bombing of the Al-Shifa plant also resulted in the mass exodus of Sudan’s international organizations. Human Rights Watch observed that because of the bombing, “all UN agencies based in Khartoum have evacuated their American staff, as have many other relief organizations.” Because of this “many relief efforts have been postponed indefinitely, including a crucial one run by the U.S.- based International Rescue Committee are dying daily.” Additionally, “the UN estimates that 2.4 million people are at risk of starvation,” and the “disruption in assistance” for the “devastated population” may produce a “terrible crisis.”

    Therefore, it is not so surprising that Osama Bin Laden’s popularity rose after the Al-Shifa bombing. This horrible incident, along with U.S. policy in Iraq in the past ten years, has devastated Iraq’s civilian population while strengthening Saddam Hussein. The U.S. egregiously supported Hussein during his gassing of the Kurds in 1988 which provided Bin Laden with a way to defend his irrational hatred of the United States. Perhaps the only way to counter the United States’ terrorism, is with terrorism of one’s own.

    If the United States is to continue its war on terrorism, it should perhaps aim its war not at Osama Bin Laden or Iraq (what many predict is next on the U.S.’s list), but rather at itself. It is only by eradicating its status as the world’s leading terrorist state, that the U.S. can eradicate terrorism.

    This doesn’ even take into account the death toll from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    As The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ, is quite often cited as saying in a sermon of his on Sept. 16, 2001. “We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards.” Wright concluded that “America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

    And so they have.

    However was it Wright who spoke those words? No, he was citing someon else.

    Apr. 28, 2008 update: Asked at a National Press Club breakfast by the moderator, Donna Leinwand, about the “chickens” quote, Wright buoyantly specified what he had initially stated in 2001.

    Leinwand: You have said that the media have taken you out of context. Can you explain what you mean in a sermon shortly after 9/11 when you said the United States had brought the terrorist attacks on itself, “America’s chickens are coming home to roost”?

    Wright: Have you heard the whole sermon? (Laughter, applause.) Have you heard the whole sermon?

    Leinwand: I—most — (chuckles) —

    Wright: No, no, the whole sermon. That’s—yes or no. No, you haven’t heard the whole sermon? That nullifies that question. Well, let me try to respond in a non-bombastic way. (Applause.) If you heard the whole sermon, first of all, you heard that I was quoting the ambassador from Iraq. That’s number one. But number two, to quote the Bible, “Be not deceived; God is not mocked, for whatsoever you sew that you also shall”—

    Audience members: “Reap.”

    Wright: Jesus said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you. Those are biblical principles, not Jeremiah Wright bombastic divisive principles. (Applause.)

    You and Steve love to ask Bones and myself to give you something current. Well mate, we reap NOW what we have sown over the centruries past – the west has brutalised Africa and whole swaiths of the rest of the world – murdered, raped and pillaged its way to riches; all while claiming to be Christian and following Christ – so NOW we reap what have sown.

  11. “Well, wouldn’t it just be a shame that this black man did well and retired among some white people. You accuse him of being ‘charming’ becuase of his use of the words ‘them jews’ – how is that better than you hoping HERE that you never live near a large populatoin of muslims?”

    I mentioned it because of the irony of a man who said so many things attacking whites, and made his money talking about racism and being black but then doesn’t retire among blacks but among capitalist whites in luxury. It’s completely ironic.

    I hope I don’t live near a large population of Muslims because there always seems to be problems.
    I’d be happy to live near a large population of Jews.

    And my statement is just based of self-preservation. In countries ruled by Muslisms I wouldn’t have much freedom (look it up). I wouldn’t want to live in other places with large populations of Muslims because I wouldn’t want to dodge riots like in Nigeria, Indonesia and now in Sweden.

    But to say that “them Jews” won’t let Obama talk to him is absolutely crazy.
    “them Jews” ? Which Jews? This man talks about racism but is worse than anyone.

  12. Reaping what the west sowed? Sees to me it’s just the Muslims that are killing people.

    But, I am extremely glad that you have gone off the Bush hating, and started talking about Clinton.

    Very pleased. At least there is some consistency. 🙂

    Maybe you can tell Wazza more about how the Muslims were angry even before Bush took office.

    Great – more articles about Clinton and what he did to make the Muslims made Greg.

  13. Did Clinton order an invasion of another country based on trumped up lies?

    Bush should have got himself a blowie like Clinton did. Might have settled him down.

  14. “The point is lost on you I see.”

    I’ll get back to your point…points…but it seems that one of them is that Americans who lost loved ones on 9/11 should get over it because after all, there are lots of Dutch people falling down stairs…..

    Tragic isn’t it. I’ll remember to tell the survivors of the various bombings to donate to rubber soles for clogs.

  15. “Did Clinton order an invasion of another country based on trumped up lies?”

    I don’t know. What do you think Bones? Why did Clinton do what he did???? Whether lies or not, Greg has quoted three paragraphs showing why Clinton’s actions made Al Quida and friends hate the US! lol
    And if you want to keep the Bush lie thing, keep remembering that Clinton etc all talked about WMDs and you STILL haven’t proven that Bush thought there were no WMDS. And your friend in Malaysia – the King of croneyism, corruption and anti-semitism hasn’t proven anything either – except for you friends at global research.

    “Bush should have got himself a blowie like Clinton did. Might have settled him down.”

    I just love it when you guys knock yourselves out. eh Bones – take a look at the timing clintons sexual activities and his use of US military overseas.

  16. Greg I’ve got some questions for you re your anti-US, anti-west diatribe which sounds like it was given by a first year uni student in the 70s ….

    but can I point out that while you are defending Wright’s sermon NOT EVEN OBAMA did! Remember?
    He ended up throwing him under the liberal looney bus. So, maybe you’d feel comfortable in his church but not many would. Your white face would also stand out. Not that there’s anything wrong with that of course.

  17. Who said this:

    This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances, but even if it were not present I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I’m speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men…
    Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the One who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them?”

    Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood, and because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned especially for his suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come tonight to speak for them.

    This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls “enemy,” for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

    I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption…I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.”

    A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war, ‘This way of settling differences is not just.’ This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

    Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality. This Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of Saint John: “Let us love one another, for love is God. And every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love.” “If we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfected in us.” Let us hope that this spirit will become the order of the day.

    I’ll give you a clue: He was black and no he didn’t retire among white people.

    Though white people retired him…..permanently.

  18. Pretty sure Clinton faced impeachment for lying about a blowjob.

    Bush is a war hero who lies to get into a war.

    I wonder which is worse.

  19. Okay Bones. “the west” is reaping what it has sown? The west meaning what exactly? The US – a country full of immigrants? Australia ? Because of Hiroshima? Nagasaki? How many centuries?

    Based on your ideas it should be normal for aborigines to be blowing up Sydney, Indians blowing up Las Vegas, Chinese blowing up Japanese, and Japanese blowing up AMericans.

    It just seems that its mainly the Muslims that like blowing things up at the moment.

    By the way, the hundreds of churches blown up, and thousands of Christians murdered in Nigeria – what did they do again? The Christians raped and killed and churches blown up in INdonesia.

    That was…..Nagasaki? Clinton? the crusades?

    Here is a question for you guys. The Jews. 6 million exterminated and a plan to kill thre rest. They would have been completely wiped out in Europe (if it weren’t for those evil Americansthat you guys think deserve to be judged..? WHAT??). These Jews that are left. WOuld you be understanding their position if they werer blowing up Germans now? Other Europeans? The Vatican?

    Why aren’t they blowing people up. They should be pretty mad right?
    ANd the Germans and the Europeans would just be reaping what they sowed right?

    No. Remember. Neither Clinton or Bush deliberately targeted civilians. But Muslims in london, Indonesia, Bali, Sweden, Holland, Spain, Nigeria, etc etc etc are.

    It’s different.

    As for dying by the sword? Every country I know has used the sword. And even people who don*t use swords get killed by people using swords.

    ANd to get back to Jesus. He was sent to die. But, he also was pretty tough in the temple, and if some rival carpenters were beating up Mary, I think we would have used some muscle on them. To Bones it would have been an evil act – to anyone else it would be defending a virtuous woman.

  20. lol

    No, I don’t think Jesus was wrong.

    I do have sympathy for the pacifist position and believe that men were never meant to kill each other.
    From what I understand the primitive church was against military service (not sure – but that’s what I had thought) and pentecostals in England in WW1 at least were conscientious objectors. But, most people who are pacifist have other people to defend them.

    And I personally would sign up as a chaplain or in medical services – but I wouldn’t be telling soldiers that they were evil sinners if they were sent to defend their country.

    This may seem to go against what I’ve said, but I’m all for not sending people overseas. I just don’t think it’s practical. If it were, a liberal like Obama wouldn’t be using drones as we speak. ANd if Hillary gets in I’m sure there will be times when she uses US military overseas – she voted for Afghanistan and Iraq remember.

    But if you guys condemn her along with Obama and Bush, I salute you for your consistency.

    Aren’t I gracious?

  21. Jesus was not wrong.

    You just had wax in your ears when you were listening. And if I were a Greg the Explorian, I’d say how can we be sure of what he said anyway? Maybe the gospel writers just made it up to make it suit their pacifist ideas?

  22. Sorry guys – I better stop. I’ve got one eye on the big soccer game and can’t concentrate.

    Maybe it/s the drinks I was served …but just remember I like you guys.

    Anytime you’re in my part of the world, I’d gladly show you around.

  23. Meanwhile, in your front yard…

    The sectarian violence has also erupted in Sydney and both sides are involved.

    Jamal Daoud, a high-profile community leader in western Sydney, says the situation is becoming “very vicious”.

    Although he is a Sunni Muslim, because of his opposition to removing the Syrian regime by force, Mr Daoud says extremists at home view him with the same hatred they have for Shiites and Alawites.

    He received the following message on his mobile phone:

    You wanna go to war ya f***ing shiite dogs? We’re gonna take you and your alawis to war ya f***ing dogs, all of yas to war in sydney
    Yeah, boys you listening? Ya f***in dogs you can suck my c***, you and the police… Blood in blood out ya motha f***ers
    Mr Daoud believes the trouble is coming from a small minority group who support the Jabhat al Nusra in Syria.

    “This is the source of the violence in Sydney, the Jabhat al Nusra supporters,” he said.

    “The last two years they have flourished in western Sydney, they have flourished. We have seen a lot of new bookstores, masallahs and other centres.”

    One of these new centres is the Al Risalah bookstore in Bankstown, which over the past year has gained a reputation for being one of the most extreme Islamic centres in the country.

    Al Risalah supporters played a prominent role in last year’s protests in Sydney’s CBD, which deteriorated into rioting against a film that mocked the Prophet Mohammed.

    “We noticed after they created this bookstore, a lot of trouble started in Bankstown,” Mr Dahoud said.

    “For the last one-and-a-half years there was a lot of trouble… like extortion and threatening, bullying, intimidation.

    “There is attacks on many Shiite businesses in that area.”

    The owner of a juice bar in Bankstown says he was forced to sell his business in June last year after being intimidated and assaulted by a group of men who reportedly emerged from the Al Risalah bookstore, which is located directly across the road.

    Al Risalah declined 7.30’s requests for an interview. A spokesman said he had no knowledge of the attack on the juice bar or any extortions or threats.

    Business owners too afraid to speak out

    More than 20 businesses in western Sydney have been targeted in the past year.

    In a boycott list published on Facebook, most of their owners were too afraid to speak to us.

    But one was prepared to talk with the help of Mr Daoud translating.

    “Some people came and ask, demand from us donations for jihad in Syria and we refuse,” the owner said.

    “They used abusive language and threatened us more. He said if you no leave the area, no leave the shop after one week, one month, maybe I kill you, I kill your children.”

    NSW Police are encouraging people to come forward otherwise they are powerless to act.

    “We do get intelligence about some of this going on, but the dilemma is someone has to be prepared to step forward and say, ‘I will make a complaint, I will make a statement’,” said Deputy Commissioner Nick Kaldas.

    “And if they do, they have our guarantee that they will be looked after and taken care of and the matter will be dealt with.”

  24. So what’s happening in Turkey, folks? Those secular democratic aspirational westernised Muslims seem to have become very upset with the governing Sharia mob who want to build a mosque in the middle of their main square. They’re taking to the streets and the dictator is showing that he is a… dictator. Now this is a real development, and one which will gather momentum.

    The sunni/shiite civil war is progressing and growing and it’s mostly a push for power, whether in nations or in communities. They simply couldn’t wait to overcome the politically correct limp-wristed leftised weedy west by remaining a compact unit of militants and moderates. Like all tensions they eventually divided and set upon one another.

    Civil war is on your doorstep in the suburbs of Sydney, Bones, and all you can talk about is how the US is such a nasty warlord, and militant Muslims are the good guys driven to desperate measures. Yeah, right. Now they threaten people of the same book, intimidate them like the Kray brothers of Islam with their protection rackets to raise money to fund their judah, against who? Against other Muslims.

    Meanwhile the west has debates about equal marriage!

    You couldn’t write this movie script.

    God bless America!

  25. Q: I just love it when you guys knock yourselves out. eh Bones – take a look at the timing clintons sexual activities and his use of US military overseas.

    Here I totally agree with you, Q. The poor Iraqis would have been saying “I hope Clinton doesnt get lucky tonight, because every time he does – we get bombed!”

    I was in the US when the impeachment trial was going on. The day before the big vote on the impeachment, Clinton suddenly bombs Iraq – no apparent reason.

    I went to work the next day, and my (US, Republican) colleagues were defending the action. They said Clinton had to bomb Iraq now, because if he left it a few more weeks it would be Ramadan, and it would be unethical to bomb people on a religious holiday.

    The most they would admit is “It dosent look all that good”. These were people who hated the Clintons with a passion.

    Of course, next year the US bombed them during Ramadan any way. But by then the news cycle had moved on and everyone forgot that justification.

    But its only Muslims who are bombing people – eh Q?

  26. @Wazza, But I’m not saying that it was wrong for Clinton to bomb.

    My whole point as always been that it wasn’t just the evil Bush bombing and invading because he hates children, muslims, wars for profit etc.

    For years all we heard was how Bush was evil, and that Obama the man of peace would make the world stop hating the US, and that Bush had just made the Muslims angry etc.

    My whole point has been that Obama didn’t close guantanamo, he went after Osama, he is still killing people with drones, and if you go back Clinton was engaged in battling terrorism and talking about WMDs etc.

    To me you are consistent because you are obviously against the actions of the US govt – both Republican and Democratic.

    Where I differ with you, is that I think that once people become President,
    they realize that it’s impossible to ensure the safety of the US without military action somewhere sometimes.
    And I don’t think that all military involvement is explained by big business interests.

    But – you are consistent. (In your madness) 🙂

  27. BUt that’s where your Republican friends were at least consistent. What gets me is those who bashed Bush for 8 years, then allow Obama a pass on everything and suddenly applaud everything the tough Commander-in-Chief does.

Comments are closed.