Friday, January 30, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
‘Change’ in Indo-US relations
OPED Thursday, January 29, 2009
Unlike in the past, Washington and Beijing may be on the same page on Pakistan and could join hands in restoring some kind of order in that country. For New Delhi, this will be a bitter pill to swallow, considering how prickly we have been in the past about the China-Pakistan axis against India. We must, therefore, prepare for ‘change’"
More at . . .
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Affluent Western societies have often proved reluctant to use force to prevent greater future violence. “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things,” observed the British philosopher John Stuart Mill. “The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse.” -- Victor Davis Hanson
Why Study War?
Military history teaches us about honor, sacrifice, and the inevitability of conflict.
--Victor Davis Hanson
Read the whole thing at http://onthebackofmymind.blogspot.com/2009/01/in-this-time-of-peace-at-any-price-why.html
Monday, January 26, 2009
Hamas and Hizbullah, Iran, Muslim Brotherhood, and even Islamist impersonator Syria, are not persuadable through dialogue. They glory in death and won't rest till they achieve 'total victory'
David Grossman, an Israeli writer, has penned an essay entitled "Israel's success in Gaza only proves it is strong, not right." Aside from the irony of his being Israeli, Grossman's ideas are the ultimate expression of Western reaction to the terrorist -extremist challenge.
To his credit, Grossman notes there have been Palestinian 'crimes and mistakes', that the other side prefers violence, and that ignoring this "would be tantamount to belittling and condescending to them, as if they were not mature adults with minds of their own, responsible for their own decisions and failures."
But, he concludes, since Israel is stronger, it somehow controls the conflict's level of violence, able to be "calming it down and even bringing it to an end." How, he asks, will peace "ever come if we fail to comprehend just how grave is the responsibility that lies on our shoulders" for achieving it?
Grossman is upset that Israelis feel united and confident, complaining about, "Those who have taught us over the years to scoff at belief in peace and any hope for change in our relations with the Arabs. Those who have convinced us that the Arabs understand only force, and therefore that is the only language we can use in our dealings with them."
He adds, "And because we have spoken to them for so long in that language... we have forgotten that there are other languages for speaking to human beings, even to enemies, even bitter foes like Hamas" not just "the language of planes and tanks".
The reason why almost everyone in Israel disagrees with Grossman, however, isn't that they have forgotten anything but that they remember so accurately. It is no accident that Grossman's article is so vague and ahistorical because for him to cite specific examples must raise the sad fact that "those who have taught us over the years to scoff at belief in peace and any hope for change in our relations with the Arabs", are the Palestinians themselves.
Why doesn't he mention the 1993-2000 peace process experience? Why not one word about radical Islamism? Because what undercuts his claims are two realities he won't face and a psychological crutch that he and some others understandably cannot do without.
The first reality is that Israel remembers the Palestinian and Syrian rejection of peace. From 1993 to 2000, Israel made deep concessions and took great risks. The Palestinian leadership and Syria turned down a plan which included returning the entire Golan Heights and establishing an independent Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital.
Grossman and those thinking like him forget that Palestinian rejection of peace makes Israelis conclude logically that Palestinians aren't ready to make peace. Even Fatah forces in Gaza -- the 'moderates' -- brag not only about firing more than 100 rockets at Israel but also of fighting alongside Islamic jihad, a group even more extreme than Hamas!
The second reality he ignores is radical Islamism's rise. Hamas and Hizbullah, Iran, Muslim Brotherhoods, and even Islamist impersonator Syria, aren't persuadable through dialogue. They reject all lessons of West Asia's last 60 years. They want to fight for decades; they expect total victory.
Israelis know these forces won't be moderated by Israeli words or deeds. Grossman's good will doesn't interest the other side. Nice well-meaning people who oppose violence, advocate compromise, and offer huge concessions face those wanting to wipe them off the map, rejecting compromise, and interpreting other's concessions as surrender.
It's no accident that Grossman and those who talk like him know little of West Asia politics and have less contact with Arabs or Muslims than those disagreeing with them. Hamas has no difficulty believing such people exist because they embody the Islamists' stereotype of a weak West fearing violence, begging for mercy, and being easily beaten.
Part of dialogue is to hear what the other side says. Do so with Hamas and Iran; see if you still believe in dialogue. Here is what key Hamas leader Ismail Radwan said in a post-war victory rally: "Gaza is not our goal. The liberation of all of Palestine, from the (Jordan) river to the (Mediterranean) sea, god willing, will be achieved." Sorry, David, I don't think you are going to make him change his mind.
That brings us to the psychological crutch: Wishful thinking. It's hard to face a life-long confrontation with evil forces seeking your utter destruction. It's unpleasant to admit there's no alternative to waging that struggle.
In contrast, it's empowering to say: We can solve this with words and sensitivity. That's why Grossman sounds sensible to outsiders knowing little and irrelevant to those understanding the specific situation:
"We must initiate speech," says Grossman, "insist on speech, let no one put us off." It doesn't matter if "dialogue seems hopeless from the start" because it will protect us far more than "hundreds of planes dropping bombs." Why is that? Because we will all come to our senses once we understand how much harm we do to each other and how 'utterly senseless' is violence.
Talk is cheap. How strange is the assumption that once both sides grasp the horror of killing their enemies they'll be repelled. But Hamas isn't repelled it's thrilled. As for the idea that violence is 'senseless', Hamas thinks it a glorious means to its goal.
There is, of course, an alternative dialogue with Palestinians and Arabs. Deal with the Palestinian Authority -- without illusions -- for minimum violence and maximum mutual benefit. Cooperate with Arab states that hate Hamas, the Islamists and Iran because of their own interests. But this requires intimidating, deterring, weakening, and discrediting Hamas. Which is why the Gaza war was imperative and concessions to Hamas are disastrous.
Beyond strategic considerations is a profound trauma, a bewildering contradiction to everything the Western intellectual, artist or policymaker holds dear. Enlightenment man meets the Dark Ages' advocate who sneers at reason; realpolitik man meets those indifferent to interests; materialistic man meets those repelled by materialism; and humanistic man meets those who glory in death and destruction.
-- The writer is Director of the Gloria Center, Jerusalem, and Editor of MERIA journal.
©CMYK Printech Ltd. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is prohibited. Email Pioneer Syndication Services at firstname.lastname@example.org for reprinting rights Email comments to email@example.com
Comment to http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/wilders-redoux/
Geert Wilders, MP in the Netherlands, has been charged with hate speech in his short film Fitna by the Dutch Court. Fitna is a compilation of quotes from the Koran with accompanying visuals. The film can be seen on Robert Spencer's JihadWatch web site.
This is an egregious attack on the rights of a citizen to freedom of speech by a "free" nation's court system. The quotes in the film are TRUE and taken right from the Koran with no editing or comment.
So it seems appropriate to send out Geert Wilders' speech from the Four Seasons restaurant on September 25, 2008, sponsored by the Hudson Institute. It is long, but well worth the read.
In a Generation or Two, the US Will Ask Itself: Who Lost Europe?
To read, click on http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/wilders-redoux/
Sunday, January 25, 2009
"This is a blog and a gathering place for all who are opposed to Geert Wilders' prosecution under Dutch law, for the apparent crime of criticising Islam. The last time I checked, religion was not able to dictate the terms of an entire country's speech - there is something incredibly dangerous in the precedent that this sets. Regardless of whether or not you agree with Geert's criticisms of Islam, the issue is much larger than that. Blasphemy laws, and religious chills upon freedom of speech need to be put to an end.
Posted by KGS at 10:36 AM
Saturday, January 24, 2009
It’s Time for a Change!
by Baron Bodissey
Gates of Vienna
Our expatriate Dutch correspondent H. Numan contributes the following essay on the political situation in the Netherlands as reflected in the trial of Geert Wilders.
It’s time for a change!
by H. Numan
Last week Geert Wilders was indicted for highly questionable charges by a kangaroo court that already convicted him before his trial has yet begun. In fact, his case hasn’t even been placed on the agenda of the court as yet. Already convicted? Yes, because of a legal loophole (art. 12 wetboek van strafvordering) and biased judges. The court found that the public prosecutors hadn’t done their homework properly and decided that Wilders must sentenced after all, which means a trial is actually just for show. They already indicated clearly what their verdict will be. The loophole?
Read on at Gates of Vienna
The threat to the United States now “is focused in the Afghan theater,” Gates said, including “both sides” of the Afghan-Pakistani border. Obama, accordingly, “wants to put more emphasis on Afghanistan,” the secretary said.
--Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates
Friday, January 23, 2009
. . . Dick Morris was talking about the $10 million a year Bill and, by extension, Hillary have been getting directly from the Emir of Dubai. The "deal" is supposedly worth $50 million over 5 years.
For the entire added material, see Some of the Sins of King Bill Dicknose and his hilarious Queen Nutcracker
In Austria, that bastion of antisemitism, the birthplace of progenitor of Nazism Adolf Hitler, comes this tidbit:
from Atlas Shrugs
Austrian politician convicted of "anti-Muslim incitement" Jihadwatch (hat tip Randall)
Free Speech Death Watch Update -- more on this story: "Austrian far-right legislator convicted of anti-Muslim incitement," from DPA, January 22 (thanks to Gudrun):
Vienna - Austrian far-right parliamentarian Susanne Winter was convicted Thursday of incitement because of her anti-Muslim statements, including the claim that Islam's prophet Mohammed was a paedophile.
Is truth no defense? Of course, the whole concept of pedophilia did not exist in Muhammad's day, but when he is taken as the supreme example of human conduct and imitated today, what results is...pedophilia. Muhammad's consummation of his marriage with Aisha when she was nine is in the hadith collection Muslims consider most reliable, Bukhari, several times: 5.48.234; 5.58.236; 7.62.64; 7.62.65; and 7.62.88.
What's more, it is clear that Muslims take this seriously and imitate Muhammad in this. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: "Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed."
The Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl "a divine blessing," and advised the faithful: "Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house."(read the rest here)
[Austrian Politician] Winter was indicted last April at Brussels Journal here:
Dispatch from the Eurabian Front: Austria, European Parliament, the Netherlands, Belgium ]From the desk of Thomas Landen (hat tip Randall)
The Austrian authorities have indicted politician Susanne Winter on charges of incitement and degradation of religious symbols and religious agitation. This offence carries a maximum sentence of two years. Last January, Ms Winter said that the prophet Muhammad was "a child molester" because he had married a six-year-old girl. She also said he was "a warlord" who had written the Koran during "epileptic fits."
The politician, a member of the Austrian Freedom Party FPÖ, an anti-immigration party which is in opposition, added that Islam is "a totalitarian system of domination that should be cast back to its birthplace on the other side of the Mediterranean." She also warned for "a Muslim immigration tsunami," saying that "in 20 or 30 years, half the population of Austria will be Muslim" if the present immigration policies continue.
Following her remarks, Muslim extremists threatened to kill Susanne Winter and she was placed under police protection. Today, the Justice Department in Vienna announced that Ms Winter will be charged with "incitement and degradation of religious symbols" (Verhetzung und Herabwürdigung religiöser Symbole). If convicted she may have to serve up to two years in jail for her opinions.
However, Alfred Hrdlicka, the Austrian "artist" who depicted Jesus and his apostles engaging in homosexual acts of sodomy during the Last Supper, has not been indicted. Nor will he be. Depicting Jesus sodomizing his apostles is not considered to be a "degradation of religious symbols" in Austria, but referring to the historic fact that Muhammad married a six-year old girl is "incitement to racial hatred."
Neither has Mr Hrdlicka been threatened by Christian assassins for his "opinions." The difference between Christian and Muslim extremists is that the former do not aim to kill those who offend them, but the latter do – which is perhaps also why the European authorities fear the radical Muslims and persecute their opponents while they subsidize those who insult Christians.
Bad News from Europe: Nazi Methods in Court
From the desk of Paul Belien on Thu, 2009-01-22 13:00
The Dutch judicial authorities are going to prosecute Geert Wilders, one of the 150 members of the Dutch Parliament, for making the movie Fitna. In this short documentary, which explains what happens if a number of verses of the Koran are taken seriously, Mr Wilders compares the Muslims’ holy book to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. He claims the Koran calls for violence against Jews and other non-Muslims. Fitna can be seen here.
BUT Europeans are getting wise to who the troublemakers are . . .
Some Good News from Europe
From the desk of Paul Belien on Wed, 2009-01-21 13:09
A wave of violent protest demonstrations struck Europe in the wake of the recent events in Gaza. Despite efforts of the media to downplay the incidents, ordinary Europeans realize that the vandals who demonstrate against Israel in Europe’s streets are almost exclusively youths of immigrant Muslim origin. The protests have been accompanied by anti-Semitic rants and attacks on Jewish citizens. Leftist Europeans joined in by demanding a boycott of Israeli products and local Jewish businesses. Even mainstream politicians joined the chorus of Israel bashing, hoping to attract the support of the growing Muslim electorate in Western Europe.
This post thanks to http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/01/freedom-of-speech-vs-jihad-islams-next-victim-susanne-winterm-austria.html
Also please see http://tundratabloid.blogspot.com/2009/01/susanne-winters-wrongfully-convicted.html
from the wonderful friend of the West at Tundra Tabloids.......
Keeping tabs on the most outrageous happenings in the Middle East, Islamist extremism and Islamist hegemony in Scandinavia, and on the political correctness that allows them to flourish
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Using the Five Principles to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah
Geert Wilders, MP in the Netherlands, has been charged with hate speech in his short film Fitna by the Dutch Court. Fitna is a compilation of quotes from the Koran with accompanying visuals. The film can be seen on Robert Spencer's JihadWatch web site.
This is an egregious attack on the rights of a citizen to freedom of speech by a "free" nation's court system. The quotes in the film are TRUE and taken right from the Koran with no editing or comment.
So it seems appropriate to send out Geert Wilders' speech from the Four Seasons restaurant on September 25, 2008, sponsored by the Hudson Institute. It is long, but well worth the read.
In a Generation or Two, the US Will Ask Itself: Who Lost Europe?
Thank you very much for inviting me. Great to be at the Four Seasons. I come from a country that has one season only: a rainy season that starts January 1st and ends December 31st. When we have three sunny days in a row, the government declares a national emergency. So Four Seasons, that's new to me.
It's great to be in New York. When I see the skyscrapers and office buildings, I think of what Ayn Rand said: 'The sky over New York and the will of man made visible.' Of course. Without the Dutch you would have been nowhere, still figuring out how to buy this island from the Indians. But we are glad we did it for you. And, frankly, you did a far better job than we possibly could have done.
I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West.
The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing--the United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe? Patriots from around Europe risk their lives every day to prevent precisely this scenario from becoming a reality.
My short lecture consists of 4 parts. First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe. Then, I will say a few things about Islam. Thirdly, if you are still here, I will talk a little bit about the movie you just saw. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem.
The Europe you know is changing. You have probably seen the landmarks--the Eiffel Tower and Trafalgar Square and Rome 's ancient buildings and maybe the canals of Amsterdam. They are still there. And they still look very much the same as they did a hundred years ago. But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world, a world very few visitors see - and one that does not appear in your tourist guidebook. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.
All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighborhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It's the world of headscarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity.
These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighborhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe. These are the building blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe. street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, city by city.
There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe. With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.
Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam. Marseille and Malmo in Sweden. In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. A ring of Muslim neighborhoods now surrounds Paris. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities. In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims. Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils.
In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in their country of origin. In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin.
The history of the Holocaust can in many cases no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity. In England Sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighborhoods in France are no-go areas for women without headscarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels. because he was drinking during the Ramadan.
Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run from the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya. Israel. I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.
A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century. Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty toFrance. One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks.
The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. A Dutch study reported that half of Dutch Muslims admit they 'understand' the 9/11 attacks. Muslims demand what they call 'respect'. And this is how we give them respect. Our elites are willing to give in, to give up. In my own country we have gone from calls by one cabinet member to turn Muslim holidays into official state holidays, to statements by another cabinet member, that Islam is part of Dutch culture, to an affirmation by the Christian-Democratic attorney general that he is willing to accept Sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and; Turkey.
Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behavior, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. Some prefer to see these as isolated incidents, but I call it a Muslim intifada. I call the perpetrators "settlers'. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.
Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities, their countries. Politicians shy away from taking a stand against this creeping Sharia. They believe in the equality of all cultures. Moreover, on a mundane level, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.
Our many problems with Islam cannot be explained by poverty, repression or the European colonial past, as the Left claims. Nor does it have anything to do with Palestinians or American troops in Iraq. The problem is Islam itself.
Allow me to give you a brief Islam 101. The first thin g you need to know about Islam is the importance of the book of the Koran. The Koran is Allah's personal word, revealed by an angel to Mohammed, the prophet. This is where the trouble starts. Every word in the Koran is Allah's word and therefore not open to discussion or interpretation. It is valid for every Muslim and for all times. Therefore, there is no such a thing as moderate Islam.
Sure, there are a lot of moderate Muslims. But a moderate Islam is non-existent. The Koran calls for hatred, violence, submission, murder, and terrorism. The Koran calls for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, to terrorize non-Muslims and to fulfill their duty to wage war: violent jihad. Jihad is a duty for every Muslim; Islam is to rule the world - by the sword. The Koran is clearly anti-Semitic, describing Jews as monkeys and pigs.
The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behavior is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages - at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. He advised on matters of slavery, but never advised to liberate slaves. Islam has no other morality than the advancement of Islam. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad. There is no gray area or other side.
Koran as Allah's own word and Mohammed as the perfect man are the two most important facets of Islam. Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a hereafter, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means 'submission'. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is Sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies. This is what you need to know about Islam, in order to understand what is going on in Europe. For millions of Muslims the Koran and the life of Mohammed are not 14 centuries old, but are an everyday reality, an ideal that gui des every aspect of their lives.
Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Koran. Which brings me to my movie, Fitna. I am a lawmaker, and not a moviemaker. But I felt I had the moral duty to educate about Islam. The duty to make clear that the Koran stands at the heart of what some people call terrorism but is in reality jihad. I wanted to show that the problems of Islam are at the core of Islam, and do not belong to its fringes. Now, from the day the plan for my movie was made public, it caused quite a stir, in the Netherlands and Throughout Europe. First, there was a political storm, with government leaders, across the continent in sheer panic. The Netherlands was put under a heightened terror alert, because of possible attacks or a revolt by our Muslim population. The Dutch branch of the Islamic organization Hizb ut-Tahrir declared that the Netherlands was due for an attack. Internationally, there was a series of incidents. The Taliban threatened to organize additional attacks against Dutch troops in Afghanistan. and a website linked to Al Qaeda published the message that I ought to be killed, while various muftis in the Middle East stated that I would be responsible for all the bloodshed after the screening of the movie.
In Afghanistan and Pakistan the Dutch flag was burned on several occasions. Dolls representing me were also burned. The Indonesian President announced that I will never be admitted into Indonesia again, while the UN Secretary General and the European Union issued cowardly statements in the same vein as those made by the Dutch Government. I could go on and on. It was an absolute disgrace, a sell-out.
A plethora of legal troubles also followed, and have not ended yet. Currently the state of Jordan is litigating against me. Only last week there were renewed security agency reports about a heightened terror alert for the Netherlands because of Fitna.
Now, I would like to say a few things about Israel, because, very soon, we will get together in its capital. The best way for a politician in Europe to lose votes is to say something positive about Israel. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I, however, will continue to speak up for Israel. I see defending Israel as a matter of principle. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel. First, it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz. Second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.
Samuel Huntington writes it so aptly: 'Islam has bloody borders'. Israel is located precisely on that border. This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, and the Philippines. Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan. Lebanon. and Aceh in Indonesia. Israel is simply in the way. The same way West Berlin was during the Cold War. The war against Israel is not a war against Israel. It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there had been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest.
Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming. Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel they can get everything. Therefore, it is not that the West has a stake in Israel. It is Israel.
It is very difficult to be an optimist in the face of the growing Islamization of Europe. All the tides are against us. On all fronts we are losing. Demographically the momentum is with Islam. Muslim immigration is even a source of pride within ruling liberal parties.
Academia, the arts, the media, trade unions, the churches, the business world, the entire political establishment have all converted to the suicidal theory of multiculturalism. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a 'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'. The entire establishment has sided with our enemy. Leftists, liberals and Christian-Democrats are now all in bed with Islam. This is the most painful thing to see: the betrayal by our elites. At this moment in Europe 's history, our elites are supposed to lead us to stand up for centuries of civilization, to defend our heritage. To honor our eternal Judeo-Christian values that made Europe what it is today. But there are very few signs of hope to be seen at the governmental level.
Sarkozy, Merkel, Brown, Berlusconi; in private, they probably know how grave the situation is. But when the little red light goes on, they stare into the camera and tell us that Islam is a religion of peace, and we should all try to get along nicely and sing Kumbaya. They willingly participate in what President Reagan so aptly called: 'the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.'
If there is hope in Europe it comes from the people, not from the elites. Change can only come from a grass-roots level. It has to come from the citizens themselves. Yet these patriots will have to take on the entire political, legal and media establishment. Over the past years there have been some small, but encouraging, signs of a rebirth of the original European spirit. Maybe the elites turn their backs on freedom, the public does not. In my country, the Netherlands 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat to our national identity. I don't think the public opinion in Holland is very different from other European countries. Patriotic parties that oppose jihad are growing, against all odds. My own party debuted two years ago, with five percent of the vote. Now it stands at ten percent in the polls. The same is true of all similarly minded parties in Europe. They are fighting the liberal establishment, and are gaining footholds on the political arena, one voter at the time. Now, for the first time, these patriotic parties will come together and exchange experiences. It may be the start of something big, something that might change the map of Europe for decades to come. It might also be Europe 's last chance.
This December a conference will take place in Jerusalem. Thanks to Professor Aryeh El dad, a member of the Knesset, we will be able to watch Fitna in the Knesset building and discuss the jihad. We are organizing this event in Israel to emphasize the fact that we are all in the same boat together, and that Israel is part of our common heritage. Those attending will be a select audience. No racist organizations will be allowed. And we will only admit parties that are solidly democratic.
This conference will be the start of an Alliance of European patriots. This Alliance will serve as the backbone for all organizations and political parties that oppose jihad and Islamization. For this Alliance I seek your support. This endeavor may be crucial to America and to the West. America may hold fast to the dream that, thanks to its location, it is safe from jihad and shaira. But seven years ago to the day, there was still smoke rising from ground zero, following the attacks that forever shattered that dream. Yet there is a danger, an even greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem.
Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe 's children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have he right to do so. This is not the first time our civilization is under threat. We have seen dangers before. We have been betrayed by our elites before. They have sided with our enemies before. nd yet, then, freedom prevailed. These are not times i n which to take lessons from appeasement, capitulation, giving away, giving up or giving in. These are not times in which to raw lessons from Mr. Chamberlain. These are times calling us to draw lessons from Mr. Churchill and the words he spoke in 1942: 'Never give in, never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy'.
Posted by Bill Warner
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
The not-peace for land deal between Arafart and Rabin
The military effort to feed the starving of Somalia without being aware that there were warlords waging a civil war there and they did not give a hoot for the starving masses. The effort ended in disgrace--a pullout with U.S. casualties
The Queen kisses the wife of the aforementioned Arafat and buys the story that Israel used poison gas on the "poor" Arabs
The war gainst the Serbs to secure Kosovo for the Islamic world by giving it to the Albanians
Lobbing a couple of Tomahawk missiles into Afghanistan Al Qaeda training camps to teach Bin Laden a lesson
Ditto at a factory of some sort in the Sudan
Set up the country for the 9-11strike by Islamics while engaged in hanky-panky, un-sex, etc.
Left U.S. Intelligence services in disarray
This made his hapless successor look real bad. Not that that one had a clue what he was about to step into . . .
Added on January 23, 2009 . . .
From Debbie Schlussel
*** [clip clip]
Debbie: last night Dick Morris was talking about the $10 million a year Bill and, by extension, Hillary have been getting directly from the Emir of Dubai. The "deal" is supposedly worth $50 million over 5 years.
Do you have any info on this? Please let us know before it's too late.
Posted by: sonomaca at June 19, 2007 06:02 PM
Gotta admit -- revelations that Hillary has been "bought" by Islamofascist money (most of which used to be American taxpayers' money, of course) would devastate her candidacy with most Americans, save for the dolts who think she will actually rescue them from the "evil" capitalists.
Hills is a crook from way back (Whitewater; cattle futures, anyone?); twisted enough to do REAL damage to this nation, should she ever ascend to its highest office. Anything that reveals her indebtedness to Muslims would certainly help derail her "inevitability train." Bill is deep into whoring for BIG $ from Dubai and Saudi Arabia, who practically built his Presidential Library and Massage Parlor; he'll spout anti-Americanism all day long, if his masters yank his chain -- almost always when he's out of the country, of course!
Posted by: theendisnear at June 19, 2007 10:14 PM
Dick Morris said the same thing at least 3 or 4 times. He really pressed the point, and said something to the effect that Bill Clinton is taking money from an anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic source. Dick Morris' information is usually accurate. Why haven't we heard more about this (and why haven't we heard more about Obama's slick dealings with the shady Syrian from Chicago
Posted by: sonomaca at June 19, 2007 10:26 PM
And on January 23, 2009 THE NUTCRACKER queen is the Obama-appointed Secretary of State of the US!
Billary Confirmed As Secretary Of State
(Not that the unlamented now-departed Condoleeza Rice was any great shakes at that job)
Clinton Takes Over at State Department - Voice of America
Clinton Takes Charge at State Department - Associated Press
Clinton Announces Two Special Envoys - Washington Post
Friday, January 16, 2009
"Wannabe Caliph" Osama bin Ladin . . .
. . . wants "jihad" against Israel. Sh*thead Osama sent out a call for "jihad" to the bottom-crawlers at the anal websites set up for that purpose.
The Islamic idiot Osama yammers about "Al-Aqsa and Palestine"--which was and is the Jewish Temple Mount that the original nutcase who founded that diswgusting ideology of evil had heard of and that he wanted to include in his sh8tty cosmology.
Why humiliate the "farkakte" caliph and deride the memory of the progenitor of lies who vomited forth the garabage that "the one in hiding" preaches?
Humiliation is what they fear most--and what they need to justify their existence.
Here's the bindle-stiff's latest:
"There is only one strong way to bring the return of Al-Aqsa and Palestine, and that is jihad in the path of God," bin Laden said in the 22-minute audiotape, referring to the revered Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. "The duty is to urge people to jihad and to enlist the youth into jihad brigades."
"Muslim nation, you are capable of defeating the Zionist entity with your popular capabilities and your great hidden strength — without the support of (Arab) leaders and despite the fact that most of (the leaders) stand in the barracks of the Crusader-Zionist alliance," bin Laden said.
The White House on Wednesday said that the tape is evidence that bin Laden is attempting to remain relevant at a time when his ideology and mission are being questioned and challenged around the world.
On the audiotape, bin Laden urges Muslims to launch a jihad against Israel, and he accuses Arab governments of being allied with Israel in its offensive against Hamas in Gaza.
National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe says that the Bush administration believes the tape is an effort to raise money as part of al-Qaeda's propaganda campaign.
from "Bin Laden urges jihad against Israel; White House scoffs"
and now as originally posted at
[now censored] :
That is what they fear most! Therefore, humiliate them every chance you get. They expect it. Whether we do it or not, they will claim that we do and did. So why not grind them into the dirt where they claim we make them crawl?
Osama sez: " . . . the Muslim world had experienced more than eighty years of 'humiliation and disgrace' at American hands, during which its sons were killed and its sanctities defiled."
-A New Round of Anger and Humiliation: Islam after 9/11
According to Bernard Lewis, "He [Osama] was referring the suppression of the caliphate by the Turkish Republic in 1924. The caliphate was established on the death of the Prophet as the headship of the Muslim world. And as Muslims see it, the world of Islam was headed by a succession of caliphs of different dynasties, ruling in different places, Medina, Damascus, Baghdad and Cairo. The last one was in Istanbul, and it ended catastrophically after World War I, when the last of the caliphs was deposed, and the last of the great Muslim empires was partitioned, its territories divided between the victorious Western allies. That is what he meant by humiliation, and essentially there could be no doubt about that."
The hand-wringing, biased-towards Moslems Human Rights Watch, claims "Religious Humiliation" of enemy combatant Moslems held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the United States.
Now, this "Human Rights Watch" is never concerned with "human rights" violations by Moslems, such as concerns prisoners held by them. So you know how much their concerns are worth (nil).
In an article in Jewish World review, Suzanne Fields writes:
" At first, the Muslim response to Western civilization was admiration and a desire to imitate Western success, an earnest attempt to gain equal status. But when Muslim countries were unable to keep up with the West, Muslims transformed failure into bitterness and hatred.
"It didn't start with American support of Israel, but the seeds were sown when five Arab states attacked Israel in 1948 and suffered a humiliating loss to the new state made up of little more than a half million Jews. Arabia tried again in the Six-Day War of 1967, and again in the Yom Kippur War of 1973, all with the same effect. The fact that Israeli women fought valiantly against Arabs in 1948, and contributed to their defeat, intensified the blow to Muslim manhood.
[*Click here to see how Jerusalem was reconquered from the Moslems. lw ed.]
"When Muslim men went away to fight to defend the Ottoman Empire during the second decade of the 20th century, Muslim women went to work outside the home out of necessity. But when Arab countries failed to sustain economic, technological and political achievement, the women were first to suffer the reaction. The pride of Muslim manhood demanded it.
"The divide between the Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds will widen until the international community appreciates the sense of humiliation Muslims feel at many actions around the world, especially in the Middle East, Malaysia’s Prime Minister told the United Nations today. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi addressing the second day of the General Assembly’s annual debate, said this humiliation 'is the root cause for the loss of trust and confidence between the Muslim world on one side and the Judeo-Christian civilization on the other side.'”
Ralph Potts' Vagabonding has the following regarding Moslem humiliation:
From Husain Haqqani's Why Muslims always blame the West", International Herald Tribune, October 16, 2004:
"...Instead of hard analysis, which thrives only in a free society, Muslims are generally brought up on propaganda, which is often state-sponsored. This propaganda usually focuses on Muslim humiliation at the hands of others instead of acknowledging the flaws of Muslim leaders and societies. The focus on external enemies causes Muslims to admire power rather than ideas. Warriors, and not scholars or inventors, are generally the heroes of common people. In this simplistic "us vs. them" worldview, both Musharraf and bin Laden are warriors against external enemies.
...Ironically, a cult of the warrior has defined the Muslim worldview throughout the period of Muslim decline. Muslims have had few victories in the last two centuries, but their admiration for the proverbial sword and spear has only increased. ...The Muslim cult of the warrior explains also the relatively muted response in the Muslim world to atrocities committed by fellow Muslims. While the Muslim world's obsession with military power encourages violent attempts to 'restore' Muslim honor, the real reasons for Muslim humiliation and backwardness continue to multiply. ...Ironically, Western governments have consistently tried to deal with one manifestation of the cult of the warrior - terrorism - by building up Muslim strongmen who are just another manifestation of the same phenomenon."
and in the same Ralph Potts' Vagabonding, we find
From Leon de Winter's Arab-Islamic World Is a Hostage of Its Own Delusions�, Wall Street Journal Europe August 16, 2004:
" . . . .What matters is how phenomena are "experienced" and how they fit into the underlying plot that explains the world to the average Arab and Muslim: the Muslim is the victim of conspiracies.
"...Based on this simple idea everything falls into place. It explains why power is in other people's hands, when it should be the ummah that holds sway; it explains the poverty, inferiority, the way the West supposedly tries to tempt pious Muslims with obscenities such as film, television, music, dance and drink; it explains the appalling conditions in the Palestinian territories and the unemployment in Morocco, the lack of modern research and development in the universities; it explains the internal Arab divisions; it explains why a third of all Arabs have less than two dollars a day to spend; it explains why the superior Islamic world is-temporarily-the victim of the inferior West. Satan, devils and spirits are not just symbols. They are actual living phenomena in Islam. The notion of conspiracy is an essential aspect of modern Muslim religious philosophy and of Islamic world history."
Also in Ralph Potts' Vagabonding, a citation and quote:
From Salman Rushdie's "A New York state of mind", Salon.com, October 1, 2002: "One of the things that I have discussed with friends who come from the Middle East or other Muslim countries is how far backwards they've slipped in the last 50 years. If you think about Beirut in the 1950s it was a fantastically open, cultured city. So was Damascus. So was Kabul. So was Tehran. These were all places which had come a long way. And now they seem to have slid back from that moment to something much less likable. And I've tried to say that these are questions which Muslim societies really need to ask themselves. It just won't do to endlessly blame the West. Because these are self-inflicted wounds."An excellent article analyzing humiliation, and the reaction of the Islamic world to it, is Humiliation of Muslims and the coming Siege of Vienna by Blake Gartner.
Here is a bit from that piece:
What Muslims claim to want is “respect”. But what is respect? The Islamic vision of “respect” is to be the dominant global power. It is to have the military power, the economic wealth and the international prestige to get what they want, whenever they want. Any compromise in any forum is immediately condemned as “humiliation” due to their weakness – a humiliation that naturally should be countered by pressing their political and military muscle.
Also see "Muslim's Lawsuit Alleges Humiliation"
And here is a good one, from the Moslem point of view, titled :
"Dignity vs Humiliation":
The Prophet (pbuh) said:
"Whoever allowed a Muslim to be humiliated while he could assist him, Allah will humiliate him in front of the entire creation on the Day of Judgment".
Let us chop off the head and hands of oppression and humiliation choking our brothers and sisters in Palestine, Iraq, etc., and our entire Ummah. Let us exchange our Cowardice for Honour and Dignity. Unless we change our own condition, Allah will not change the condition of our Ummah. You’ve seen anti-war protests, UN Resolutions and the like. They all failed. Jihad NEVER failed. Victory or Martyrdom!
" . . . the Arab and Muslim worlds are trapped in a culture of humiliation."
Shame and Pride
Hence, there is nothing that we--the West, the free (un-Islamic) people--can say or do that will not humiliate the Islamic, unless we surrender to it, subjugate ourselves to Islam.
As we will never do that willingly (without being conquered or killed by the Islamic hordes), they will always feel humiliated. Let them! Let them feel that they are worthless, that their ideology is inferior, that it is crude and brutal--for it is.
Whence the ultimate source of this Humiliation of the Islamic male? (The Islamic female is humiliated by the males of her society, so that she does not have far to look for the source of her humiliation.)
In The Plot Against America, Dexter Filkins writes:
"WRIGHT shows, correctly, that at the root of Islamic militancy — its anger, its antimodernity, its justifications for murder — lies a feeling of intense humiliation. Islam plays a role in this, with its straitjacketed and all-encompassing worldview. But whether the militant hails from a middle-class family or an impoverished one, is intensely religious or a “theological amateur,” as Wright calls bin Laden and his cohort, he springs almost invariably from an ossified society with an autocratic government that is unable to provide any reason to believe in the future. Islam offers dignity, even in — especially in — death. Living in the West, Atta and the others felt these things more acutely, not less. As Wright notes:“'Their motivations varied, but they had in common a belief that Islam — pure and primitive, unmitigated by modernity and uncompromised by politics — would cure the wounds that socialism or Arab nationalism had failed to heal. They were angry but powerless in their own countries. They did not see themselves as terrorists but as revolutionaries who, like all such men throughout history, had been pushed into action by the simple human need for justice. Some had experienced brutal repression; some were simply drawn to bloody chaos Qaeda, there were reformers and there were nihilists. The dynamic between them was irreconcilable and self-destructive, but events were moving so quickly that it was almost impossible to tell the philosophers from the sociopaths. They were glued together by the charismatic personality of Osama bin Laden, which contained both strands, idealism and nihilism, in a potent mix.'”
Beyond the societal reason for a feeling of humiliation of the Moslem male, lies the personal one, the one that is the core source of a recognition of an actual inferiority.
The following is reprinted from PSYCHOPATHIA SEXUALIS ISLAMIYYA:
SHAME, THE ARAB PSYCHE, AND ISLAM
An excerpt from SHAME, THE ARAB PSYCHE, AND ISLAM, that most excellent piece, is this quote:
"The Arab world is suffering a crisis of humiliation. Their armies are routed not only by Americans, but also by tiny, Jewish Israel; and as Arthur Koestler once remarked, the Arab world has not, in the last 500 years or so, produced much besides rugs, dirty postcards, elaborations on the belly-dance esthetic (and, of course, some innovative terrorist practices). They have no science to speak of, no art, hardly any industry save oil, very little literature, and portentous music which consists largely of lugubrious songs celebrating the slaughter of Jews.
"Now that the Arabs have acquired national consciousness, and they compare their societies to other nations, these deficiencies become painfully evident, particularly to the upper-class Arab kids who attend foreign universities. There they learn about the accomplishments of Christians, Jews, (Freud, Einstein, for starters) and women. And yet, with the exception of Edward Said, there is scarcely a contemporary Arab name in the bunch. No wonder, then, that major recruitment to al-Qaeda's ranks takes place among Arab university students. And no wonder that suicide bombing becomes their tactic of choice: it is a last-ditch, desperate way of asserting at least one scrap of superiority—a spiritual superiority—over the materialistic, life-hugging, and ergo shameful West.
But this tactic is not, I suggest, a product of Islam. Rather, it is a product of the bruised Arab psyche. . . . "
* * *
"Arab women are elected for the special role of the inferior who, by definition, lacks honor. Arab men eradicate shame and bolster their shaky self-esteem by imposing the shameful qualities of the dhimmi, submission and passivity, upon women. Trailing a humbled woman behind them, Arab men can walk the walk of the true macho man.
"Hence the relative lack of material achievement by Arabs: the Arab world has stunted the female half of its brain pool, while the men acquire instant self-esteem not by real accomplishment, but by the mere fact of being men, rather than women. No wonder, then, that the Arab nations feel irrationally threatened by the very existence of Israel. Like America, the Jews have brought the reality of the liberated woman into the very heart of the Middle East, into dar al-Islam itself. Big Satan and Little Satan: the champions of Muslim women."
The foregoing is a quote by Dr. Sanity from Saving Arabs From Themselves by Dr. Leo Gutmann
Muslim men and their Masculinity
In his Yes This IS Islam Dr. Sanity tells us about a . . .
. . . 14 year old girl, abducted and raped by an adult male, who on her rescue and return to her family was brutally murdered by her father for "shaming" the family.
Why are Muslim Men . . .
. . . raging, dysfunctional . . . shaky about their masculinity . . . ?
Dr. Sanity says:
. . . over and over again we hear the refrain that the behavior of muslim men toward muslim women is "not" Islam. That it is contrary to "real" Islam (despite the manuals issued by imams on how to beat a wife or daughter so that it doesn't "show"). We even witness the apologists among the women who claim that covering themselves is their "choice" and allows them to be who they "really are".
Frankly, this bullshit is beginning to make me sick. I have no problem with such muslim women apologists wearing whatever they want. But their perspective would be ever so much more persuasive if women who choose NOT to have their individual identities submerged under a shapeless, formless and oppressive religion, were not murdered so frequently by raging, dysfunctional men, shaky about their masculinity."
--from This IS Islam
MORE ABOUT MUSLIM MEN'S HUMILIATION . . .:
" . . . child rearing and family structure of the Islamic families in Europe (and throughout much of the Muslim world) tend to foster the development of emotionally stunted and immature boys/men. Much was made of the high incidence of spousal abuse, pedophilia, and perverse sexuality. Among the most chilling of the insights was the recognition that the families of the rapists did not see their sons as having done anything wrong and felt that the women universally deserved their punishment for behaving immodestly.
The Symposium participants tied rape of infidel women and unveiled Muslim women to some core tenets of Islam as well as psycho-cultural correlates of the Muslim culture. Dr. Sanity has an excellent summary and offers some clarifying comments:
I continue to think that the treatment of women under Islam is not only the key to understanding the pathology of the culture, but also the key to developing an antidote to its most poisonous and toxic elements. Unveiling the women of Islam and eliminating their second-class status; empowering them in the oppressive Islamic countries where their individuality and self-expression has been crushed-- may cause a ripple effect that could eventually alter a family structure that encourages the development of generation after generation of dysfunctional and pathological men and women.
Rape is typically a crime of rage at the rapist's perceived humiliation by the more powerful and alluring woman. A significant percent of rapists are unable to complete the sexual act which adds to their feelings of weakness and attendant rage. While the Symposium participants make the point that rape conflates rageful aggression and sexuality, I think they miss an aspect of current conditions that are serving to worsen the predicament for the Islamic culture, and by extension for those Western societies with which the Muslims come into contact.
The following section has to do with the psychodynamic development of boys and specific features of the Arab family and cultural practices that increase the male terror of the female body. . . .
Read it and more at
from Dhimmi Watch:
Islam's young men are often sexually insane. Arab moms have this folk idea that if they pull on their little boy's penises it will make it bigger and make them 'manlier' so basically, and I have seen this in both Egypt and Syria - Arab moms masturbate even INFANTS till they are writhing in dry orgasm.
It is done with barely concealed sadism and the battered islamic moms seem to 'worship' and yet in some primordial way hate their sons.
Older men routinely sexually abuse boys and girls and the whole culture is [pervaded] with intense shame/honor/guilt complexes. Sex is brutal, domineering and fraught with violence.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at April 22, 2007 12:16 PM at Dhimmi Watch
And there you have it! Humiliation has its roots in sexual shame and guilt. We did not impose that straight-jacket on the Moslems: Mohammed did. But do they blame him and his "all the sex I want for me, and none for you, except . . . " And the "excepts" require either sufficient wealth for marriage, taking captive women and children that can be used for sex, or sublimation, that is, perverting the sex drive into a killing drive--with the target, of course, infidels--that is, us, the free people, who are not subject to Islam.
So, if it's humiliation they feel, let them know why they feel it: their society is inferior to ours. They lack accomplishments, their young men hang around the streets wanting to kill (they can't have sex with their young women), they live under an ideology that was once good for enriching the sly Mohammed with women and wealth, by constant warfare and conquest of neighboring people. They are unfit to cope with the modern world where they cannot expect to live off the taxes paid by "non-believers." They feel humiliated because they are inferior human beings: morally, intellectually, sexually.
COMMENTS from original post at http://islamic-danger.blogspot.com/2007/06/humiliate-them-that-is-what-they-fear.html
posted by urbanadder22 3:37 PM
Aimee Kligman, née Dassa said...
You have a most interesting approach on this problem. I have placed a link on my own blog and hope you'll visit us and reciprocate.Aimee Kligman
quote from Dominique Moïsi:"The world today faces not only a clash of civilizations but a clash of emotions as well. The West displays -- and is divided by -- a culture of fear, while the Arab and Muslim worlds are trapped in a culture of humiliation and much of Asia displays a culture of hope."Dominique Moïsi is a Senior Adviser at the Institut Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI) in Paris.from the blog of Political Beach Girl
IT'S ALL ABOUT "HUMILIATION"Islamics feel that they must constantly humiliate those who are not moslems, whom they call the "kuffar."If we, whom they term the "kuffar," commit any act the Islamics take as a "humiliation," they dirty their diapers."Any act" includes defeating them in battle, not being respectful enough--to them or to their progenitor--the mad beast of makkah, or saying anything pejorative about their shitty ideology.
The following is fromhttp://politicalbeachgirl.blogspot.com/2007/10/from-najistani-what-hitler-learned-from.html
It is a comment by the erudite najastani.[original has important links]najistani said...
It is a comment by the erudite najastani.
[original has important links]
CULTURAL JIHAD AND HUMILIATION OF THE KUFFAR
Islam is the only religion which is more obsessed with unbelievers than it is with its own followers. Muslims define their own identity solely in opposition to the Kuffar. Islamic accomplishments are so negligible that they have no positive cultural features with which they can identify. Hence the unceasing and implacable aggression toward civilized peoples and envy of their accomplishments. The development and deliberate cultivation of hatred is such a central feature of Islam that there is nothing that we Kuffars can do, or not do, that would make our univited guests hate us any less or any more.
Rage is so intrinsic to Islam that external events are irrelevant. Hatred of non-Moslems is the pivot of Islamic existence. Muslims are bound together by a shared and carefully nurtured animosity to 'The Other' developed from earliest childhood, which ignites a permanent fire of tension between Moslems and non-Moslems. Ever since Jihadists started immigrating into the West, we have become all too familiar with concepts such as 'Killing the unbelievers wherever you find them' and the tribal polarities of Dar al-Harb versus Dar al-Islam , Ummah versus Kuffar etc.
This venom manifests not only as highly publicised murderous attacks - 9/11, 7/7, Beslan, Madrid, Bali etc but as less well publicised local instances of 'street-jihad' - small scale SJS murders, child abductions , rapes and general gangsterism. Muslims do not necessarily want to kill all unbelievers, since Muslim culture is predatory and parasitic and
incapable of sustaining itself. Large numbers of non-Muslims have always been kept as 'dhimmis' - second class citizens who supported their indolent masters by their labour and payment of the crippling 'jizya' - the infidel poll tax. But if the kuffar is not killed, it is essential that he must be thoroughly humiliated.
Humiliation is very important in Islam - second only to killing. Humiliation of the kuffar takes a number of forms:
1) Dhimmitude - economic
and social oppression bordering on slavery.
(2) Sexual predation - historical white
slavery and modern day pedophile rings and rape of 'uncovered
(3) Cultural humiliation - muslim cultural triumphalism and destruction of the kuffars' culture.
Most counter-jihadists are familiar with humiliation
by dhimmitude and Islamic sexual predation, but cultural humiliation doesn't get as much publicity in the blogosphere, and yet it is a growing danger that deserves far more attention.
At first sight the idea of muslim cultural triumphalism seems absurd. Dar al-Islam produces nothing of any cultural significance that Dar al-Harb wants . But the fact that they have nothing to offer doesn't stop them imposing their cultural presence with domineering and triumphalist structures.
The main expression of cultural supremacism in Europe is the building of large, aggressive 'in-yer-face' mosques in prominent locations. For example, the London megamosque will be next to the Olympic site and will be many times bigger than any Christian building in London - an edifice of Stalinesque gigantomania . What Muslims lack in quality they attempt to make up for in size and numbers. Nevertheless, large piles of masonry still can't compensate for the inherent cultural barrenness of Islam, and the main effort in cultural humiliation is directed at destroying the kuffars' culture rather than creating anything new. Constant attempts are made to restrict the public celebration of traditional kuffar festivals, such as Halloween, Christmas and Easter.
Also, and most importantly, the religious artifacts of the Kuffar, especially 'idolatrous' images such as crosses, carvings, statues and stained glass windows, are regarded as Jahiliyya - worthless trash. Today, as all throughout its past, Muslims devalue the civilisations which they attempt to supplant through the defacing of ancient historical and religious sites. Any culture that is pre-Islamic is considered to be jahiliyya, that is, from " the time of ignorance.
As the European Jihadist population increases in number and expands outwards from its ghettos, we can expect escalating attacks on the physical remnants of our culture, especially sacred sites such as churches.
Eventually the architectural and artistic heritage of Europe will go the way of the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Islamic multiculturalism will not have produced 'vibrant cultural enrichment' but cultural desolation.
Political Beach Girl
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
The Caliphate was eliminated when the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist. The West stopped fearing Muslims, viewing them as nothing more than "oil cows". And Islam truly ceased being a power.
That, of course, is what the West wanted to believe. Truth is that Christendom still didn’t recover most of the territories lost since the rise of Islam. Constantinople (now Istanbul), Egypt, Syria, Bosnia and Chechnya were all Christian lands in the past.
Islam did not invade the West continuously for a thousand years. Instead, there were many generations of peace, but that peace was eventually always interrupted by Muslim attacks on Europe. Each time Christians lost large parts of their territory, then fought back, but never fully recovered the lost territories.
For two centuries now, the West was strong enough to ignore the threat from the south. But Muslims felt "humiliated" because they did not have the strongest army, the wealthiest economy and the dominant political power.
Islam began to resurge in the 1960s (some say in the 1920s, but Islamists weren’t strong enough until after Israel "humiliated" Arab nationalists in 1967). First came terror. Then global Jihad. In the 1990s, massive Islamic immigration into Europe began to threaten a demographic takeover. Islam is on the move again. Will Vienna be under siege once more?
All of the above from Islam Watch Blake Gartner's Humiliation of Muslims and the coming Siege of Vienna
The following note is mine. Leslie White
Regarding Moslems boasting, "It took us 200 years to defeat the Crusader Kingdom. Israel has existed less than 60. We have another 140 to destroy it, and we will." There is a difference. The Crusaders could "go home." The Jews of Israel "are home;" they have no other place to go. They must either die under an Islamic onslaught or count on the "mercy" of conquering Islamics. Even with incompetents such as Ehud Olmert and his corrupt government, I wager that Israel will not count on the "mercy" of the Mohammedans. The Islamics have been taught by koran and ahadith, by learning about the life of Mahomet, that Jews are subhumans, descended from "apes and pigs (sic);" they hate Jews with a hatred ingested with their mothers' milk.
Israel has a strong military, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), but Israel has a weakness: a hope for "peace" with the Arabs, conjoined with an abyssmal ignorance of Islam and its teachings. In attempting to achieve "peace with Islam, Israeli governments look for approval towards the other Western nations, especially the United States. To show its "moral high-mindedness," Israel cares more for the well-being of its Arab-Islamic enemies than it does for either its soldiers or its citizens. The soldiers must fight house-to-house to "spare Islamic lives," while Israeli citizens must endure rocket barrages, apparently so as not to further enrage their enemies.
The mentally impaired U.S. President has ordered Israel to set up a "Palestinian State." (It was something that he has been dreaming of ever since he gained power, whether to please his Saudi cohorts or to have another "democratic" shariah state ["Palestine"] in the Middle East, besides Iraq, is difficult to distinguish.)
Israeli prime minsiters have always followed Washington's orders and tried to comply in setting up the "Palestinian" state. What no one is saying is that the "Palestinian" Arabs do not want "peace with Israel" or a state alongside the Jewish state. The "Palestinian" Islamics want Israel.
BUT, what is most important, and gives us a valuable insight into the Islamic mind, is the statement:
"It took us 200 years to defeat the Crusader Kingdom. Israel has existed less than 60. We have another 140 to destroy it, and we will"
Why is that important? Because the Islamic revels in the glories of the past. He re-fights those battles of the past--when Mohammedans were victorious. He will base his present-day tactics on battles and Islamic victories of the past.
Or on words in the koran.
More about that at
MAINTAIN A STRONG MILITARY
When faced with Islamic aggression
also, you will be interested in The Root of Terrorism a la Islamic style
Monday, January 12, 2009
Friday, January 9, 2009
A reader asked this question:
A rabbi who was in a forum in Indonesia with an imam was impressed by some fascinating articles on the "LibForAll Foundation" website. It preaches a very tolerant and humanistic form of Islam. Do you think that a Hindu-influenced "indigenous" Islam of Indonesia is a kinder, gentler Islam than the venomous Whahabist fanatical-hate version currently being spread throughout South Asia and Indonesia by Saudi petro-dollars?
Let's start at the beginning. The rabbi is going to a Muslim website to learn about Islam, the real Islam. Why is the rabbi, a scholar, not going to the actual doctrine found in the Trilogy of Koran, Sira (life of Mohammed) and Hadith (traditions of Mohammed)? He has very real reasons for not doing this. He has never been taught anything about the doctrine of Islam. Rabbinical training does not include the doctrine or history of Islam. Rabbis know nothing about the story of Mohammed and the Jews. They know about Mien Kampf, but not about the Sira.
At this point of the story, we can put a Christian minister, a Buddhist priest or an atheist humanist in place of the rabbi-same story. This is a manifestation of being a dhimmi (a kafir who serves Islam). A dhimmi submits to Islam and agrees to be ignorant about it. This means learning about Islam only from Islamically-approved sources. Andrew Bostom has written the definitive book on Islamic persecution of the Jews over 1400 years, Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism. Many synagogues will not let him speak unless they have a Muslim on the stage with him to refute any errors by Andy, who is a Jew. So naturally this rabbi went to an Islamic website, instead of the Trilogy.
But to the point-the website promises a kinder and gentler Islam, not like that terrible extremist Islam. This is the ultimate dream of all non-Muslims. The dream is that moderate Muslims will forge a reformation. This dream ignores the simple fact that both the Wahabbis and the Taliban are reform movements. They do not dilute the doctrine found in the Trilogy.
So why is the Wahabbi the good Islam and the kinder/gentler Islam not possible? Islam means submit. Muslim means one who has submitted. Islam is the cause; Muslims are the effect. Islam makes Muslims; Muslims do not make Islam. What any Muslim says about Islam is immaterial. If what he says contradicts Mohammed, he is wrong. If what he says is confirmed by Mohammed, then he is right. Why not skip the Muslim and go directly to Mohammed?
The kinder/gentler Islam is based upon the Islam preached in Mecca for 13 years. Mohammed portrayed himself as a member of the lineage of Jewish prophets. The Koran in Mecca is heavily derived from the Jewish scriptures. Noah, Abraham, David and the others all appear in the Koran. Islam was portrayed as the real Judaism, while the Jews had corrupted the original teachings of their prophets. Mohammed was the super Jew; he was more Jewish than they were.
Then he went to Medina, where he became a politician and jihadist. The Jews of Medina (there were none in Mecca) said he was not a prophet. In short order he exiled the first two of the three Jewish tribes in Medina and took all of their wealth. The third tribe was crushed, its women and children enslaved, and the 800 men beheaded as Mohammed watched.
He then went 100 miles away to crush the Jews of Khaybar and made them dhimmis (semi-slaves). On his deathbed he exiled the Jews from Arabia.
Two different Mohammeds, two different Islams. So the answer to a reformation is to use the Meccan Koran and Meccan Islam. This is so easy. All of that nasty Jew hatred stuff is in Medina, so just drop it. No one wants to know about it anyway. It is the part that the rabbi refuses to acknowledge. His moral ground is ignorance. Not only is he refusing to look at Medinan Islam, he also refuses to know the history of 1400 years of dhimmitude under Islam. So drop the ugly truth and maintain the beautiful lie.
But there is a problem. Islam is a process; it is not static. Mecca is the beginning part of the process-you can't just throw it out. Then there is the matter of the Koran clearly stating that the later Islam is the stronger, better Islam. The Medinan Islam is the completion of Islam-you can't throw it out. Besides, it is the jihad of Medinan Islam that gave Mohammed his triumph. His 13-year stint of being a peaceful religious teacher in Mecca failed. He only garnered a 150 Muslims. When he went to Medina and became a politician and jihadist he converted 100% of Arabia to Islam in 10 years, annihilating the Jews in the process. Why would Islam throw out the winning strategy?
There is another dreadful problem. The Koran is perfect. The Sunna (Mohammed's pattern of the perfect life) is sacred. How can you reject what is perfect? That would mean labeling Medina as bad and evil. Rejecting Medina would also mean rejecting the code that the Sharia is based upon.
Islam is dualistic and has two natures in one body. It is like an Oreo cookie. It has the nice creamy white filling and the crisp dark outer chocolate wafers. Sure, you can just scrape out the white filling, but you can't call it an Oreo. The Oreo is the entire cookie. Islam is the same way; you can't have only one part. There is no Islam without Medina, just like there is no Oreo without the dark wafer.
Our rabbi (read preacher, priest, professor, pundit…) must get off his pathetic ground of ignorance about the doctrine and history of Islam and turn to knowledge of the entirety of Islamic doctrine which is no longer hard to do. The entire corpus of Koran, Sira and Hadith can be held in one hand and has been made easy to read. It is immoral to be so ignorant. Turn to Mohammed, not some imam. Then you will get the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
by Major John W. Bellflower