The Evolution of Vehicles as a Terrorist Weapon | Paul Ashley | Pulse | LinkedIn

French police forces and forensic officers stand next to a truck July 15, 2016 that ran into a crowd celebrating the Bastille Day national holiday on the Promenade des Anglais killing at least 60 people in Nice, France, July 14. Credit: Eric Gaillard/Reuters
French police forces and forensic officers stand next to a truck July 15, 2016 that ran into a crowd celebrating the Bastille Day national holiday on the Promenade des Anglais killing at least 60 people in Nice, France, July 14. Credit: Eric Gaillard/Reuters

Since the early 1980s, vehicles have been used as a weapon in numerous terrorist attacks. The basic ‘model’ had vehicles delivering explosives to a target and then detonating them, causing death and injury. The normal saloon/sedan car has historically been seen as too small to carry out attacks. But like any other terrorist weapon, terrorists have seen greater potential in their usage.

We have now seen a different type and style of attack, after the December 19, 2016 terrorist attack in Berlin, Germany. A large heavy lorry was driven into a crowded Christmas market and has left many wondering where it is safe from such an attack and what to do should one happen.

The use of a vehicle as a terrorist weapon has its origins in 1980’s Lebanon with multiple attacks using vehicles as a tactic. The first was on April 18, 1983 when a van packed with explosives detonated outside the United States Embassy in Beirut killing 63 people.

The attacks at the time were attributed to the Islamic Jihad which was thought to be backed by Iran.Later the use of a vehicle as terrorist weapon was used again in Beirut, where large vehicles were driven into the American Marines barracks. On the October 23, 1983 a large Mercedes van was driven next to the barracks of the Marines and detonated were large numbers of soldiers were sleeping. The explosion left 146 American Marines dead. On the same day and nearly at the same time a French barracks which housed the Parachute Chasseur Regiment in Beirut was attacked using the same tactic which resulted in 58 soldiers dying.

In December 1989 the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) used a large dump truck which they armoured to attack a permanent British Army checkpoint between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland border at Derryard near Rosslea, County Fermanagh. Inside the armoured vehicle, the terrorists had various weapons, including machine guns, rockets, grenades and a flame thrower, which they used to attack a small detachment of eight British soldiers and one member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC).

Two soldiers died and one was severely wounded.In May 1992 PIRA carried out a three part coordinated attack on different security force locations in Northern Ireland. Two were carried out using a Human Proxy Bomb, where cars were used with large amounts of explosives, but failed in their attempt to blow up their target. The third location at Cloghoge vehicle checkpoint manned by the British Army was attacked using a large van which was packed with a large amount of explosives and detonated.

The attack showed remarkable ingenuity. The South Armagh Brigade of PIRA fitted a van with wheels that could be driven along a railway track. The vehicle was “driven” on the railway track until it was very close to the checkpoint. The vehicle was then detonated using a mile long wire. The explosion killed one soldier but twenty three that were inside a fortified bunker survived with injuries.

On February 26, 1993, Ramzi Yousef, who was born from Pakistani-Palestinian parents, drove a van loaded with a 1,310-lb (590kg) bomb of urea nitrate-hydrogen gas enhanced device under Tower one of the World Trade Centre in New York, United States. His intention was to destroy the tower, and hoped that it would fall onto the second tower thus destroying the World Trade Centre. He failed but events in September 11, 2001 sadly succeeded.

On April 19, 1995, Timothy McVeigh, an American citizen, used a Ryder truck to bomb the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma United States. The explosives consisted of several tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and a large quantity of fuel oil, which was detonated by McVeigh igniting a two minute fuse. The explosion resulted in the destruction of the entire north wall of the building along with other buildings in the area and causing many deaths.

Near the end of 2004, hostilities had died down in the Iraq war, but on December 25, 2004 terrorists found a new way of using a large vehicle to attack a target. A large fuel tanker was driven towards the Jordanian Embassy in the Mansour district of Baghdad. The vehicle failed to detonate with any truly destructive force and merely left an orange glow that lit the evening up. The vehicle split in half with one half of the tanker lodged in the gates of the Libyan Embassy and the other half landing in the small courtyard of a house approximately 75 metres away.

In Nice, France on July 14, 2016, Bastille Day, a 19 tonne lorry driven by lone wolf Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhel was driven into a celebrating crowd. He killed 84 people before being stopped. The Islamic State of the Levant, or Da’esh, had discovered a new way to use a large vehicle as a terrorist weapon.

For some time al-Qaeda and Da’esh had been using its online magazines Dabiq and Inspire to conduct lone attacks against the West using any method possible, but since the attack in Nice they have called for their followers to use large vehicles and encouraged them to drive them into large crowds. Certainly Anis Amri who drove the latest heavy vehicle in the Berlin attack listened to them.

The use of such vehicles to carry out this style of attack is likely to continue as they are easily obtained by either hijack, hired, stolen or simply purchased. The stopping of such a vehicle especially when fully laden would defy most barriers and although the small Jersey Barriers would not necessarily stop the vehicle it would certainly slow them down.

In Iraq after the 2003 invasion, and some years after, large vehicles were used to crash through various locations. In order to stop them Jersey barriers were put in place but the terrorists found that they could be breeched. In places where these barriers were in use, several suicide vehicles were used to gain entry to each level. For example on October 24, 2003 three suicide bombers in large vehicles were used to breech the barriers outside the Palestine and Sheridan Hotels in Baghdad, Iraq. This included a cement truck filled with explosives.

The first was used to breech the first layer of barriers; the second to do the same but was mistimed and missed the target. The third driver who was driving around the roundabout waiting his turn saw the explosion and drove his vehicle through the first level, thinking the second had been broken through. He was caught up and rather than being able to detonate his vehicle between the two hotels causing immense damage and death, the driver detonated the device where it had stopped causing little damage.

The lessons learnt from this were several; first where the metal handles were in the top of the barrier, a long thick ‘metal rope’ was placed and woven into all the barriers at that location. Any attempt to drive through them they would be stopped as it would be impossible to drag all the barriers. The second lesson was that where possible, a large wide trench should be dug to prevent access to the barriers.

Of course in a city these types of defence maybe impossible but it would be possible to have points of entry away from main roads and the barriers could be linked together. Another form of defence that could be used in cities is to educate the public by having some sort of air alarm that would be sounded at the start of an attack.

The types of vehicles used in recent attacks are easier to obtain than aircraft and the ability to cause mass casualties is still great but not on the same scale. Authorities are not able to do much in regards to spotting who would carry out such attacks. It is extremely important that all counter-terrorist organisations and Intelligence agencies share and pool knowledge in this area so as to limit those who are on the radar from escaping and eventually stopped before a terrorist act is carried out.

Europe is under siege at the moment and attacks of this type are likely to occur again. Strong measures must be taken to protect the public. Admitted the security forces are doing their best but with so many to watch someone somewhere will escape the net and be able to carry out another dreadful terrorist attack similar to those in Nice and Berlin. The next phase could be the use of plant vehicles such as a JCB which could scoop barriers out the way and drive through causing many fatalities.

Source: The Evolution of Vehicles as a Terrorist Weapon | Paul Ashley | Pulse | LinkedIn

RADICALISATION: IS THIS THE RIGHT PATH TO BE FOLLOWED OR SHOULD WE DO MORE?  France’s challenges for working out a coherent strategy against violent radicalization and terrorism. A broad (and incomplete) outline. |

by Milena Uhlmann

Terrorism isn’t new to the country; in its history, France has experienced a significant number of attacks. In 1995, the GIA-affiliated terrorist network of which Khaled Kelkal was part conducted several attacks, as did the Al Qaida-affiliated gang de Roubaix one year later; but until Mohammed Merah’s murders in 2012 in Toulouse and Montauban, terrorist attacks were treated as political violence in the context of anti-colonial struggles or connected to other kinds of violent conflicts abroad, such as the Bosnian War, rather than as religiously inspired or connected to social, societal and/or political issues within the country, or as some sort of atypical pathology.

Terrorist perpetrators, their networks and milieus were met with repressive instruments – a wider angle of analysis which would have allowed to tackle the threat from a more holistic perspective had not been incorporated in a counter-terrorism policy design.


With some vague kind of sense of urgency developing after an increasing number of young French men and some women started to leave for Syria to join jihadist groups there in 2012/13, the French government put together the “Plan de lutte contre les filières terroristes et la radicalisation violente“ (Action Plan against Terrorist Networks and Violent Radicalization), comprised of 22 measures. This plan dating from April 2014 put priorities on impeding travel to Syria, preventing online jihadist propaganda, the hesitant start of diffusion of so called „counter narratives“, strengthening judicial instruments against jihadist networks and implementing prevention and reintegration strategies.In April the same year, the government created a national hotline (“numéro vert“) as part of a new structure called „Centre national d’assistance et de prévention de la radicalisation“ (National Assistance and Radicalization Prevention Center, CNAPR). Persons believed to be wanting to leave to the region, or to have radicalized / be on the path to radicalization, can since be reported to the CNAPR. The calls are taken by police officers from the “Unité de coordination de la lutte antiterroriste” (Coordination Unit for the Fight Against Terrorism, UCLAT), who are assisted by a psychologist. It receives on average between 60 and 80 calls every day. From the end of April 2014 until end of September 2016, 12.265 alerts had been processed either by the CNAPR or the Security Staff in the prefectures (4.015 of them had been signaled until March 2015, 8.250 until January 2016). In total, 15.000 persons have been signaled through UCLAT, the prefectures or different intelligence services; 80 percent of them are adults, 70 percent of those are males, whilst females make up for the biggest part of the minors. 36 percent are converts. Seven percent of those signaled left to the SYRAQ region, and 20 per cent of them died there. Of the total number of persons, UCLAT is monitoring about 2.000 which are deemed potentially dangerous.

The information gathered and analyzed is forwarded to the prefecture responsible for the region the signaled person lives in as well as to the internal intelligence service (Direction Générale de la Sécurité Intérieure, DGSI). The prefect then notifies the relevant public prosecutor. If the reported case concerns a minor, the prosecutor can then strive for the implementation of educational assistance measures with regard to the family concerned. With the prosecutor’s consent, the prefect also notifies the mayor of the municipality the person concerned lives in. In conjunction with the prosecutor, the prefect orders stings the relevant local follow-up unit into action, which each département (county) was ordered to create in February 2015. Critics argue that this system relies too heavily on state and security services, which is partially keeping people from calling the hotline and working together with the units.

These units consist of state institutions (such as the police, the justice sector and the employment agency), regional and local authorities (such as social services) and local associative networks. Through these different actors, the units are meant to aim at providing tailored measures to assist the families of the individual in question as well as the individual him/herself. A social worker is supposed to be assigned to each case to keep track of the process. Whilst the prefect initiates this action, the role of the mayor is to assure comprehensive and coherent action taking into account the individual situation of the individual in question. Local and intercommunal councils on security and crime prevention (Conseils locaux et intercommunaux de sécurité et de prévention de la délinquance, CLISPD) should be implicated as well. Via the CLISPD, the prefect can entrust a deputy prefect with the mission to take up preventive measures and to create fallow-up units in the counties.

Apart from the fact that CLISPD are only created for municipalities with a population of more than 10.000 inhabitants and consequently this instrument cannot be used in certain rural areas, other structural problems persist: the division of tasks is not always clear, and the phenomenon of radicalization is complex. There is thus some confusion about who can or should do what, and those who find themselves confronted with the phenomenon all too often lack specific knowledge and expertise, as has amongst others been pointed out to by the Association of the Mayors of France (Association des maires de France, AMF).

Furthermore, it is proving difficult to find trained specialists who are capable of working with radicalized persons, and some families are not willing to cooperate with the follow-up unit designed for changing the path of one of their kin. This is stated by the Inter-ministerial Guide for Prevention of Radicalization dating from March 2016, provided by the Inter-ministerial Committee for Prevention of Crime and Radicalization (Comité interministériel de prévention de la délinquance et la radicalisation, CIPDR), the institution in charge of the non-repressive pillar of the French prevention efforts which is also responsible for the monitoring and quality assurance of the work of the follow-up units. In its report to the parliament for the year 2015, the CIPDR is stating that the follow-up units are not being handled coherently, with confusion over the the roles of the different partners, affecting the efficiency of the work of the units.

This is aggravated by the large and steadily growing number of those being followed-up upon with the goal of disengaging them from violence, posing a problem to proper monitoring in general: by 13th October 2016, 2.240 persons had been directed into programs monitored by local units, as well as 972 families (1.600 persons / 800 families in May 2016). Furthermore, a large number of the individuals concerned are at the same time being followed-up upon by the police, implying a heightened level of radicalization of these individuals.


The first actor that had been commissioned with the work of disengagement simultaneously to the creation of the national hotline in April 2014 was the Center for the Prevention of Sectarian Aberrations Linked to Islam (Centre de prévention des dérives sectaires liées à l’Islam, CPDSI). … …  


France’s challenges for working out a coherent strategy against violent radicalization and terrorism. A broad (and incomplete) outline. |


Milena Uhlmann is Associate Fellow at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence (ICSR) in London and the author of various publications on conversion to Islam in Western Europe, radicalization processes and deradicalization approaches. (Latest publication: “Radicalisation et déradicalisation”, co-authored chapter with Asiem El Difraoui in his recent book “Le djihadisme”, Presses Universitaires de France, 2016) Since the Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Cacher attacks until after the Paris attacks of November 13, 2015, she has mainly worked in France on issues related to these phenomena. The views expressed are solely those of the author.

Why the Resilience of Islamist Militants Will Threaten Security Across Africa in 2017

The violence of ISIS and Al-Qaeda affiliates threatens to spread far beyond Nigeria and Somalia.

On December 23 the Nigerian army achieved a significant milestone in its long war against Boko Haram, capturing what was described as the Islamist militant group’s last stronghold in the remote Sambisa Forest in the country’s northeast near the border with Cameroon. On Christmas Eve, President Muhammadu Buhari triumphantly tweeted that it was the “final crushing of the Boko Haram terrorists” who were “on the run and no longer have a place to hide.” The remarkable turnaround of the conflict in less than two years deserves to be applauded, but the latest victory is unlikely to put an end to terrorist attacks in Africa’s most populous country, much less extinguish the flame of militancy and violence that presents one of the biggest obstacles to the otherwise the buoyant economic prospects for the continent, with 2016’s moderate average growth expected to accelerate to 4.5 percent in 2017. Nigeria’s struggle against Boko Haram illustrates both the resilience of the threat and what might be done to counter it.

After years of ceding ground to Boko Haram, so much so that by 2014 the group had consolidated its hold over a territory larger than Belgium and proclaimed a self-styled “emirate,” the Nigerian armed forces adopted a new strategy and began fighting back. While the counterattack began in the waning days of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration, things began to change after Buhari, a retired major-general, won a historic (and decisive) election victory over the incumbent in March 2015, in part by promising to defeat the militants.

Cashiering his predecessor’s military chiefs shortly after taking office, Buhari installed new commanders, including a chief of army staff, Lieutenant-General Tukur Yusuf Buratai, who is a native of Borno, the epicenter of the insurgency. He also moved command headquarters close to the fighting. Since then, in concert with a multinational force from neighboring countries, the Nigerian military has pursued an aggressive strategy, combining an intensive air campaign with a surge of troops on the ground, gradually pushing Boko Haram out of the towns it occupied and, increasingly, in remote hideouts like “Camp Zero,” the base that fell on December 23.

Along the way, as I had the opportunity to witness firsthand in November when I toured the battlefront, the Nigerian army also took on the task of not only providing security to the populations it liberated, but also, until aid groups and development organizations returned, providing humanitarian relief, medical assistance, and even education and livelihood training. For example, the civil-military operations carried out by the battalion I spent time with in Pulka, just a few kilometers from what were at the time Boko Haram positions in the Sambisa Forest, were critical to the wellbeing of the community and served to rally the population to support the government’s push against the militant group.

Notwithstanding the success of the military operations, Boko Haram remains a force to be reckoned with. In response to defeats, the militants shifted tactics, expanding their use of suicide bombings, most of which have targeted the civilian population. Just days before the capture of its forest bastion, Boko Haram staged a pair of attacks on a busy market in the town of Madagali that left 56 people dead and more than 120 wounded. Nor does its most recent setback seem to be having much effect on the terrorists’ operational tempo: two suicide bombers struck in northern Cameroon on Christmas Day and another attacked a busy cattle market in Maiduguri, capital of Borno State, the next day. Moreover, Boko Haram’s elusive longtime leader Abubakar Shekau surfaced this week in a new video in which he claimed that he and his followers were “safe” and would continue their fight “to establish an Islamic Caliphate” separate from Nigeria. Alongside the strengths of Boko Haram, the Nigerian military faced its own frustration in its attempts to purchase aircraft and other military platforms from the United States; it recently turned to Russia and Pakistan to obtain warplanes after a proposal to buy American-made A-29 Super Tucano attack planes stalled.

Meanwhile, the schism within Boko Haram may be contributing to the intensification, rather than diminution, of violence as both factions try to outdo each other in staging attacks. In early 2015, Boko Haram pledged allegiance to the militant group Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and formally rebranded itself as the “Islamic State West Africa Province;” however, the group split between those loyal to Shekau and those now following Abu Musab al-Barnawi, whom ISIS appointed as the new “governor” (wali) of its “province” in August. Even if the group was weakened in Nigeria, militants still spilled into neighboring countries, causing Cameroon and Niger, for example, to rise in the 2016 edition of the Global Terrorism Index to 13th place and 16th place, respectively.

Resilience is a characteristic shared not only by ISIS-aligned groups in Africa like Boko Haram, but also al-Qaeda affiliates such as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and Somalia’s al-Shabaab. Despite being mauled by the French-led intervention in Mali in 2013, AQIM has bounced back to stage a series of deadly attacks in 2016, including hits on luxury hotels in Burkina Faso and Ivory Coast, countries that had not previously not been hit by terrorism.

In Somalia, despite punishing U.S. airstrikes, al-Shabab appears far from finished. Notwithstanding the presence of a 20,000-strong African Union force in the country to prop up the weak but internationally backed government, al-Shabab continues to be able to regularly seize control of towns like Mahadaay, a strategic crossroads the militants took over on December 19 after driving out regime soldiers. This came just days after the militants briefly overran El Wak, a town near the border with Kenya, a country that has repeatedly suffered attacks by al-Shabab in the last year.

The continuing threat posed by these varied militant groups is the result of their exploitation of local conflicts and social, economic, and political marginalization, as well as the fragile condition of many of the states affected. This weakness often manifests in a low capacity to resist militants overall and a tendency towards ham-fisted responses that aggravate grievances. In some cases, defeat spurs the extremists to adapt new strategies that result in renewed vigor—an example is the fragmentation of AQIM’s organization in the Sahel in the wake of the Mali intervention. The multiplication of factions along ethnic lines facilitated both the members’ blending into local populations and their making inroads among them; one splinter group, the ethnic-Fulani jihadist Macina Liberation Front, freed 93 suspected militants in a jailbreak in early December.

In other instances, the manifest failure to achieve political settlements propels the resurgence of otherwise weakened militant groups—in Somalia, the utter fiasco of the process for selecting a new government in Somalia, including the sale of electoral seats for up to $1.3 million and the recent postponement for the fourth time of the presidential vote, serves as an example. New instability, such as the crisis now underway in the Democratic Republic of the Congo thanks to President Joseph Kabila’s decision to hold on to power despite his term of office expiring on December 19, presents armed movements with additional opportunities, underscored by the recent massacre of civilians in the country’s east.

Even where they do not pose an existential threat to the states affected, the various militant jihadists currently active across Africa can have a disproportionate impact on their fortunes. Counterinsurgency campaigns are expensive affairs that divert resources from the investments in infrastructure, education, and health, which Africa’s emerging economies need to make if they are position themselves to take advantage of the current growth opportunities. Ivory Coast may be Africa’s new economic powerhouse, with a diversified economy and growth in 2016 expected to hit 8.5 percent, the second-highest in the world, but more attacks such as the one in March by AQIM can still scare off foreign investors who are just beginning to discover its potential. The stakes are even higher for country like Nigeria: Africa’s biggest economy slipped into recession this year and continued insecurity—not just from Boko Haram, but also militant groups in the oil-producing southeast such as the Niger Delta Avengers —doesn’t help.


Why the Resilience of Islamist Militants Will Threaten Security Across Africa in 2017

“Nothing to do with Islam”?


It is my personal opinion that the following article opens an important perspective on the Islamic world and how it is perceived or “misperceived” from us “Westerners.”

Personally, I do not 100% agree with the vision described, also because I know many Muslims that have nothing to do with this “interpretation” of the Muslim religion, but It remain the fact that we should all stop to always try to justify and disconnect the extremist part of Islam from the “general Islam”.

The most important thing that we should all understand is that “terrorism” triggered on religion cannot be treated like any other form of Terrorism.  In fact, if with “general terroristic groups” (thus not triggered by faith) there is always the possibility to “find an exit”, with religious terrorism there is no chance.

How could you say to a person who acts in the name of a god, that god has changed his mind? 

I live to you all any further consideration on this article, and more generally on the “big issue”.

Danilo Amelotti


Until religious leaders stand up and take responsibility for the actions of those who do things in the name of their religion, we will see no resolution.” — The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.”

The Islamic State is a byproduct of Al Azhar’s programs… Al Azhar says there must be a caliphate and that it is an obligation for the Muslim world. Al Azhar teaches the law of apostasy and killing the apostate. Al Azhar is hostile towards religious minorities, and teaches things like not building churches… Al Azhar teaches stoning people. So can Al Azhar denounce itself as un-Islamic?” — Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Nasr, a scholar of Islamic law and graduate of Egypt’s Al Azhar University.

The jihadists who carry out terrorist attacks in the service of ISIS, for example, are merely following the commands in the Quran, both 9:5, “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them…” and Quran 8:39, “So fight them until there is no more fitna [strife] and all submit to the religion of Allah.

“Archbishop Welby — and Egypt’s extraordinary President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi — has finally had the courage to say in public that if one insists on remaining “religiously illiterate,” it is impossible to solve the problem of religiously motivated violence.

For the first time, a European establishment figure from the Church has spoken out against an argument exonerating ISIS and frequently peddled by Western political and cultural elites. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, speaking in France on November 17, said that dealing with the religiously-motivated violence in Europe”

requires a move away from the argument that has become increasingly popular, which is to say that ISIS is ‘nothing to do with Islam’… Until religious leaders stand up and take responsibility for the actions of those who do things in the name of their religion, we will see no resolution.

“Archbishop Welby also said that, “It’s very difficult to understand the things that impel people to some of the dreadful actions that we have seen over the last few years unless you have some sense of religious literacy”.

“Religious literacy” has indeed been in short supply, especially on the European continent. Nevertheless, all over the West, people with little-to-no knowledge of Islam, including political leaders, journalists and opinion makers, have all suddenly become “experts” on Islam and the Quran, assuring everybody that ISIS and other similarly genocidal terrorist groups have nothing to do with the purported “religion of peace,” Islam.

It is therefore striking finally to hear a voice from the establishment, especially a man of the Church, oppose, however cautiously, this curiously uniform (and stupefyingly uninformed) view of Islam. Until now, establishment Churches, despite the atrocities committed against Christians by Muslims, have been exceedingly busy only with so-called “inter-faith dialogue.” Pope Francis has even castigated Europeans for not being even more accommodating towards the migrants who have overwhelmed the continent, asking Europeans:

“What has happened to you, the Europe of humanism, the champion of human rights, democracy and freedom?… the mother of great men and women who upheld, and even sacrificed their lives for, the dignity of their brothers and sisters?

“(Perhaps the Pope, before rhetorically asking Europeans to sacrifice their lives for their migrant “brothers and sisters” should ask himself whether many of the Muslim migrants in Europe consider Europeans their “brothers and sisters”?)

A statement on Islam is especially significant coming from the Archbishop of Canterbury, the senior bishop and principal leader of the Anglican Church and the symbolic head of the Anglican Communion, which stands at around 85 million members worldwide, the third-largest communion in the world.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby (left), recently said that dealing with the religiously-motivated violence in Europe “requires a move away from the argument that has become increasingly popular, which is to say that ISIS is ‘nothing to do with Islam’… Until religious leaders stand up and take responsibility for the actions of those who do things in the name of their religion, we will see no resolution.” (Image source: Foreign and Commonwealth Office)

Only a year ago, commenting on the Paris massacres, the Archbishop followed conventional politically correct orthodoxy, pontificating that, “The perversion of faith is one of the most desperate aspects of our world today.” He explained that Islamic State terrorists have distorted their faith to the extent that they believe they are glorifying their God. Since then, he has clearly changed his mind.

Can one expect other Church leaders and political figures to heed Archbishop Welby’s words, or will they be conveniently overlooked? Western leaders have noticeably practiced selective hearing for many years and ignored truths that did not fit the “narrative” politicians apparently wished to imagine, especially when spoken by actual experts on Islam. When, in November 2015, Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Nasr, a scholar of Islamic law and graduate of Egypt’s Al Azhar University, explained why the prestigious institution, which educates mainstream Islamic scholars, refused to denounce ISIS as un-Islamic, none of them was listening:

“The Islamic State is a byproduct of Al Azhar’s programs. So can Al Azhar denounce itself as un-Islamic? Al Azhar says there must be a caliphate and that it is an obligation for the Muslim world. Al Azhar teaches the law of apostasy and killing the apostate. Al Azhar is hostile towards religious minorities, and teaches things like not building churches, etc. Al Azhar upholds the institution of jizya [extracting tribute from non-Muslims]. Al Azhar teaches stoning people. So can Al Azhar denounce itself as un-Islamic?”

Nor did Western leaders listen when The Atlantic, hardly an anti-establishment periodical, published a study by Graeme Wood, who researched the Islamic State and its ideology in depth. He spoke to members of the Islamic State and Islamic State recruiters and concluded:

“The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam”.

In the United States, another establishment figure, Reince Priebus, Chairman of the Republican National Committee and Donald Trump’s incoming White House Chief of Staff, recently made statements to the same effect as the Archbishop of Canterbury. “Clearly there are some aspects of that faith that are problematic and we know them; we’ve seen it,” Priebus said when asked to comment on incoming National Security Adviser former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s view that Islam is a political ideology that hides behind being a religion.

In much of American society, Flynn’s view that Islam is a political ideology is considered controversial, despite the fact that the political and military doctrines of Islam, succinctly summarized in the concept of jihad, are codified in Islamic law, sharia, as found in the Quran and the hadiths. The jihadists who carry out terrorist attacks in the service of ISIS, for example, are merely following the commands in the Quran, both 9:5, “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them…” and Quran 8:39, “So fight them until there is no more fitna [strife] and all submit to the religion of Allah.”

The question becomes, then, whether other establishment figures will also acknowledge what someone like Archbishop Welby — and Egypt’s extraordinary President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi — has finally had the courage to say in public: that if one insists on remaining “religiously illiterate,” it is impossible to solve the problem of religiously motivated violence.

Judith Bergman is a writer, columnist, lawyer and political analyst.

Source: “Nothing to do with Islam”?

Inside the Secret Rescue of Yazidi Sex Slaves From ISIS Captors – NBC News

DUHOK, Iraq — It was dark as the car sped along a small road on the outskirts of the embattled Iraqi city of Mosul. The car was driving fast, but not so fast as to draw attention. That was essential. The lives of the two men in the front seat depended on their ability to keep a low profile and pass through undetected.In the passenger seat, Khaleel Al-Dhaki was focused on the secret mission he was leading to rescue a Yazidi woman and her child, both of whom were taken by ISIS and dragged into Mosul.”This kind of operation can’t be done during daytime,” he later told NBC News. “We are basically going in there to kidnap them back from ISIS.”

Al-Dhaki, a lawyer by training, runs a small team of activists who regularly make dangerous trips into ISIS territory to rescue Yazidi women, members of a non-Muslim minority that live mostly in northern Iraq.

“Saving a soul is the best thing a man can do,” Al-Dhaki said. “You get more motivated when you watch them meeting their families. I can’t describe the moment of the reunion. We devote our whole lives to rescuing these women.”

Al-Dhaki estimates ISIS kidnapped around 7,000 Yazidis and that roughly 3,000 of them managed to escape on their own or were ransomed out of bondage. The fate of 1,000 Yazidi men remains unknown, he adds.

That leaves, by his calculation, some 3,000 Yazidi women and children like Leila and Ahmed in ISIS’ hands.

Al-Dhaki estimates ISIS kidnapped around 7,000 Yazidis and that roughly 3,000 of them managed to escape on their own or were ransomed out of bondage. The fate of 1,000 Yazidi men remains unknown, he adds.

That leaves, by his calculation, some 3,000 Yazidi women and children like Leila and Ahmed in ISIS’ hands.

He had arranged to pick up a 23-year-old woman and her 3-year-old son. Although he shared her real name with NBC News, al-Dhaki asked that she be called “Leila” — for her safety and the safety of other Yazidis held by ISIS. Leila had managed to leave her captor’s home and go with her son to a safe house that al-Dhaki’s team had secured for them.

Leila spoke to NBC News of her “marriage” to an ISIS fighter, the rape and the abuse she went through while in ISIS captivity. Marc Smith / NBC News

Now, outside that safe house, Leila and her son were climbing into the car. She was wearing a headscarf that left her face uncovered. She appeared terrified and sat silently as the car passed other vehicles along the road, each one potentially driven by an ISIS fighter.

The boy, whom NBC News is calling “Ahmed,” slept in his mother’s arms in the backseat.

The extraction was a success. Relatives were waiting to receive Leila and Ahmed once they were safely out of ISIS territory.

They cried, hugged and kissed one another before driving into Kurdish-held territory near the Turkish border, far away from ISIS. Leila and her son had been gone for two-and-a-half years.

“They took my husband away from me and gave me to an ISIS fighter. They married me to him,” she told NBC News. Leila is now a refugee living with relatives in a tented camp. Her own village is still occupied by ISIS.

Leila spoke hesitantly, struggling to finish her sentences. She described how, after the trauma of being separated from her husband and being forced to marry another man, she was “resold” twice again to other ISIS radicals. ISIS fighters seemed to trade Yazidi women like baseball cards.

Leila’s last rapist was a squat, thickly-built Iraqi fighter with an unkempt beard that fell to his chest. His wife was also an ISIS fanatic.

“I hated her even more than him,” Leila said. “She would beat my son.”

Children ‘Not the Same’

As Leila spoke, Ahmed was crying and throwing whatever he picked up from the carpet covering the tent’s floor. For most of his life, Ahmed had been surrounded by violent armed men. To prevent Leila from escaping, her ISIS captor would take Ahmed with him when he went to ISIS headquarters, where acts of savage brutality were carried out.

Once the the Mosul offensive began, Leila said her captor and his wife wore explosive suicide vests in their home, ready to kill and die if U.S.-backed Iraqi troops came knocking.

How had all of this shaped Ahmed during his formative years? Al-Dhaki said many of the Yazidi children he has rescued remain troubled.

“They need help. They are showing signs of violence. They are not the same as before,” he said.

Leila said that Ahmed had seen beheading videos and passed by the body of a crucified man on the street. She doesn’t know what he saw during those long hours at ISIS headquarters.


Continue reading at Source: Inside the Secret Rescue of Yazidi Sex Slaves From ISIS Captors – NBC News

Ed io commento: Stupendo discorso di Putin sull’identità cristiana 

Stupendo discorso di Putin sull’identità cristiana e sulla deriva antropologica degli stati occidentali e la loro sistematica distruzione delle loro radici umane e cristiane, senza le quali, si ritorna al primitivismo da cui il Vangelo e la Chiesa ci hanno affrancati.

Forse mi ripeto,

ma la russia e tutte le sue Istituzioni, nei decenni passati sono sempre stati il Nemico della democrazia e dell’occidente.  All’epoca dei muri e della guerra fredda la Russia era considerata Il demonio, ed ogni cittadino di quella terra era o Nemico o persona da salvare da oppressione e dittatura.

Non che all’epoca ciò non fosse vero, e non che i passati governanti o reggenti Russi non fossero (in fin dei conti) dei meri e talvolta spietati dittatori (o forse non voglio realmente credere che tutto quel che ci insegnavano, dicevano ed inculcavano fosse falso): ma oggi la frittata si sta girando, e quelli che erano nemici stanno diventando gli unici alleati, mentre quelli che erano amici, stanno diventando dei dittatori.

Le mie sono forse affermazioni forti, ma cerchiamo di capire che Identità nazionale, identità culturale, libertà “VERA” di pensiero e di parola iniziano realmente a sparire sotto colpi di “democrazie imposte” e strategie folli.  Noi oggi viviamo i nostri governi con la paura, con l’abbandono del credo, e con la massima sfiducia in quello che potrà essere il nostro futuro.  E giorno dopo giorno, video dopo video, parola dopo parola, molti iniziano ad accorgersi che di là da quel muro o confine che ieri era la nostra protezione, oggi sembra esserci un  “salvatore”, o perlomeno, l’unica persona in grado di dire come stanno le cose e capace di mandare avanti un idea “democratica ma vera e severa”.

Personalmente non credo che ci possa essere uno stravolgimento totale degli assetti e che chi ieri era cattivo oggi sia solo buono e chi ieri era buono, oggi sia completamente il cattivo, ma la cosa mi fa riflettere molto e spero, anzi prego che faccia riflettere molti, soprattutto coloro i quali oggi e domani hanno la responsabilità di governare le nostre nazioni! Per ora lasciatemi dire che le parole ascoltate in questo (come in altri) discorso di Putin sono da me condivise al 100%.

Danilo Amelotti

Source e video a : Stupendo discorso di Putin sull’identità cristiana –

Police raids to crackdown on ISIS stronghold in Europe as extremists secretly buy up land – Mirror Online

The swoops follow an exclusive Sunday Mirror investigation which revealed that IS had developed new training grounds in Balkan countries.

Local security services have staged a series of raids in Balkan countries following revelations that Islamic State terrorists have been secretly buying up land in mainland Europe.

The swoops follow an exclusive Sunday Mirror investigation which revealed that IS had developed new training grounds in the region.

Locals in the Bosnian village of Osve told our investigators that they regularly heard gunshots and a terrorism expert warned that the village is “a major threat” after it become a hideout for terrorists on the run, and a training centre for new recruits before they go to fight in Syria and Iraq.

Raids took place in five major cities across Macedonia, including the capital Skopje, and were aimed at smashing a network of recruiters and organisers for the terrorist group.

Macedonian police raided 25 homes, the Yaya Pasha and Tutunsuz mosque in Skopje, an internet cafe and the offices of two Islam-linked NGOs identified as Spark of Grace and Islamic Youth.

The nine arrested are aged between 19 and 49 and have all been detained for 30 days as police continue their investigation.

Now a senior police source in Kosovo has warned that IS is preparing a huge attack on mainland Europe.

The nine arrested are aged between 19 and 49 and have all been detained for 30 days as police continue their investigation.

Now a senior police source in Kosovo has warned that IS is preparing a huge attack on mainland Europe.

“When the attack comes it will come from Europe, not Syria.”

The entire region is now on red alert and police in Macedonia admitted this week that they have arrested nine IS terrorists and revealed they are hunting 27 more.

Interior minister Mitko Chavkov said: “The mere fact that these people were present on those battlefields and have returned here is an indicator that terrorist acts against Macedonia are a real possibility.”

Source: Police raids to crackdown on ISIS stronghold in Europe as extremists secretly buy up land – Mirror Online

Per fare politica senza fucili ci vogliono le “PALLE”!!! In Risposta all’articolo di Vittorio Feltri “L’Europa dei pirla non sa temere l’odio islamico”

Caro Direttore Feltri,

ho potuto leggere con attenzione il suo articolo “l’Europa dei pirla non sa temere l’odio islamico”  e mi permetta di dirle in tutta franchezza che non mi trova d’accordo.

Onestamente, seppur io condivida con lei i timori di un Islam estremista e minaccioso, e soprattutto di come il nostro sistema politico Italiano ed Europeo sta reagendo sia al problema del terrorismo, sia al problema dell’immigrazione, non riesco onestamente a condividere ne le sue mire guerrafondaie ne tantomeno molte delle idee proposte.  Il suo grido di paura la dice lunga sul sentimento che anima il suo articolo e su come probabilmente ciò’ che lei afferma derivi più da quella paura radicata piuttosto che da una reale analisi della situazione e delle possibili reazioni della nostra società.

Mi permetta di essere un minimo arrogante nelle mie affermazioni, ma io che la guerra l’ho vissuta sulle mie spalle probabilmente ho un idea ben più chiara e lucida di cosa essa possa essere, e soprattutto a dove essa possa portare.

Come ho scritto nel mio articolo “dubbio e terrorismo, un binomio da sconfiggere” non deve essere il dubbio (che poi si tramuta in paura) a gestire e manovrare le nostre decisioni e reazioni, bensì un approfondita analisi della situazione ed una reazione a livello politico forte e decisa, che infonda da una parte la tranquillità nella popolazione e dall’altra la consapevolezza che nessuno potrà mai imporre al popolo libero Europeo qualsivoglia ideologia religiosa o culturale differente da quelle accettate.

Leggendo il suo articolo mi è subito venuta in mente una breve proiezione pratica di quelle che sono le idee da lei espresse: ho visto campi di concentramento come quelli aperti da Nazisti e fascisti durante la seconda guerra mondiale per eliminare il popolo ebreo dalla faccia della terra, ho visto battaglie senza quartiere nelle strade delle nostre città, e morte e devastazione in ogni angolo della nostra bella Europa (perché se veramente lei vuole la guerra deve sapere che l’Europa sarà il campo di battaglia!): onestamente parlando, mi lasci dire che è un eresia!  Come pensa si possa fare una guerra con pugnale e fucile contro tutto il mondo Islamico?  Pensa davvero che questa sia la soluzione migliore ed unica? O forse voleva solo fare scalpore, ma in fin dei conti neanche lei crede alle parole ed affermazioni che scrive?

Certo che se è la paura a muovere le nostre decisioni, allora probabilmente quella guerra che lei dice necessaria si verificherà: tutti in nome della paura prenderanno armi e bombe a mano e si getteranno contro chiunque sia di fede mussulmana, cercando di estirpare per sempre quello che lei dichiara essere il male del mondo. Ma come abbiamo imparato dalla storia e come ci insegna la medicina con gli antibiotici, fare una guerra preventiva non poterà all’eliminazione della minaccia, ma solo all’irrobustimento dell’idea e della forza di chi di estremismo e paura vuol farci vivere!

Nel suo articolo accenna all’attentato occorso ad Utøya, in Norvegia, il 22 Luglio 2011. Parlando di quell’evento, forse (come lei dice) nel tentativo di immedesimarsi in quelle vittime, lei scrive “La loro paura li disarmò, li spinse a nascondersi. Se gli andavano addosso insieme, tremando come foglie di sicuro, ma stringendosi l’uno all’altro per la fifa, il killer ne avrebbe stecchiti quattro o cinque, poi gli altri 595 avrebbero sbranato quell’Anders Breivik, che adesso, condannato a 21 anni, è triste per non averne ammazzati abbastanza”.  

Direttore mi permetta di dissentire con forza dalla sua teoria: io qua vedo chiaramente una persona che è si abituata a scrivere, ma che di guerra, combattimenti, paura di morire, etc probabilmente non sa veramente niente!  soldati e poliziotti addestrati, nonostante armati e preparati, spesso esitano a rispondere con forza ad un aggressore armato che spara contro di loro!  E lei veramente pensa che un gruppo (per quanto folto) di ragazzi “sprovveduti, disarmati ed impauriti come forse è lei ora”, si sarebbe potuto scagliare contro la minaccia? E veramente crede che se anche lo avessero fatto ne sarebbero morti solo quattro o cinque?  No direttore, ne sarebbero morti ben di più ed in fine, probabilmente si sarebbero comunque dispersi alla vista dei primi compagni caduti!

Direttore Feltri, la guerra, quella vera, non la si fa scrivendo con un olivetti 32, ma con le armi e soprattutto con il sangue di migliaia di uomini, donne e bambini!

Se veramente vuole vuole usare la sua olivetti 32, e vuole che le cose cambino, allora dovrà iniziare a scrivere a chiare lettere che la politica debole dell’attuale Europa deve essere sostituita da una politica con le Palle!  Non si può combattere l’estremismo con un altro estremismo, ne si può decidere quale sia la mossa migliore da fare con la paura!  Bensì bisogna avere le palle per fare una politica seria ed anche difficile.

Certo fino a quando i nostri politici e giornalisti agiranno in base alla possibilità di consensi e di vittorie politiche, allora sarà difficile cambiare ogni cosa, e probabilmente quella guerra da lei nominata sarà inevitabile.  Viceversa, se i nostri politici, anche a costo di andare contro l’idea comune della parte rappresentata, saranno capaci di imporre a chiunque viva in Europa i dettami Europei, le leggi Europee e la cultura Europea, allora forse tra 10 o 20 anni quell’integrazione con cui oggi molti politici e giornalisti si riempiono la bocca, diverrà realtà!

Cordiali saluti

Danilo Amelotti


Leggi l’Articolo di Vittorio Feltri

L’Europa dei pirla non sa temere l’odio islamico


Ho paura. Ho deciso di vantarmene. E mi assumo il compito di propagarla. Mi rendo conto. Non si comincia così un libro contro la morte che arriva al galoppo impugnando la scimitarra. Non è molto nobile. Si deve cominciare con un grido di guerra. Eppure, lo confesso: ho deciso di buttare la fifa oltre l’ostacolo.

Ho paura adesso, e anche per dopo. Per quando queste mie pagine saranno in giro per l’Italia.

E qualche frase rimbalzerà su Internet. S’incazzeranno, oh se si incazzeranno. Perché ho intenzione di scrivere la verità su quel che ha, in testa e nella pancia, non solo la gentaglia con le bandiere nere e le mani sul collo di poveri prigionieri vestiti di arancione, ma anche il musulmano dal dolce sorriso ospite di trasmissioni tivù, dispiaciuto per i morti e nemico, come no, del terrorismo. Prevedo l’accusa di provocatore irresponsabile. Papa Francesco dirà che mi merito un pugno. Portatemi pure in tribunale, sempre meglio dell’obitorio, a cui siamo destinati in tanti se la paura non ci desterà dal sonno dei pirla.

Dirò qui la verità sugli islamici e il loro Allah con il Profeta Maometto appresso. Non la Verità con la V maiuscola, per carità. La verità con la v minuscola ritengo sia la più importante acquisizione della mia vita. Ho imparato ad attingerla con il cucchiaio dell’osservazione e dell’esperienza, senza presumere divine rivelazioni. Non c’è bisogno di essere arabisti per capire, anche senza assaporarne i suoni aspirati, che il Corano ha in sé una potenza distruttiva assoluta verso chiunque manifesti un sussulto di libertà e dica no al dominio di un libro che si è fatto Dio, così come si sono fatti suoi boia coloro che lo impugnano.

Continua a leggere a: L’Europa dei pirla non sa temere l’odio islamico –

La mia lettera in risposta alle affermazioni della Sig.ra Federica Mogherini…

Cara Sig.ra Federica Mogherini,

Come ultimamente sembra essere un “must” di voi politici con le questioni concernenti Immigrazione, Islam, Integrazione etc, anche lei sembra aver travisato completamente i reali problemi e le reali necessità della nostra Europa.  Chi le parla non è ne un laureato ne un Politico, bensì un cittadino Italiano che per ben 25 anni ha servito con onore e rispetto la bandiera e la patria Italiana, e che (me lo lasci dire) di Islam, mussulmani, integrazione etc ne ha visto molto.

Se avrà mai opportunità e voglia di leggere questo articolo ed i miei scritti passati, potrà notare che non sono ne un estremista, ne tantomeno una persona alla quale piace fare di tutta un erba un fascio.

Ma tra il non essere un estremista, e l’aprire le porte liberamente a culture tendenzialmente devastanti, mi permetta, c’è un enorme differenza, e mi lasci spiegare il perché!

Noi, sia Italiani sia più generalmente Europei, conviviamo con molte razze e culture da secoli.  Dal dopo guerra a oggi, a parte problemi “minoritari”, non si sono mai verificati grossi scontri tra le culture, (almeno fino al nuovo millennio); ciò è stato permesso sia da una politica culturale seria e certa, che quindi non ha permesso a possibili “estremisti” di approfittarsi di situazioni o debolezze, sia da un flusso migratorio “contenuto”, che quindi ha permesso una maggiore possibilità di integrazione e transizione ai popoli.

Oggi la questione è ben differente:  Voi politici odierni non siete stati, ne siete, ne (a parer mio) sarete mai capaci di dare certezze ed infondere quella sicurezza che serve ai popoli per non cadere nel vortice della paura (creata dal dubbio del domani e delle vostre scelte scellerate); viceversa, ogni volta vi se ne presenti l’occasione, dimostrate al popolo europeo che l’ospite ha il diritto e la ragione sul padrone di casa.  Ogni volta che un ospite batte i piedi in terra e pretende qualcosa voi glielo date, anche quando ciò arreca grave danno al cittadino Europeo.  Oggi gridate tutti ad un integrazione, cercate di darci lezione di comportamento e di accoglienza, ma non vi peritate a tagliare i diritti del cittadino in favore dei capricci dell’ospite.

Allora forse sarebbe il caso che ricominciaste a pensare seriamente a quali siano le priorità ed a come un integrazione possa essere possibile nel futuro.  Un buon inizio sarebbe quello di prendere in mano le leggi e le regole di quei paesi Islamici ove vige un “comune e quieto vivere” tra le razze e le religioni (UAE in primis) e notare che li l’integrazione funziona perché gli “stranieri ospiti” vengo trattati si bene, ma da loro viene preteso il rispetto della legge e delle culture locali!  In UAE non esiste Arabo che debba cedere la sua casa o i suoi territori a Immigrati, gli immigrati clandestini quasi non esistono e se vengono trovati vengono immediatamente incarcerati e processati/espulsi! In UAE vige la libera professione della fede, ma attenzione ciò non significa mai che il popolo locale debba adattare le sue credenze e le sue tradizioni all’ospite!!! per capirci meglio Sig.ra Mogherini, mentre voi fate togliere i crocifissi dalle scuole per accondiscendere alle richieste di “pochi ma estremisti”, generando quindi quell’intolleranza che lei critica nel suo discorso, nei paesi Arabi tolleranti nessuno si può azzardare a chiedere di avere un crocefisso nella scuola pubblica!!! E questo non è razzismo come voi volete far credere, questo è solo il comune senso della ragione di un sano padrone di casa!

Allora Sig.ra Mogherini, prima di dire cose di cui lei stessa un domani si potrebbe pentire, cerchi di individuare dove realmente siano i problemi, e se veramente vuole dare lezione di civiltà e cultura, inizi a farlo con i suoi colleghi!

Concludo dicendole che a parer mio l’integrazione tra quella parte di Islamici moderati che vive in Europa ed il resto dei cittadini europei già esiste, e funziona anche bene.  Io vivo in Germania, una nazione che ha un alta percentuale di Islamici immigrati, e non mi pare che qua viva o persista una situazione di razzismo o estremismo. Certo le mele marce esistono ovunque, ma queste non fanno sicuramente statistica.  Allora forse se capisce questo capirà che il razzismo e l’intolleranza che si legge sui giornali tra i popoli è causata sicuramente più dal vostro urlare ai quattro venti per guadagnare consensi (sia contro sia a favore) piuttosto che da una situazione reale! Ciò che sicuramente oggi sta turbando un po’ tutti è la vostra incapacità totale a gestire le emergenze sia di Immigrazione sia di terrorismo; continuate a urlare al lupo al lupo ma non riuscite mai a creare delle situazioni stabili o a infondere certezze nelle popolazioni. Viceversa, anche con queste sue ultime affermazioni, non fate altro che caricare la molla dell’intolleranza, che prima o poi vi/ci scoppierà in mano!

Un cordiale saluto.

Danilo Amelotti

Di seguito il testo del Post di Magdi Cristiano Allam dove leggerete alcuni passi del discorso della Sig.ra Mogherini

Cari amici, Federica Mogherini, esponente del Pd che ricopre la carica di Alto Commissario per la Politica Estera e della Sicurezza dell’Unione Europea, ha fatto il 24 giugno a Bruxelles l’elogio dell’islam, sostenendo che “l’islam appartiene all’Europa” nel passato, nel presente e nel futuro. A suo avviso anche i partiti religiosi islamici dovrebbero poter essere ammessi in seno alla nostra democrazia.

Mi domando in che mondo viva. I partiti religiosi islamici sono banditi nella gran parte dei paesi musulmani e lei li vorrebbe legalizzare in Europa. Ripete che i terroristi islamici non hanno nulla a che fare con l’islam. Secondo lei denunciare l’islam sarebbe una forma di razzismo.

Cari amici, liberiamoci al più presto di questa Europa relativista e di questa sinistra filo-islamica. Ecco alcuni stralci del discorso della Mogherini.

“L’idea di uno scontro tra islam e “Occidente” – una parola in cui tutto è messo insieme e confuso – ha indotto in errore le nostre politiche e le nostre narrazioni. L’islam ha un posto nelle nostre società occidentali. L’islam appartiene all’Europa, occupa un posto nella storia dell’Europa, nella nostra cultura, nel nostro cibo e – ciò che più conta – nel presente e futuro dell’Europa. Che piaccia o no, questa è la realtà”.

“Alcune persone stanno ora cercando di convincerci che un musulmano non può essere un buon cittadino europeo, che con più musulmani in Europa sarà la fine dell’Europa. Queste persone non sono solo sbagliano sui musulmani. Queste persone si sbagliano sull’ Europa, non hanno idea di cosa sono l’Europa e l’identità europea”.

“Il cosiddetto Stato islamico sta portando avanti un tentativo senza precedenti di pervertire l’islam per giustificare un progetto politico e strategico malvagio. … L’Isis è il peggior nemico dell’islam nel mondo di oggi. Le sue vittime sono prima di tutto persone musulmane. L’islam è una vittima stessa dell’Isis”.

“Io non ho paura di dire che l’islam politico dovrebbe essere parte del quadro. La religione gioca un ruolo nella politica. Non sempre per il bene, non sempre per il male. La religione può essere parte del processo. Ciò che fa la differenza è se il processo è democratico o no”.

“Forse dovremmo anche prendere il tempo di rispolverare ‘” acquis” di alcuni Stati membri. Abbiamo un problema di coerenza interna… Abbiamo sostenuto la “campagna per riportare le nostre ragazze”, per aiutare le ragazze nigeriane rapite da Boko Haram. C’è una tale contraddizione di solidarietà quando queste ragazze sono lontane e la nostra mancanza di solidarietà quando sono alla nostra porta. Questo è impossibile da sostenere. Nei prossimi giorni e mesi abbiamo bisogno di trovare soluzioni, non solo per le ragazze in Nigeria, ma per le loro sorelle e madri e figlie che sono costrette a fuggire dagli stessi movimenti radicalizzati”.

“Qualsiasi tentativo di dividere i popoli d’Europa in “noi” e “loro” ci porta nella direzione sbagliata. I migranti e noi. I musulmani e noi. Gli ebrei e noi. L’ “altro” e noi. Abbiamo imparato dalla nostra storia che tutti noi siamo “altro” di qualcun altro. La paura dell’altro non può che portare a nuovi conflitti”.

via (11) Cari amici, Federica Mogherini, esponente del Pd… – Magdi Cristiano Allam.

Allerta nei porti italiani: possibili attacchi via mare –

Vi sembrerà strano o addirittura esagerato, ma pensate, ora si temono attacchi anche sulla parte adriatica della nostra bella costa Italiana!

Strano che tutti i nostri esperti di antiterrorismo ed i nostri vari ministri si accorgano solo ora, cioè dopo quello che è successo in Siria, che forse l’Italia ha tanti lati e tanti punti deboli!

Io aspetto ancora i grandi titoli di giornale che diranno che ci aspettiamo attacchi interni studiati dai residenti ed attuati da qualche immigrato clandestino nella sua strada verso il nord!

Il Viminale si accorge che la minaccia jihadista arriva anche dai Balcani. Tra gli obiettivi sensibili, aggiornati dopo la recente spirale di attacchi in Francia, Tunisia e Kuwait, sono finiti i porti del Mare Adriatico, in particolar modo quelli di Ancona, Bari e Brindisi.

È qui che i terroristi dell’Isis o di altre sigle del terrore approdano per infiltrarsi in Italia e colpire le principali città europee.


Ora il ministero dell’Interno si aspetta attacchi via mare proprio come facevano negli anni Settanta e Ottanta i commando palestinesi contro Israele.

Da mesi i porti dell’Adriatico sono il punto di partenza dei foreign fighter europei per raggiungere la Siria e l’Iraq e combattere tra i miliziani dello Stato islamico. Adesso, però, si temono i rientri. Tanto che, come segnalato nei giorni scorsi dai servizi di intelligence britannici, gli stessi porti di Puglia e Marche rischiano di diventare il punto di ritorno per colpire l’Italia. Perché, mentre giustamente si teneva d’accordo l’avanzata dell’Isis in Libia, nessuno guardava ai Balcani dove da mesi sono apparse le prime bandiere del Califfato e dove sono attivi numerosi campi di addestramento per jihadisti. “La regione balcanica – spiega una fonte del Viminale al Messaggero – è nodale per il radicalismo di matrice islamica, soprattutto per l’attivismo incessante di soggetti e di gruppi estremisti di orientamento salafita, sempre più coinvolti nel reclutamento e nel trasferimento di jihadisti in territorio siriano e iracheno”. Particolarmente attivi sono quelli presenti in Albania, Bosnia-Erzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro e Serbia che ruotano attorno a leader per gran parte bosniaci e di etnia albanese. “Specie in Kosovo – continua il Viminale – al di là dell’approccio radicale predicato da taluni imam, l’idea del jihad sembra prendere piede soprattutto piede soprattutto in alcune aree meridionali del Paese, dove il diffuso disagio socio-economico accentua la permeabilità, specie tra i più giovani, all’azione di proselitismo di impronta salafita”.

Già dopo il brutale attacco al museo del Bardo, la Difesa aveva rafforzato le misure di sicurezza nel Mar Mediterraneo armando “unità navali, team di protezione marittima, aerei, elicotteri e velivoli a pilotaggio remoto e da ricognizione elettrinica” per proteggere “le linee di comunicazione dei natanti commerciali e delle piattaforme off shore nazionali” e “sorvegliare le formazioni jihadiste”. Dopo le stragi alla fabbrica di Saint-Quentin-Fallavier e sulla spiaggia di Sousse, il Viminale ha ulteriormente alzato il livello di allerta individuando ottantacinque possibili jihadisti, mettendo sotto controllo una decina di centro di preghiera radicalizzati e autorizzando un giro di vite sulle espulsioni. “Chi non ha diritto a stare in Italia, va rimpatriato – ha dichiarato ieri il ministro dell’Interno Angelino Alfano – accogliamo i profughi e facciamo tornare a casa chi non ne ha diritto”.

via Allerta nei porti italiani: possibili attacchi via mare –