|
Tuesday, 25 January 2005
The demon satanist Zarqawi
Mood:
 don't ask
Think for just a moment about the words of the most "feared" terrorist leader in Iraq...
Here is a man who threatens to wage a "fierce war on this evil principle of democracy". Lets break that down for those who don't get it... Democracy is defined in many ways... as a Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives; a political or social unit that has such a
government; the common people, considered as the primary source of political power; majority rule; the principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.
It means, the people have a say in the functions of government. It is not meant for one race, religion, sect, social class or order, but for citizens of the country. Where exactly do you see a trace of "evil principle" in that definition? But these are the words of a terrorist "mastermind" who has driven fear in the hearts of average Iraqi citizens just as the former dictator Saddam Hussein has done. The Iraqi people don't seem to get it. If they don't stand for themselves, they will continue to be the victims. Zarqawi has threated to kill the infidels who participate in the elections and involve themselves in setting up such an institution...Who gave this man the right to decide for the Iraqi people who lives and dies...who can make decisions that effect their own future...certainly not Allah, as Zarqawi and Bin Laden may claim...does the world really believe that these savages are fulfilling the will of Allah? If so, the world is worse off than we thought...Who gave this coward the right to play God...to end lives at his own whim and put fear in the hearts of common people? Who lets him do it? The Iraqi people do.
I find it amusing that Zarqawi called democracy as he does. It shows his ignorance and stupidity. He will meet his death soon...and his God will not be lighting his way to paradise, but lighting his soul to burn in the fiery depths of hell.
Zarqawi has done what Bin Laden didn't count on. He has taken advantage of a centuries old religious conflict to turn Iraqi inward on to itself. There is really no objective to their activity. It changes...expel the infidels, develop an Islamic state, keep the shia out of power...and that is his platform now...he knows that the Shia are the majority and the Sunnis will lose the vote...but rather than allow the vote and chance a secular government will emerge and unite the country, Zarqawi bombs sunnis to scare them away from elections...bombs shias to remove opposition, and bombs everybody else just because he can....he doesn't want peace in the world...what demonic satanist bastard would?
Face it people...he is not a fundamentalist...he is not a man of god and he is not an ideologist...he is a demon...a liar...a thief and a coward...he holds the people of Iraq hostage every day. He cuts the heads off of people in the streets and defies and blasphemes the good of Islam and the Quran. He disgraces God and Islam and all that it means...He is an embarrassment to Muslims and shameful example to young muslim youth. What he may not know or may not wish to believe is that his own house is burning...his days are numbered and soon the word will pass of the fall of the demon Zarqawi.
Posted by Author
at 8:20 PM
Sunday, 9 January 2005
Why is it?
Mood:
 irritated
Why is it...??? The US bombs the wrong house...steps up to the plate and says...We hit the wrong target. We regret any loss of innocent life. Insurgents wage battle from populated areas so this is bound to happen...But the US took responsibility...this type of thing doesnt happen every day, but the fact that it happened "enrages the Arab world".
Meanwhile, Arabs kill innocent civilians every single day in Iraq in car bombings and other attacks...with the sole intention of killing to intimidate or punish...Sunnis, Shiites, Christian and other...Why is it that this doesnt "enrage the Arab world"?
Posted by Author
at 9:34 PM
Wednesday, 8 December 2004
More Al Jazeera
Ex-US marine: I killed Iraqi civilians
Wednesday 08 December 2004, 8:40 Makka Time, 5:40 GMT
A few marines have described a 'shoot first, ask later' policy
Related:
Clashes before Hoon's visit to Iraq
US soldiers seek asylum in Canada
A former US marine has said his unit killed more than 30 innocent Iraqi civilians in just two days.
In graphic testimony presented to a Canadian asylum tribunal on Monday, Sergeant Jimmy Massey's evidence appeared to bolster war crime claims made by fugitive US paratrooper Jeremy Hinzman.
The 26-yea-old Hinzman said he would face persecution if sent home to the US, in a politically charged case which could set a precedent for at least two other American deserters seeking asylum in Canada.
Massey told Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) that men under his command in the 3rd battalion, Seventh Marines, killed "30 plus" civilians within 48 hours while on checkpoint duty in Baghdad.
"I do know that we killed innocent civilians," he said, relating the chaotic days after the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
Unknown enemy
Massey said in some incidents, Iraqi civilians were killed by between 200 and 500 rounds pumped into four separate cars which each failed to respond to a single warning shot or respond to hand signals at a Baghdad checkpoint.
At the time US soldiers feared bombers would try to ram checkpoints, he said. Searches found no weapons in the vehicles or evidence that those killed were anything but innocent civilians, he added.
"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not ... when you don't know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?"
Jimmy Massey,
former marine sergeant
He said marines also killed four unarmed demonstrators and more Iraqis the following day during another spell of checkpoint duty in the Iraqi capital.
"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not," said Massey.
"When you don't know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?" asked the 12-year marine veteran, later honourably discharged from the service with severe depression and post traumatic stress disorder.
Hinzman case
Hinzman earlier argued at the tribunal which started on Monday and was due to end on Wednesday that he gradually realised after joining the army in 2001 that he could not bring himself to kill another person.
"I was faced with being deployed to Iraq to do what the infantry does, kill people, and I had no justification for doing so," said Hinzman.
Hinzman and his wife and two-year-old son arrived in Canada early this year, after deserting from his unit, an action which carries a maximum five-year term in jail.
Posted by Author
at 4:42 PM
Tuesday, 7 December 2004
From Al Jazeera
Why Iraqis should boycott the election
By Mohammed al-Obaidi
Sunday 05 December 2004, 16:46 Makka Time, 13:46 GMT
Forty-seven Iraqi political parties met on 17 November and made the decision to boycott the coming Iraq election. The People's Struggle Movement (Al-Kifah al-Shabi), which I represent, was one of those groups.
After carefully studying Iraq's situation, considering the military occupation as well as economic and national interests, we felt there were enough reasons for any patriotic Iraqi to boycott the proposed January election.
It is a violation of all international laws. International charters that regulate the relationship between occupier and occupied do not give occupying authorities the mandate to instigate a change in the country's social, economic and political structure.
The planned election will change the political composition of Iraq to suit the interests of the occupation authorities. The change will also lead to ethnic, sectarian and religious divisions that the Iraqi state and people had succeeded to avoid.
Historically, Iraqis have been able to coexist and the spectre of civil war did not loom until the country was stricken by the US-led occupation.
Many Iraqi political activists believe the coming election results have been decided already. They also believe the electoral process will not be free and democratic but will be exclusively for those who maintain strong ties with the US occupation authorities. We feel that all steps have been taken to secure full US domination of decision-makers in Iraq.
"If Iraqis cooperate with the US in the coming elections, then they will get just what Afghanistan has got - a puppet"
A look at the electoral process and the composition of the current national council reveals that the election's main mission will be to install some of the country's most notorious politicians who have constantly spoken proudly of their links to international intelligence agencies.
The coming election will give power to every politician who has assisted the invaders and collaborated with them to consolidate the occupation. Therefore, we believe that even after the election, the decision-making process will be taken in the US embassy in Baghdad and the elected government will be no more than a vehicle to carry out Washington's decisions.
"The US administration works hard to portray the Iraq election as a political achievement to cover over the scar that the war has left on its credibility"
It is very difficult for any sensible person to believe that the US would give up its domination of Iraq after spending billions of dollars and sacrificing the lives of hundreds of its soldiers.
We cannot believe that after all this the US will simply allow free and democratic elections to take place in Iraq that could install a government which could make it its first priority to tell foreign troops to get out.
We strongly believe that the main purpose of the election process is to secure a government that will facilitate long-lasting agreements with the US to keep its forces on Iraqi soil and transform the country into an American colony.
The US administration works hard to portray the Iraq election as a political achievement to cover over the scar that the war has left on its credibility.
Washington will use the election card to pull the wool over the eyes of the international community to prevent it from seeing the tragic consequences that the war has left on the Iraqi people.
For all these reasons, many Iraqi political activists feel it is their national duty to boycott the 30 January election.
Professor Mohammed al-Obaidi is the spokesman for the People's Struggle Movement (Al-Kifah al-Shabi) in Iraq, and works as a University Professor in the UK. He was born and educated in al-Adhamiyah district in Baghdad. This article, was written exclusively for Aljazeera.net, and was translated from Arabic.
Response...sent to Al Jazeera...we will see how much they edit it
Why they shouldnt
By Solomon Pierce
While I respect Mr al-Obaidis comments, he does make at least one point that is contradictory to his own opinion. Im not sure how long he has lived in the UK, but as a native Iraqi citizen, unless he is a product of the former regime, he knows the oppression that Saddam Hussein brought to the Iraqi people. No one would dare be critical of that government or even form opposing political parties. The fact that Mr al-Obaidi makes free statements in this regard shows the value of democracy...free speech. It is not the Americans that stand in the way of a free and sovereign Iraq. It is the insurgency that does that...it is the calls for boycott that do that. What are you afraid of Mr al-Obaidi? How can the US influence 25 million people? In a free election , those people will decide. By calling for boycott and blowing up cars on crowded streets, you don't give the people a chance to decide. If the insurgency did not exist, there would be no need for the US to remain in Iraq...there would be a peaceful election and the US and Britain would pack up and go home. But the insurgency has a message of "crusades"...not concerns of political puppetry. Mr al-Obaidi mentioned that "Iraqis have been able to coexist and the spectre of civil war did not loom until the country was stricken by the US-led occupation"...please...spare me...There was no civil unrest before because the whole country lived in fear...there was a tyrannical dictator that kept the country in check...I will give you that. A "sensible" person would rather die, than live a life of fear. Now that the regime is gone, the insurgency is filling that void with a continuing terror campaign. They are using fear to keep people away from the poles, as you are using propaganda to do the same. Why? Not because you fear a puppet regime...I don't think that's possible with 25 million people with free will...You and I both know what you fear. You said it yourself..."The change will also lead to ethnic, sectarian and religious divisions that the Iraqi state and people had succeeded to avoid." That's why you boycott. You might be in the minority then...and the tables would be reversed.
The US has invested billions into the restructuring of Iraq because the US is a melting pot of cultures from all over the world who know oppression, and poverty ...who went to America for a chance at at a better life...a life with freedom... life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That freedom is not cheap...America, Britain and Iraq among others have lost many good men and women in this "struggle". This is something else America knows about in its short 225 year history. So the next time, Mr al-Obaidi, that you make comments, remember that your right to do so freely is being bought and paid for by all of those lives...
As for whether or not the US would give up "dominance" of Iraq after spending billions...a "sensible" person, you suggest would find it difficult to believe, etc....you,sir, are not a sensible person...you are an instigator...you have such a cynical view of the situation that you cant even see what the consequences of your actions are with regard to boycott. You are an educator and a leader... I feel very sorry for you, but moreso for the Iraqi people...they remain oppressed, not by Americans, but by the same political groups that oppressed them before the war...with a little help from the outside terror organizations...and they know this...the Iraqi people are not as stupid as you think they are...but there is little they can do..they fear for their lives. They are a good people with a lot of bad influence from within.
The political parties that boycott would better serve the process to participate on the ballot and try to be apart of the mold of Iraq to the will of the people.
Good Luck Mr al-Obaidi.
Posted by Author
at 9:26 PM
Monday, 6 December 2004
Interesting facts
I have learned some intersting new facts with regard to muslim beliefs...the sacrifice of sheep and the power of envy...stay on top of the web site...
Posted by Author
at 11:17 PM
Saturday, 4 December 2004
The Tenth Crusade?
The Tenth Crusade
It is very disturbing to hear Sunni muslim clerics talk of of how the conflict in Iraq is turning young mulims, who had no previous propensity for violence into dedicated Mujahadeen who will stop at nothing in the fight against the western "crusaders". It is futher evidence of the incitement and instigation that the Sunni leadership uses to create as many "fronts" as possible...it is strategically... brilliant, and exactly what I would expect to hear. I have had the greatest opportunities over the last year and a half to see hear many perspectives in a war that has come to a decisive point after over 25 years of fighting. Many don't see the war in Iraq as a mere battle in a war of a much larger scale, but one only has to see and hear the perspectives of those who live in the region, primarily moderate muslims , who may not surprise you, but will , without question, offer historic insight that many of us may not have otherwise considered. I have spoken, via email to my friend and former interpreter in Iraq... Khalid (not his real name), whose entire family had been directly affected by the tyranny of the former Iraqi regime. Khalid, who is a more moderate Sunni, was always cautious, keeping his opinions subdued, an obvious symptom of years without basic civil liberties.
Salem Aleikum,
I have not heard for you in some time. I hope that you and your family are safe and secure.
How are things in Taji? I see that it is a busy and worrisome place. I am not sure of the direction that things are going but I do believe that it is more important than ever for us to stay the course. The insurgency has become a voice and that, I think, is a bigger problem than any other. Why is this happening? Do people so quickly forget about what it was like in Iraq before? How did the struggle for freedom for the Iraqi people and the security of its neighbors become a fight between Islam and the rest of the world? Often I wonder how much the Iraqi people are willing to endure...What is the frame of mind there, Khalid? What do you and your family, friends and neighbors think about all of this now? I talk to my Kuwaiti friends and their opinions have been disturbing, but they are not in the middle of a life and death struggle over which right... is right.
Do you know of what ever happened to the other ITs? I know the Mosul guys went back to Mosul. I think of Saleh when I hear of all the trouble in Baquba...what about Soadad? Anyway, let me know how you are doing and your thoughts, if you feel comfortable doing so. Please give my regards to your wife and your children. My family will come to Kuwait soon and I hope that a day will come that we can all meet in one place without worry.
a belated Eid Mubarak to you an yours...KD
as'salem aleikum msr K...
Is is real veri good to have you send me this e mails, I am in taji with msr bill and msr jon,
I do not like it here ..i wish to work for ford. I hear from people that ford of kuwaiit will come to iraq soon...could you tell them that I am a good worker and for they mite give for me a job...thank you msr K...I do not understand why these things happen here in iraq this way...my family do not understand this either.I do not speak for my neighbors. The people of iraq are good people but a scared. I think even the insurgence is a scared...they are afraid of what they do not know. Those Iraqi people who are part of this bad things only know bad things ther hole life... I think ther are many insurgence not from iraq who tell them to do these bad things and they do. i am a scared for my family and my children...and I am a scared for myself and everybody. I do not know of the other IT s. I hope they are ok. khalid.
I have been through 3 different interpreters in my current position. Our team of "ITs" are predominantly Shia. We work in an environment that is primarily moderate Sunni which has had its disadvantages in the past but everyone seems dedicated to making our relationships work. My current interpreter, Nawaf, is 35 years old, is in his second marriage, and recently welcomed his third child into the world. He is a Kuwaiti citizen, although he live in the United States for 13 years and is a graduate of the University of Oklahoma. For the last nine years he has been back in Kuwait. Nawaf and I usually have about an hour of every day that we end up dedicating to discussing and in some cases debating the situation across the middle east. From him I get multiple views...he is in a position where gets first look at unedited information from the news wire. He is , most definitely...an Arab...he was in the United States during the invasion of Kuwait while most of his family was enduring months of oppression from the Iraqi Army occupation. He is a rather devout Muslim, who has been a valuable source of information in regard to the history of Islam. While his American influenced thinking and sense of professionalism tells him to stay objective, what I hear when I talk to him is a deep seeded faith driven belief that a Christian/Zionist conspiracy is at the root of all problems in the Middle east. When we have this discussion, I know, from his tone and the many directions that our conversations move, that his perception is based on what he knows about Islam and of his interpretations of the Quran and is selective in its applications of beliefs from the Old Testament . It is a textbook illustration for me that shows the depth of devotion that muslims have to Islam... unfortunately,for most... it is truly a one sided story, considering the cynical nature of Arab culture with respect to the west. There is a belief in the Muslim world that events of the last 25 years are the beginnings of a new Crusade against Muslim people.
This "conspiracy theory" is an overwhelming belief among Arab muslims, and while most are not active "revolutionaries", it is at the core of the rights of Jihad. Jihadists tend to further distort it as being one of a conspiracy direct toward the destruction of Islam specifically.
Look at recent headlines...what comes into focus for the arab people is the videotaped killing of an Iraqi in a mosque in Fallujah...the detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib... These things dominate the Arab media and overshadows the grisly videotaped beheadings of innocent hostages, like Nick Berg, Kim Sun-il, Jack Hensley and Margaret Hassan, among others, by extremist groups in Iraq, not to mention the execution style murders of 49 Iraq Army Soldier enroute home for the observance of Ramadan. This is typical of Arab media but even more typical of Arab culture and when combined with Islamic culture, it creates an unbelieveable sense of paranoia.
I recently watched a CNN International interview with 2 muslim professors in Britain discussing the French Ban on obvious religious symbols. This law actually covers the wearing of Jewish skullcaps and Christian Crucifixes as well as muslim headscarves, however, the muslim professors in this interview took it as an opportunity to express it as a blatant attack on Islam. Another part of the conspiracy, and coming from the educated as well as the spiritual leadersip in the muslim community, highly regarded as truth to the muslim world.
Posted by Author
at 9:49 PM
Thursday, 2 December 2004
Islam contradictions
I want everybody to read this carefully...on a FAQ section of a pro Islamic web site, a young ,obviously devout muslim man asks some questions some concerns that he has regarding his Chinese girlfriend and her parents.
I am facinated by Islam, however, I see so many signs that are contridictory to the peaceful, loving image that moderate mulims try to defend it with...
Read on...
Question:
Assalamu'alaikum. I am very in love with my girlfriend, a Chinese non-muslim.We've been together for 5 years and planned to be wed soon. The problem is she is the eldest in her family and by tradition has to look after her parents who are non-muslim.I have tried to convert them to the islamic faith but they refused to submit to islam (I am certain they are Buddist). As a muslim, I respect their decision but will I be doing a sin if they continued to livewith my girlfriend and I after we wed.I deeply love and respect them even though they rejected our religion as they are my girlfriend's parents. They however were understanding enough to not keep idols and dieties in the house after we wed but they love to eat pork (just like any other chinese) What am i supposed to do? My girlfriend doesn't eat pork anymore and she has submitted to islam willingly but she is concerned about changing her name as her parents want her to keep her original name(ie Wong Wan Pei). Can this be allowed?
Answer:
All praise is due to Allah.
First of all, we praise Allah the most glorified that He guided this woman to Islam and that you are now allowed to marry her under Islamic law (shari'ah). May Allah the Almighty help you to remain firm toward your faith.
Out of compassion and caring for your sake, please allow me to reproach a particular aspect of your question, which is that you did not indicate any regret on your part regarding the sinful and forbidden relationship of taking a girlfriend and continuing with her in a friendship that angers and displeases Allah regardless of the extent of that friendship.
Your question focused on a secondary issue regarding the ruling on changing one's name which is not as serious as what you have practiced for the past five years. Allah the most glorified has forbidden such an indecent relationship in the Qur'an (interpretation of the meaning, )
"...not committing fornication, nor taking them as lovers (i.e. girlfriends)..." (Al-Maa'ida, 5:5)
So, it is obligatory upon you to repent to Allah and to regret what has passed and to have the firm will not to return to the same action again, and to do good deeds and perform acts of worship to expiate the evils of that sin, and Allah is surely forgiving and merciful. (Please see also similar discussion of this issue in question #61)
As for your statement: "I deeply love my girlfriend's parents even though they rejected our religion," by Allah it is extremely astonishing how a Muslim man that believes in Allah and the last day can love people who are non-believers that don't believe in Allah and the last day and don't forbid what Allah forbids and don't practice the religion of truth and also refuse the religion of Islam??! Is this not a clear violation of Allah's statement in the Qur'an in surat al-Mujadlilah 58:22 (interpretation of the meaning):
"You will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, making friendship with and loving those who oppose Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad- Peace and Blessings of Allah be Upon Him), even if they are their fathers or their sons or their kindred..."
We are not saying to you curse them or pick up arms against them; however, it is obligatory upon you to abhor them for their disbelief and their denial of the Lord of the worlds and to hate the invalid and untruthful religion that they are practicing. On the other hand, there is no objection for you to treat them with kindness--while disliking them in your heart--and to be amicable towards them so that perhaps Allah will guide them through you. You will find no conflict or contradiction between these two ideas if you consider them carefully.
Furthermore, there is no objection to her parents living with you after marriage if they do not perform forbidden acts in the home (e.g., eating pork, drinking alcohol, etc.)
As for the question raised at the end of your letter regarding changing her name, the answer is: if the name of the person has a forbidden meaning, like the name of an idol or one of their deities or a name that means worshipping other than Allah, such as Abdul-Maseeh (worship per of Jesus the messiah) or Abdul-Hussain (worshipper of Hussain) then it is mandatory to change it. However, if its meaning is permissable and not objectionable, e.g. if it means one of the colors such as red or green or a vocation like carpenter or baker, then it is OK and it is not obligatory to change it. However, if changing the name in official documents would cause the person much distress or harm, then it suffices to change it amongst his family and acquaintances.
Finally, I ask Allah to give you and this woman a halaal (lawful and good) and blissful life, full of imaan (faith) and taqwa (piety - God-fearing) and enriched with righteous posterity. All success is from Allah.
OK...did you get that folks?
First off, its wrong to have a girlfriend...its not only wrong it is very seriously wrong...it assumes that there has been a moral violation of decency...The guy never said anything about sex. But the cleric made assumptions and associated them with a passage that forbids premaritial sexual relations.
Next, the cleric tells him that he is obligated to "abhor" his future inlaws....look it up...it means , Hate, Disgust, Detest...Oh, but you can be nice to them....but inside you must hate them...
He goes on top tell this young follower that he is not a true muslim if he so much as makes friends with a non muslim, saying in effect, if one is a non muslim, he is the enemy.
There is that one , non committal disclaimer however...in typical Arab Muslim fashion...
"We are not saying to you curse them or pick up arms against them...however..."
This is not an isolated example...judge for yourself.
Posted by Author
at 12:38 PM
Friday, 26 November 2004
Face value
Mood:
irritated
An excerpt from the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page
>
>
>Semper Fi
>November 18, 2004;
>
>Some 40 Marines have just lost their lives cleaning out one of the world's
>worst terror dens, in Fallujah, yet all the world wants to talk about is
>the NBC videotape of a Marine shooting a prostrate Iraqi inside a mosque.
>Have we lost all sense of moral proportion?
>
>The al-Zarqawi TV network, also known as Al-Jazeera, has broadcast the tape
>to the Arab world, and U.S. media have also played it up. The point seems
>to be to conjure up images again of Abu Ghraib, further maligning the
>American purpose in Iraq. Never mind that the pictures don't come close to
>telling us about the context of the incident, much less what was on the
>mind of the soldier after days of combat.
>
>Put yourself in that Marine's boots. He and his mates have had to endure
>some of the toughest infantry duty imaginable, house-to-house urban
>fighting against an enemy that neither wears a uniform nor obeys any normal
>rules of war. Here is how that enemy fights, according to an account in the
>Times of London:
>
>"In the south of Fallujah yesterday, U.S. Marines found the armless,
>legless body of a blonde woman, her throat slashed and her entrails cut
>out. Benjamin Finnell, a hospital apprentice with the U.S. Navy Corps, said
>that she had been dead for a while, but at that location for only a day or
>two. The woman was wearing a blue dress; her face had been disfigured. It
>was unclear if the remains were the body of the Irish-born aid worker
>Margaret Hassan, 59, or of Teresa Borcz, 54, a Pole abducted two weeks ago.
>Both were married to Iraqis and held Iraqi citizenship; both were kidnapped
>in Baghdad last month."
>
>When not disemboweling Iraqi women, these killers hide in mosques and
>hospitals, booby-trap dead bodies, and open fire as they pretend to
>surrender. Their snipers kill U.S. soldiers out of nowhere. According to
>one account, the Marine in the videotape had seen a member of his unit
>killed by another insurgent pretending to be dead. Who from the safety of
>his Manhattan sofa has standing to judge what that Marine did in that
>mosque?
>
>Beyond the one incident, think of what the Marine and Army units just
>accomplished in Fallujah. In a single week, they killed as many as 1,200 of
>the enemy and captured 1,000 more. They did this despite forfeiting the
>element of surprise, so civilians could escape, and while taking
>precautions to protect Iraqis that no doubt made their own mission more
>difficult and hazardous. And they did all of this not for personal
>advantage, and certainly not to get rich, but only out of a sense of duty
>to their comrades, their mission and their country.
>
>In a more grateful age, this would be hailed as one of the great battles in
>Marine history -- with Guadalcanal, Peleliu, Hue City and the Chosin
>Reservoir. We'd know the names of these military units, and of many of the
>soldiers too. Instead, the name we know belongs to the NBC correspondent,
>Kevin Sites.
>
>We suppose he was only doing his job, too. But that doesn't mean the rest
>of us have to indulge in the moral abdication that would equate deliberate
>televised beheadings of civilians with a Marine shooting a terrorist, who
>may or may not have been armed, amid the ferocity of battle.
>
>Chris Pangalos
>Rolling Thunder Productions
>Disc Jockey Entertainment
>PO Box 470142
>Charlotte, NC 28247-0142
>(704) 243-3387 (office)
Posted by Author
at 10:10 PM
Sunday, 14 November 2004
THE WORLD SITUATION
Mood:
irritated
Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in our lifetime. The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even
fewer who realize what losing really means.
First, let's examine a few basics
1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11th, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the
following attacks on us: Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; Beirut, Lebanon
Embassy 1983; Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; Lockerbie, Scotland
Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; First New York World Trade Center attack
1993; Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; Nairobi,
Kenya US Embassy 1998; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden,
Yemen USS Cole 2000; New York World Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001.
(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist
attacks worldwide). 3
2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush #1, Clinton and Bush #2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate
predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.
3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.
4. What is the Muslim population of the World?
25%
5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for
political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).
http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of
exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others. Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the
US, but kill all in the way - their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else.. 5 The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were
of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful
Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist
Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing - by their own
pronouncements - killing all of us infidels. I don't blame the peaceful
Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?
6. So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than
the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid
verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.
So with that background, now to the two major questions
1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?
If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.
We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the
answer to the second question - What does losing mean? It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads,
bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is
We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want
us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18
years. The plan was clearly to terrorist attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them.
We would of course have no future support from other nations for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent and
cannot help them.
They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain
to do, will be done. Spain is finished.
The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they
might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished
too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and
fading fast.
If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war and therefore are completely committed to winning at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.
Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple.
Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put
100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.
So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by imploding. That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win.
Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.
President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.
Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war. For the duration we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to
lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.
And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII and immediately restored them after the victory
and, in fact, added many more since then. Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.
Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is
because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that
conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and
weakening, it concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.
Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and
media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies
best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the
treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war by a small group of our
military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago
were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands,
cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just
for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein. And just a few years ago these same
type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same
reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters who recently were
burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets
of Iraq. And still more recently the same type enemy that was and is
providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of
an American prisoner they held. Compare this with some of our press and
politicians who for several days have thought and talked about nothing
else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners - not burning them,
not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading
them, but "humiliating" them. Can this be for real?
The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the
Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of
comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are
fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results
of losing this war, nothing can. To bring our country to a virtual
political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero
playing his fiddle as Rome burned - totally oblivious to what is going on
in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this
internal strife.
Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media
people are disloyal. It simply means that they absolutely oblivious to
the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim
terrorists have been pushing us for many years. Remember, the Muslim
terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into all
non-Muslims - not just in the United States, but throughout the world. We
are the last bastion of defense.
We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That
charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we
believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the
hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't. If
we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no
other free country in the World will survive if we are defeated.
And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow
freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the
press, equal rights for anyone - let alone everyone, equal status or any
status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that
contributes to the good of the World. 8
This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war
or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of
the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history
books to be written or read.
If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue
to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach
little by little on the established French traditions. The French will be
fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which
will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve.
Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?
Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some
external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away,
politically correct piece by politically correct piece. And they are
giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they
abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once
they are in power. They have universally shown that when they have taken
over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few
who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically
correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?
I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. I believe that with the
election over, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical
situation we are in and will unite to save our country. It is your future
we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it.
Posted by Author
at 3:14 PM
Heres a good one
Amnesty International thinks that the US has committed "gross violations" of Human Rights in Fallujah...and furthermore (get this...), not only has the US violated hamanitarian law treaties, but so have the insurgents...say it aint so! They have called on the insurgents to play fair and respect human rights! What a bunch of morons! Telling people who cut innocent civilians heads off with dull knives on video to "be nice"...ok...or what? These groups like Amnesty International have a good role in the World but they do not understand todays battlefield and the threat to the free world...the consequences of failure in this war are too great to be concerned with what Amnesty International thinks or says. The Red Cresent Society wants to go into Fallujah to take medical supplies and food and water to those who are there...Those who are there knew what was coming and made a choice to ride it out. The US military has enough to worry about now trying to clear the city and cannot guarantee the safety of the Red Cresent folks...if we let them in now, they will do no good...they will end up like the CARE folks...running scared. Read on...
Iraq: Fears of serious violations of the rules of war in Falluja
Amnesty International is deeply concerned that the rules of war protecting civilians and combatants have been violated in the current fighting in Falluja. Dozens of civilians have reportedly been killed during the fighting between US and Iraqi forces and insurgents. Amnesty International fears that civilians have been killed, in contravention of international humanitarian law, as a result of failure by parties to the fighting to take necessary precautions to protect non-combatants. The humanitarian situation in the city is said to be precarious.
Twenty Iraqi medical staff and dozens of other civilians were killed when a missile hit a clinic on 9 November, according to reports from a doctor who survived the strike. It is not known whether the missile was fired by the US-led forces or by insurgents. Also on 9 November, according to press reports,a 9-year-old boy reportedly died after being hit in the stomach by shrapnel. His parents were unable to take him to hospital because of the ongoing fighting. He died a few hours later as a result of blood loss and was buried by his parents in their garden because it was too dangerous to go out. One woman and her three daughters were reportedly killed when their house was bombed.
On 11 November a British television programme, Channel Four News, broadcast footage in which a US soldier appeared to have fired one shot in the direction of a wounded insurgent who was off screen. The soldier then walked away and said "he's gone". Under International humanitarian law the US forces have an obligation to protect fighters hors de combat. Amnesty International calls on the US authorities to investigate this incident immediately.
Amnesty International is concerned that US military spokespersons have provided estimates of the number of deaths among insurgents -- said to be in the hundreds -- but not of civilian fatalities or injuries. The organization urges all sides involved in the military confrontation to take every possible precaution to spare civilians.
Insurgents are also reported to have violated rules of internaitonal humanitarian law. In one incident, some Iraqis are reported to have come out of a building waving a white flag. When a Marine approached this group, insurgents opened fire on the Marines from different directions. A US military official in Iraq also accused insurgents of storing weapons in mosques and schools. Insurgents were reported as firing from a mosque on 10 November.
All violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law must be investigated and those responsible for unlawful attacks, including deliberate targeting of civilians, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, and the killing of injured persons must be brought to justice.
More than 10,000 US marines and 2,000 Iraqi security forces launched, on Monday night, an attack on Falluja which has been under insurgents' control since April 2004. At least half of Falluja's residents reportedly left the city before the attack. However, according to press reports tens of thousands of civilians are still inside. There are concerns that a humanitarian crisis is looming with acute shortages in food, water, medicine and with no electricity. There are also many wounded people who could not receive medical care because of the fighting. The Iraqi Red Crescent Society stated that it had asked the Iraqi interim government and US forces for permission to deliver relief goods to civilians in Falluja and to send a medical team to the main hospital but had received no response.
In a statement published on 4 November, Amnesty International reminded the United States of America (USA) and the interim Government of Iraq that they are legally bound to observe at all times the rules of all applicable human rights and humanitarian law treaties to which they are states parties, as well as rules of customary international law binding on all states. The organization also urged armed groups in Falluja to respect the legally binding rules of international law.
Posted by Author
at 2:58 PM
The eye of the storm
Mood:
 not sure
This is a very good article, yet disturbing. The author, Haim Harari,
Chair, Davidson Institute of Science Education, Weizmann Institute of
Science frankly knows more about the Middle East than any of us. He
lays it out very well and very clearly. For years, I have assumed that the next major turbulence would takes place in Saudi Arabia where the
separation between the haves and the have-nots is so great. This is a story about the
Muslim world as seen from a man whose family has lived in that area
for over 200 years.
I know this is not a quick read but it is, in my opinion, a necessary
read.
I am confident you will find it interesting.
"A View from the Eye of the Storm"
Speech delivered by Haim Harari at a meeting of the International
Advisory Board, April 2004.
As you know, I usually provide the scientific and technological
"entertainment" in our meetings, but, on this occasion, our Chairman
suggested that I present my own personal view on events in the part of
the world from which I come. I have never been and I will never be a
Government official and I have no privileged information. My
perspective is entirely based on what I see, on what I read and on the fact that my family has lived in this region for overt 200 years. You may regard my views as those of the proverbial taxi driver, which you are supposed to question, when you visit a country.
I could have shared with you some fascinating facts and some personal
thoughts about the Israeli-Arab conflict. However, I will touch upon
it only in passing. I prefer to devote most of my remarks to the broader picture of the region and its place in world events. I refer to the entire area between Pakistan and Morocco, which is predominantly Arab, predominantly Moslem, but includes many non-Arab and also significant non-Moslem minorities.
Why do I put aside Israel and its own immediate neighborhood? Because
Israel and any problems related to it, in spite of what you might read or hear in the world media, is not the central issue, and has neverbeen
the central issue in the upheaval in the region. Yes, there is a 100
year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is.
* The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with
Israel.
* The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem
regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to with
Israel.
* The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of
civilian in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to
do with Israel.
* Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endanger Saudi Arabia and
butcher his own people because of Israel.
* Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of
Israel.
* Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens
in one week in El Hamma in Syria because of Israel.
* The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had
nothing to do with Israel.
* The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with
Israel,
I could go on and on and on. The root of the trouble is that this
entire
Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word,
and would have been so even if Israel had joined the Arab league and an
independent Palestine had existed for 100 years.
* The 22 member countries of the Arab league, from Mauritania to the
Gulf
States, have a total population of 300 millions, larger than the US
and almost as large as the EU before its expansion.
* They have a land area larger than either the US or all of Europe.
* These 22 countries, with all their oil and natural resources, have a
combined GDP smaller than that of Netherlands plus Belgi! um and
equal to half of the GDP of California alone.
* Within this meager GDP, the gaps between rich and poor are beyond
belief and too many of the rich made their money not by succeeding in
business, but by being corrupt rulers.
* The social status of women is far below what it was in the Western
World 150 years ago.
* Human rights are below any reasonable standard, in spite of the
grotesque fact that Libya was elected Chair of the UN Human Rights commission.
* According to a report prepared by a committee of Arab intellectuals
and published under the auspices of the U.N., the number of books
translated by the entire Arab world is much smaller than what little Greece alone translates.
* The total number of scientific publications of 300 million Arabs is
less than that of 6 million Israelis.
* Birth rates in the region are very high, increasing the poverty, the
social gaps and the cultural decline.
* And all of this is happening in a region, which only 30 years ago,
was believed to be the next wealthy part of the world, and in a Moslem
area, which developed, at some point in history, one of the most advanced cultures in the world.
It is fair to say that this creates an unprecedented breeding ground
for cruel dictators, terror networks, fanaticism, incitement, suicide
murders and general decline. It is also a fact that almost everybody in the region blames this situation on the United States, on Israel, on Western Civilization, on Judaism and Christianity, on anyone and anything, except themselves. A word about the millions of decent, honest, good people who are either devout Moslems or are not very religious but grew up in Moslem families: They are double victims of an outside world, which now develops Islam phobia and of their own environment, which breaks their heart by being totally dysfunctional.
The problem is that the vast silent majority of these Moslems are not
part of the terror and the incitement, but they also do not stand up
against it. They become accomplices, by omission, and this applies to political leaders, intellectuals, business people and many others. Many of them can certainly tell right from wrong, but are afraid to express their views.
The events of the last few years have amplified four issues, which
have always existed, but have never been as rampant as in the present
upheaval in the region. These are the four main pillars of the current World Conflict, or perhaps we should already refer to it as "the undeclared World War III". A few more years may pass before everybody acknowledges that it is a World War, but we are already well into it.
1. The first element is the suicide murder.
Suicide murders are not a new invention but they have been made
popular, if
I may use this expression, only lately. Even after September 11, it
seems that most of the Western World does not yet understand this weapon.
It is a very potent psychological weapon. Its real direct impact is
relatively minor. The total number of casualties from hundreds of suicide murders within Israel in the last three years is much smaller than those due to car accidents. September 11 was quantitatively much less lethal than many earthquakes. More people die from AIDS in one day in Africa than all the Russians who died in the hands of Chechnya-based Moslem suicide murderers since that conflict started. Saddam killed every month more people than all those who died from suicide murders since the Coalition occupation of Iraq.
So, what is all the fuss about suicide killings? It creates
headlines. It is spectacular. It is frightening. It is a very cruel death with bodies dismembered and horrible severe lifelong injuries to many of the wounded.
It is always shown on television in great detail. One such murder,
with the help of hysterical media coverage, can destroy the tourism
industry of a country for quite a while, as it did in Bali and in Turkey.
However, the real fear comes from the undisputed fact that no defense and no preventive measures can succeed against a determined suicide murderer. This has not yet penetrated the thinking of the Western World. The U.S. and Europe are constantly improving their defense against the last murder, not the next one. We may arrange for the best airport security in the world. But, if you want to murder by suicide, you do not have to board a plane in order to explode yourself and kill many people. Who could stop a suicide murder in
the midst of the crowded line waiting to be checked by the airport metal detector? How about the lines to the check-in counters in a busy
travel period? Put a metal detector in front of every train station in Spain and the terrorists will get the buses. Protect the buses and they will explode in movie theaters, concert halls, supermarkets, shopping malls, schools and hospitals. Put guards in front of every concert hall and there will always be a line of people to be checked by the guards and this line will be the target, not to speak of killing the guards themselves. You can somewhat reduce your vulnerability by preventive and defensive measures and by strict border controls but not eliminate it and definitely not win the war in a defensive way. And it is a war!
What is behind the suicide murders? Money, power and cold-blooded
murderous incitement, nothing else. It has nothing to do with true
fanatic religious beliefs. No Moslem preacher has ever blown himself up. No son of an Arab politician or religious leader has ever blown himself. No relative of anyone influential has done it. Wouldn't you expect some of the religious leaders to do it themselves, or to talk their sons into doing it, if this is truly a supreme act of religious fervor? Aren't they interested in the benefits of going to Heaven? Instead, they send outcast women, naive children, retarded people and young incited hotheads. They promise them the delights, mostly sexual, of the next world, and pay their families handsomely after the supreme act is performed and enough innocent people are dead.
Suicide murders also have nothing to do with poverty and despair. The
poorest region in the world, by far, is Africa. It never happens
there. There are numerous desperate people in the world, in different
cultures, countries and continents. Desperation does not provide anyone with explosives, reconnaissance and transportation. There was certainly more despair in Saddam's Iraq then in Paul Bremmer's Iraq, and no one exploded himself. A suicide murder is simply a horrible, vicious weapon of cruel, inhuman, cynical, well-funded terrorists, with no regard to human life, including the life of their fellow countrymen, but with very high regard to their own affluent well being and their hunger for power.
The only way to fight this new "popular" weapon is identical to the
only
way in which you fight organized crime or pirates on the high seas:
the offensive way. Like in the case of organized crime, it is crucial
that the forces on the offensive be united and it is crucial to reach the top of the crime pyramid. You cannot eliminate organized crime by arresting the little drug dealer in the street corner. You must go after the head of the
"Family". If part of the public supports it, others tolerate it, many
are afraid of it and some try to explain it away by poverty or by a
miserable childhood, organized crime will thrive and so will terrorism.
The United States understands this now, after September 11. Russia is
beginning to understand it. Turkey understands it well. I am very
much afraid that most of Europe still does not understand it.
Unfortunately, it seems that Europe will understand it only after suicide murders arrive in
Europe in a big way. In my humble opinion, this will definitely
happen. The Spanish trains and the Istanbul bombings are only the beginning. The unity of the Civilized World in fighting this horror is absolutely indispensable. Until Europe wakes up, this unity will not be achieved.
2. The second ingredient is words, more precisely lies.
Words can be lethal. They kill people. It is often said that
politicians, diplomats, perhaps also lawyers, and business people must sometimes lie, as part of their professional life. But, the norms of politics and diplomacy are childish, in comparison with the level of incitement and total absolute deliberate fabrications, which have reached new heights in the region we are talking about. An incredible number of people in the Arab world believe that September 11 never happened, or was an American provocation or, even better, a Jewish plot. You all remember the Iraqi Minister of
Information, Mr. Mohammad Said Al-Sahaf and his press conferences when
the US forces were already inside Baghdad. Disinformation at time of war is an accepted tactic. Nevertheless, to stand, day after day, and to make such preposterous statements, known to everybody to be lies, without even being ridiculed in your own milieu, can only happen in this region. Mr. Sahaf eventually became a popular icon as a court jester, but this did not stop some allegedly respectable newspapers from giving him equal time. It also does not prevent the Western press from giving credence, every day, even now, to similar liars. After all, if you want to be an anti-Semite, there
are subtle ways of doing it. You do not have to claim that the
holocaust never happened, and that the Jewish temple in Jerusalem never existed.
But millions of Moslems are told by their leaders that this is the
case. When these same leaders make other statements, the Western media
report them as if they could be true. It is a daily occurrence that the same people, who finance, arm and dispatch suicide murderers,condemns the act in English in front of western TV cameras, talking to a world audience, which even partly believes them. It is a daily routine to hear the same leader making opposite statements in Arabic to his people and in English to the rest of the world. Incitement by Arab TV, accompanied by horror
pictures of mutilated bodies, has become a powerful weapon of those
who lie, distort and want to destroy everything. Little children are
raised on deep hatred and on admiration of so-called martyrs, and the Western World does not notice it because its own TV sets are mostly tuned to soap operas >and game shows. I recommend to you, even though most of you do not >understand Arabic, to watch Al Jazeera, from time to time. You will not believe your own eyes.
But words also work in other ways, more subtle. A demonstration in
Berlin,
carrying banners supporting Saddam's regime and featuring three-year
old
babies dressed as suicide murderers, is defined by the press and by
political leaders as a "peace demonstration". You may support or
oppose
the Iraq war, but to refer to fans of Saddam, Arafat or Bin Laden as
peace
activists is a bit too much. A woman walks into an Israeli restaurant
in
mid-day, eats, observes families with old people and children eating
their
lunch in the adjacent tables and pays the bill. She then blows
herself up,
killing 20 people, including many children, with heads and arms
rolling
around in the restaurant. She is called "martyr" by several Arab
leaders
and "activist" by the European press. Dignitaries condemn the act but
visit her bereaved family and the money flows. There is a new game in
town: The actual murderer is called "the military wing", the one who
pays
him, equips him and sends him is now called "the political wing" and
the
head of the operation is called the "spiritual leader". There are
numerous
other examples of such Orwellian nomenclature, used every day not only
by terror chiefs but also by Western media. These words are much more dangerous than many people realize. They provide an emotional
infrastructure for atrocities. It was Joseph Goebbels who said that
if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. He is now being outperformed by his successors.
3. The third aspect is money.
Huge amounts of money, which could have solved many social problems in
this dysfunctional part of the world, are channeled into three concentric spheres supporting death and murder. In the inner circle are the terrorists themselves. The money funds their travel, explosives, hideouts and permanent search for soft vulnerable targets. The inner circles are primarily financed by terrorist states like Iran and Syria, until recently also by Iraq and Libya and earlier by some of the Communist regimes. These states, as well as the Palestinian Authority, are the safe havens of the wholesale murder vendors.
They are surrounded by a second wider circle of direct supporters,
planners, commanders, preachers, all of whom make a living, usually a
very comfortable living, by serving as terror infrastructure. Finally, we
find the third circle of so-called religious, educational and welfare
organizations, which actually do some good, feed the hungry and
provide some schooling, but brainwash a new generation with hatred, lies and ignorance. This circle operates mostly through mosques, madrasas and
other religious establishments but also through inciting electronic and
printed media. It is this circle that makes sure that women remain inferior, that democracy is unthinkable and that exposure to the outside world is
minimal. It is also this circle that leads the way in blaming everybody
outside the Moslem world, for the miseries of the region.
The outer circle is largely financed by Saudi Arabia, but also by
donations from certain Moslem communities in the United States and Europe and,
to a smaller extent, by donations of European Governments to various NGO's
and by certain United Nations organizations, whose goals may be noble, but they are infested and exploited by agents of the outer circle. The Saudi regime, of course, will be the next victim of major terror, when the
inner circle will explode into the outer circle. The Saudis are beginning
to
understand it, but they fight the inner circles, while still financing
the infrastructure at the outer circle. Figuratively speaking, this outer circle is the guardian, which makes sure that the people look and
listen inwards to the inner circle of terror and incitement, rather than to the world outside. Some parts of this same outer circle actually operate
as a result of fear from, or blackmail by, the inner circles. The
horrifying added factor is the high birth rate. Half of the population of the
Arab world is under the age of 20, the most receptive age to incitement,
guaranteeing two more generations of blind hatred.
Some of the leaders of these various circles live very comfortably on
their loot. You meet their children in the best private schools in Europe, not in the training camps of suicide murderers. The Jihad "soldiers" join packaged death tours to Iraq and other hot spots, while some of their leaders ski in Switzerland. Mrs. Arafat, who lives in Paris with her daughter, receives tens of thousands of dollars per month from the allegedly bankrupt Palestinian Authority, while a typical local
ringleader of the Al-Aksa brigade, reporting to Arafat, receives only a cash payment
of a couple of hundred dollars, for performing murders at the retail
level.
4. The fourth element of the current world conflict is the total
breaking of all laws.
The civilized world believes in democracy, the rule of law, including
international law, human rights, free speech and free press, among
other
liberties. There are naive old-fashioned habits such as respecting religious sites and symbols, not using ambulances and hospitals for
acts of war, avoiding the mutilation of dead bodies and not using children as human shields or human bombs. Never in history, not even in the Nazi
period, was there such total disregard of all of the above as we observe now.
Every
student of political science debates how you prevent an
anti-democratic force from winning a democratic election and abolishing democracy.
Other aspects of a civilized society must also have limitations. Can
a policeman open fire on someone trying to kill him?
Can a government listen to phone conversations of terrorists and drug dealers? Does free speech protects you when you shout "fire" in a crowded theater? Should there
be death penalty, for deliberate multiple murders? These are the
old-fashioned dilemmas. But now, we have an entire new set. Do you
raid a mosque, which serves as a terrorist ammunition storage? Do you return fire, if you are attacked from a hospital? Do you storm a church
taken over by terrorists who took the priests hostages? Do you search every ambulance after a few suicide murderers use ambulances to reach their targets? Do you strip every woman because one pretended to be
pregnant and carried a suicide bomb on her belly? Do you shoot back at someone
trying to kill you, standing deliberately behind a group of children? Do you
raid terrorist headquarters, hidden in a mental hospital? Do you shoot an arch-murderer who deliberately moves from one location to another,
always surrounded by children? All of these happen daily in Iraq and in the Palestinian areas.
What do you do? Well, you do not want to face the dilemma.
Nevertheless,
it cannot be avoided. Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that
someone would openly stay in a well-known address in Tehran, hosted by the
Iranian Government and financed by it, executing one atrocity after another in Spain or in France, killing hundreds of innocent people, accepting responsibility for the crimes, promising in public TV interviews to do
more of the same, while the Government of Iran issues public condemnations
of his acts but continues to host him, invite him to official functions
and treat him as a great dignitary. I leave it to you as homework to
figure out what Spain or France would have done, in such a situation.
The problem is that the civilized world is still having illusions
about the rule of law in a totally lawless environment. It is trying to play ice hockey by sending a ballerina ice-skater into the rink or to knock out a
heavyweight boxer by a chess player. In the same way that no country
has a law against cannibals eating its prime minister, because such an act is unthinkable, international law does not address killers shooting from hospitals, mosques and ambulances, while being protected by their
Government or society. International law does not know how to handle
someone who sends children to throw stones, stands behind them and
shoots with immunity and cannot be arrested because a Government shelters
him. International law does not know how to deal with a leader of murderers who is royally and comfortably hosted by a country, which pretends to
condemn his acts or just claims to be too weak to arrest him. The amazing thing is that all of these crooks demand protection under international law,
and define all those who attack them as "war criminals," with some Western media repeating the allegations.
The good news is that all of this is temporary, because the evolution
of international law has always adapted itself to reality. The
punishment for suicide murder should be death or arrest before the murder, not during
and not after. After every world war, the rules of international law have changed, and the same will happen after the present one. But during
the twilight zone, a lot of harm can be done.
The picture I described here is not pretty. What can we do about it?
In the short run, only fight and win. In the long run, educate the next generation and open it to the world. The inner circles can and must be destroyed by force. The outer circle cannot be eliminated by force.
Here we need financial starvation of the organizing elite, more power to women, more education, counter propaganda, boycott whenever feasible and access to Western media, internet and the international scene. Above all, we need a
total absolute unity and determination of the civilized world against
all three circles of evil.
Allow me, for a moment, to depart from my alleged role as a taxi
driver and return to science. When you have a malignant tumor, you may remove the tumor itself surgically. You may also starve it by preventing new blood from reaching it from other parts of the body, thereby preventing new "supplies" from expanding the tumor. If you want to be sure, it is
best to do both.
But, before you fight and win, by force or otherwise, you have to
realize that you are in a war, and this may take Europe a few more years. In order to win, it is necessary to first eliminate the terrorist regimes, so that no Government in the world will serve as a safe haven for these people. I do not want to comment here on whether the American-led attack on Iraq was justified from the point of view of weapons of mass destruction or any other pre-war argument, but I can look at the post-war map of Western Asia.
Now that Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya are out, two and a half
terrorist states remain: Iran, Syria and Lebanon, the latter being a Syrian colony.
Perhaps Sudan should be added to the list. Because of the conquest of
Afghanistan and Iraq, territories unfriendly to them now surround both Iran and Syria.
Iran is encircled by Afghanistan, by the Gulf States, Iraq and the
Moslem republics of the former Soviet Union. Syria is surrounded by Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Israel. This is a significant strategic change and it applies strong pressure on the terrorist countries. It is not surprising that Iran is so active in trying to incite a Shiite uprising in Iraq. I do not know
if the American plan was actually to encircle both Iran and Syria, but that is the resulting situation.
In my humble opinion, the number one danger to the world today is Iran
and its regime. It definitely has ambitions to rule vast areas and to
expand in all directions. It has an ideology, which claims supremacy over Western culture. It is ruthless. It has proven that it can execute elaborate terrorist acts without leaving too many traces, using Iranian Embassies.
It is clearly trying to develop nuclear weapons. Its so-called
moderates and conservatives play their own virtuoso version of the "good-cop versus bad-cop" game. Iran sponsors Syrian terrorism, it is certainly behind
much of the action in Iraq, it is fully funding the Hizbulla and, through it, the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad, it performed acts of terror at least in Europe and in South America and probably also in Uzbekistan and Saudi Arabia and it truly leads a multi-national terror consortium,
which includes, as minor players, Syria, Lebanon and certain Shiite elements in Iraq. Nevertheless, most European countries still trade with Iran, try to appease it and refuse to read the clear signals.
In order to win the war it is also necessary to dry the financial
resources
of the terror conglomerate. It is pointless to try to understand the
subtle differences between the Sunni terror of Al Qaida and Hamas and the Shiite terror of Hizbulla, Sadr and other Iranian inspired
enterprises. When it serves their business needs, all of them collaborate
beautifully.
It is crucial to stop Saudi and other financial support of the outer
circle, which is the fertile breeding ground of terror. It is
important to monitor all donations from the Western World to Islamic organizations,
to monitor the finances of international relief organizations and to
react with forceful economic measures to any small sign of financial aid to any of the three circles of terrorism. It is also important to act decisively against the campaign of lies and fabrications and to
monitor those Western media who collaborate with it out of naivety, financial interests or ignorance.
Above all, never surrender to terror.
No one will ever know whether the recent elections in Spain would have
yielded a different result, if not for the train bombings a few days
earlier. But it really does not matter. What matters is that the
terrorists believe that they caused the result and that they won by
driving Spain out of Iraq. The Spanish story will surely end up being
extremely costly to other European countries, including France, who is now expelling inciting preachers and forbidding veils and including others who sent troops to Iraq. In the long run, Spain itself will pay even more.
Is the solution a democratic Arab world? If by democracy we mean free
elections but also free press, free speech, a functioning judicial
system, civil liberties, equality to women, free international travel,
exposure to international media and ideas, laws against racial incitement and
against defamation, and avoidance of lawless behavior regarding hospitals,
places of worship and children, then yes, democracy is the solution. If democracy is just free elections, it is likely that the most fanatic regime will be elected, the one whose incitement and fabrications are the most inflammatory. We have seen it already in Algeria and, to a certain extent, in Turkey. It will happen again, if the ground is not prepared very carefully. On the other hand, a certain transition democracy, as in Jordan, may be a better temporary solution, paving the way for the real thing, perhaps in the same way that an immediate sudden democracy did not work in Russia and would not have worked in China.
I have no doubt that the civilized world will prevail. Nevertheless,
the longer it takes us to understand the new landscape of this war, the
more costly and painful the victory will be. Europe, more than any other region, is the key. Its understandable recoil from wars, following the horrors of World War II, may cost thousands of additional innocent lives, before the tide will turn."
Posted by Author
at 2:23 PM
Friday, 29 October 2004
Announcement
The Last Great Jihad: A Cult Revolution through the eyes of a growing Mujahadeen.
website
http://lastgreatjihad.tripod.com
weblog https://lastgreatjihad.tripod.com/cultrevolution
Posted by Author
at 2:00 AM
Website
Mood:
 a-ok
Ok...I think Ive finished transferring all of the opinionated stuff from the website to the blog where it belongs. Its kind of jumbled up here by virtue of the order I transferred it, but it will all come together in the end. Anyway, Ill put a permanent link to the website somewhere where you can actually see it...in the meantime...here it is...
http://lastgreatjihad.tripod.com
I just updated part of it...
Posted by Author
at 1:55 AM
World War III
World War III
US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air
Station, Pensacola, Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month.
It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why
this action is so necessary.
AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!
That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When
more than 3,000 Americans were killed -AD) and maybe it was, but I think it
should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been
buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and
roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.
It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a
religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students
attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an
outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most
powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on
this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events to follow for the
next 25 years.
America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam
experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President
Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the
desert.
The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's
inability to deal with terrorism.
America's military had been decimated and down sized/right sized
since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly
organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that
was doomed from the start.
Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped
and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect
her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil
continued. In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was
driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut When it explodes, it kills 63
people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button
once more.
Then just six short months later a large truck heavily laden down
with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine
Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America
mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.
Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with
explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait, and America continues her
slumber. The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into
the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.
Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes
in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.
Then in August a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the
main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the
snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually
attacked.
Fifty-nine days later a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked
and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the
passenger list and executed.
The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners
when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most
tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing
259.
Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still
trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war. The wake up
alarm is getting louder and louder.
The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993,
two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in
Langley,Virginia.
The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are
arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the
underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people
are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an
act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.
Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.
A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only
35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It
destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring
over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that
America does not respond decisively.
They moved to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two
US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. These attacks were planned with
precision. They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes
back to sleep.
The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on
12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and
exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war,
but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.
And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most
Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America. How
wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we
chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.
In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every
high officials in government over what they knew and what they didn't
know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can
see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on
the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing
since 1979.
The President is right on when he says we are engaged in a war. I
think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until
we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to "Get out of Bed" and
act decisively now. America has been changed forever. We have to be ready
to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life
continues.
We cannot afford to keep hitting the snooze button again and again
and roll over and go back to sleep.
After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said "... it seems
all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message we
need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.
Support Our Troops and support President Bush for having the courage,
political or militarily, to address what so many who preceded him
didn't have the backbone to do both Democrat and Republican. This is not a
political thing to be hashed over in an election year this is an AMERICAN
thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years
to come.
If you believe in this please tell as many people as you can..
especially to the young people and all those who dozed off in history
class and especially those who seem so quick to protest such a necessary military action. If you don't believe it, just delete it and go back to sleep.
Posted by Author
at 1:51 AM
Imposing Islamic Law
Even countries with "less than fundamental ideals" of Islam have laws that require compliance with Islamic principles. This idea of using government to ensure compliance with the tenets of religion completely diminishes the meaning of the fast with regard to Ramadan...in much the same way as commercialism has diminished the meaning behind Christmas. It is ironic that Muslim clerics use that very analogy with regard to Christmas when describing to their congregates the "misguided Christian sacrilege". I try not to be offended when I hear it because I consider the source...I know that it is an almost "cultish" culture that has been created by clerics over the years in Islam and that has isolated muslims much in the same way that David Koresh, Charles Manson and Jim Jones did with their respective groups. What is different in Islam is that it has millions of followers and is regarded by most as peaceful and good intentioned. It is the fundamentalist clerics who enlist young poor, "isolated" muslims to embrace extremism, providing for them "safe passage" when they violate Quranic scripture in the act of Jihad...nourishing them with pro fundamentalist/ anti semitic ideas and a desperate hate for the west. I do believe in the peaceful people of Islam and I respect their devotion and their right to practice their religion freely. What I find most distressing about Islamic countries is the imposing of religion...one religion, and the extremes that are bred in that environment. Isolation, poverty, ethnic instability, lack of education... all collectively contributing to the growing Mujahadeen... Holy warriors...a growing movement of people easily manipulated out of a desire to belong to something, to have something and be part of something that identifies them as a people...manipulated by influential and powerful Islamic clerics...whose opposition to secular goverment and determination to drive us all to a life like the middle ages (a literal reference to the times of the Prophet Mohammed) has become, over the last 40 years, a steadily growing and ever present movement that is the most serious threat to world peace.
Not North Korean or Iranian nuclear missles...but Islamic fundamentalism...believe it.
For now, let us remember what is good about Islam, as muslims around the world observe the Holy month of Ramadan...be respectful of them and their observances and try to focus on what is common in our religions, despite the differences.
Ramadan Mubarak...
Posted by Author
at 1:49 AM
Newer | Latest | Older
|
