I note that the Mega-Mosque has reared it’s minarets once again on our horizon; and after the mealy-mouthed response on the Downing St. Web-site, what else would you expect? The merits, or indeed the lack of those merits, for such a huge, intrusive and controversial structure have been debated in many arenas, and I do not propose to swell those discussions in any way but one.

I, alng with many others with similar long and very accurate memories, are still awaiting the promised building of Christian places of worship in sunny places like Mecca (notwithstanding the bingo parlours adjacent to the airport) as a quid-pro-quo for the building of bloody mosques in the Royal Parks. We see the refusal of the Saudis to even acknowledge that other religions may have just as firm a place in infidel (their term) people’s hearts as their own blood-soaked belief, as they regularly confiscate bibles, crosses and even, heaven forfend, Stars of David!

Yep, bring the new mosque on, seeing as it is planned to be built in the correct place, right next to Abbey Mills, the largest sewage pumping station operated by Thames Water.

The accompanying illustration depicts the type of building that I would prefer to see:-

Remember when we here at ATW alerted the readership to the ballooning costs of the Olympics, and how an internationally-respected engineer had left because of interminable political meetings which produced nothing but reams of printed paper? Remember when we alerted you to the further increased costs, all for the sake of a set of drugged-up clowns who think they can run/jump/swim/lurch faster than the other drugged-up clowns?

Well it seems that the truth about the increased costs was already known by the fragrant Tessa Jowell some sixteen months before they had to bite the collective bullet and announce the second smash-and-grab from the Lottery, the Council Tax-payers of London and the British Taxpayer to fund the four-fold increase in the costs of the Olympics.

Off topic (a bit), and  thinking purely hypothetically, of course, does anyone else see the resemblance between this:-

and this?

I think it is tonight that the Presbytery of the Free Presbyterian Church meets to elect its Moderator. It’s always been Dr Paisley who has held this post. But will he win the vote this time round? If the FPC has ANY morality in it, then the answer will be no. But I fear the worst. I fear that too many within the Presbytery worship Paisley, not Christ, and that is why they will vote for the Moderator who shares power with an IRA terrorist. But maybe I am wrong. It will be a defining moment for a Church which has stood up for decency and Biblical truth UNTIL this point but which now needs to decide where it stands, now that its leader has become an apostate.

When Oirish separatism makes so much propagandistic capital out of the opinions of a septuagenarian nobody, you know their constitutional agenda has hit the buffers.  Republicanism’s own Imam, Bigoted Bri, had much to say about the hypothetical prognostications of Sir Kenneth Bloomfield and his address to an Irish summer school on the future direction of Northern Ireland.

For me, this speech contained nothing more than a few heavily-qualified hypotheses about the far distant future washed down with a dose of Vichy Unionism.  Some Unionist representatives chose to give it more attention than it deserved; nationalists went into full Fenian ‘Chucky’ mode, of which Bigoted Bri’s arrogant analysis is but one poorly-conceived part.

‘Instead they concentrated on one sentence in which Bloomfield said: "I do not find the idea of some form of Irish unity or closer association in any way unthinkable in principle." Shock, horror.

For the doyen of the liberal unionist establishment, even though he is not associated with any political party, to come out with that line – however hedged around with qualifications – was too much for the political pygmies who populate the unionist landscape.’

‘Political pygmies’, eh?  I suppose the label would not be applied to those leaders within his own community who have CVs in terror, murder, kidnapping, international arms deals and robbery.  Does holding a ministerial position in a region whose official name is constantly denied not count as pygmyism?  Of course not.  For the IRA are sugar and spice and all things Semtex.

If Bloomfield’s summer school delivery (that it was made at a summer school and not in the corridors of power in London says everything about its lack of importance) indicates anything, it shows that Ulster and the Irish Republic may have a closer cooperative association in the future.  I see nothing wrong with that.  Sustained friendly neighbourliness with the Republic will go some way to convincing myself and thousands of other Unionists that the Republic should not be cut adrift, towed out into the Atlantic, and sunk.

‘"We have been made to feel peculiarly unloved by many of those to whom we have pledged our loyalty for generations."

Home truths unionists need to contemplate.’

The IRA lost one of its seats in the last Irish election on a platform of stability in Northern Ireland and the relative cessation of terrorist activity.  Furthermore, not one of Bertie Ahern’s choices for the Senate had a Northern Ireland background.  Leaving aside the increasingly rare outpourings of nationalist sentimentality, the Republic – where over 10% of its population is now foreign-born – is moving on.

Home truths separatists need to contemplate.

‘Again, because unionists did not read Bloomfield’s paper they were not aware that he posed serious and difficult questions for any Irish government, including what alterations they would make to Irish institutions to accommodate the Britishness and unionism of people in the north, and the costs of subsidising the north, which he compared with the impact on Germany of absorbing East Germany.’

Again, because of his nationalistic sclerosis, BB is incapable of analysing the huge and prohibitive financial costs involved in absorbing another territory where a huge percentage of the population would be in almost certain open revolt.  Still, we’ll leave that to Vichy Unionists.  Woe betide any separatist would want to face up to that elephant in the room.

‘Disraeli said, "change is constant".’

Yes, and only Bri is ruling out the possibility that some current separatists could become reconciled to the existence of the Union.  Change may be constant, but is also works both ways.

Over on The Business, you can read an interesting analysis of the war on terror, six years on from 9/11, and a five point plan to do something positive to ensure we win and the terrorists lose. In essence, these five points boil down to;

1.  Pakistan is a critical area. Musharraf must be told that the military and financial aid on which his regime depends will only keep on flowing if he renounces his military uniform, as he promised to do by the end of 2004 at the latest, and allows free and fair parliamentary elections. While the Islamist parties would undoubtedly make gains, mainstream groups would hold the balance of power. The longer Pakistan goes without elections, the better the extremist religious parties will do when they come.

2. Iraq is also critical. The first priority must be to prevent the country from becoming a base for terrorism in the heart of the oil-producing Middle East. It must also be prevented from turning into a venue for a region-wide Shiite Sunni struggle with Iran intervening on behalf of its co-religionists while Saudi Arabia lends support to its fellow Sunnis. Finally, the Iraqi people must be provided with basic security and an opportunity to determine their own future. Regrettably, all three of these goals will require the ongoing presence of coalition forces; the new US strategy, which has succeeded in cutting sectarian killings in Baghdad in half, should be given time to succeed. It is important to remember that Osama bin Laden acquired his belief in the West’s decadence from the American retreat from Somalia in 1993-94.

3.  Preventing Iran from getting the bomb must be the West’s third priority. A nuclear Iran would instantly become the regional hegemon, entirely impervious to external pressure.

4. The fourth crucial step is to win at home. It is a sobering fact that the only successful terrorist attack on British soil since 9/11 was carried out by British citizens. The attacks that have been foiled since also seem to have been principally the work of those with strong ties to British society.

5. A renewed push for economic and political liberalism in Islamic countries. Ultimately, terrorism will not be defeated until it has been starved of the oxygen of despair, which is its life force. Men and women across the Islamic world must believe that they have control over their own futures and that they can make a better world for their children; for that democratic market capitalism is a crucial prerequisite.

Not sure I agree with ALL of these, but there is value in the broad views expressed. Put even more succinctly, I would advise that we  a/ Take out Wazirstan. b/ Fight and kill all Jihadists in Iraq c/Bomb Iranian nuclear facilities d/ Arrest all Islamic threats within the UK, including the preachers of hatred. What do you think we need to be doing?

Are you REALLY surprised to read in The Times that almost half of Britain’s mosques are under the control of a hardline Islamic sect whose leading preacher loathes Western values and has called on Muslims to “shed blood” for Allah?

Riyadh ul Haq, who supports armed jihad and preaches contempt for Jews, Christians and Hindus, is in line to become the spiritual leader of the Deobandi sect in Britain. The ultra-conservative movement, which gave birth to the Taleban in Afghanistan, now runs more than 600 of Britain’s 1,350 mosques, according to a police report. The Times investigation casts serious doubts on government statements that foreign preachers are to blame for spreading the creed of radical Islam in Britain’s mosques and its policy of enouraging the recruitment of more “home-grown” preachers.

Mr ul Haq, 36, was educated and trained at an Islamic seminary in Britain and is part of a new generation of British imams who share a similar radical agenda. He heaps scorn on any Muslims who say they are “proud to be British” and argues that friendship with a Jew or a Christian makes “a mockery of Allah’s religion”.

All of this seems to conform to what we already know. Britain faces an Islamic enemy WITHIN. We discovered that on 7/7, and yet Government is in denial. A commentator on religious radicalism in Pakistan, where Deobandis wield significant political influence, told The Times that “blind ignorance” on the part of the Government in Britain had allowed the Deobandis to become the dominant voice of Islam in Britain’s mosques.

Khaled Ahmed said:

“The UK has been ruined by the puritanism of the Deobandis. You’ve allowed the takeover of the mosques. You can’t run multiculturalism like that, because that’s a way of destroying yourself. In Britain, the Deobandi message has become even more extreme than it is in Pakistan. It’s mind-boggling.”

Could Britain itself be the centre for global jihad?

I read that the Government is allegedly trying to head off a revolt by the trade union movement, which is threatening to join the campaign for a referendum on the proposed European Union treaty.

Ministers are playing down their previous claims that Britain secured an opt-out from the charter of fundamental rights which would form part of the treaty. But the move could undermine the Government’s attempts to resist a referendum. Next week’s TUC conference in Brighton will discuss calls for a referendum and ministers are determined to avoid an embarrassing defeat which would fuel demands for a public vote. Several unions have different concerns about the Government’s stance. Some oppose an opt-out from the charter because it could entrench workers’ rights, including the right to strike. Others fear the new treaty would open the door to privatisation.

I don’t buy this. The Unions will be given whatever "clarity" they need by Brown. He does NOT want a referendum because there is every chance that he would lose such. So expect to have intense discussions with the Unions and some new pretend victories over red-lines with the EU, but Labour will not allow the people of Britain to speak on this most important issue. The Unions are shadow-boxing, that’s all.

As readers know, Government is not really that concerned about punishing murderers or rapists or drug-dealers or criminals of any kind. But it is VERY anxious to punish those who drive and so it is announced that drivers who use a hand-held mobile phone or fiddle with a satellite-navigation system while driving could be jailed for up to two years. Prosecutors have said they could be charged with dangerous driving in a dramatically tougher approach to such offences. Those caught fiddling with an MP3 music player or texting on a mobile at the wheel could also face the charge.

To give you an idea, that puts motorists who use their mobile phones whilst driving  in the same league as rapists.

These control-freaks in power hate motorists and want to make our lives a misery. Don’t get me wrong, I believe drivers should use hands-free when in motion but as Edmund King of the RAC Foundation says existing punishments should be properly enforced! 

"The message to motorists is clearly that, if you are using a hand-held mobile or satnav, beware because the law is going to clamp down on you. If it really is interpreted that using a handheld mobile phone is dangerous driving, that is a dramatic change to what is currently happening.  Despite the threat of three penalty points, which could be a threat to a person’s livelihood, we all see thousands of motorists driving dangerously using mobile phones. It is not just about sentencing, it is about enforcement. We ought to look at what is alreadly in law first."

He’s right. I see loads of people driving around holding their mobiles. I see truck drivers at it all the time. It’s about the Police enforcing law, not making ever more draconian laws!  But I believe that when you strip it all back, Government hates drivers.

So, Bin Laden dyes his beard!

Rumours circulate that a new video message from Osama bin Laden is to be released in the coming days ahead of the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, his first new message in more than a year. The Al Qa’eda leader has not appeared in new video footage since Oct. 29, 2004, and he has not put out a new audiotape in more than a year. US intelligence agents were last night examining a still photo released at the same time as the announcement, which was said to have been taken from the video. One difference in his appearance was immediately obvious in comparison to other videos released in the past. In the still photo from the upcoming video his beard is fully black, while it was almost entirely gray with dark streaks in previous videos.

A few points here.

1. It’s a pity that he has not died, rather than his beard having been dyed. This terror warlord deserves death.

2. If he is still alive, then in a way it is good since he reminds us that we must never ever give up in our battle against Islamic Jihadists. All talk of cut and run is a victory for Bin Laden.

3. We’re getting close to the 6th anniversary of that dreadful day and six years on, let me ask you a question. Bin Laden appears to not have forgotten what was done that day, and in fact he appears to delight in the deaths. How do YOU feel about 9/11, six years later? Still angered? Still shocked? Still wanting to fight back? I know that everytime I see a programme on TV, or read a book about it, the emotions all flood back to me. Still unbelievable to think of what happened that day to so many innocent Americans.

I’ll have more to say on this topic on the anniversary itself.

In UK politics, we hear a lot about the centre ground. I contend that there is no centre ground. What is portrayed as "the centre" is in fact a lurch to the left, sanitised as reason incarnate and the sold as a place all people of good will must occupy.

Take the case of the Swedish businessman who lent £2.6m to the Tories who is now set to become an advisor to Gordon Brown. Interchangeable politics overnight, huh? Johan Eliasch recently resigned from his post as Conservative deputy treasurer, although the party insisted he was still a supporter. It is said he is about to quit altogether to advise the prime minister on deforestation and green energy. Mr Eliasch spent £8m on 400,000 acres of Amazon rainforest to preserve it. He will carry out a review on behalf of the prime minister into environmental issues. And he said he expected his £2.6m loan to be repaid. Privately, Mr Eliasch had complained to friends that he felt David Cameron had abandoned his commitment to occupy the political centre ground.

Sorry, deforestation and green energy is NOT the centre ground. These may, or may not, be worthy causes, I will leave that to one side but the fact is that these are predominantly green issues floating on the left. Those of us on the right are a bit more bothered about our porous borders, about psychotic Islamists, about our loss of sovereignty, about high taxation and the loss of liberty. Eliasch was a wealthy greeny who was obviously charmed by Cameron but who is now returning to his political roots. As for the Conservatives, well, they don’t appear to have ANY roots under the Cameron leadership and vary from day to day in whether they are right or left, a strategy that will cause mayhem with the electorate.