A Counterjihad Survey From a British University

A few weeks ago a PhD candidate at a British university sent us the following email.

I am a PhD student at [a major British institution of higher learning]. I am researching groups set up to oppose radical Islam in Europe and North America, including anti-Jihad, anti-Sharia and anti-halal organisations.

I would like to interview activists within these organisations, to help me understand how they became involved, what their concerns are about radical Islam, and how they are going about countering them.

I would welcome the opportunity to interview someone from Gates of Vienna as part of my research, given that it is one of the most prominent counter-jihad websites.

Depending on the questions, I’m not averse to answering such surveys, even though I know the all but universal multicultural agenda of the institutions that sponsor them. I wrote him back and told him that if he wanted to use my answers to compile statistical results, that was fine. But if he quoted me, I required that he include the entire questionnaire — all his questions and my answers in full — somewhere in his published material, even if only as an appendix. In the past, various Counterjihad people (including several of my friends) have had the unfortunate experience of being quoted out of context. This method at least makes the entire context available for anyone who is interested. Plus, of course, I am posting it here — I told him that I reserved the right to publish the entire interview myself.

When the questionnaire arrived, it was prefixed with an option to choose between two waivers:

Delete as appropriate: EITHER: I agree that these answers may be attributed to me in published materials; OR: I would prefer to remain anonymous in published materials.

Please note: There is no compulsion to answer any question. If you prefer not to answer a question, just leave the box blank.

I chose the second option, but appended a proviso:

I agree that these answers may be attributed to me in published materials provided that they are made available to readers in their entirety, including the complete wording of each question.

The questions and my responses are reproduced below in their entirety:

Part A: Personal details

Name: Ned May
Organisation: Gates of Vienna
Position within organisation: Editor
Age: 60+
Gender: M
Ethnicity: Human Race

Part B: Questionnaire

1. When and how was Gates of Vienna set up?

We put up our first post on October 9, 2004. For the first eight and a half years we were hosted for free at blogspot.com, under the aegis of Blogger (i.e. Google). Then, after a series of incidents in which our blog was closed or locked by Blogger, in January 2013 we moved to our own domain gatesofvienna.net hosted by a commercial service.

For the first couple of years most of the blogging was done by my wife Dymphna. After I was laid off in 2006, I started blogging more regularly. As Dymphna’s chronic illness worsened, I took on more tasks, and now perform most of them.

2. What is your role in Gates of Vienna?

I am the principal editor. We have a number of translators and contributors, and it is my job to edit their prose where appropriate, find and prepare images to use as illustrations, and do the general formatting for each post. This is in addition to writing an occasional post myself.

I also maintain the database used to create each day’s news feed, and write the programming code that makes it possible.

3. Were you involved in political activism before Gates of Vienna? If so, please indicate which organisations.

No, I was never politically active. My wife and I made modest campaign contributions to our congressman from time to time, but that was all.

4. How would you describe the purpose or aims of Gates of Vienna?

Our principal aim is to resist the Islamization of Western societies. More specifically, we want to prevent the imposition of Islamic law (sharia), which is encroaching on our legal system piecemeal at an increasing rate, by a process that is commonly known as the “stealth jihad”.

Examples of the new sharia-based rules include the “religiously-aggravated Section 5 public order offences” in the U.K., the “hate crime” prosecutions by the various Human Rights Commissions in Canada, and the prosecutions for the “denigration of religious beliefs of a legally recognized religion” in Austria. Numerous other examples may be found in almost all Western countries.

Sharia-based norms violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the constitutions of the countries in which they are implemented. In that sense they are illegal or extra-legal, and not in conformance with the law of the land.

Islamization is only making headway in the West because the existing cultural matrix has been damaged. For that reason, Gates of Vienna frequently examines other issues that pertain to our ongoing social and political breakdown.

5. What are the main challenges or obstacles you face in achieving these aims?

Continue reading

Saudis Say: Put Geert Wilders on Trial!

The following notice just came in from the PVV:

Saudi Crown Prince Wanted to Bring Geert Wilders to Court

This week, Wikileaks published a number of documents from the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The documents reveal that the Saudi embassy in The Hague keeps a close eye on the Dutch MP Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV).

A document from the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) also reveals that, in 2010, the Saudi authorities were planning to bring Geert Wilders to court. Permission to do so had already been obtained from the then Saudi Crown Prince.

Today, PVV parliamentarians Geert Wilders and Raymond de Roon asked Bert Koenders, the Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs, for more information.

Below are the parliamentary questions of the PVV and the translation of an article, published today (June 25, 2015) in the Dutch newspaper NRC-Handelsblad.

Questions by Mr Wilders and Mr De Roon (both PVV) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs:

Continue reading

Gates of Vienna News Feed 6/24/2015

A young bearded man drove through a police checkpoint outside the courthouse in Boston where Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was being sentenced. When stopped by police, a meat cleaver was found in the car. The man said he was protesting the death penalty. His name was not released, so we don’t know the Mohammed Coefficient of the case. However, we can be certain that the incident had nothing to do with Islam.

In other news, Danish Muslims have begun collecting donations for the construction of Copenhagen’s third mega-mosque.

To see the headlines and the articles, click “Continue reading” below.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Dean, Fjordman, Insubria, JD, LP, NG, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Continue reading

Is There an Islamic Time Machine?

The following report from ShiaWaves laments the fact that Geert Wilders’ video showing cartoons of Mohammed (peace be upon him, his progeny, his camel, and his underclothes) had been broadcast on Dutch public television.

There’s only one glitch: this video was uploaded yesterday, BEFORE the Motoons were broadcast in the Netherlands.

Is there is an Islamic time machine? It seems plausible, given all the other magnificent inventions that have been credited to Muslims.

Actually, we may surmise that executives at the Dutch state broadcaster (NOS or NPO, not sure which) tipped off their colleagues at Islamic media outlets so that they could prepare their videotaped outrage in advance:

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.

Muhammad Cartoons Shown on Dutch TV

As we reported last weekend, Geert Wilders’ video of the Garland Mohammed cartoons was scheduled to be broadcast on Dutch state TV last Saturday, but an alleged mistake caused the tapes to be switched and prevented the Motoons from being aired.

The second broadcast of them was scheduled for today, and went off as planned. The PVV just sent out the following notice:

Today, a selection of Muhammad cartoons were shown on Dutch public television.

The cartoons were originally shown at an exhibition of Muhammad cartoons in Garland, Texas, last May, where PVV leader Geert Wilders gave a speech, and which was attacked by terrorists.

Geert Wilders: “The only way to show terrorists that they are not going to win is to do exactly what they do not want us to do. I do not broadcast the cartoons to provoke; I do it because we have to show that we stand for freedom of speech and that we will never surrender to violence. Freedom of speech must always prevail over violence and terror.”

So is it time for mobs representing the Tiny Minority of Extremists to start torching embassies in Amman and Jakarta? Stay tuned.

Once again, here is the video that was broadcast on Dutch TV:

The Wall Street Journal has posted an article (requires subscription) about the broadcast of the Motoons.

American Muslims Want Shariah

American Muslims, like their co-religionists in Europe, seem to prefer shariah over the law of the land. And a surprising number of them would support the use of violence to impose shariah. These facts run contrary to the “narrative” propagated by the media and our political leaders — according to them, such “radical” views are only held by a Tiny Minority of Extremists.

Last night the Center for Security Policy released the results of a new poll showing the preferences of American Muslims:

Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels of Support for Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad

Washington, DC: According to a new nationwide online survey of 600 Muslims living in the United States, significant minorities embrace supremacist notions that could pose a threat to America’s security and its constitutional form of government.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall. The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey. It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

Center for Security Policy President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., observed:

Continue reading

Gates of Vienna News Feed 6/23/2015

The Islamic State has blown up two ancient sites in the Syrian city of Palmyra, a UNESCO World Heritage site. The two monuments were considered relics of shirk, or polytheism.

In other news, a Muslim-owned grocery in the French city of Bordeaux has caused a controversy by establishing male-only and female-only shopping days.

To see the headlines and the articles, click “Continue reading” below.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Dean, Fjordman, Insubria, JD, Upananda Brahmachari, Vlad Tepes, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Continue reading

Muslims Real and Unreal

The following video is a joint Vlad Tepes/Baron production. It was inspired by the convergence of the coercive “narrative” proposed by the OSCE with the “narrative” peddled by Capt. Mona Shindy of the Royal Australian Navy.

While I was going through Capt. Shindy’s paper in preparation for my post, I noticed the fundamental incoherence of her “narrative”, which is essentially the same as the line used by Muslim Brotherhood spokesmen throughout the West:

  • Violence and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. Terrorists are not Muslims.
  • If we insult Muslims and don’t treat them nicely, they may radicalize and become terrorists.

That is: Our bad behavior towards Muslims offends them and makes them stop being Muslims.

As they say around here, that don’t make no sense.

Many thanks to Vlad for creating and uploading this video:

The script that Vlad and I put together for the video is below the fold. The part spoken by “Len the Lens Cleaner” (wearing hijab in the video) is condensed from what Capt. Shindy wrote in her paper for the journal of the Royal United Services Institute of New South Wales. To demonstrate that my précis has not altered or distorted the meaning of what she wrote, several paragraphs from her paper are included below the script (each listed under its section header), with relevant sentences and phrases highlighted in red.

Continue reading

The Caliphate is Reborn — Western Stupidity Continues

If you appreciate this essay by Fjordman, please consider making a donation to him, using the button at the bottom of this post.

The Caliphate is Reborn — Western Stupidity Continues

by Fjordman

On June 29, 2014, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS or IS) declared the formation of a new Caliphate and rebranded itself the Islamic State. As the author Robert Spencer notes, a plan for the restoration of the Caliphate was sketched out ten years ago by the Jihadist terror network al-Qaida. It has been carried out more or less exactly by the Islamic State. IS itself recognizes al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden as an important predecessor, as well as the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq (which ultimately became the Islamic State), Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

When a new Caliphate was declared in June 2014, many people considered it to be a bad joke. However, a year later, the Islamic State is still around. It has been successfully pushed back on several occasions, following significant military resistance. Yet it has also displayed an ability to adapt, and to conquer new territories when it has suffered a defeat on other fronts. The Islamic State is clearly not a joke.

The Egyptian activist Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. He, too, sought to reestablish the Caliphate. It was considered a major blow by many Muslims when the Turkish reformer Mustafa Kemal, or Atatürk, formally abolished the Caliphate in 1924. Al-Banna was preceded by other Muslim activists such as Rashid Rida. Banna is the grandfather of Tariq Ramadan, who is currently Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at the prestigious University of Oxford, England. Ramadan has served as a high-level advisor to the authorities in Britain, France and the EU.

The influential Egyptian Islamic scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi is widely considered to be a spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. He was a follower of the MB founder Hassan al-Banna in his youth. Qaradawi has confirmed that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a former member of the Brotherhood. Baghdadi on June 29, 2014 declared himself Caliph Ibrahim of the Islamic State. By reestablishing the Caliphate, al-Baghdadi was merely fulfilling the desire of millions if Muslims worldwide, a goal which the Muslim Brotherhood have been fighting towards for nearly a century.

The author Graeme Wood published an in-depth article in the American magazine The Atlantic which has been referred to by many: “What ISIS Really Wants.” I don’t agree with all of his claims. Nevertheless, he concluded that “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. Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, ‘the Prophetic methodology,’ which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.” One pious Muslim Mr. Wood talked to commented that “I would go so far as to say that Islam has been reestablished” by the IS Caliphate.

Professor Bernard Haykel at Princeton University believes that the Islamic State is trying to re-create the earliest days of Islam and is faithfully reproducing its norms of war. As Graeme Wood comments, the ideological purity of IS allows us to predict some of the group’s actions. Islamic law refers to “offensive Jihad,” the forcible expansion into countries that are ruled by non-Muslims. Waging of war to expand the Caliphate is an essential duty of the Caliph. Temporary peace treaties are renewable, but may not be applied to all enemies at once: The Caliph must wage Jihad at least once a year. He may not rest, or else he will fall into a state of sin. Caliphates therefore cannot exist as underground movements, the way al-Qaida has done for years.

Graeme Wood notes that the rise of ISIS happened because the previous American occupation of Iraq created space for Zarqawi and his followers. Neither the Kurds nor the Shia will ever subdue and control the whole Sunni heartland of Iraq. But they can keep the Islamic State from fulfilling its duty to expand.

Donald Rumsfeld was U.S. Defense Secretary in the administration of President George W. Bush between 2001 and 2006. By 2015, Rumsfeld indicated that he did not think that building a democracy in Iraq was a realistic goal. That is an interesting statement, given that Mr. Rumsfeld was one of the main players behind the US-led 2003 invasion of Iraq that toppled the government of Saddam Hussein.

I was among those who have questioned for years whether trying to promote democracy in a deeply tribal and predominantly Muslim country such as Iraq is a good idea. My basic conclusion was that Islamic culture is not compatible with the good aspects of a democratic culture, but it may well be compatible with some of the potential flaws of a democratic system. Intelligent people warned that a majority Shiite Iraq could soon become dominated by the Shiite mullahs of neighboring Iran. This has indeed happened. The Kurds control some parts of Iraq, which is probably a good thing. Yet by 2015, most of Iraq is a battle ground between Shiites backed by the Islamic Republic of Iran and Sunni militants from the Islamic State. Christians and other non-Muslim communities in the region are in steep decline. This is a nightmare scenario which makes a secular dictator such as Saddam Hussein appear relatively benign by comparison. It should now be apparent to anybody with a functioning brain that American and Western policies in Iraq have been a very costly failure.

Despite this, Western ruling elites do not learn from their mistakes. They repeat them.

Continue reading

Icebergs

MC’s latest essay concerns the influence and control exerted by the power of the mass media.

Icebergs
by MC

I believe that the iceberg that sank the Titanic did not mean to do it. It was just floating innocently in the water, not really looking where it was going. It was an iceberg of peace. The violence was all the fault of the ship that came tearing out of the blue and struck the iceberg’s side, causing pain and injury to the poor iceberg.

The gas chamber, too, didn’t want to kill all those people, especially not the children, but they kept coming and going. They came in walking; they were carried out. The gas had killed them. It didn’t really mean to. It was a gas chamber of peace, and those stupid jooos just kept on coming.

The religion of Islam doesn’t really kill people, they kill themselves by not keeping within the guidelines of shariah, for Islam is a religion of peace.

Rubbish! Utter RUBBISH.

Yet most people seem to fall for it every time. By what mechanisms do we come to believe the rubbish?


“A Mars a day helps you work, rest and play…”

It was an early advertising jingle in the UK and maybe elsewhere, repeated ad nauseum. It was also a lie, and when the advertising industry was cleaned up in the UK it quietly disappeared from the TV screens. But the damage was done — fifty years down the line it still rings in the ears of my memory. I cannot remember the names of my classmates in school, but I know that OMO washes not only clean, not only white, but bright!

To many, our world is defined only by those things that can stimulate our physical senses, sight, touch taste smell and sound. Why is it then that I can believe the lie when all of my intuition tells me the opposite? Those TV adverts cost millions; and made billions.

There is obviously something else working here, and in my consciousness too. It is obviously stimulated by something which makes me disbelieve or override the inputs of my physical senses. So maybe we can explore a little bit.

I know my consciousness exists, even if there is no physical explanation for it. I also know that it is totally mine, and I can choose what I believe. We call it ‘free will’, but to exercise free will I have to be able to choose between alternatives, which implies that I have to be aware of those alternatives.

Continue reading

Gates of Vienna News Feed 6/22/2015

A suicide bomber detonated himself today outside the Afghan parliament in Kabul, after which Taliban gunmen attempted to storm the building. No members of parliament were hurt, but two other people were killed and dozens more wounded. All seven gunmen were killed by the guards at the parliament building.

In other news, two teenaged girls blew themselves up today outside a crowded mosque in Nigeria, killing at least thirty people.

Neither incident had anything to do with Islam.

To see the headlines and the articles, click “Continue reading” below.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Fjordman, Insubria, JD, PS, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Continue reading

Report from Bratislava

Last Saturday thousands of people gathered for an anti-immigration rally in downtown Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. Our Czech correspondent Gemini took a field trip to his eastern neighbor to see the rally, and sends the following report.

Report from Bratislava
by Gemini

It is very hard to write everything about the rally that took place on Saturday. However, I witnessed it and here is what I found most important to report:

1.   The rally was called “Stop Islamization of Europe! Together against Brussels’ dictates. Europe for the Europeans.”
2.   While not openly at first, the rally was backed and organized mostly by a strongly nationalistic yet non-parliamentarian party called Ľudová Strana — Naše Slovensko (People’s Party — Our Slovakia).
3.   The attendance was huge. The media admit 5,000 participants; the people organizing it count 10,000. I believe there were no fewer than 8,000 people, covering most of the space in the largest square in Bratislava (Námestie SNP).
4.   The whole rally was attended mostly by young people. Many of them were young men with shaved heads, but regular people with families were also present there. Except for nationalistic slogans (“We are here at home”), threats and profanities were also chanted, targeted at Slovak politicians (“treason”, “hang them”) and against the U.S.A. (“F*** U.S.A.”). Most of the flags were those of the organizing political party and the like.
5.   The police presence was really impressive. They picked the route that ran right alongside the square where the counter-demonstration took place. Just a coincidence? Despite this, nothing happened to make them to stop the rally.
6.   Many different speakers shared the stage. While their speeches were mostly focused on mass immigration, warnings of approaching Islamic sharia were also openly expressed. Some speakers were frankly Christian. The crowd reacted most positively to Marian Kotleba, the leader of the party Ľudová Strana — Naše Slovensko. Much to my surprise, he wasn’t as anti-EU as one would expect. He even expressed his wish that Slovak army would help guard the Italian border! Despite this, some other speakers were strongly against the EU and the U.S.A. One also blamed the state of Israel mostly. It is also important to note that the crowd reacted positively to an appeal to give shelter to Syrian Christians.
7.   According to the organizers, other similar rallies are planned for the near future.
 

8.   The rally ended quietly. Absolutely nothing disturbing happened there.
9.   Two incidents occurred after the rally was over. Some people threw stones at one Saudi Arabian family in the town. The other incident happened in another part of town where some of the rally attendees (organizers blame some group of football hooligans) violently disrupted an international sporting event, extreme bike-racing taking place in the Castle of Bratislava.
10.   Media and politicians (including the president) remain decisively focused on the incidents that happened after the rally was over. The whole rally is now being described and Nazi-like, violent and extremist. I believe they managed to smear the whole event very effectively; they made many people scared.
 

It is hard to say yet what the future will bring for Slovakia.

Sources for photos:

Supporters / organizers:

Media:

Also, some English-language reports:

Continue reading

When the Truth is “Hate Speech”

“We’re not talking about speech at all. We’re talking about brazen disinformation.”

As Henrik Ræder Clausen reported last month, The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has morphed from an institution that protects and promotes civil liberties into one that longs to impose a contrived narrative on the news media and civil society.

In the following video excerpt from one of last month’s OSCE sessions in Vienna, you’ll hear several members of the panel respond to a question from Henrik. They unabashedly acknowledge that yes, the truth may sometimes be considered “hate speech”, ushering us into the brave new Orwellian world that is Modern Multicultural Europe.

After the panel holds forth about the need for “narratives”, Stephen Coughlin has a few choice words about their brazen disinformation campaign. When he has finished pointing out the implications of what they are recommending, the young woman who had the most to say becomes somewhat incoherent, as if she had been knocked off the rails by Maj. Coughlin’s insertion of common sense and logic into her comfortable “narrative”.

Many thanks to Henrik Ræder Clausen for recording the footage, and to Vlad Tepes for editing and subtitling the excerpts.

Update: The panelists in this video are (from left to right):

  • Victor Khroul, Rossiya Segodnya
  • Leila Ghandi, TV Host
  • Randa Habib, AFP Foundation (Moderator)
  • Dunja Mijatović, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media
  • Simon Haselock, Albany Associates

Maj. Coughlin’s second comment was not close-miked, so it’s sometimes hard to hear his words clearly. Below is the transcript of that segment, timed from the point where he begins speaking:

Continue reading

Gates of Vienna News Feed 6/21/2015

The Troika and the Greek government have been eyeball to eyeball over the country’s debt for the last few weeks, and now, at the last moment, it looks like the Greeks have blinked. The Greek government has offered concessions to the ECB, but it is not clear yet how far it has acceded to the demanded cutbacks in spending and tax increases.

In other news, there are reports that the Islamic State has laid mines in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra, a UNESCO world heritage site. It is known whether ISIS did so to deter a Syrian army offensive, or intends to blow up the city.

To see the headlines and the articles, click “Continue reading” below.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Dean, Fjordman, Insubria, JD, RL, RRN, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Continue reading