Category Archives: Arab Imperialism

Attitude Adjusting On Sliding Scale Of Islam

Muslims_praying
Muslims praying in the streets...
THERE ARE THOSE WHO THINK the tide has turned on the question of militant Islam, moderate Muslims, and the algebra of just getting along. Some believe as a result of Jack Straw's recent admission of concern over Muslim women's use of veils to cover their faces in British society and PM Tony Blair's call for full discussion on the Muslim conflict with modernity has signalled a sea change in mood for free speech traditions long stymied by the political correctness crowd.

Calling out for more common sense, these free speech advocates suggest that the rules of the game seem to have changed, that the genie is out of the box, so to speak, and isn't going back. They believe that the growing popularity of these views has been picked up by politicians at each end of the spectrum. Much of this is pure political vote grabbing, they admit, but quickly add that they are damn glad the politicians are using this particular issue to highlight voter unrest.

The right-wing BNP is not exactly a favorite among these new defenders of free speech, but they are comforted by the new strategies surfacing in regard to what is a very obvious problem: militant Muslims in their midst.

One observer of the Muslim controversy has stated, "The evidence that there is something wrong with Islam itself is just about overwhelming. Only a few pieces of critical information are needed to cinch it in the minds of millions."

Says another online pundit, "I think this observation is grievously mistaken."

1) More information, more data, more facts, will not be effective against the PC template by which millions in the West surgically detach Islam itself from the problems caused by Islam.

2) Sufficient information is already out there.

3) Millions of people whose minds are formed by the PC template already know sufficient information about Islam, but their minds filter that information.

4) It is not the knowledge of information alone that forms a person's opinion: it is the interpretative filter by which that information is fit into various cognitive and analytical slots in that person's mind.

5) Unless we decontruct the interpretative filter of the PC template, no amount of information, no mountains of data about the perniciousness of Islam, will be sufficient to change most minds affected by PC.

Summarizing the polarity of opinions is easy. It goes like this: the world community as a whole is being hurt by Muslims who are trying to make us all into dhimmis, and by the PC liberals, who have a very warped view about tolerance. I agree with this summary.

Incoming Bogey, Six Plus Six

Ahmadinejad's Naked Agenda
Ahmadinejad's Naked Agenda
The Persian Ten Year Plan?

HERE'S AN EYE OPENER, maybe an eye burner if one actually takes the time to realize how much this administration has co-operated with a transnational political policy which is actually succeeding in putting Humpty Dumpty (the Caliphate) back together again, and guess what, there are only a few pieces of the eggshell puzzle left to go. According to the former president (1997-2005) of Iran Seyed Mohammad Khatami, in what he dubbed "six plus six", Iran's eventual goal was to see secular dictators in all the countries bordering Iraq as well as Egypt, to fall.

Note where Obama has helped with speeches and even force of arms, and notice who Obama has silently ignored while the people cry out from their oppression. Iran. Syria, its satellite. Given a pass. Egypt. Libya. Oops. Beating to their own drum, more secular than mullah dominated. Thumbs down. Take down time comes rushing out from the other side of President Obama's Nobel prize winning mouth.

Well, it doesn't take a weather man to know which way the wind blows...

Read it all.

Open Letter to Congressman King

propking
Forget Stopping Crime, The Left Loves It
We appreciate the dedication and value the work you are accomplishing with your House Committee on Homeland Security hearings regarding the recruitment and radicalization of Muslim immigrants, most lately your focus on al Shabaab.

But we also want to know when will the loving law-abiding patriotic citizen be urged to boldly speak out on de rigeur issues such as calling for nominalizing the steady flood of Islamic immigration pouring into our communities and our institutions without being made to feel that we are saber-rattling racists and hatemongers of the worst order?

When will we be urged to come clean, shaking off this mantle of dhimmitude, and finally being allowed to admit that we are at war with Islam, simply because they say they are at war with us, contrary to what Presidents Bush, Obama and other duplicitous leaders in the West and the Middle East have insisted?

Freedom and liberty are no excuse for bad behavior, but neither is the stifling of free speech or pride in the traditions of one's own nation. Our jobs have been shipped overseas, and now our culture is being stolen by usurpers who statistically care nothing about America but a third world life in a once prosperous state they wish to remake in their own image. As constitutional conservatives, who cherish what our forefathers fought and died bringing forth, this era of leadership has become a national disgrace. So, we just have one question.

Is there any hope that Homeland Security will wise up and stop the madness?

An Exercise In Critical Thinking

“If Obama WERE a Muslim, how would his behavior be different than what it has been?”

excellent question….

Answer….he is a Muslim, always has been, NO Christian Hides images of GOD, Jesus or Christianity…..for ANY reason…obama is doing to the US, what Al Qaeda and the Taliban couldnt. ruining the Value of Our currency, and weakening our Military, making us just like Japan was in WWII, dependent on other Nations for it’s Oil and trying to disarm Americans with gun control legislation, and obama and ATF inspired schemes to make Guns the focus of Mexican Drug problems….

I really have nothing to add to this clarifying snippet I've appropriated from the comments section over at Logan's Warning.

Say what you will, but some people just have the special knack of going straight to the point. Tip of the cap to Chief Cabioch and Charles for this small but effective pinch of salt.

Bits Of Knowledge Go A Long Way Regarding Pakistan

Obamawar
Obama's War
In 1839, The empire-keen British sought to expand the borders of its colony of British India, by launching a war of conquest against the neighboring Pashtuns. The Pashtuns, as a fiercely independent tribal warrior people, resisted ferociously, so that the British conquest of them was not successful. The British were only able to conquer part of the Pashtun territory, and even that remained in constant rebellion against them. Meanwhile, the remaining unconquered portion of Pashtun territory became the nucleus for the formation of Afghanistan. In 1893, the British imposed a ceasefire line on the Afghans called the Durand Line, which separated British-controlled territory from Afghan territory. The local people on the ground however never recognized this line, which merely existed on a map, and not on the ground.

In 1947, when the colony of British India achieved independence and was simultaneously partitioned into Pakistan and India, the Pakistanis wanted the conquered Pashtun territory to go to them, since the Pashtuns were Muslims. Given that the Pashtuns never recognized British authority over them to begin with, the Pakistanis had tenuous relations with the Pashtuns and were consumed by fears of Pashtun secession.

When Pakistan applied to join the UN in 1947, there was only one country which voted against it. No, it wasn't India—it was Pashtun-ruled Afghanistan which voted against Pakistan's admission, on the grounds that Pakistan was in illegal occupation of Pashtun lands stolen by the British. Their vote was cast on September 30, 1947, and is a fact.

The world needs to compel the Pakistanis to let the Pashtuns go, and allow them to have their own independent national existence, along with the Baluchis and Sindhis. Humoring Pakistan and allowing it to continue using Islamist hatred to rally the people towards unity to counter slow disintegration is not the way to achieve stability in the region, or security for the world.
In 1948, in the nearby state of Kashmir, its Hindu princely ruler and Muslim political leader joined hands in deciding to make Kashmir an independent country rather than joining either Pakistan or India. Pakistan's leadership were immediately terrified of this precedent, fearing that the Pashtuns would soon follow suit and also declare their own ethnically independent state. In order to pre-empt that and prevent it from happening, Pakistan's founder and leader Mohammad Ali Jinnah quickly decided to raise the cry of "Hindu treachery against the Muslims" and despatched hordes of armed Pashtun tribesmen to attack Kashmir. This was his way of distracting the Pashtuns from their own ethnic nationalism by diverting them into war against Kashmir "to save Islam". These are the same Pashtun tribesman whose descendants are today's Taliban. Fleeing the unprovoked invasion of their homeland, Kashmir's Hindu prince and Muslim political leader went to India, pledging to merge with it if India would help repel the invasion. India agreed, and sent its army to repel the Pashtun invasion. Pakistan then sent its army to clash with Indian forces, and the result was Indo-Pakistani conflict, which has lasted for decades.

Pakistan's fear of Pashtun nationalism and separatism, which it fears can break up Pakistan, is thus the root of the Indo-Pakistani conflict over Kashmir and also the root of Pak conflict with Afghanistan, not any alleged Indian takeover of Kabul. This is all due to the legacy of 1839, which happened long before Pakistan was even created.

When a communist revolution happened in Kabul in the late 70s, Pakistan's fear of potential spillover effects on Pashtun nationalism caused Pakistan to embark on fomenting a guerrilla war against Kabul that led to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Aligned with with the USA, Pakistan then proceeded to arm the Pashtuns while indoctrinating them with Islamic fanaticism. The USA was not allowed any ground role, and was told it could only supply arms and funds to Pakistan, which would take care of the rest. Pakistan then simultaneously embarked on destabilization of India by fomenting insurgency there.

After the Soviets withdrew, Pakistan again feared that the well-armed Pashtuns would turn on it and pursue secession. So Pakistan then created the Taliban as a new umbrella movement for the fractious factional guerrilla groups under an ultra-fundamentalist ideology. Osama Bin Laden's Al Qaeda then became cosy with Taliban, and the result was 9-11.

When the 9-11 attacks occurred, the cornered Pakistanis then did a 180 and promised to help the US defeat the Taliban and bring the terrorists to justice. Meanwhile they were racking their brains hoping to come up with a way to undermine the War on Terror from within. Now that they have succeeded in doing that, and in bleeding US/NATO forces, they hope to jump horses by kicking the US out and aligning with China.

Because of Pakistan's attempts to illegitimately hang onto Pashtun land, it has brought itself into conflicts with so many countries—first against its neighbors and then against more distant larger powers. This is the reason why Pakistan is an irredentist state and can never be an ally against Islamic extremism, because Pakistan depends on this very Islamism as a national glue to hold itself together, and keep nationalistic ethnic groups like the Pashtuns from breaking Pakistan apart.

At the same time, Pakistanis don't dare own upto the Pashtun national question at any level, nor its effect on their national policies, because any attempt to do so would open up the legitimacy of their claim to Pashtun land.

It's only later on, much after America's defeat, that some Americans will realize too late that they should have seen that the Pashtuns on both sides of the artificial line were actually one people. Pakistan knows it all too well, because they've been living with the guilt and fear of it ever since Pakistan's creation.
Sovereignty is a 2-way street, entailing not just rights but obligations. Pakistan only wishes to assert rights owing to it from sovereignty, and wishes to completely duck the issue of any sovereign obligations to apprehend terrorists on what it claims as its own territory. This is because the fundamental reality is that the Pashtun territory is not really theirs, is not really under their control, and the Pashtuns don't really recognize Pakistani central authority over them.

Pakistan uses Islamic fundamentalism to submerge traditional Pashtun ethnic identity in a desperate attempt to suppress Pashtun ethnic nationalism, and to stave off the disintegration of Pakistan. The Pashtuns are a numerically large enough ethnic group possessing the strength of arms to be able to secede from Pakistan at any moment, should they decide upon it.

The answer is to let the separatists have their way and achieve their independent ethnic states, breaking up Pakistan. It's better to allow Pakistan to naturally break up into 3 or 4 benign ethnic states, than for it to keep promoting Islamic fundamentalist extremism in a doomed attempt to hold itself together. Pakistan is a failing state, and it's better to let it fail and fall apart. This will help to end all conflict in the region and the trans-national terrorist problem. An independent ethnic Pashtun state will be dominated by Pashtun ethnic identity instead of fundamentalist Islam, and thus AlQaeda will no longer be able to find sanctuary there. Conventional ethnic identity is far more natural and benign than trans-nationalist Islamism with its inherent collectivist political bent. Supporting the re-emergence of 4 natural ethnic states—Pashtunistan, Balochistan, Sindh and Punjab—would be far better than continuing to support a dangerous and dysfunctional failed state like Pakistan which continues to spew toxic Islamist extremist ideology in a doomed attempt to hold itself together.

afghanistan_cartoon
Military Genius On Display
Following the failure of the Vietnam War, many Americans later recognized that war was really a war of ethnic reunification by the Vietnamese people. It wasn't a case of one foreign country attempting to conquer another foreign country—indeed, the north and south Vietnamese were not strangers or aliens to one another—they were 2 halves of a common whole. The question was whether they would reunify under communist socialism or under free democracy, but because a blinkered American leadership refused to recognize the Vietnamese grassroots affinity for one another and their desire to reunify, it pretty much ensured that Vietnamese reunification would take place under communist socialism.

Likewise, the Pashtun people live on both sides of an artificial Durand Line (Afghan-Pak "border") which they themselves have never accepted or recognized. It's a question of whether they will politically reunify under close-minded theocratic Islamism or under a more secular and tolerant society. Because today's blinkered American leadership is again blindly defending another artificial line on a map, and refusing to recognize the oneness of the people living on both sides of that artificial line, America is again shutting itself out of the reunification process, guaranteeing that Pashtun reunification will occur under fanatical fundamentalist Islamism as prescribed by Pakistan (much as Hanoi's Soviet backers prescribed reunification under communist socialism.) It's only later on, much after America's defeat, that some Americans will realize too late that they should have seen that the Pashtuns on both sides of the artificial line were actually one people. Pakistan knows it all too well, because they've been living with the guilt and fear of it ever since Pakistan's creation—but that's why they're hell-bent on herding the Pashtuns down the path of Islamist fanaticism, using Islamist glue to keep the Pashtuns as a whole hugged to Pakistan's bosom.

If only policymakers in Washington could shed their blinkers and really understand what's going on, then they might have a chance to shape events more effectively, and to their favor. Pakistan is rapidly building up its nuclear arsenal, as it moves to surpass Britain to become the world's 5th-largest nuclear state.The Pakistanis are racing to build up as much hard-power as possible to back up the soft-power they feel Islamist hate-ideology gives them.

The world needs to compel the Pakistanis to let the Pashtuns go, and allow them to have their own independent national existence, along with the Baluchis and Sindhis. Humoring Pakistan and allowing it to continue using Islamist hatred to rally the people towards unity to counter slow disintegration is not the way to achieve stability in the region, or security for the world.

—Article attributed to Sanman

Thanks to Sanman for this interesting and encouraging post. Your essay suggests what many in Europe have begun to realize about their own lives under the EU. Many Americans, thanks to the Tea Party and its forebears, are busily reconsidering the noble idea that smaller government based on common interests and liberty, can be much more effective, creative, and successful, and therefore superior to these many cobbled-together super states, usually bound by awkward if not outright oppressive regimes which seem to be failing for many of the same reasons all over the globe.

Earth dries, the spitting sun. Terrifying unsung winds,
latter day stormtroopers born for nightblindness, compost damages,
foul waters crashing through amber posts sleepy, crawling mud
broadcasting fire, terror, joblessness, crumbling infrastructure, recalculating
unholy numbers this awesome algebra of pain announcing itself
to the lands as a carrot, then mere thud.

Money, rage, religion...
bunking for blood worthless as sinking treasure,
fighting back glances, on undeserving glum faces
too haunting to measure case by case,
files floating, paltry putrid lessons
of a dead awful stick
left to rot.

Time is running out. All thinking people need to seriously consider the nuances and the noises of world history and one's own basic common sense in the context of the dangers we face as we choose our next leaders who must meet the patriotic mark and allow us to once again mobilize ourselves and our families and our friends to invigorate what we give witness to as the thriving contours of the next century. Each of us here in America and across the peaceful nations should recognize the dangers we face as a culture and a people, so to then act upon the emphatic impulse that there appears little room for error this time around.

The Gall Of Simplicity

WE FOUND THIS SHORT ENTRY FULL OF amazing clarity and insight. Don't forget to check out the author's blog:

I saw one of these suboids interviewed in a recent Panorama or Frontline about the death of Bin Laden. As he was talking about killing it was obvious that his pleasure centers were lit up like the macy's fireworks and he went into some kind of romantic, blissed out state while fondling his kalishnikov. It wasn't just a show of what they ignorantly consider strength. He had genuine romantic feelings for that weapon and the death it could bring.

Ten thousand years of human civilization has passed that guy and the rest of the Taliban Neolithics by. While our ancestors were building the first cities his were sacking them. While ancient traders were spreading wealth and culture between east and west his were raiding their trade convoys.

Even the kalashnikov he loves so intenesly is testiment to what the civilized world can produce yet he consciously choses to fight for the return of the stone age. The dystopia he longs for would be incapable of creating even one part of his beloved weapon.

This really is a conflict between civilization and barbarism.

And yet we discover other unabashed harbingers of clarity voicing outrage against what seems to be an inspired caricature of an American presidency:

The short-form BC released in 2008 was supposed to be the original "one and only". Now the MSM gives this illegal alien muslim marxist bi-sexual abortion loving Israel hating Kenyan-born punk from Chicago a "do over" with this second different-looking long form BC which is now supposed to be the original "one and only". Anybody who actually refers to this fake phoney piece of garbage as president needs to have their head examined!! He has dual citizenship alright; citizen of England AND Indonesia!! This old school pot-head needs to be cuffed and perp-walked out of the WH straight into Gitmo with his mooselim bro's. The fact that this punk said America was not a Christian nation but could be considered one of the largest muslim nations is grounds enough for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to relieve him of command as Commander-in-Chief.

Just Saying, Neither Islam Nor Its PR Committee Is My Friend

Ayatollah Khomeini memorably articulated:

ISLAM MAKES IT UNCUMBENT on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. . . . But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. . . . Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]…. Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur'anic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.

Just seems to me, I've got other alliances and obligations that to choose to war against my neighbors in favor of those who wish me dead, dead, and more dead, as evidenced just one of many tens of thousands of time, by this recent leader of the masses who proclaim to follow the message of Mohammed, who was the"perfect model of human behavior" they say...