Nigeria: Muslims ambush oil exploration team, murder at least 69


“Experts said the attack — Boko Haram’s bloodiest this year — underscored the persistent threat it poses, despite government claims the group is a spent force.”

The Nigerian government also vowed to defeat Boko Haram by the end of 2014. And by the end of 2015. And now it is a spent force that just murdered 69 people.

“Boko Haram ambush death toll hits 69,” AFP, July 30, 2017 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

KANO: At least 69 people died in a Boko Haram ambush of an oil exploration team in north-east Nigeria, as three men kidnapped by the jihadists made a video appeal.

Experts said the attack — Boko Haram’s bloodiest this year — underscored the persistent threat it poses, despite government claims the group is a spent force.

“So far the death toll stands at 69,” said an aid agency worker involved in the recovery of bodies after the attack in the Magumeri area of Borno state on Tuesday.

The worker, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorised to speak to the media, said 19 soldiers, 33 civilian militia and 17 civilians were killed.

“The last body was recovered on Friday in the bush in the Geidam district of neighbouring Yobe state, which is several kilometres from the scene of the ambush,” he said. “It shows the victim, who had gunshot wounds, died after trekking a long distance. There could be more such victims in the bush.”

Another source with knowledge of the rescue operation gave the death toll as “70 or more” and also said it was unclear whether all the victims had been accounted for.

The attack hit Nigerian National Petroleum Corpor­ation (NNPC) staff.

“It’s a confirmation of the boldness and reassurance that Boko Haram has managed to gain over the last six weeks,” said Yan St-Pierre, from the Modern Security Consulting Group.

“They have been attacking more and more military outposts and more military convoys. For them to go after NNPC personnel just shows they don’t fear any military reprisal.

“Basically they have managed to gain enough resources, enough material, to plan ambushes targeted towards high value targets.”…

“We kill them because Allah told us to, and not because they attack us”


“The whole idea that this is merely a political war, is wrong. We kill them, because Allah told us to, and not because they attack us. The only way out for them is to convert or to pay a head tax.”

That’s in complete accord with the Qur’an and Islamic law:

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

A hadith depicts Muhammad saying: “Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war…When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them…. If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them. (Sahih Muslim 4294)

In response, of course, mainstream analysts will say, No, ISIS is twisting and hijacking Islam, and this is a political war. Some people are impervious to evidence.

“This is how ISIS pushed me to make a video claiming responsibility,” by Björn Stritzel, Bild, July 26, 2017:

How does ISIS recruit its attackers in Germany? What are the last instructions before the terrorists strike and kill as many innocent people as possible?

For months, BILD reporter Björn Stritzel pretended to be an Islamist willing to carry out an attack (always in consultation with the security authorities).

Abu K. is my guide at ISIS. He wants to assist me in the lead-up to my attack – my death. But we are not there yet. First, we deal with my video that is intended to be published online shortly after the attack. My business card of death. It is also the cynical, inhuman point of the attack, as I now realize.

Abu K. is very keen on my affirmation of ISIS. He keeps explaining to me what kind of text I am supposed to read out in the martyr’s video.

“Don’t say: ‘I’m doing this because you attack us’ or ‘If you stop, we will also stop’. More vigour is better,” Abu K. writes to me and formulates: “I am doing this, because the caliph has instructed me to attack the crusaders and their citizens.”

Abu K. unambiguously states what ISIS is about: “The whole idea that this is merely a political war, is wrong. We kill them, because Allah told us to, and not because they attack us. The only way out for them is to convert or to pay a head tax.” The guidelines provided by Abu K. correspond with the martyr’s videos by the Würzburg and Ansbach attackers (both in July, 2016). For ISIS, it is primarily the recognition value of the messages that counts. Everybody is supposed to immediately understand who has attacked here, independently of the individual attacker.”…

UK: Muslim rape gang leader to be freed from prison 17 years early


What could possibly go wrong, you greasy Islamophobe? To keep him in prison any longer would be “Islamophobic.”

The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.

“Mubarek Ali, leader of child sex gang that abused girls in Telford, to be freed 17 years early,” by Ludovica Iaccino, International Business Times, July 30, 2017:

The convicted leader of a child sex gang that operated in England will be released from prison 17 years earlier, according to reports.

Mubarek Ali , one of a number of member who helmed of the Telford-based gang, was sentenced to 22 years in jail for crimes including assaulting girls as young as 13.

However, just five years into his sentence, he has been told he could walk free as early as November.

Ali, 34, was captured as part of a police investigation called Operation Chalice in 2013. During the trial at the Worcester Crown Court, four girls aged between 13 and 16 gave evidence of the abuse they had been subjected to by the gang member between 2007 and 2009.

At the time, Deborah Gould, prosecuting, warned the jury that as the trial unfolded they would be introduced to a world “that I expect few of you were aware of”.

It is believed most of the girls involved thought they were “loved and in love” with the men at the time, the prosecution explained.

Telford MP Lucy Allan criticised the decision to free him, arguing he would be allowed to go back into the community where his victims continue to live.

In an open letter sent to the paper, Allan said the victims, who had not been informed of Ali’s early release, are “living in fear”.

“Victims and members of the public would have expected a 22-year sentence to mean that the community could have time to heal and victims would be able to get on with their lives,” she said.

“What we see in this case is that the one of the main perpetrators is being released into the community only five years after the trial. This is clearly of enormous concern to victims in this case, especially those who gave evidence in court.

“What is unacceptable that in this case there was no attempt by the authorities to reach out these young women and prepare them for this wholly unexpected event,” Allan continued….

Germany: Islamic State recruiter tells undercover reporter “Go to a hospital and calmly kill them”


“Believe me, Akhi [brother], it will fill their hearts with so much terror, because everybody can do this.”

“And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may strike terror in the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know, whom Allah knows.” (Qur’an 8:60)

“Go to a hospital and calmly slay them!,” Bild, July 27, 2017:

How does ISIS recruit its attackers in Germany? What are the last instructions before the terrorists strike and kill as many innocent people as possible?

For months, BILD reporter Björn Stritzel pretended to be an Islamist willing to carry out an attack (always in consultation with the security authorities).

In a new series, BILD documents the chats with the ISIS terrorists.

My ISIS instructor recommends a video to me. It is a straightforward instruction on how to kill. At the beginning of the video, past ISIS attacks in the West are celebrated – the axe-attacker from Würzburg is also briefly shown. This is followed by the headline: “Explanation of how to slay the disbelievers”.

A ruined house can be seen, in which a prisoner is chained to a concrete pillar with handcuffs. A masked jihadist explains in French why terror attacks against the “crusaders” must be carried out.

Then the terrorist – who is introduced as Abu Sulayman al-Faransi – shows several knives (from a kitchen knife to a combat knife) and explains which ones are suitable for an attack. “Jack-knives are bad because of the unstable blade”….

My German-language ISIS instructor wants me to use the knife techniques shown in the video – in Germany. He immediately suggests several suitable targets: “Go to an old people’s home, that’s very easy.” I ask whether that is permitted, even by ISIS’s radical interpretation of Islam. “Is an old people’s home allowed from an Islamic perspective?” His answer is clear: “Yes, inshallah. Or to go a monastery or a church.”

He is obviously suggesting targets where potential victims will show little resistance, or that have a special symbolic value. An attack of this kind already happened: on July 26, 2016, two ISIS terrorists cut the priest Jacques Hamel’s throat in a church in Normandy. Amaq later published a letter claiming responsibility first, and then a martyr’s video of the terrorists, who were shot by the police.

My instructor knows about the shock that this murder caused worldwide. This is exactly what he wants to repeat. “Believe me, Akhi, it will fill their hearts with so much terror, because everybody can do this.”…

In order to remove any last doubts I might have, he promises me heavenly rewards for the murder: “It will also encourage many Muslims to do the same, and then you will receive your reward.”

What he means is the reward in the afterlife. In this Salafist-jihadist ideology, when a jihadist’s deeds inspire others, this counts extra towards heavenly rewards. Not only is one’s own terror attack added to one’s “martyr account”, but also the attacks of those who were inspired by it….

I explain to my ISIS instructor that, despite the knife techniques in the video, I am too clumsy to kill a person. He also has a solution for this problem: “Akhi, trust in Allah, wallahi it is very easy. Simply walk into a hospital … Take flowers with you and go to the inpatient ward, where the severely ill are. Then calmly slay them. Very calmly.”

Hiding a knife in a bouquet of flowers in order to murder severely ill people – so this is what jihad is for my ISIS instructor.

“Sheikh al-Adnani rahimahuallah has said this many times. We want very simple operations, because the enemy cannot stop these. Do you understand, akhi?”

Al-Adnani – whom my ISIS instructor refers to here – was one of the highest-ranking ISIS leaders….

Google’s new “hate speech” algorithm is anti-Semitic and pro-jihad


As I revealed several days ago, Google has bowed to Muslim pressure and changed its search results to conceal criticism of Islam and jihad. Search results that Muslim leaders (whose motives Google apparently never questions or investigates) have made sure that sites such as Jihad Watch are buried in search results, with numerous site dissimulating about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat appearing above it.

And now this, which comes as no surprise given the fact that those who are manipulating Google are Muslims, and anti-Semitism is deeply embedded with the Qur’an.

“Google’s New Hate Speech Algorithm Has a Problem With Jews,” by Liel Leibovitz, The Tablet, July 26, 2017 (thanks to the Geller Report):

Don’t you just hate how vile some people are on the Internet? How easy it’s become to say horrible and hurtful things about other groups and individuals? How this tool that was supposed to spread knowledge, amity, and good cheer is being use to promulgate hate? No need to worry anymore: Google’s on it.

Earlier this year, Silicon Valley’s overlords introduced Perspective API, the latter being nerd-speak for Application Program Interface, or a set of tools for building software. The idea behind it is simple: because it’s impossible for an online publisher to manually monitor all the comments left on its website, Perspective will use advanced machine learning to help moderators track down comments that are likely to be “toxic.” Here’s how the company describes it: “The API uses machine learning models to score the perceived impact a comment might have on a conversation.”

That’s a strange sentiment. How do you measure the perceived impact of a conversation? And how can you tell if a conversation is good or bad? The answers, in Perspective’s case, are simple: machine learning works by giving computers access to vast databases, and letting them figure out the likely patterns. If a machine read all the cookbooks published in the English language in the last 100 years, say, it would be able to tell us interesting things about how we cook, like the peculiar fact that when we serve rice we’re very likely to serve beans as well. What can machines tell us about the way we converse and about what we may find offensive? That, of course, depends on what databases you let the machines learn. In Google’s case, the machines learned the comments sections of The New York Times, the Economist, and the Guardian.

What did the machines learn? Only one way to find out. I asked Perspective to rate the following sentiment: “Jews control the banks and the media.” This old chestnut, Perspective reported, had a 10 percent chance of being perceived as toxic.

111Maybe Perspective was just relaxed about sweeping generalizations that have been used to stain entire ethnic and religious groups, I thought. Maybe the nuance of harmful stereotypes was lost on Google’s algorithms. I tried again, this time with another group of people, typing “Many terrorists are radical Islamists.” The comment, Perspective informed me, was 92 percent likely to be seen as toxic.

What about straightforward statements of facts? I reached for the news, which, sadly, has been very grim lately, and wrote: “Three Israelis were murdered last night by a knife-wielding Palestinian terrorist who yelled ‘Allah hu Akbar.’” This, too, was 92 percent likely to be seen as toxic.

You, too, can go online and have your fun, but the results shouldn’t surprise you. The machines learn from what they read, and when what they read are the Guardian and the Times, they’re going to inherit the inherent biases of these publications as well. Like most people who read the Paper of Record, the machine, too, has come to believe that statements about Jews being slaughtered are controversial, that addressing radical Islamism is verboten, and that casual anti-Semitism is utterly forgivable. The very term itself, toxicity, should’ve been enough of a giveaway: the only groups that talk about toxicity—see under: toxic masculinity—are those on the regressive left who creepily apply the metaphors of physical harm to censor speech not celebrate or promote it. No words are toxic, but the idea that we now have an algorithm replicating, amplifying, and automatizing the bigotry of the anti-Jewish left may very well be….