Tony Blair caused terrorism in London, abuses it for warmongering


This video from Britain says about itself:

Send him to The Hague! Tony Benn on Blair’s ‘war crimes’ (FULL INTERVIEW)

20 December 2013

Former Labour cabinet minister and Stop the War Coalition President Tony Benn talks to the host of Going Underground, Afshin Rattansi about the alleged war crimes of Tony Blair. He shares stories of intelligence goings on during his time as an MP, featured in his memoirs, including a threat to assassinate him if he ever became Prime Minister. They also discuss voter apathy and how austerity could lead to fascism on the streets of Britain.

From daily The Morning Star in Britain:

Blair reaped a whirlwind

Wednesday 8th July 2015

THE last thing that people marking the 10th anniversary of the mass slaughter of innocent civilians in London need is a call to arms from Tony Blair.

His observation that Western countries need to have “the means of combating these people and combating them on the ground” smacks of his obsession with launching wars.

Blair says that, 10 years ago, “we faced people who had been radicalised over a period of time,” but he accepts no responsibility for involving Britain in illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and encouraging Israel to colonise Palestinian land.

He notes that there are “training camps actually in Libya not just in Syria, in Iraq and elsewhere and this threat is not going away. It will intensify in time to come.”

Would camps in Libya exist if British and French warplanes had not acted as the air force for an assortment of armed opposition groups seeking to overthrow Muammar Gadaffi?

Would Isis be in a strong position in Iraq had the US and British invading forces not destroyed the state infrastructure, including the army, leaving an assortment of weaponry available to insurgents?

Would the same death cult, together with al-Qaida-linked groups, have taken over large swathes of Syria but for Washington and London turning a blind eye to their allies Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and Bahrain sending weapons and fighters to anti-government groups?

Blair counters that countries that played no role in invading Iraq have also been affected and that “radicalisation” predated that criminal act.

Both points are true, but they don’t absolve Western imperialist leaders.

Obscurantist salafist ideas have existed for centuries, not least in Saudi Arabia which played a key role in backing armed rebellion in Afghanistan even before Soviet military support for the Kabul government.

Washington was warned then that, by supplying state-of-the-art munitions to the so-called mojahedin, it was sowing a wind and would reap a whirlwind.

US politicians thought they could turn religious extremism on and off like a tap to suit themselves.

The current global situation offers conclusive proof that they were wrong.

Yesterday’s moving commemorations across Britain of July 7 2005 involved people of all faiths and none to emphasise togetherness and mutual respect.

The timely and brave response of transport workers, police, firefighters, nurses and doctors at a nearby BMA conference who all ran towards the scenes of carnage that everyone else had been told to flee provided an example of our people at their best.

The “peace iftars” in many mosques highlight that Muslims have borne the heaviest burden of the death cult upsurge, both in lives lost and victimisation by shallow politicians.

Labour London mayoral hopeful Sadiq Khan recalls that Blair called in Muslim Labour MPs after the London Tube and bus bombings to tell them that this was their responsibility.

Khan retorted correctly that this was a problem for all of us.

When grubby politicians demand that Muslim communities atone or apologise for atrocities committed by self-professed Muslims, they must be reminded that no religion sanctions mass murder of innocent civilians.

London’s multiracial, multi-faith population suffered the hurt of July 7 2005 together and commemorated it yesterday in the same united way.

As Muslim Council of Britain secretary-general Shuja Shafi says, “The best way to defy the terrorist is to increase our bonds of unity, not to single out any one group of people for blame or opprobrium.”

Life for British Muslims since 7/7 – abuse, suspicion and constant apologies, by Mehdi Hasan. The London bombings shocked us all. But in the decade since, our community has been unfairly demonised: here.

British bombs on Syria will help ISIS


This video from #SyrianGirl says about itself:

The only way to defeat ISIS is to stop US support of ISIS by proxies Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia. Not by bombing the country more.

The British Cameron government wanted to start a war on the Syrian government in 2013. A war in which they would have been allies of ISIS and Al-Qaeda. The peace movement managed to stop that plan then.

Now, they have again plans to bomb Syria. Officially, against ISIS this time. But as part of a coalition which includes countries serving as ideological inspiration for ISIS cruelty; and from which money is still flowing to ISIS. And a coalition which in practice still includes Al-Qaeda.

By Paddy McGuffin in Britain:

New bid to bomb Syria

Friday 3rd July 2015

As Defence Secretary Fallon pushes for more air strikes, campaigners warn of untold misery for people in the Middle East

ANTI-WAR campaigners challenged Defence Secretary Michael Fallon yesterday following his call for more air strikes in Syria and warned that the action could fuel potential Isis recruits.

Mr Fallon argued it was “illogical” that British planes were able to hit extremists in Iraq but not bases across the border and suggested any evidence that last week’s massacre in Tunisia was planned in Syria would show that the Islamic State leadership in the country represented a direct threat to the British people.

No Mr Fallon, that horrible massacre in Tunisia was not planned in Syria. It was planned in Libya. It was planned in the ‘new’ ‘free ‘Libya; created by David Cameron and his pals Nicolas Sarkozy and Silvio Berlusconi with their ‘humanitarian’ war for oil.

When the PM obtained Commons approval for the bombing of militant positions last year, he made it clear that this was limited to Iraq.

However Mr Fallon quoted David Cameron who said in September during the debate on taking action in Iraq that there was a “strong case” for Britain to do more in Syria.

He confirmed the government would seek Commons approval before conducting air strikes there. But he added: “The exception, as the house knows, is if there was a critical British national interest at stake or the need to act to prevent humanitarian catastrophe.”

Labour strongly indicated that it would back the government’s proposal with shadow defence secretary Vernon Coaker saying that Labour stood “ready to work with the government to defeat Isis” and would “carefully consider” any proposals that the government decides to bring forward.

“We all need to be clear about what difference any action would make to our objective of defeating Isis, about the nature of any action, its objectives and indeed its legal basis.

“Any potential action must command the support of other nations in the region, including Iraq and the coalition already taking action in Syria.”

Acting Labour leader Harriet Harman also appeared to imply the party could support the proposal saying that the situation was different to that in 2013.

But a Stop the War spokesman warned against military action as it’s action that has led to more people joining Isis. He said: “The US is already bombing Syria as well as Iraq, with little success. Many argue that this bombing has helped Isis recruit. “The proposal is in response to the terrible attack in Tunisia last week, but will do nothing to stop further attacks. Support for Isis in Tunisia has grown in the past two years, largely as a result of the growth of terrorism in neighbouring Libya. That in turn dates from the British and French-led bombing of Libya in 2011 which has created a state of civil war, terrorism and misery for its people.”

Campaign Against Nuclear Disarmament general secretary Kate Hudson said that US and British military action in the Middle East and North Africa had been “ill-conceived, leading to death and destruction for innocent civilians, and shattered states — both of which were abandoned by their attackers — where terrorists including Isis have since been able to organise.

We bombed Isis into existence. We can’t bomb them out of existence.”

Tunisian mass murderers from ‘new’ Libya


This video from the USA is called Hillary Clinton: USA created Al Qaeda.

Translated from NOS TV in the Netherlands:

Perpetrator of massacre in Tunisia was in training camp in Libya

Today, 17:23

The man who last week staged an attack in Tunisia on a tourist beach had been earlier this year in Libya in a training camp for jihad, along with the two men who earlier in Tunis committed an attack in the Bardo Museum. That says a senior Tunisian security officer.

The Tunisian Prime Minister Habib Essid still said on Saturday that the perpetrator had not been in view of the security services and had never left Tunisia. In the attack last Friday, 39 people were killed.

The perpetrator, who himself was killed by hotel security guards, left according to the security officer in January to Libya to attend jihad training. The two men who in March in broad daylight shot dead 22 people in the Bardo Museum in Tunis were there at the same time.

Thank you so much, on behalf of the surviving families of the murdered foreign tourists and Tunisians, thank you dear NATO, dear David Cameron, dear Nicolas Sarkozy, dear Silvio Berlusconi, etc. etc. for your bloody regime change war for oil ‘bringing democracy’ to a ‘brave new’ Libya … [sarcasm off]

Benghazi, where Libya’s uprising began, now a shattered city | Washington Times: here.

The Congressional harrying of former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over emails concerning the 2012 death of an American Ambassador and three staff members in Benghazi, Libya, has become a sort of running joke, with Republicans claiming “cover-up” and Democrats dismissing the whole matter as nothing more than election year politics. But there is indeed a story embedded in the emails, one that is deeply damning of American and French actions in the Libyan civil war, from secretly funding the revolt against Muammar Gaddafi, to the willingness to use journalism as a cover for covert action: here.

British Conservatives help ISIS


This 12 May 2015 video from Britain says about itself:

Russell Brand, Abby Martin: David Cameron: Islamophobia to Control You, Part 1.

This video is the sequel.

Since 2002, Right-wing White Terrorists have Killed More Americans Than Muslim Extremists: here.

By Seumas Milne in daily The Guardian in Britain:

By scapegoating Muslims, Cameron fuels radicalisation

Ministers foster terror with their wars. Now they attack liberties at home in the name of British values

Wednesday 24 June 2015 20.54 BST

The anti-Muslim drumbeat has become deafening across the western world. As images of atrocities by the jihadi terror group Isis multiply online, and a steady trickle of young Europeans and North Americans head to Syria and Iraq to join them, Muslim communities are under siege. Last week David Cameron accused British Muslims of “quietly condoning” the ideology that drives Isis sectarian brutality, normalising hatred of “British values”, and blaming the authorities for the “radicalisation” of those who go to fight for it.

It was too much for Sayeeda Warsi, the former Conservative party chair, who condemned the prime minister’s “misguided emphasis” on “Muslim community complicity”. He risked “further alienating” the large majority of Muslims fighting the influence of such groups, she warned. Even Charles Farr, the hawkish counter-terrorism mandarin at the Home Office, balked. Perhaps fewer than 100 Britons were currently fighting with Isis, he said, and “we risk labelling Muslim communities as somehow intrinsically extremist”.

But Cameron and his neoconservative allies are preparing the ground for the government’s next onslaught. The target will not be terrorism, but “non-violent extremism”. Next month, from nursery schools to optometrists, health services to universities, all will be legally obliged to monitor students and patients for any sign of “extremism” or “radicalisation”.

The new powers represent a level of embedded security surveillance in public life unprecedented in peacetime. We already know from the government’s Prevent programme the chilling impact of such mass spying on schools, where Muslim pupils have been reported for speaking out in favour of Palestinian rights or against the role of British troops in Afghanistan.

But the “counter-extremism” bill announced in the Queen’s Speech is about to take the anti-Muslim clampdown a whole stage further. The plans include banning orders for non-violent individuals and organisations whose politics are considered unacceptable; physical restriction orders for non-violent individuals deemed “harmful”; powers to close mosques; and vetting controls on broadcasters accused of airing extremist material. It’s censorship under any other name.

That was the view of Sajid Javid, then culture secretary, in a leaked letter to the prime minister earlier this year. But Cameron shows every sign of pressing ahead with what amounts to a full-blown assault on basic liberties. Most ludicrously, the new powers are defended in the name of “British values”, including “individual liberty” and “mutual respect and tolerance”.

But as became clear in the aftermath of the murderous Paris attack on Charlie Hebdo earlier this year, we are not all Charlie when it comes to freedom of speech. Anti-extremism powers will be used overwhelmingly against Muslims, rather than, say, non-Muslim homophobes and racists who have little interest in mutual respect and tolerance.

And they will fail, as their earlier incarnations have done, to discourage the small minority drawn to terrorism at home or jihadi campaigns abroad. Government ministers claim such violence is driven by “ideology” rather than injustice, grievance or its own policies. But, given that they refuse to speak to any significant Muslim organisation they don’t agree with or fund, perhaps it’s not surprising to find them in thrall to an ideology, neoconservatism, of their own.

Any other explanation for the terror threat would in any case implicate the government and its predecessors. In reality, it shouldn’t be so hard to understand why a small section of young alienated Muslims are attracted to fight in Syria and Iraq with Isis and other such groups. Jihadi “ideology” has been around for a long time. But there were no terror attacks in Britain before US and British forces invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and those behind every violent attack or terror plot have cited western intervention in the Muslim world as their motivation.

Isis has a different appeal to al-Qaida. It has taken huge stretches of territory using naked terror, destroyed borders and set up a self-proclaimed caliphate. In the Middle East it presents itself as the defender of Sunnis in a convulsive sectarian war. For a few young marginalised western Muslims, such groups can offer the illusion of a fight against tyranny and a powerful sense of identity.

But add in relentless media hostility, rampant Islamophobia, state surveillance and harassment of Muslim communities, and such alienation can only spread. In the past year, we’ve had the “Trojan Horse” Birmingham schools plot that never was, the ousting of an elected Muslim mayor of Tower Hamlets by a judge – including on grounds that he had exercised “undue spiritual influence” on Muslims – and evidence of an increasing level of anti-Muslim attacks. Islamophobia now far outstrips hostility to any other religion or ethnic group.

Ministers and their media allies downplay the role of “foreign policy” in Muslim radicalisation, against all the evidence. By foreign policy, they mean multiple western invasions and occupations of Muslim states, torture and state kidnapping on a global scale, and support for dictatorships across the Arab and Muslim world. That includes Saudi Arabia, of course, which shares much of Isis’s “ideology” and practices; and Egypt, whose ex-military leader, Abdel Fatah al-Sisi, overthrew the elected president in 2013 and is soon to be welcomed to Downing Street.

Isis is itself the direct product of the US and British occupation and destruction of Iraq, and both countries back armed rebel groups fighting in Syria – as they did in Libya. So no wonder would-be jihadis get confused about who is on whose side. Western Isis volunteers are a disaster for Syria and Iraq, but so far they haven’t carried out return attacks at home.

That could of course change, not least as the government criminalises dissent, brands conservative religiosity “extremist” and, in the formulation of ministers, “quietly condones” Islamophobia. The British government has long fed terrorism with its warmaking abroad. Now it’s also fuelling it with its scapegoating of Muslims at home.

ISIS’ war in Syria, helped by Western governments


This video from London, England says about itself:

UK: Kurds hurl eggs at Turkish embassy during anti-ISIS demo

22 September 2014

Approximately a dozen Kurdish protesters rallied outside the Turkish embassy in London, with some hurling eggs at the building and being carried off by police during the protest against the advancement of the Islamic State (IS) into the Kurdish town of Kobane, Monday.

During the demo, protesters chanted ‘Stop Supporting ISIS‘ and waved a banner ‘Hands off Kobane.’

By Ian Sinclair in Britain:

HAWK’S LIE: How the West backed Isis in Syria’s war

Thursday 18th June 2015

READING radical alternative news and commentary about Western foreign policy often leads to intense self-doubt and to questions like “why isn’t anyone else talking about this?”, “am I reading this right?” and even “perhaps I am losing my mind?”

Two recent news reports about the US involvement in Syria have triggered these exact questions for me.

Last month a formerly classified August 2012 Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) report was published by the right-wing watchdog Judicial Watch.

In the heavily redacted document the DIA — the intelligence arm of the US Department of Defence — notes that “the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI (al-Qaida in Iraq) are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.”

The next sentence in the report is this: “The West, Gulf countries and Turkey support the opposition, while Russia, China and Iran support the (Bashar al-Assad) regime.”

Later, the DIA makes another extraordinary statement: “There is the possibility of (the opposition) establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in Eastern Syria (…) and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”

Charles Lister, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Doha Centre and arguably the leading expert on the Syrian insurgency, provided the second jaw-dropping reading experience in May 2015. “The US-led operations room in southern Turkey, which co-ordinates the provision of lethal and non-lethal support to vetted opposition groups (…) specifically encouraged a closer co-operation with Islamists commanding frontline operations,” including with official al-Qaida branch Jabhat al-Nusra, Lister explained in Foreign Policy magazine.

So, to summarise, the West — the US and likely Britain too — was supporting Syria’s armed insurgency in 2012 in the full knowledge it was dominated by Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida in Iraq. Three years later the US is encouraging rebel groups to co-operate with al-Qaida’s branch in Syria.

What happened, you might well ask, to the epic generational struggle against al-Qaida and radical jihadists that we have been fighting since 2001 to save Western civilisation? A war and evil enemy, lest we forget, that has been repeatedly hyped up by a pliant media and supported by all the main political parties in the US and Britain.

Except for Seumas Milne in the Guardian, the mainstream media has ignored the extraordinary revelations of the DIA and Lister. The BBC has, as far as I’m aware, not mentioned either on any of its many news platforms.

Incredibly, the highly respected Middle East specialist Shadi Hamid describes the Obama administration as “opting to remain disengaged in Syria”.

In addition to this explosive new evidence of Western support for jihadists, the West’s key allies in the region have also been supporting the more extreme elements of the resistance to the Syrian government.

In August 2014 the Washington Post reported that before their blitz in Iraq, “Turkey rolled out the red carpet” to Islamic State, eager to aid any enemy of the Assad government. “Wounded jihadists from the Islamic State and the al-Nusra Front (…) were treated at Turkish hospitals,” the Post noted. “Most important, the Turks winked as (…) Turkish towns became way stations for moving foreign fighters and arms across the border.”

The Wall Street Journal carried a similar report in March this year, except this time it concerned Israel and how some of the al-Nusra Front’s “severely wounded fighters are regularly taken across the frontier fence to receive treatment in Israeli hospitals.”

Unsurprisingly, on this issue the Western media invariably report the official US government line that the US is opposed to these actions and is putting pressure on Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to stop supporting jihadists in Syria.

However, a close reading of mainstream news reports suggests that far from being opposed, the US is deeply involved in these nefarious networks. For example, earlier this year the Wall Street Journal published a story with the headline Saudis Agree to Provide Syrian Rebels With Mobile Anti-aircraft Missiles.

According to the report, “rebel leaders say they met with US and Saudi intelligence agents, among others, in Jordan on Jan. 30 (…) That is when wealthy Gulf States offered the more sophisticated weapons (anti-aircraft missiles).”

Writing about increased co-ordinated support to the Syrian rebels provided by Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the Guardian’s Martin Chulov recently noted the Saudi king told allies “the US would not stand in the way.”

And in June 2013 the Los Angeles Times noted that arms shipments from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries to Syrian rebels were “provided with assent from the US.”

Public denials at odds with covert actions are, of course, meat and potatoes when it comes to outsourcing foreign policy to regional proxies. “We’ll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours,” the US-supported Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh told US General David Petraeus in January 2010 about US drone strikes in his country.

According to the Washington Post, a similar deception has long been in effect between the US and Pakistan, with the Pakistani government publicly condemning US drone strikes, while at the same time secretly co-operating with the US.

And of course, if the US really felt about its Middle East allies as they publicly claim to, a simple way to pressure them to stop supporting jihadis in Syria would be for the US to threaten to stop selling its allies arms.

In reality, the US continues to arm countries such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia despite — or perhaps because of — their support for the Syrian insurgency. In March 2015 the Stockholm Peace Research Institute noted that the Gulf Co-operation Council states and Turkey are “scheduled to receive further large order of major arms in the coming years” — mainly from the US and Europe.

It’s certainly possible I’m not reading the evidence correctly. I may be taking it out of context. There may well be good reasons why the media has chosen not to cover the story, and I could well have lost my mind. But what if the reports point to a far more frightening conclusion — that it is the Western media and political elite is mad and delusional?

Ian Sinclair is the author of The March That Shook Blair: An Oral History of February 15 2003, published by Peace News Press. He tweets from @IanJSinclair.

Turkish and Jordanian military forces, including tens of thousands of ground troops, are preparing to invade Syria, with the aim of establishing militarized buffer zones in the northern and southern areas of the country, according to media reports Tuesday: here.

ARCHEOLOGIST BEHEADED BY ISIS REFUSED TO GIVE UP LOCATION OF HIDDEN ANTIQUITIES Renowned antiquities expert Khaled Asaad was beheaded by ISIS after refusing to reveal the location of “valuable Palmyran artifacts” that had been hidden from the Islamic State. [Reuters]

British ex-jihadi recruiter denounces ISIS, al-Qaeda


Abu Muntasir in Deeyah Khan’s television documentary: 'If people want to call me a coward, fine – I’m a coward.' Photograph: ITV

From weekly The Observer in Britain:

‘Recruiter’ of UK jihadis: I regret opening the way to Isis

Abu Muntasir sobs on TV documentary as he tells of raising funds and recruiting fighters before turning his back on violence

Tracy McVeigh

Saturday 13 June 2015 22.03 BST

The “godfather” of the British jihadi movement, who recruited dozens of young men to fight in foreign wars, has said he now regrets opening the way for people to join terror groups such as Islamic State and al-Qaida.

Abu Muntasir, 55, who lives in Suffolk, was one of the first influential propagandists in the UK for a radical Islamist message. Active in the 1980s and 1990s, he helped to radicalise “thousands” of young Muslims, encouraging many of them to travel to fight in wars in Afghanistan, Kashmir, Burma, Bosnia and Chechnya.

Among the first to invite speakers to the UK from abroad who preached violence and hatred to disaffected Muslims, he distributed speeches from hate preachers Ali al-Timimi, now serving a life sentence in the US for inciting terrorism, and the late Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in a controversial CIA drone attack in Yemen that also left his children dead.

In a documentary by Emmy-winning film-maker Deeyah Khan to be shown on ITV this week, Muntasir and several former extremists speak of their deep regret at the decisions of hundreds of UK Muslims to travel to join Isis in Syria and Iraq, and of their efforts to educate young people away from the same paths they followed as angry young men.

Muntasir, who is seen sobbing in the film as he recounts the horrors of his own days on battlefields in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Burma, is described as one of the “founding fathers of western jihad” and admitted that he worked to “create the link and clear the paths. I came back [from war] and opened the door and the trickle turned to a flood. I inspired and recruited, I raised funds and bought weapons, not just a one-off but for 15 to 20 years. Why I have never been arrested I don’t know.”

A comment at the Observer site on this article says on this:

Good point. Why wasn’t he arrested? Has anyone from the security services been asked that question?

Maybe the answer is that at some stages, organisations like al-Qaeda were and are allies of secret services and armed forces of NATO countries.

The Observer article continues:

He said it was not until he realised, while fighting in the jungles of Burma with armed resistance groups, that what was going on was not a holy war, but nothing less than the butchery and exploitation of young Muslims, that he turned his back on violence. “If people want to call me a coward, fine – I’m a coward.”

Muntasir, founder and chief executive of Jimas, said it was time for people who supported Islamic extremism to ask why their sons and daughters were being blown up for false ideals in “unwinnable wars”. Hate, he said, is not what Islam or the prophet taught.

“It was a virus with which we infected a generation. Now it has proliferated,” said one of Muntasir’s former followers, Alyas Karmani, now a peace campaigner, youth worker and imam in Bradford. He said the psychology used by Isis to groom youngsters is similar to that which Muntasir used to bring in followers.

“He was a charismatic father figure. It was exciting and there was an energy. I was an activist, never an extremist. For me I always had an inner voice telling me that a lot of this is not right.

“But I was angry. I had a very violent dad. I had a lot of racism. I was angry and frustrated. So we planted this virus. And the kids today have caught it.

“It’s the same attraction then as it is for young people now. A range of factors that is the same for Muslims and non-Muslims. Young people want to change the world, to feel loved and have a sense of belonging, a sense of attachment. That might just be in a foreign field.”

Speaking to the Observer, Karmani said that to tackle the numbers of young people leaving the UK for Syria, Iraq and Libya, it was important that the debate should change to understanding the human elements at play.

“It’s not about ideals – 90% of them never subscribe to the ideals – it’s other factors that are a draw. This is the new rock and roll; jihad is sexy. The kid who was not very good-looking now looks good holding a gun. He can get a bride now, he’s powerful. The Isis gun is as much a penis extension as the stockbroker with his Ferrari.

“There is a fundamental disconnect with our young people. Youth work used to be a brilliant vehicle but that’s all gone in the cuts, so who connects with young people now?”

He said many first- and second-generation immigrants were forced to live double lives. “I do blame the parents. If their kids aren’t able to talk about what’s going on in their lives outside the house, that’s a massive problem.

“If they have to be repressed about sex, about their friendships, who are they going to talk to? It makes them exposed and vulnerable. We have to stop seeing Muslims as ‘other’. They’re not. See them as the same.”

In making the film, Khan, “born in the west to parents from the east” and forced to give up a singing career because of extremists’ threats to her and her family, said she had been shocked by many attitudes she found in talking to young people across the UK: “I was horrified to find so many people with backgrounds like mine turning to extremism.”

Exposure: Jihad – A British Story will be on ITV at 10.40pm on 15 June.

Why ISIS terrorism? Mark Fiore animated cartoon


This video from the USA says about itself:

Who Created ISIS?

8 June 2015

With the fall of Ramadi in Iraq and Palmyra in Syria, fingers are pointing faster than you can say “Preemptive War.” John McCain thinks the crazy Islamic extremists of ISIS wouldn’t be causing the world all this trouble if only Obama hadn’t spent so much time worrying about global warming. Jeb Bush says Al Qaeda in Iraq was wiped out and ISIS didn’t exist when his dear ol’ brother was president. You can read more here.