Tony Blair's SisInLaw Becomes Muslim: Lauren Booth Converts to Islam: What's Wrong with Craig Darby?

Tony Blair's sister-in-law, Lauren Booth, converted to Islam after visiting the Fatima a-Masumeh shrine in Iran, where she experienced a "shot of spiritual morphine." Booth is a "journalist and broadcaster. Her husband Craig Darby has complained of the difficulties of being a kept man. Odd for the husband of a Muslim. I wonder how that's working out?

Lauren Booth and Craig Darby

Booth works for Press TV, the English language Iranian news channel. She is currently on page 60 of the Koran. Hilarious. How many imprisoned woman dying in Iranian prisons will she write about? She is, of course, a sympathizer and advocate for Palestine. She is hoping to change Tony Blair's mind about Islam. Did I mention she's up to page 60 in the Koran?

Booth may have had several shots of something. In May 2009 she "divorced" her husband on Facebook after a fight. She changed her marital status to "single" and FB sent a message out to her followers. Her husband learned of her action sometime later. She apologized to him, but the next day he had a motorcycle accident and was in a coma for two weeks.

Get this, her husband actually allowed the UK's MailOnline to publish this embarrassing interview about their marriage?

As she drums her fingers on the desk, I have only to close my eyes and I'm aged 11, hopping up and down on one foot, pleading with Mum for cash to buy a Beano comic and a packet of gobstoppers.

But Lauren isn't my mum: she's my wife. We're supposed to be equals. I'm 39 years old and, by rights, should be at the peak of my career, adored by my kids, admired and pampered by my grateful missus. Instead, I'm a househusband with not a penny to my name.

That's why I'm here, cap in hand, asking for £10 pocket money to buy a round of drinks. No wonder I feel humiliated.

Like any woman, Lauren is utterly unpredictable. She might be the main breadwinner but, safe to say, she has definitely not lost this particular feminine streak. Some days her pink purse (yes, really) snaps open and she hands over a wodge of cash with no questions asked and only a dismissive wave of her hand.

Other times, one eyebrow will shoot up quizzically and I know I'm in for the third degree: 'How much money exactly? What's it for? Don't I know she's not made of money?'

Darby says he is a beer-swilling ex-paratrooper, just bursting with testosterone. She wears a hijab when she leaves home to pray at her local mosque and he stays behind and does the laundry. Sometimes he fails to sort the colored from the whites, or Lauren's silk undies from their daughters pajamas. Do you believe the beer-swilling ex-paratrooper story? I don't. This pitiful person says he feels like a Geisha Guy.

There's not a Muslim man on the face of the earth that would live the life of Craig Darby.

So how is Lauren's local imam gonna look at this? Of course, she can't pray with Muslim men. The imam may not pay much attention to her. Afterall, she's not a man, but...judging from all the above, she will find a way to catch her imam's eye - or die trying...literally.

The video is Booth speaking to a group of Muslims. She says she always loved the "religion." She thanks Allah for the peace she feels. Her husband is nowhere around. Her daughter delivers a message for the crowd. The UK's Muslim demographics are soaring.

Lauren Booth on Converting to Islam

Posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook

Content Scrapers: Until I can figure out what to do about your confiscation of my work for your own website, please be sure to give a link back as shown above.

The Destruction of Tony Blair...or Maybe Not: Chilcot Inquiry Fails to Nail?

The Brit leadership was determined to bring former Prime Minister Tony Blair to his knees for his alliance with President G. W. Bush and the Iraq War. The Chilocot Inquiry failed to nail. See a video below.

I think you'll enjoy the following commentary from two British journalists. While you are reading, keep the Oil for Food scandal in the back of your mind, which would have strengthened the alliance against Iraq, gotten us out quicker and easier - had we had the help and willingness of world leaders involved in the scandal - especially France.

Remember the ignored, and worthless UN sanctions against Saddam Hussein.

As time passes, we forget the intense belief that Saddam has WMD. Remember the words of Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Senators Harry Reid, John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and others, as well as Bill Clinton - in full support of entering Iraq because of the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Remember John McCain saying "Every intelligence agency in the world believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction...." To this day, we do not know the truth about WMD.

From The Guardian's Jackie Ashley: 

The body language said it all. Tony Blair began his day at the Chilcot inquiry visibly strained, even shaking, according to one television channel, which focused on his hands. There was none of the easy charm that we remember from his days as prime minister and he meekly accepted the constant interruptions from the panel, who started off determined not let him drone on for too long.

But by the afternoon, the old Blair had resurfaced. His answers became longer, his head was held higher, and he appeared in control of the situation. The reason was simple: the inquiry members had failed to nail him on the central issue of their quest – why had he taken the country to war when the attorney general's advice had been lukewarm at least, on the legality of such action?

The key point came early in the afternoon. The former attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, had told the inquiry that he believed individual states, not just the United Nations, could declare Iraq to be in breach of Resolution 1441. So Lord Goldsmith has asked Tony Blair if he considered this were the case, and only after getting an answer in the affirmative did he change his legal advice. To an extent, Goldsmith was laying responsibility for the legal decision with Blair, while Blair claimed it lay with Goldsmith. Yet the inquiry failed to follow up this line of questioning.

By mid-afternoon the former prime minister knew he had escaped. The remaining questions about post-invasion planning were never going to trouble him. It was just like watching Blair at prime minister's questions, swatting away his inquisitors, absolutely certain he was right. He may have had some sleepless nights ahead of today's appearance but he didn't need to lose a wink.

From The Guardian's Simon Jenkins:

This was the big one. Yet as we sat down to the climax of the Chilcot inquiry, in walked a ghost. Its muscles were taut, its eyes bloodshot, its tan implausible, its mouth unsmiling. The hand visibly shook when pouring water. Tony Blair looked awful.

Outside they were chanting war criminal and liar. Blair had been smuggled in through the Queen Elizabeth II centre's "prisoner's entrance". The man who once "stopped the traffic" dared not try again. Sir John Chilcot might incant "this is not a trial," but you could have fooled us.

Then the extraordinary happened. Sir Roderic Lyne mumbled an interminable opening question about sanctions and containment. The face relaxed. The body did not squirm. The hands moved and the room was treated to the spectacle of Blair's ghost coming to life.
Slowly he established dominance and it was Chilcot and his colleagues who took on a hunted look. Within an hour they were listening mute to a seminar on neoconservatism for slow learners.

The former prime minister's case had already been stated by his two trusted aides, Alastair Campbell and Lord Goldsmith. This was that the pre-war evidence on Saddam and his weapons was compelling at the time. The dodgy dossiers were not sexed up. The case in international law would have been strengthened "politically" by a second UN resolution, but was legally robust....

Blair's self-assurance was extraordinary. He deployed sincerity and sweet reason. None of the bullet questions touched him. When asked to comment on the "beyond doubt" foreword to the dodgy September dossier, he confided with a smile: "I did believe it – frankly beyond doubt."...

Then came the sting in the tail. Chilcot repeated his opening question: why really did we invade Iraq and why in March 2003? The honest answer was that Bush was going and Blair wanted to come along too. But his egoism got the better of him. It was all his decision.

"I never regarded September 11 as an attack on America. I regarded it as an attack on us, and I had said we stand shoulder to shoulder with them [Americans]. We did in Afghanistan and I was determined to do that again."

Congress and Tony Blair Supports Invading Iraq (video)

Tony Blair Nails It on The Head

Cross-posted by Spree, guest blogger and contributor, from Wake up America

The Guardian has a piece out where Tony Blair speaks his mind and his words, if listened to, are a good example of what is wrong with the way we are fighting "radical Extreme Islamics".

Jumping to one specific paragraph here so I can explain my statement above.

Pelosi, Reid, far left liberals LISTEN UP, this is a lesson you folks refuse to learn.

Blair added: 'How are [we] oppressing them? You're oppressing them when you support the people who are trying to blow them up.'

Thats it in a nutshell folks.

How many times do you see a liberal blog accuse the conservatives of lumping all Muslims in with extremists?

The opposite is the truth actually.

I have often, as well as seen other conservatives often, separate the two, because they are separate.

A few examples:
A Heartfelt Thank You to the Muslim Delegation
Moderate Muslims Take a Stand....Again
Moderate Muslim's Speak Up Again

Why do conservatives separate the two? Because they are two different species from each other, Moderate Muslims wish to live in peace and practice their religion, Extremists wish to force everyone to practice their religion or DIE.

It is the liberals playing thier political games that misrepresent how conservatives separate the two and instead of helping us fight extremists. They claim that by going after those extremists we are being "racist" or hate "all" Muslims.

This must stop because there is an enemy out there and denying it does not mean they do not want you dead.

More from Blair:

The idea that as a Muslim in this country that you don't have the freedom to express your religion or your views, I mean you've got far more freedom in this country than you do in most Muslim countries,' Blair told Observer columnist Will Hutton, who presents the documentary.

'The reason we are finding it hard to win this battle is that we're not actually fighting it properly. We're not actually standing up to these people and saying, "It's not just your methods that are wrong, your ideas are absurd. Nobody is oppressing you. Your sense of grievance isn't justified."'

Blair held out the example of the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan - criticised by Islamists as an example of the heavy-handed imperial West oppressing Muslims - to highlight unfounded claims of grievance. He asked how it is possible to claim that Afghanistan's Muslims are being oppressed when the Taliban 'used to execute teachers for teaching girls in schools'.

Blair added: 'How are [we] oppressing them? You're oppressing them when you support the people who are trying to blow them up.'

Blair, who normally chooses his language carefully when he talks about Islamists, also takes a swipe at critics who accused him of undermining civil liberties. 'When I'm trying to change the law in order to make it easier to deport people who engage in terrorism - the idea that that's an assault on hundreds of years of British civil liberties is completely absurd. Some of what is written on this is loopy-loo in its extremism.'

He could be speaking about America because there is no difference between the accusations of the left from the UK and the accusations from the left here in the U.S.

Perhaps the left should do as the right consistently does and start separating the Moderates who wish to live in peace from the radical extremists that want us dead.

Maybe then we could stop the extremists at the same time as we open our arms and welcome the moderates.

If Americans, as one, do not start taking this threat from extremists seriously and stop worrying about being "politically correct" and start worrying about protecting ourselves as a nation, then the next attack on American soil, WILL be our own fault for encouraging the extremists instead of standing up against them.

The Moderate Muslims have shown the courage to stand up against the radicals that have hijacked their religion, when is America's left going to show that same courage and backbone instead of burying their heads in the sand and claiming there is no threat?

There IS a threat. They want you dead. They want me dead. They want our children dead.

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, ... nor follow
the religion of truth... until they pay the tax in acknowledg-ment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."
Qur'an, Sura 9:29

The horror stories are there for anyone to see:

Man Sexually Assaulted in Pakistan After Refusing to Convert to Islam

Joseph Francis, the National Director of CLAAS, explained: “When he entered the drawing room, he found it filled with unknown people. They began to beat him severely. They threatened him with dire consequences if he did not accept Islam. After his refusal, they committed sodomy with him one by one for the whole night.”

Or these words from The Ayatollah about Sex with infants:

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby.
However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is
harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life.
This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives".
(Arabic Source)

Michael Yon's latest most chilling report from Iraq:



Caption:

Soldiers from 5th IA said al Qaeda had cut the heads off the children. Had al Qaeda murdered the children in front of their parents? Maybe it had been the other way around: maybe they had murdered the parents in front of the children. Maybe they had forced the father to dig the graves of his children.

Read his whole detailed piece in full to see the type of monsters we are dealing with all over the world.

Even Moderate Muslims are telling liberals to stop denying reality:

Radical Islam is a grim reality, despite liberal pretensions to the contrary. Today, FSM Contributing Editor M. Zuhdi Jasser continues his passionate appeal for combating global terror, pointing out the dangerous folly of ignoring the root causes of this growing ideological cancer.

This Muslim also points out that you cannot be politically correct AND fight the Global War on Terror and he makes no bones in telling President Bush this same thing.

Mr. President, as a devout Muslim, I can tell you that the only way the United States can make progress in this war is to have your administration give anti-Islamist Muslims acknowledgement for the centrality of their ideas in this war of ideologies. We can defeat political Islam only if we engage it and marginalize Islamists while positively engaging spiritual Islam. It is time for the administration to set the parameters defining the ideology we are fighting and be critical of organizations which facilitate it. The words of encouragement and admonition to Muslim organizations to lead the charge against radicalism are too vague. The reality is that the priorities, ideologies, and minority politics of the current agenda of the Islamic organizations the administration has courted and which attended last Wednesday’s press conference are far from being on the right page in this conflict.

For example, the central role of the informant has become a cornerstone of our security. The primary informant in the arrest related to the JFK Plot demonstrated this. The Circuit City informant demonstrated the same with his tip leading to the arrests of the Fort Dix Six just weeks ago. The informants and so many others have stepped up in connection with other foiled plots despite the pressures against them from Islamists and the MSM. MSM often feed into conspiracy theories about informants, by legitimizing the victimization of Muslims for being “coerced” as informants. The Denver Post made just such a claim as recently as May 18, 2007. Their report claimed that, “Arab-Americans and Muslims are concerned about FBI efforts to recruit them as informants and other tactics designed to prevent terrorism.” This story was, to no one’s surprise, picked up and widely distributed by the Islamist organizations, e.g. CAIR.

Nothing illustrates the insidious dangers of political Islam (Islamism) more than this type of philosophy regarding informants. Rather than being celebrated as heroes, they are ignored, or subliminally treated as ‘traitors to the tribe’. Sadly, the latest message coming from Islamists is still far from endorsing the heroism of the informant but rather issuing frightening warnings that they may become defendants in a national lawsuit. Just this week, the lawyer for the flying imams, Omar Mohammedi, tried to prevent media access to the trial in his case against US Airways and the “John Does”. This again demonstrates the hypocrisy of the Islamists using the media when they need to be victims but denying freedom of press when they want to camouflage their agenda. The reality is that the informants are our 21st century heroes. Are Muslim organizations working feverishly to create a culture in the mosques and in our organizations of weeding out the bad apples? Or is the allegiance to political Islam greater and more intimidating? These are the questions the President should be asking instead of reiterating the same tired platitudes.

He then speaks to the denial based crowd, yes that means YOU, LIBERALS:

Denial and obfuscation feed the infinite time loop. Conspiracy theories feed the loop. Tribalism with an arrogance masking a collective inferiority complex feeds the loop. Hatred feeds it even more. Put all this together, and the nutritional source must be political Islam. It has no boundaries and seeks governmental domination. Political Islam has no moral courage for it is not based in universal truths of the one God of Abraham separated from the political affairs of this world. It is an ideology which accepts no responsibility for the plight of Muslims while blaming all others. Nations based upon individual freedom and liberty over collectivism and tribalism pose existential threats to the existence of the Islamists. This conflict can no longer be ignored.

[...]

Create a pervasive conspiracy mentality. Magnify victimization of the Muslim minority. Try litigation against those who work to defeat political Islam, even if it fails since it will ultimately intimidate. Divide America across religious lines; this will exploit American guilt while allowing political Islam to thrive. Sue the John Does who report suspicious activity. Base it on a claim of racism. Ignore the terror plots broken up by heroes who are or were John Does. It’s all about the theocratic tribe and the long term goals of political Islam and an Islamic state. Use the rules of pluralistic democracy to intimidate those who counter Islamism. Never allow the debate to begin between Muslim anti-Islamists and Islamists.

Read the whole piece and if you are one of those that he speaks of, SHAME ON YOU because you are the ones fascilitating the horrible killings in the name of Allah.

Would you dare call HIM a Muslim hater? A racist?

As long as people like John Edwards denies that there is a Global War on Terror going on, he and others that live in denial like him are encouraging more recruitment and more killing instead of having the courage to stand up and fight it with every breath in their bodies.

Extremism is all around us, as witnessed by honor killings in London as well as here in America.

These examples go on and on and on and yet we still see comments like the ones John Edwards made, "There is no Global War on Terror" or comments about how Jihad extremists are not as much of a threat as the "conservatives" make it out to be.

Denial is a dangerous thing and the Liberals cannot see past their Bush Hatred to see what is right in front of their face.

I quoted Dr. Sanity's blog yesterday which speaks to this denial:

Dr Sanity manages to nail it right on the head and declares those that live in complete denial, INSANE.

I wish I could tell you that the political left in this country was out of its friggin' mind...but I can't, because it is increasingly clear that if you could put all the combined synapses of all the the above bloggers together you would not get a single logical or coherent thought about the war that is being waged against the West by the religion of peace.

These bloggers and many of their readers are on a mission to go where no human has gone before. They are beyond mere denial and delusion; beyond psychosis even. I regularly treat schizophrenics who have more respect for reality.

Then for the best part:

Sadly, they suffer from a totally debilitating disorder: Severe Acquired Leftist Anencephalic Dementia (SALAD). Their minds are simply not there any more! The cognitive dissonance of believing so many bizarre and contradictory fantasies; the mental contortions and fits necessary for them to retain their ideological myths has caused their minds to softly and silently vanish away (that's what happens when the snark is a boojum, you see).

Why do the liberal left of our country keep defending and encouraging these murderers?

More importantly, how can they deny what is right in front of their face?


Stop in at Right Truth, today is her series of Sunday Reading List and there is always something for everyone there.

Wizbang has a must read piece aptly named, See No Teerorism, Hear No Terrorism and I predict that their predictions are correct.

Technorati Tags: War on Terror, Tony Blair, al-Qaeda, Islam, Muslim Moderates, CAIR

Crimes Against Humanity: Deadly Denial

The Guardian's Claudia Webbe is clearly upset at Prime Minister Tony Blair's stance on, in Blair's words, the:

"...gang culture that is killing innocent young black kids...."

GuardianUnlimited reports that Blair is taking advantage of his last few days and weeks as Prime Minister. Blair admitted to:

"lurching into total frankness."

The PM directly addressed the citizenry calling:

"...on black people to lead the fight against knife crime."

Ms. Webbe characterized the citizenry as:

"...a willing audience of, mainly, white faces..."

Ms. Webbe does not affirm or deny that black children are dying at the hands of Black gangs. Instead, she refers to a report that says:

"...a significant minority of vulnerable children and young people, disproportionate numbers of whom are black, were suffering from negative outcomes and outputs and endure high levels of exclusions, and that service provision was not good enough."

So, Ms. Webbe does not deny that young, black children, as well as non-black children, are dying at the hands of gangs, or someone. Prime Minister Blair, as paraphrased by The Guardian, says that the spate of London murders

"was not being caused by poverty, but a distinctive black culture."

and...

He said people had to drop their political correctness and recognise that the violence would not be stopped:

"by pretending it is not young black kids doing it".

The Home Office Minister, Lady Scotland, disagrees with Blair and says the:

"...disproportionate number of black youths in the criminal justice system was a function of their disproportionate poverty, and not to do with a distinctive black culture.

So, is Lady Scotland saying that the murders are not due to Black gangs murdering Black children, as well as non-Black children? Claudia Webbe says:

"The prime minister is wrong to assert or imply that this is a "black problem": the bullet does not discriminate in its effect, and neither is the black community responsible for the manufacture, supply and importation of dangerous weapons."

Ms. Webbe clearly does not deny or affirm that the gangs are comprised of those from the Black community. She blames the murders on the bullets, and not only that, she denies that Blacks work in the industries that may produce the bullets, the weapons - no one Black is to blame. She doesn't state that knives are at fault, or those working in industries which manufacturer knives. This post is not about race; it is about denial; insert Hispanic Gang, White gang, Skin-head Gang, Islamic Jihad, Pro-Life terrorist, Pro-Abortion terrorist, Green Terrorist - they are all terrorists. To deny it is foolish and self-destructive. To be fair to Ms. Webbe, she asserts that the Black Community has:

"...not been silent in its condemnation and fight against the UK's history of violence."

I have much empathy for those living in crime-ridden communities, with no way out, who have the gumption to stand-up and fight back, if only by persistently notifying authorities. It is not a desirable way of life - in fact, it is undeniably a nightmare. She points to a successful community program (apparently from 2000):

Operation Trident is a clear example of community mobilisation and our preparedness to stand up to the "men of violence".

The issue is, of course, who are the current men and/or women of violence? Are they Black gang members, White gang members, or is it Islamic terrorism? Come, come now, don't be a denier. In the here and now, around the world, it is also Islamic Jihad terrorism. In the streets of London at any given moment it may be some gang culture, of some color, Black, White or in between; and it is, assuredly, Islamic Jihad, as well. Ms. Webbe's heated characterization of Tony Blair's words, as well as the title of her article:

"A kick in the teeth"

is about one micro-enth, or less, of the intensity of my feelings, and the feelings of many others, about Islamic terrorism - as well as gang violence. It is the deniers that allow the holocaust of whatever measure. Ms. Webbe asserts in the sub-heading of her article:

"The black community carries no blame for the violent crime that afflicts it - no matter what the prime minister says."

I, of course, have no first hand knowledge of gang culture in London. I do have a keen sense of words, however, and in hers I find no denial of the gang members, of which Blair spoke, being Black. It's not about race or color, it's about crimes against humanity. Permalink for this entry: http://maggiesnotebook.blogspot.com/2007/04/crimes-against-humanity-deadly-denial.html Trackback URL for this entry: http://haloscan.com/tb/maggiesnotebook/1899838835239706034 Tracked to: Iz-lamic RepubliC of GreaT Britain by Woman Honor Thyself. Excerpt from her important piece: Britain’s National Union of Journalists denounced Israel on Friday for its “military adventures” in Gaza and Le-banon, called on the government to impose sanctions and urged a boycott of Israeli goods. Trackposted to Pet's Garden Blog, Perri Nelson's Website, third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, DragonLady's World, Pirate's Cove, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe. Technorati Tags: Prime Minister Tony Blair Britain England Gangs Gang Culture Blacks African American Black Gangs Skin-heads Hispanic Gangs White Gangs Claudia Webbe The Guardian Guardian Unlimited Racial Racist Politically Correct Racism