Sunday, February 17, 2008

Lionheart Video Interview

Thanks to Veritas Universalis for posting these, and to Steen for the tip.

According to Veritas Universalis (my translation):

The interview was recorded in the USA on February 1st, 2008. Lionheart says among other things that Al Qaeda is sitting on top of 95% of the narcotics traffic in England, that it considers it to be legitimate chemical warfare against the infidel, and that the distribution is managed by Pakistani taxi drivers. Lionheart is in mortal danger after the publicity he has been exposed to in recent weeks, and he is considering seeking asylum in the USA.

The three videos last a total of 28 minutes. I just received the tip, and haven’t had time yet to watch them myself.







[post ends here]

34 comments:

Gaeidhil said...

"My country is being taken over..."

That's an interesting concept, coming from a British citizen.

VinceP1974 said...

There is no such thing as a British citizen.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

What's your point, gaeidhil.

Gaeidhil said...

Gee I forgot, they're property of the European socialist state.

Gaeidhil said...

Re: Blogger Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

"What's your point, gaeidhil."

It's called irony.

I don't wish "lionheart" any ill will on a personal level. I just find it ironic that an Englishman would fall prey to colonization on English soil.

What is obvious from this exercise is that when the power shifts and someone finds them self in the cross hairs of that power their life can be swallowed up in a big hurry if they don't have powerful friends.

The organs of the state are just that, "organs of". By their very nature they exist in a relationship of interdependency and either can or will not divorce themselves from the larger enterprise without some risk to themselves.

"Lionheart" has in effect become jetsam of the new state. What value he had as a citizen has been subsumed by the demands of accommodation towards a far more violent and well organized group.

That's the point.

VinceP1974 said...

That's probably the most incoherent "point" I've read in a while.

ScottSA said...

Gaeidhil said...

"I don't wish "lionheart" any ill will on a personal level. I just find it ironic that an Englishman would fall prey to colonization on English soil."


It's hardly ironic. It's tragic. When the British came to the Indian subcontinent, they came to a mishmash of decaying empires, squabbling warlords, a stupefactive society riddled by various progressive notions as Suttee, the caste system, and that particular eastern jewel, thuggee. When they left, they left behind rule of law, a mature physical and economic infrastructure, a unified population (except for our friends the Musselmen and their "homeland"), and a democratized population.

That, it seems to me is in rather stark contrast to what the Musselman brings to England. If you don't see that contrast, I can't help you.

As for the interview, "Lionheart" is a singularly unimpressive fellow. He comes across more like a semi-literate ex-skinhead than a crusader. He makes me even more proud of my fellow countrymen, Steyn and Levant...would that England had people of their stature willing to stand against the storm.

VinceP1974 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Baron Bodissey said...

Vince,

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the first of these rules.

The detailed explanation of what I mean by "civil" is:

No name calling, gratuitous insults, personal slurs, denigration of someone's intelligence, etc.

If you can't make your argument without calling someone names, then it isn't an effective argument in the first place.

I invite you to make your point again, this time without name-calling.

VinceP1974 said...

Baron: My apologies.

Baron Bodissey said...

Vince --

Apology accepted.

You had a valid point to make. I'd like to see you re-phrase it without using epithets.

Your argument had merit.

VinceP1974 said...

Luckily my RSS Reader still had my comment , so i don't have to recreate genius. :)

===============

scottsa: I take issue with this:

"As for the interview, "Lionheart" is a singularly unimpressive fellow"


What is it with people? Do they expect normal people thursted into some extraordinary circumstance to suddenly undergo some sort of make-over or hire a team of PR people?

What you should fear is the day that people like Lionheart decide not to risk anything to fight against what is happening.

Then no one will turn this thing around.. because people who seem to more focused on someone's clothes or articulation surely aren't worth a thing.

Dymphna said...

Scott SA said:

As for the interview, "Lionheart" is a singularly unimpressive fellow. He comes across more like a semi-literate ex-skinhead than a crusader.

Scott, what were you expecting, Richard Burton? Only the handsome and well-spoken need apply?

How dare you sit in judgment over a life of pain you know nothing about?

Are you a victim of the entertainment industry or something? Everyone has to be plastic pretty and eloquent to deserve help?

This guy had nothing. He spent his whole adolescence locked up after his grandfather died. He got out and turned it around. He was working in the schools with his former arresting officer on drugs. He had his own flat, and his own small computer business.

THe al-Qaeda-funded Pakistanis drove him out and he ended up homeless, sleeping in his car.

Then the druggers turned him into the Hate Crimes Unit (the HCU can't spell, either) as revenge for his cooperation with the police in his neighborhood. It is now a no-go area full of the drug lords who sell heroin through-out Britain, not to mention their lucrative child prostitution business.

The police don't go sniffing thru blogs. Someone has to want to get even. And that's what they did. Showed some of his angry posts to the police.

If he goes back and the police keep him in jail while the Crown Prosecutor's Office makes up its mind on his case, he's been told he won't survive. By then, he'll be in a body bag.

But to have your sympathy he has to be camera-ready, right? You think his killers are any better spoken or dressed?

He is a Christain. I've had several talks with him about it...that is the source of his hope. He is homesick and doesn't want to be here. He loves his country.

But he is probably in permanent exile now. That's sad when it wasn't what he wanted.

gxm said...

Folks,

It’s all quite simple. With all its faults western culture and the USA in particular has brought about the most advanced high tech civilization in history. Do you want to continue onward and see if we can improve and enhance it or go back to the 7th century? There are certainly unknowns and nothing is certain. It might even be a little scary out there in the future.

“The ever-accelerating progress of technology…gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue.”
- John von Neumann

Even so I vote to go forward.

npabga said...

It's good to see that he seems to be a regular guy. He saw something wrong and tried to do something brave to fight against it at great personal risk. You don't need to be charismatic to do somthing good for the Counter-jihad.

deadbambi said...

I agree with npabga - I am utterly impressed with Lionheart. In the name of counter-jihadism, he's put his own personal safety and freedom at risk. He's got more guts than me, and likely most of us.

ScottSA said...

Hey, sorry everyone got in a tizzy, but I don't think he's a good spokesman for the counterjihad. In fact, he feeds into exactly the stereotype the alleged "progressives" like to use.

I feel for him on a personal level, but in this video he stepped from his personal circumstance onto the public stage, and in doing so he entered a different reality. Especially since a public act like this is an act of propaganda (I use the term to convey meaning, not as an insult)...he is not going to change his own circumstances, so the only reason he would videotape an interview is for propaganda purposes. As propaganda, it doesn't work. It has quite the opposite effect.

VinceP1974 said...

I dont want to violate any rules again.

But I want to.

Paardestaart said...

Hihihi..I sympathize Vince :-)

deadbambi said...

Okay, I'll bite.

Scott, could you please tell me exactly which words or combination of words in the 3 videos makes you think Lionheart is a bad spokesman for the counterjihad movement?

I ask because I really have no idea what brings you to such a conclusion.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

I don't see why the mere fact of being interviewed makes this man a "spokesman" at all. Unlike the other people mentioned, Lionheart didn't choose first to examine the situation and then get involved, he was thrown into it without preparation. He isn't appealing to anyone or trying to do so, he's telling his story as best he can. LEts face it, it'll be people like him that do all the grunt work in the event of violent conflict (god willing we never reach that point) and disparaging them for an inability to use big words is not going to endear them to our cause.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

Umf, also, gaeidhil strikes me as being either irish or of irish descent so there's a certain understandable resentment there. Ireland was not our finest hour...

Gaeidhil said...

I fail to see how my comment expressed resentment. I purposely avoided naming names so as not to sublimate this discussion into a debate about what constitutes historical fact and propaganda masquerading as facts.

What I do resent is the notion that "lionheart" on both a political and individual level is disposable.

If you feel compelled to view him as the byproduct of a bad meal then your cautions rest with the menu.

The CJ's of the world would have us cast this guy into the trash heap because his rough edges don't fade to black on cue. What makes "lionheart" special is that he has experienced the manifest destructiveness of his own and other people's decisions, first hand. As a consequence of that he has become a more moral person. He is not a saint, but he is human and fallible and we have to accept that as part of the deal.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

I understand now, and you're 100% right.

The eternal problem with the 'net is that it's hard to read emotion...

Felicie said...

He made a good impression on me - honest, forthright, serious. And, by the way, he didn't volunteer for a "spokesman against Islam" position. He was thrust into this role by the events.

Gaeidhil said...

Now if he wanted to muddy the waters he would take refuge in a church. Maybe one in a Roman Catholic parish with a heavy Irish component.

Let's see where the press goes with that story.

ScottSA said...

Geez, it feels like a lizard swarming hereabouts!

Maybe I'm being too subtle for you vincep, but there are more than two responses to this spokesman (and yes, felicie, he DID volunteer to be a spokesman...he wasn't simply walking down the street minding his own business one day to be suddenly set upon by the fuzz).

One need not canonize someone simply because one agrees with his opinion. In fact, one need not even like the messenger in order to like the message. Those are perfectly reasonable propositions, like it or not, and the message overrides the presentation as long as he is preaching to the choir.

The problem is that now he's preaching outside the church, on the street, and presentation DOES matter. It matters as much as it mattered in the case of Rodney King's plaintive "Can't we all get along?"...something that made of him not a rallying cry, but a laughing stock.

It's all very well to see him as a "reg'lar guy" and all that, but that in and of itself carries very little currency, and is actually counterproductive outside the choir loft.

deadbambi said...

Scott,

You are being too subtle for me.

What exactly is it that Lionheart said that makes you feel he's a poor spokesman for counterjihadism?

Was he too plain spoken? Was his accent too plebeian? Is it because he wore a sweatshirt on camera? What is it????

Seriously, I really have no idea what brings you to this conclusion and I'd like to understand your point of view.

eatyourbeans said...

Give me a break. If we're waiting for Churchill to rise from the dead to rouse people to the danger, it will be a long wait and a short fight.

"Every man a fortress" --Stalin, 1942
"Everyman a spokesman"-- Eatyourbeans, 2008

PS: Lion Heart, Ask your American hosts about the ACLU. if you can get the them interested, and they well might, in your case, you are as safe as if your parents were George Washington and Betsey Ross.

Gaeidhil said...

Another option is to contact the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Gaeidhil said...

Here is the link:

w2.eff.org/bloggers/

If you're a blogger, this website is for you.

EFF's goal is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger, to let you know you have rights, and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected.

To that end, we have created the Legal Guide for Bloggers, a collection of blogger-specific FAQs addressing everything from fair use to defamation law to workplace whistle-blowing.

w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/

Gaeidhil said...

I'm going to say it again for those that seem to be hung up on the presentation quality of "lionheart".

Just because the guy does not qualify as marital quality stock for your sister is not sufficient cause to collapse his rights as an individual.

His case should be taken up by capable legal representation on all fronts asap if he wants something better than a snowball's chance in hell.

deadbambi said...

I'd be okay with Lionheart marrying my sister. Geez, you guys are harsh!

Gaeidhil said...

The guy has more than enough trouble without marrying my sister.