back to article Cyber-jihadists deface home of teddy bears' picnic

Geographically mixed-up Algerian hackers made themselves look rather silly by defacing the website of an English stately home instead of Belvoir Fortress in Israel, their intended target. Cyber-jihadis from a previously unknown group called Dz-SeC commandeered the website of Belvoir Castle to post an anti-Zionist rant along …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Clive Galway

    Maybe one of the teddy bears...

    ... was named Mohammed?

    1. Andrew Austin

      Just wait for the...

      Teddy bear execution video to follow this...

      "Please My Cameron, my Teddy bear life hangs by a thread, please tell Hamleys not to sell Teddy Bears to Israe..ARGHHHAHHAhuuuurrgrgrg [HACK, SAW, HACK,SAW., HACK...Teddy Bear severed head placed carefully on lifeless teddy body...]".

      1. Anonymous Coward

        Bad taste

        Since this has, and possibly does, still happen to real hostages, does anyone else find this a bit sick?

        1. Bryce Prewitt



        2. ratfox
          Thumb Up


          Welcome to planet earth! This is called catharsis... Recommended by all psychiatrists!

        3. Anonymous Coward

          Sick? Certainly not....

          ....I'm used to reading Private Eye and even have a subscription that I can threaten to cancel if they stop being properly offensive!

          Mine's the one with several still wrapped PEs in the pocket....

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh well

    At least they didn't crash a plane into Belvoir Castle, or for that matter Belvoir fortress. On the scale of things defacing a web site, who really cares. Well apart from the teddy.

  3. Anonymous Coward


    Script kiddies.

    1. Andy Jones


      More like Script Teddies.

      1. Mr Ree

        i think you'll find they're actually...


        already going.......

  4. Adrian Jones

    Is this just publicity

    For the DVD release of Four Lions?

  5. Bunglebear


    Jihadis are never very bright, no matter their technical skills. I hope it didn't cost Belvoir Castle too much to fix their site, or they can bill the local mosque.

    1. T-Unit

      Not as dimwitted...

      ... as blaming a Muslim place of worship for the actions of an extremist subset of that religion. Idiot

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward


        Just as one of the excuses rolled out for the Jihad by the Muslims appears to have been the crusades.

        1. Alex Wells

          Woah woah!

          Nothing to do with bombs. nothing about extremists. no political discussion.

          @Titus, just don't generalise! It's obvious you don't like to be lumped in with our own idiots, so why would anyone who happens to go to a Mosque instead of the pub enjoy being lumped in with theirs? It just rolled off as a bit of a DMail thing to say...

      2. Anonymous Coward

        On the Contrary

        I personally hold Christians responsible for the hate that is spouted in the name of their god. Muslims are no different.

        If someone wants to distance themselves from the actions of "extremists" committed in the name of a religion then they should make a stand and become an atheist like many of us supposedly Christian westerners have done.

        1. Anonymous Coward

          It's all religion

          Blame the God botherers all of them, this whole 'mine is better than yours' thing is so freaking childish.

          And according to Stephen Hawking they are all barking up the wrong tree... I know I've never seen proof of a god or gods (or goddesses my pagan friends).

          Anon? Well if you pissed off someone who hears voices wouldn't you?

          1. Hegghogg

            @ AC 2nd September 2010 12:33 GMT

            "I know I've never seen proof of a god or gods (or goddesses my pagan friends)."

            Hence you're not religious. Religious people *have* seen proof. But of course, what you're demanding is 'objective, empirical evidence' - meaning evidence that *you* would accept - and of course there isn't any. Just as there isn't any objective, empirical evidence for so many of the other things we take for granted in the world. Ultimately, we all just have to decide what we perceive in the world, and how we respond to it. Extremists, religious and otherwise, respond by trying to make everyone see things the way they do.

            1. Anonymous Coward

              I think you mean...

              ...that religious people *believe* that they have seen proof, rather than actually having anything that would stand up to a rigorous level of proof.

              I prefer to only be sure about something that has a rigorous standard of proof about it, and the current attempts to complete the Standard Model of Physics seem pretty rigorous to me. If the end result of that is that there is no term in the equation for gods of any kind then I'd say that is pretty much it for belief based on anything other than scientific rigour. Of course, there's plenty I'm unsure about as a result, but it seems to me that's just a normal consequence of being alive.

              But I can still marvel at the beauty of the mathematics that sprang into existence because it had to and doesn't deal in shades of grey.

          2. steward

            Since you posted as an anonymous coward...

            "I know I've never seen proof of a god or gods (or goddesses my pagan friends)."

            I've never seen proof of the alleged you, since you're anonymous. The post could have been made by a 'bot for all I know.

        2. william henderson 1

          yes but

          muslims were at it long before the followers of jebus started

          1. Anonymous Coward

            You sure about that?

            'Cos I thought Islam started in the 7th Century AD, which is something like 600 years AFTER the birth of Christ.

          2. The Indomitable Gall

            no but

            @william henderson 1

            "muslims were at it long before the followers of jebus started"

            Erm... Islam was founded in the 7th century. Quite a while *after* the followers of Jesus started....

          3. Burch

            Didn't pay much attention

            in history class did you?

            Or any other I'll wager.

          4. Anonymous Coward

            Oh really?

            Check your history... you are wrong.

          5. steward

            "muslims were at it long before the followers of jebus started" - not

            "In hoc signo vinces", a victory guarantee to Constantine by Jebus' crowd, 312 C.E.

            The hegira, the beginning of Mohammed's preaching and the founding of Islam: 622 C.E.

            The followers of jebus started at least 310 years before muslims EXISTED.

        3. Anonymous Coward


          And what if a radical atheist hate group sprouts up, wishing to expunge the world of the folly that is religion? Will you distance yourself by becoming a Budhist?

          People believe what they believe, you can't change that just because you don't like what others are doing. Normal pacifist muslims love their God and their religion and they won't stop believing in them just because some terrorist decides to blow up a bus/train/building.

          Btw, I'm an atheist, I just hate small mindedness.

        4. The Indomitable Gall

          Re: On the contrary


          "I personally hold Christians responsible for the hate that is spouted in the name of their god. Muslims are no different."

          ...much in the same way that the Madrid train bombers and the London bus and underground bombers held all Spanish and British people for the violence visited by their countries in Afghanistan and Iraq.

          What's good for the goose is good for the gander....

        5. Marvin O'Gravel Balloon Face


          Yeah, you and Mao Zedong, Pol Pot and Stalin.

          Peace and love all round.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward


            I agree all of these disputes have a geopolitical aspect. In fact at the risk of oversimplifying all of the disputes are to do with either territory or influence therein. As a pure aside I have a lot of sympathy for the Palestinian position, I mean, if I lived somewhere and a bunch of people turned up and claimed that 2000 or so years ago God gave them my country I would be a tad hacked off myself.

            What I cannot agree with is the medieval attitude that religion has anything to do with this at all? Why don’t the church’s, mosques, synagogues etc just excommunicate (or the religious equivalent) anybody who is involved with any act of violence. Where they don’t compensation as suggested by Bunglebear would seem very appropriate.

            1. Alex Wells
              Jobs Halo


              Disagree that the church is always responsible for those claiming to be acting on it's behalf - as much as I disagree with much of religion I can't hold the church responsible for Waco...Likewise 'Islam' (which is many thousands of groups) cannot be held responsible for some hackers who misread DNS records.

              On the other hand, I'll be rioting right beside you when the pope comes to visit.

              Jobs because the new religions have prettier toys.

            2. Matt Bryant Silver badge

              RE: @Peyton?

              "....As a pure aside I have a lot of sympathy for the Palestinian position, I mean, if I lived somewhere and a bunch of people turned up and claimed that 2000 or so years ago God gave them my country I would be a tad hacked off myself...." So which "Palestinian" people would that be? There is no such racial group as "Palestinians", there has never been a country called "Palestine", it was a moniker given to an area by the occupying Romans who were intent on breaking up the then Jewish kingdom. In the old days prior to WW1, even Jews that left the area referred to themselves as Jewish Palestinians. Old Saint George was more than likely a Christian Palestinian. The area covered by the Manadate under British control between WW1 and WW2 range as far as Iraq (another artificial, colonial, boundary creation) and included a number of ethnic groups including several Jewish tribes, Bedouin, Syrians Arabs, Christian Arabs, Christian Maronites and the Druze. Historically, the land of Israel has changed hands many times (Egyptian, Babylonian, Turkish, Jewish, Roman and Persian dynasties have conquered it at one time or another), so who is the "rightful" owner? The Muslim "Palestinian" Arabs you sympathise with (out of historical ignorance, it seems) were themselves invaders from the Saudi area. So, if you're willing to accept one people's claim simply by right of historical conquest then you can't argue if the Christians go on another crusade or the Israelis conquer all of the West Bank and claim back all of their old kingdom. Of course, if the "Palestinians" had just accepted the original UN partition plan back in 1947 then they would have had a state called Palestine and would probably be a lot better of right now, but I'm sure you wouldn't criticise them for throwing away that chance and every one since to negotiate a Palestinain state.

              "....Why don’t the church’s, mosques, synagogues etc just excommunicate (or the religious equivalent) anybody who is involved with any act of violence...." In the case of Islam, there is no such concept as excommunication. Even if you are condemned to the Msulim equivalent of Hell you do so as a condemned Muslim. To leave Islam is a crime against Allah punishable by death, even in so-called moderate Muslim countries like Egypt. Just Yahoogle for Abdul Rahman in Afghanistan for an insight into what leaving Islam can entail.

        6. <shakes head>

          slightly flawed logic

          By your logic all atrocities committed by atheists are your responsibility, if you don't believe in a god then Darwinist survival of the fittest is the only correct (can't be right or wrong as this is a moral judgment) stance, and therefore all atrocities are just the right of the strongest.

          interesting viewpoint, are you stonger than me?

        7. Mr__H

          @Atheist AC

          @AC - are you distancing yourself from "extrememist atheists"? If we are all a bunch of indefinable entities experiencing unconnected, unintelligable, bare facts that therefore negate the possibility of any kind of interconnection, be that any kind of communication or relationship as true atheism must conclude then actions such as those atrocities committed by extremists are no more "wrong" or "right" than any other action. A car-bombing in Iraq is just as praiseworthy as volunteering to take an elderly neighbour to the shops (and just as despicable). Not what you were agreeing with? That's where a philosophy devoid of input from an external entity naturally leads.

          If you go for a "collective conciousness", make yourself god or any other fudge you [a] were in a cave without the last 100 years of philosophical thought (post-structuralism/post-modernism anyone) and [b] just make theory this your god instead. There's still an external entity and/or yourself which can just as validly be called a god though, hence no "atheism" just your own self-serving version of theism

          "they should make a stand and become an atheist like many of us supposedly Christian westerners have done."

          Really? Made a stand, eh? Look at the newspapers/magazines/web. People have plenty of gods still; money, fame, ecology, sex, influence, power. Take your pick, just don't pretend the west is a place without as many gods.

          (and yes, before you even ask, I'm a fully-paid-up, card-carrying, evangelical christian and no, I don't mind people knowing).

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward


            So where do you stand? Do you oppose violence in the name of religion (Islam or Evangelical Christian)?

          2. DrunkenMessiah


            Point 1: Being an atheist does not mean you don't have morals. While you may think that morality is instilled in us by the belief that is we do something wrong we'll be punished in an afterlife, most atheist believe that if we do something wrong, it's wrong. For me, hurting people is not on the cards, not because I think that if I do I'll be punished, but because I don't want to.

            Point 2: You can twist words as much as you want but we both know that atheism is the non-believe in a deity, a supernatural being which may or may not be all seeing, all powerful, all guiding or all anything. You can call money, fame etc Gods if you wish but don't pretend that you don't know and we don't know that you're twisting the meanings of words.

            1. Denarius Silver badge

              @drunkenmessiah dont read much do you ?

              what has believe in a deity got to to do with attributes ? Abrahamic religions infer or believe in a deity with all powerful abilities, but this is unusual. Most supernaturalist beliefs are about locally limited spirits, whatever a spirit may be. Vikings had their gods eventually destroyed by the giants.

              As for non-theists, I note that many of the current south Asian Islamic leadership were atheists, trained by russians, armed by yanks. They converted to one of the varieties of Islam, with the localities mountain tribe attitudes.

              Finally, _you _ may have beliefs in some moral standard, which were trained into you from where ? Most likely a relic of the christian twilight. When the cultural darkness is complete, there will still be recognisable moral people, but no power to influence. See Seneca, Burrus and Nero history or read the Meditations of Marcus Auralius and note his behaviour in the real world against those who largely agreed with him.

              Plenty of precedent for non-theists doing the darwinian thing, as anyone who recalls the full title of that book will know. Stalins statement on the death of one man a tragedy, death of a million a statistic is an excellent example.

              Now back to Paris or something interesting. IT anyone ?

        8. Hegghogg

          Extremism Right There

          "If someone wants to distance themselves from the actions of "extremists" committed in the name of a religion then they should make a stand and become an atheist like many of us supposedly Christian westerners have done."

          That's ridiculous. So if I were Muslim, you'd argue that because some barbarian idiot with a political axe to grind uses my religion as his excuse (and a pretty transparent excuse at that) you believe that I have no right to practice my religion which, as far as *I'm* concerned, doesn't involve blowing anyone up at all?

          For that matter, your phrasing suggests that if a person uses *someone else's religion* as an excuse for violence, then I - as a believer in *another* religion - am responsible for the said violence because I don't swear off *my* religion and believe as you dictate I should?

          I'm constantly told that atheism is the sign of a more rational mind...

          1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

            Re: Extremism Right There

            Don't take one commenter's burblings as evidence that atheism is *not* the sign of a more rational mind. Obviously.

            1. Hegghogg

              @ Sarah Bee

              Ah, this could go round and round, couldn't it?

              My point was that being an atheist -- even if you concede it means you're a more rational person (which I'd dispute) -- doesn't necessarily make you immune to those exact same *human* tendencies of which religion is so often accused of being the exclusive cause. Too often a person's atheism is offered, and accepted, as a sort of intellectual "get-out-of-jail-free" card: an excuse for narrow-mindedness, prejudice and hatred (or in this case straightforward generalisation) on the basis that this sort of thing is okay in that direction, because the person doing it is 'more rational'.

              1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

                Re: @ Sarah Bee

                Yeah, I know - I was just pointing out that you have to be careful when pointing fingers at people for tarring everyone belonging to a specific group with same brush, if you'll excuse the mixed metaphor. Not that you were - it's just very easily done.

                Atheists aren't really a group as such, anyway - they're only defined by something that they're not. Which makes it er, a broad church...

            2. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart

              RE the 72 Virgins

              'sfunny how everyone seems to assume that the 72 virgins are female, would a female jihadist/whack-job suicide bomber be met by 72 male virgins?

              Does the jihadist /whack-job suicide bomber have to marry the 72 virgins, otherwise they'd both have to be stoned, and I don't mean on the whacky-bacy, for committing adultery.... well the women will be stoned for committing adultery.

              And why do people refer to them as religious wars? Most "religious" wars are not between different religions but between sects of the same religion, the Iran-Iraq war was essentially between Sunnis and Shiites, Catholics and Protestants in northern Ireland have been fighting each other for about 600 years. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all refereed to as the faiths of Abraham. they all worship the same god!

              So whoever made the "your imaginary friend is better that your imaginary friend" type posting should have said "my version of our imaginary friend is better than your version of our imaginary friend"

              All I can say is thank the flying spaghetti monster that I'm an agnostic.

              1. Matt Bryant Silver badge

                RE: RE the 72 Virgins

                "'sfunny how everyone seems to assume that the 72 virgins are female...." Actually, male shaheeds (martyrs or Islamic warriors that die for the cause of Islam) are supposed to get 72 "clean" girls and 28 boys - don't ask what the boys are for, I'm told it's a hang over from the days when the Greeks conquered most of what is now the Muslim states, the Greeks of the day being prone to a bit of young man on the side. Please, no jokes about Greek girls and monobrows, I happen to have met some very tasty Greek ladies.

                ".....would a female jihadist/whack-job suicide bomber be met by 72 male virgins?...." Just to show equal pay and rights has obviously been an issue for a lot longer than we thought, female shaheedss are promised "one faithful husband" - apparently, finding a faithful Arab husband was a bit of a challange in olden times!

                1. Hegghogg

                  Actual Question @ Matt Bryant

                  "male shaheeds (martyrs or Islamic warriors that die for the cause of Islam)"

                  Actually that's something I've wondered from time to time. This word you mention, 'shaheed', presumably it has some sort of authority in Islamic scripture? If so, can it literally be translated as 'martyr'? I've always wondered exactly when and how fanatical jihadists came to misinterpret the word 'martyr' so as to be able to apply it to people who *murder* for their religion (supposedly), rather than people who simply die for it.

                  To me, a maniac exploding a bomb in a crowded city street and killing dozens or hundreds of people can't legitimately label himself a 'martyr' just because he happens to die - by his own hand - in the act. Whether I agree with their religion or not, I'll recognise someone who is killed for their beliefs as a martyr - but not someone who chooses to die in the process of killing others. They're just a dead murderer.

                  So, as someone who knows the word you may know the story behind it. Is Islamic scripture really this hazy on the definition of 'martyr'?

                  1. Matt Bryant Silver badge

                    RE: Actual Question @ Matt Bryant

                    As I understand it, shaheed and martyr are not quite the same thing, just close enough equivalents to make for an easy translation. As regards whether the suicidal act of blowing up "infidels" counts as a fitting thing for a "warrior" to be doing, it all comes down to your values system. Having lived and worked in the Mid-East, I soon realised that the ethnic group we refer to as "Arabs" have a different set of core values to what we consider the norm in the West, whether in business practices, family values or war. That's not to say their values are worse or better than ours, just different. The common mistake Western people make is assuming that Arabs will act or think in the way we would in a similar situation. If you are an extremist Islamist, then you may take the view that all non-Muslims are infidels and are the enemies of Islam, and that any act that kills them in preparation for the spreading the influence of Islam is a good thing, even if that means sacrificing your own life (and suicide is normally not a good thing in the eyes of Islam).

                    The Arabs aren't the only ones with a different mindset. The Allies were shocked at what the Japanese did to prisoners of war in WW2, they just didn't understand that the traditional Japanese considered any soldier taken prisoner as losing all honour. We were also shocked by the Kamikaze, but didn't know at the time that it had been official Japanese military policy NOT to endorse Kamikaze missions, it wasn't until the War was almost over that the official Kamikaze campaign was approved. Even today, people tell me that doing business in Japan is completely different to Europe or the US. But then we don't even have to go as far as Japan, we use such terms as "vive la difference" to point out the cultural differences between the UK and France.

                    In the meantime, we're off on another round of doomed Mid-East peace talks, all because the politicians assume that both sides (Israeli and "Palestinian") will act like Westerners and want peace. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, but I can't see either side being willing to make the concessions the other demands, even with Obama's big and cheesy grin being used on them. So we'll probably have more than a few similar threads to come here, more arguments over who is "right", and more confused Westerners wondering how the Heck it got to such a mess.

    2. Alex Wells

      Thanks Bunglebear...

      I haven't been that angry at the stupidity of my own countrymen for at least 3 days.

      Next time there's an EDL/BNP riot that I have to pay taxes to control can I send you the bill you halfwit?

    3. Nigel 11

      Dim doesn't begin to cover it

      Anyone who wants to blow himself up so that he can spend eternity with seventy-two perpetual virgins ... and thinks that he won't get bored, thinks that he'll still think he's in heaven after the first million years .... or billion ... or googleplex ....

      Personally I hope that these people get what they are expecting. In the fullness of eternity, they will come to realise that they are in HELL.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Alex Angry?

        Not as angry as it makes me when inncocent people get blown up all in the Name of Islam. Just in case you wish to accuse me of facist sympathies I would also add that watching Palestinians getting beaten up by the Israeli army, hearing of the devastation caused by IRA bombs, and/or the UFF made me just as angry. None of these things are good.

        We live in a secular society and I can see no reason for any of these religions to take these actions.

        1. peyton?

          @@Alex Angry?

          None of the cited examples can be boiled down to purely religious sources. They all have geopolitical aspects.

          It would be nice if we could simply point to a single source for a problem and excise it, but it turns it is a complicated world in which we live. Oversimplifying its complexities merely complicates things.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Thumb Down

        Never actually understood...

        the appeal of spending eternity with any number of virgins? Surely you'd want girls who definitely put out?? 72 slappers would be a much better option...

        1. I'm Brian and so's my wife

          Frankie Boyle: comic genius

          FB dealt with exactly this issue by questioning why you'd want 72 virgins. His counter-offer was 2 women from Dundee.

          Not-so-subtle icon invoked.

      3. Simon Westerby 1

        "perpetual virgins"

        If they are "perpetual virgins" does that imply that even though you get to stay with them, for eternity... thats pretty much it in the fun stakes...

        To me sounds more like hell then heaven...

  6. Guy Herbert

    Typically cunning PR ...

    for the DVD release of FOUR LIONS?

  7. Anonymous Coward

    Jihadis are so dumb

    Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

    Teddy bears, cartoons, pigs, schoolteachers, women... Whatever will they think of hating next?

    1. chr0m4t1c

      Well, according to reports last week

      They're planning to hate the aid workers who have gone to help the victims of the recent floods.

      I mean, seriously, WTF?

      Hopefully it's the usual load of media made-up stuff.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        No it's probably true, unfortunately...

        Their reasoning being that for once the west is actually providing effective aid that is visibly helping a few million muslims (rather than our slightly more traditional approach of shooting them).

        Obviously this can't be allowed to continue, people might stop hating us, so they're threatening to target aid workers to discourage us helping.

        And if that doesn't tell you everything you need to know about the mindset of these lunatics, nothing will.

  8. TeeCee Gold badge

    Algerian hackers?

    With a geographical ballsup of that magnitude are we sure that they're not just proving their credentials in order to help their applications for US citizenship?

  9. Anonymous Coward

    That's pronounced "Beaver" Castle

    much to the amusement of myself and countless other children of the East Midlands who went there on school trips for no adequately explored reason

    1. Hegghogg

      Pronounced 'Beaver'?

      Actually I just discovered this when dealing with someone with the surname 'Belvoir': apparently British people have pronounced it 'Beaver' since the time of the Anglo-Saxons. It seems the Anglo-Saxons couldn't pronounce the complicated Norman-French word and simplified it.

      Personally, it's news to me. I've lived in the UK all my life and I've never known anyone -- up until the said surname-bearer -- pronounce it as anything other than 'belv-WAHR'. Of all the French words we've imported, this has got to be one of the easier ones.

      'Croissant', on the other hand -- now *that's* tricky. 'Krwah-'? Madness, I tell you.

  10. ravenviz Silver badge

    To our US cousins

    Please don't think that when we're living in our castles that we're not just having tea parties for teddies and dollies.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wasn't Belvoir Castle

    in the family of William de Staunton who was a Crusader in the 3rd Crusade? Maybe they got the right place after all.....

  12. Mr Grumblefish

    Now things really will get nasty

    Do not anger the teddy bears. Just don't.

  13. Anonymous Coward

    I have the urge to sing...

    If you log onto the web today, you're sure of a big surprise...

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Viking Crusaders

    Anyway, why do extremists blame the Brits for the Crusades? The Crusades were campaigns by the Normans (basically French-domiciled Vikings) who had also conquered and brutally oppressed Anglo-Saxon England. So let's blame the Danes, and we all know how well their flag burns:-)

    All this would be lost on these particular cyber-jihadists, who clearly couldn't find their own arses with both hands and a torch.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Viking Crusaders

      >who clearly couldn't find their own arses with both hands and a torch

      I've just tried that and I've lost my torch.

      1. frank ly

        The Obvious Question

        Can you see light at the end of the tunnel?

  15. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge


    I've always found them suspicious

    1. Not That Andrew

      Sinister Ducks

      I think you'll find it's the ducks you have to keep an eye out for:

      1. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge

        true, and the dolphins too

        INFIDELS, the lot of them!!!!!

  16. John A Blackley

    I suspect

    that the "Cyber-jihadis from a previously unknown group called Dz-SeC" is actually one fourteen year-old, undereducated, mamma's-boy nitwit.

  17. Juan Inamillion

    I, for one,welcome...

    ...our ursine Overlords

    Hey it really is nice to see everyone (mostly) treating all this with the true British sense of the ridiculous that it deserves. Fine efforts, fellows, very fine!

    Oh, and errr.. to the question @Bad taste asked: No.

  18. Gavin 14

    All together now!

    If you log onto the web today

    You’re sure of a big surprise

    If you log onto the web today

    You’re not going to believe your eyes

    A site’s been hacked, a mix up there was

    Belvoir Castle made some jihadists cross

    Today’s the day the hackers got their wires crossed.

  19. Tom 7

    Its every schoolboys dream

    to conquer beaver castle.

    1. Anonymous Coward

      or at least

      learn to wrestle a beaver. it's as much fun as poking them with a stick.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    We all know

    It was a bunch of spotty thirteen year old berks (possibly living in Leicestershire?) with to much time on their hands (and sticky stuff on their sheets) don't we?

    1. Anonymous Coward

      And when they get their afterlife,

      they will BE one of the 72 virgins.

  21. Mectron

    Big or small

    islam (and muslims) is a danger to the human race and must be BAN RIGHT NOW. Islam is simply not compatible with human life/Inteligent life form

    1. Captain Thyratron

      Thank you for enlightening us with your reasoned discourse.

      I think we've all learned something from it.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Irony, anyone?

      "islam (and muslims) is a danger to the human race and must be BAN RIGHT NOW. Islam is simply not compatible with human life/Inteligent life form"

    3. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge

      as in

      freedom of religion except for those who think differently from me!!!!!!!

    4. Oz

      Re: Big or small

      I'm not normally one to respond to comments in this way but, Mectron, sir... you are a cretin! Do you happen to read the Daily Mail (assuming you can read, that is)?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward


        Would you by any chance work for Mossad?

    5. Anonymous Coward

      you're a little late for that

      they already have their shar'ia courts set up and have two feet in the door.

  22. Captain Thyratron


    Whoa, what a fustercluck.

  23. Andy Goss

    Perpetual recyled virgins

    They are supposed to miraculously "re-virginate" every morning. Sort of like "Goundhog Day" meets "The Prisoner", only there's no escape.

    And don't blame the Christians, it was the Romans' fault for re-structuring Christianity for their own imperial ends, until then it was fairly benign.

  24. Anonymous Coward

    So the Virgins, what are they all about?

    So speculating on the Virgins where do they come from?

    Given that they have been assigned the onerous task of servicing the succesful Jihadist presumably they are formed from minor sinners in a previous life? Your veneal rather than mortal sinners, and then they are 're-virginated' and get a pass through the pearly gates.

    So anyways thats OK, with luck this shouldn't be a problem for me, it is you women out there that needs to make sure you die in a state of grace. The again what about that gay suicide bomber ........ where does his 72 come from, whoops, oh s*i*........ 'Hail Mary for I have sinn.......'

    1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

      Re: So the Virgins, what are they all about?

      I believe the virgins amount to a translation mistake, don't they? It's a bit unfortunate, really.

      1. Anonymous Coward

        72 virgins (or not as the case may be) or 1 sarah bee

        hmmmm decisions decisions

        also given that the cyber jihadists missed the mark by 2200 miles ish (as the crow flies) does this mean they were trained by americans, who lets face it could not hit the side of a fast food joint from 3 paces?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Thumb Up


          ".... smallest reward for the people of Heaven is an abode where there are eighty thousand servants and seventy-two houri, ........"

          Panic over for indeed the inestimable Sarah is correct.....

          "........Iḥūr or ḥūrīyah (Arabic: حورية‎) are described as "(splendid) companions of equal age (well-matched)", "lovely eyed", of "modest gaze", "voluptuous women", "pure beings" or "companions pure" of paradise, denoting humans and jinn who enter paradise after being recreated anew in the hereafter. ......."

          Reading through this stuff it looks like 'Houri' are largely women (there is some confusion with gender and the translation from Arabic), but in any event 'attractive' (counts me out!). Whoah whoah, whoah should I inadvertantly make it to heaven I won't be spending eternity doing 'business' services for some pimple covered Jihadist brown hat hacker. WTG FPTY TFFT

          Feel a bit sorry for the girls, oh and the attractive people. But then again they get all the breaks down here..... do I really care that Arnie, Jordan, or MLF have to spend an eternity ..... nah lets get on with the morning after all it's their career choice?

      2. Kubla Cant

        Translation error

        So you go to all that trouble, make the suicide video, blow yourself up...

        ...and when you get to heaven they tell you "Sorry - translation error. Turns out you're actually spending eternity with 72 perpetual celebrities."

        (On a cruder note, if you've exploded yourself it's no wonder the virgins stay that way, since your bits are dispersed all over the street.)

      3. Tom 35

        Translation errors

        So a bit like witch then.

        Very convenient translation errors, gives you a way to get rid of people you don't like without having to do it your self.

    2. TeeCee Gold badge

      @Titus Technophobe

      "....Virgins where do they come from?"

      Er, here?

  25. Bernard M. Orwell


    It's not about religions really, is it? It's about belief. Specifically, it's about UNREASONABLE belief.

    People who are prone, for whatever reason, to believe what they are told and fail to question it are easy to manipulate. Religion, therefore, is a tool used for political advancement. It's not the religion that fails, specifically, its merely that it acts as a vehicle for the machinations of those who have the intellect and will to make use of it.

    The same goes for other motivating factors; Patriotism springs to mind as an example (My country right or wrong. Isn't that the cry of patriotic Americans in some cases?).

    Atheism too sometimes teeters on the brink of being an 'unquestioning faith' and the only thing that sends it spiralling into the same status as religion is that it retains the readiness to be questioned; to allow for reasoned examination. Indeed, it encourages such, unlike religions which hold the converse; unquestioning faith; as a virtue.

    it is, I believe, therefore that we must guard against two thing; extremism and unquestioning obedience. Whether it is religion, science or patriotism we must be encouraged to question, to understand and to deliberate in a civilised manner and to respect the views of others. Only then might we see an end to conflict, as each soldier, suicide bomber or fundamentalist stops for a second, considers what they've just been told is "right", "true" or "their duty" and says....

    ....hang on just one bloody minute.....!?

    1. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Refer to Prattchet's "Small Gods"

      for one of the best analyses on this topic.

      Voltaire's statement that self-mockery is the highest human value also springs to mind here

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    Like it wasn't a MOSSAD false flag op?

    Yawn. Wake up and smell the pretzels you schmucks.

  27. The Beer Monster

    I've said it before and I'll say it again,,,

    Please God/Mohammed/Jehovah/Deity of choice (delete as appropriate)

    save me from the

    Muslims/Jews/Christians/Enemy of choice (delete as appropriate)

    1. The Beer Monster



      I'll have you know that the last time I said this on El Reg it got upvoted! TWICE!

      Some people have no sense of humour. Or humor for the leftpondians.

    2. unitron

      A different version

      I prefer the saying

      "Please, God, save me from your followers."

  28. Bunglebear


    I appear to have unintentionally triggered a flame war with a tongue in cheek comment. My apologies. Anyway, keep it up, it makes fun reading.

  29. Anonymous Coward

    I blame the Mardukes

    True believers are always a problem.

  30. Martin Glenn

    Beaten to it

    Was going to post about it being "Beaver" but got beaten to it, Being a local to the area, The castle is actually Lincolnshire and the grounds are Leicestershire.

  31. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge
    Big Brother

    And of course gods are created

    in the image of their believers: some are quite benign, others are homicidal lunatics (just like people, really). The problem is the different ones to often go by the same name. This gives rise to confusion, evidence of which abounds above ;-)

    Big brother because he is the nearest thing to the big beard in the sky many believe in.

  32. James Woods


    where are the damn screenshots.

    will the teddy bears fight back?

  33. NoDosh

    All these comments

    And not one mention of the popular front of Judea?

    Jihadi? They're all very naughty boys. The grenade? From Antioch obviously.

    1. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge

      And Saint Atilla raised on high his handgrenade!!!!


      But don't you mean the people's popular front? or the popular people's front?

  34. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Biggest flop ever

    Imagine a bunch of poor teddy-bear hating bastards actually *intended* to target "Beaver" castle after all, and here you are accusing them of antizionism and whatnot.

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    if we were all agnostic. Can't recall too many murderous attacks under the banner 'well I'm not quite sure, really.'

  36. NoDosh
    Paris Hilton

    Moral outrage

    I for one am a huge fan of bare beaver.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like