Springtime for Islamists in Libya?
The headline reads “interim [Libyan] ruler unveils more radical than expected plans for Islamic law.”
There’s that word again: expected. But those who thought they knew what to expect in Libya were either arrogant or daft, or both. And one of the many things that was clearly possible there was the ascendance of Islamist elements.
At any rate, here’s the announcement:
Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, the chairman of the National Transitional Council and de fact president, had already declared that Libyan laws in future would have Sharia, the Islamic code, as its “basic source”.
But that formulation can be interpreted in many ways – it was also the basis of Egypt’s largely secular constitution under President Hosni Mubarak, and remains so after his fall.
Mr Abdul-Jalil went further, specifically lifting immediately, by decree, one law from Col. Gaddafi’s era that he said was in conflict with Sharia – that banning polygamy.
In a blow to those who hoped to see Libya’s economy integrate further into the western world, he announced that in future bank regulations would ban the charging of interest, in line with Sharia. “Interest creates disease and hatred among people,” he said.
It seems somewhat minor in the scheme of things. But is it an ominous portent for the future?
David Warren contrasts the irony of the relatively orderly Bush-overseen judicial end of Saddam Hussein with Gaddafi’s extra-judicial lynching under forces promoted by Obama. He adds:
In Libya itself, we will see what we will see. The reports I read suggest we may soon be nostalgic for the days when Gadhafi was alive, to unite the various opposing factions. Different militias, that despise one another, are in possession of different parts of Tripoli; old regime loyalists are still not entirely extinguished even in that city; and the rest of the country is far from peace. Contempt is also being expressed for the transitional government, by its various fickle allies…
No one is responsible in Libya, now, and such international assistance as the transitional government may require, to create security and make life less cheap, will come after the fact of chaos.
Not unexpected at all. That’s why there is something to be said for what happened in Iraq, where—because we invaded and stuck around, despite the huge cost in blood and treasure—that country has at least a chance of coming out relatively well compared to others in the region.
How long before we’re debating ‘who lost Libya?’ and ‘who lost Iraq?’ in the same way policy makers once debated the loss of China?
The loss of Libya question will be of greater importance to the Europeans given the normal market for Libyan oil and the neighborhood, but loss of Iraq will be strategically important to us for the ultimate impact it will have on the Saudis, Kuwaitis and the Gulf States and our policy of providing support to them.
Unless, that is, we decide not to give that support any longer. Somehow I wouldn’t put that past our current administration, because it would be a problem that could not be solved with a Predator or two.
Anybody know what happened to the bodyguards?
Infidels cannot ever hope to straighten out muslim lands.
Hudna is the best that can be obtained.
Most Arab Muslim countries are tyrannies. Exceptions, such as Jordan and Lebanon, have internal factions which make freedom chancey.
Usually, the west’s excuses are the remains of colonialism, economic justification for supporting tyrannies (it’s our fault, again) and various other reasons ignoring the local culture.
In Iraq, and now in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, if the locals want to vote themselves a vicious, repressive sharia-laden tyranny, we’ll know it’s them being their potty little selves and we’ll know something about what their diaspora-ed cousins might like to see in their new digs.
“David Warren contrasts the irony of the relatively orderly Bush-overseen judicial end of Saddam Hussein…”
I wish people would stop cutting Bush the Younger so much slack here. Under his command, both Iraq and Afghanistan got constitutions where the Islamic basis for law was enshrined. What the heck does anyone care if it was orderly under Bush vs. disorderly under Obama, when the results are no different?
Bush and Obama have both trod the way of letting the will of the people speak out in the Muslim world. As we can see, the people want Islamic shariah and world conquest. Changing people’s minds is difficult to impossible, so it’s time to change track, abandon the Muslim heartlands to their hellish proclivities and, above all, keep those very hellish proclivities and the people who harbor them away from infidel soil.
ziontruth: the results are quite different, so far, because nearly all these countries (including Egypt under Mubarek) have at least a nominally Islamist constitution. But not all Islamist constitutions are equally Islamist. Sometimes it’s more de jure than de facto.
Neo,
So, in effect, the better cases of Iraq and Afghanistan are better in that those countries have gotten Mubarak-like strongmen to put the lid on the excesses of shariah law. Not very reassuring, to say the least.
It seems, in the Middle East, bad things can only be postponed, never averted.
Heh. Your caption sounds like a song from an updated version of “The Producers”. …Yes, I come from Bani Walid, that is why they call me Kahlid…
1. neo-neocon Says:
…But not all Islamist constitutions are equally Islamist. Sometimes it’s more de jure than de facto.
True, but I wonder if these regimes are heading for the same place at different speeds. It’s too soon to answer; it’s not too soon to worry.
2. From India, here is an encouraging straw in the wind. However, a single straw does not indicate in what direction a swirling wind is blowing.
3. William Powell Says:
Heh. Your caption sounds like a song from an updated version of “The Producers”. …Yes, I come from Bani Walid, that is why they call me Kahlid…
Say shahadah, be a smarty, join the True Shariah Party.
4. ziontruth Says:
…I wish people would stop cutting Bush the Younger so much slack here.
(OT) Q.: What families have done the most damage to the country?
A.: Off the top of my head: the Kennedys, Bushes, and Rockefellers in that order. Others that haven’t come to mind may belong on the list.
One has to wonder if the Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight considered the possibility of Libya going sour before humbly claiming credit for events there.
OB, they’ll do their utmost to keep the lid on until after the election–with the connivance of the MSM, the EU, and the Libyan bad guys.
gs: “What families have done the most damage to the country?”
I’d add Roosevelt to the list.
They don’t have dynasty families, but as individuals have done more than some families:
Johnson, Carter, and (maybe) Nixon.
gs,
I believe that, unlike Obama, Bush’s heart was in the right place. However, that’s not enough. The road to heck and all that.
Slightly OT, but I want to let in a little levity to the lovely topic of Libya, and also, in homage to my favorite film trilogy as well as individual film, I bring you the scoop on Gaddafi’s last moments.
GADDAFI: They found me. I don’t know how, but they found me.
AIDE: Who? Who?
GADDAFI: Who do you think? The Libyans!
those who thought they knew what to expect in Libya were either arrogant or daft, or both
i think you should qualify that to just be for those who were wrong…
now, anyone other than i want to notice that the no longer have treaties? that they are now free to coordinate and organize towards one target?
the worst part is that the pre-protest idea of what its for sticks more than the post-protest truth of what it ended up like.
they have moved from “good intentions” as a way to asuage the masses when the outcome isnt what they were led to expect, to “not expected”, and so on.
yet does anyone take the time to remember that this game has worked to negate the warnings from rational people?
from what the EU was told as to what its become and about to push to become more so. To the promises of liberation… to the promises of new math, new English, and a host of 100% harmful pedagogues? how the health care was not going to ration, but that’s what its doing? liberating children with sex courses for kids, then getting bent that magazine editors of the same political stripe are making young girls sick, and no one is writing great literature (the word screed comes up to often for that, along with manifesto).
they have discovered the get out of jail free card, the key words to say so that no one holds them to these failures and adds them up. every point of the decline and cultural destruction we comment on can each be traced back to common roots of almost one tree
Obama is about to piss away our successes in Iraq. I guess he figures it won’t blow up until after the election.
The Iranians must be very pleased.
I’d add Roosevelt to the list.
And the Sulzbergers.
Occam’s Beard Says:
“I’d add Roosevelt to the list.”
And the Sulzbergers.
The Browns (Pat and Jerry) and Cuomos are contending for a spot. I’m betting on the Browns.
Duplicity w/ his middle finger gauging the direction of the wind: http://johnpaulus.com/blog/2011/03/19/obamas-link-to-gaddafi-runs-right-through-jeremiah-wright-and-louis-farrakhan/
Just so we know what KIND of people are on this side of the pond supporting such while claiming “the unexpected”, “good intentions”, “lack of funds”, “humanism”, and anything else that can make the wrong, stupid, harmful, and malicious ok, till the next wrong stupid harmful malicious act…
just think of what kind of people they are if this is their history, and they have never had to pay or answer for it, nor even be remembered and so regarded and labeled by it!!!!!!!!!!
Red Shirts (Southern United States)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Shirts_%28Southern_United_States%29
The election of 1900 was a special election because there was one held in August and another held in November. The same Democratic platform from 1898 was resounded as in the 1900 election, with sayings such as “White Rule for TarHeels,” “White Supremacy”, and “No Negro Rule”
The Red Shirts and Democrats would ensure their win during the August special election, which was a Democratic ploy to disfranchise the black vote. The Democrat and Red Shirts felt that if they could “demoralize black leaders” the black vote would decrease
do you think that people who misrepresent themselves to this degree, and keep doing the bad stuff, would actually side for freedom and open elections and peace in libya, and other countries?
THINK PEOPLE…
its time to stop ignoring their history and their RECORD of behavior…
the record is clear if you try to find a singular general answer… what is that answer? siding with whatever is the largest powers, irregardless of prior action. no fealty, no honor, revisionism to hide it, etc.
think of it as a form of clinical opportunism just as you can have things like habitual liars.
they side with whatever in the time will get them next to power or in control of it.
when the church was powerful, these deviants entered the church… (ergo whats happening in Libya has to do with the power base of the church and trying to tame it. as they can never build it given that their goals are so anathemic)
so in the earliest days of the US and such, they sided with the wealthiest robber barrons and edumacated their kids…
later, the progressives sided with the democrats and racist organizations. after all, if the south won, they would have a new country to be leaders over, and a ready made constituency…
right after, they sided with the white unions, and the red shirts, the knights of the white Camellia, and others fixed elections through many of the same tactics as today, with the limitations that today you can do a crime scene and get evidence so some of the worst is not up front.
(its not what they want to do, its what they can get away with!!!!!! so their not doing something is not because that’s not what they want to do, its because the consequences are too expensive NOW)
when the elections were questioned and there was this big scandal… they then sided with the race groups of irish, and germans, and italians…
which caused riots and again, mass murders of blacks… as they then sided with the communists and socialists in a more serious collusive way…
and so the history of the longshoremen, the white man cigar union, the teamsters and such lynching and terrorizing was erased and the memory of them storming the homes of rich republicans is remembered (“gangs of ny” a perfect example of the cleaning)
and from there, the taking over of the movements under commiterm. so feminism, and race groups, and gender groups were created as innocents clubs and funded, and later self funded… or state funded if people dont donate (know anyone that has donated any substantial money to NOW? well, take a look at their filings, they have almost no one giving to them. they live by inter charity finance gams for political reasons!!!)
so they, with the aid of extermal help from other states, which you can read about in pieces. remolded the zitgeist into whatever power they thought could win over the ideology of people power!!! (they even took over the capitalist people power idea!! its not socialism that promises freedom, nor islam, nor any of those, but a government of the people for the people and by the people already does!!!)
a big crisis happened in 1995… they lost a model to rely on… but china was open, and china was willing to collude, and so on… and china was willing to hybridize into a fascist state… ie, state capitalism, chrony capitalism, fascism, sovereign democracy, etc…
the new communism was fascism…
and to the power people, who cares?
however, in this game they need a shield… what better than a two edged shield? one in which, if it wins, you get power, and if it loses, you get power?
and in steps Islam and taking over or playing the game the nazi chrony capitalists started, the soviets continued, and now the fascists and progressives use…
i said, you have two large sides, and that the one country line in the sand of turkey, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India..
would either succeed.. or be dismantled..
given we did not elect a person on the side of peace in the middle east, the end of the idea of the caliphate (along with other despotisms), and so on and so forth..
over extending, so that you can remove or thin and dismantle the project.. before its complete… i said would happen if we allowed it to…
and so, take a look whats happening… the reversal and movement forward of a new front.. which will, like go ban, flip the power.
and so far… the ideas have nothing to do with what is happening and obvious.
well, obvious if you take out as map, and color things and look, and stop thinking that they read the times, or wonder what you or some of your friends think and do not look at a map when playing geopolitical power games.
the return of afghanistan and iraq to non free hands… could only be facilitated by pressure. if we made sure they could stand, the neighbors could stand with that. if not, then they would slowly start to whistle and wander away to do other things.
the best way to make pressure is to make it appear that your going to win before you do. in this way, you can collect on the semblence rather than the reality.
and i said LONG ago what the target is with white males, an so on… Israel… the point being, that by attempting an end game to the passion play of israel, the other side has to attempt an end game to finalize it, or else be stuck in a new game… the idea of no game went out the window long ago as its too useful
with the uprisings happening, and the people on the ground KNOWING that they are dealing with their old suppliers and advisers (Russia and now china), and that there was no similar containment opposition from the US…
in this way, the game was fixed… the countries with peace treaties with israel and no conflict and other things will be reformed and those treaties negated.
and since thats how its going, and the leader of the US is not on another side. the states are switching their courses to their best interests..
and as each falls, the borders are so wide another can fall… and since they are supplied by one side and have been for more years than i have been alive, its like dominoes if there is no opposition.
so all that has led up to the left here siding with the opposition there.. not those opposed to sharia, but those that are for it. as the left believes they can take over any power base that exists… so they help power bases take over, then take over that…
kind of like a parasite helping its host to achieve so that the host gets bigger, the parasite does. then when the game ends, the parasite finds a new host, while the old host pays the price for the boost in achievement.
to abstract it to Christianity… the devil on your shoulder gets you to succeed better, but on terms that cause the success to collapse. your there holding the pieces of your broken life, the devil is off to find another shoulder to whine on.
regardless of the abstraction…
waht do you think will happen when the war of over 1000 years heats up again.. as it NEVER ended…
the “Wars of Apostasy” started in 633…
1379 years ago..
Umar became the second caliph and by 650 the last Sassanid king was assassinated.
and here is where history repeats.
Umar then went after Syria… won eventually against the Byzantines.. and so took Palestine along with the rest of Syria… then they took northern Iraq, Armenia and took over Egypt…
and so UMAR built the first two class fascist state..
Uthman b. Affan (644-656) became the next caliph, then came Abi Talib the 4th.
Uthman was accused of religious innovation: he authorized an official version of the Qur’an and had all other copies burned. As the Qur’an reciters had enormous influence over the masses, this action helped to assert the hegemony of the caliphate in religious affairs and to further the unification of the empire.
hitler did the same later!!! the idea was to revision the books… just like Germans today are rediscovering the old Christmas songs as they did not know they were changed to be more politically correct
near around the year 700 the Umayyad caliphate was born… and the entire Muslim empire was under one leader… (notice how that is phrased)
During Abd al-Malik’s reign (685-705) dismantled the bizantine empire… replaced the coinage, laws, and so on..
moving on the same states in a 2000 year old war… hard to have peace on earth when there are people who still get upset over things that far gone, eh? (Takes a special kind of culture to hold slights for 2000 years! so i never thought that any politician can make peace since the countries, people, and languages of the original slights don’t even exist any more)
ah… and THAT IS KEY… because the current dominant line of thought, aligns itself with CORDOBA… (Cordoba mosque IS to celebrate the victory of Islam over the US – Obama’s bow was a way to tell them they won!!!!!!!!!!)
it was from this era that you had the Christians put under Islam… you had the birth of the Berbers… and a kind of peace with the christian kings from Germany, France, etc.
our American culture tends to completely skip over and pretend that any of that existed!!!!
about the ONLY reference to it was to paint the Europeans as constantly at war… but tend to ONLY cover inter-european conflicts, not the larger conflicts of the empires. they will say that turkey fell, but wont point out that turkey was Islam. they will make Europe seem evil for the crusades, but not point out that it was a reactive response to encroachment on the borders.
The death of al-Hakam II in 976 marked the beginning of the end of the Caliphate of Cé³rdoba.
and that was when a boy took over, but his guardian, as in rome, and france in other histories, took advantage of things. consolidated power and steadily allowed Berbers from Africa to immigrate to al-Andalus in order to build up his base of support.
oh.. so the democrats with the borders in the US are just copying from the history of Islam..
think that if this was taught in school rather than a soviet version of us history, people might think differently about open borders?
this ultimately resulted in Islam taking the form of a collective committee (a communist state hierarchy). from THAT Moment forward Islam would be in line with the fascism and communism to come in the future, and so be able to be infected by them. even more so given that primitive helped that, even to today
The decision to name Hisham II Caliph shifted power from the individual to the advisers. The title Caliph became only a symbol; it no longer held power and influence. The Caliphate would be rocked with violence, with different revolutionaries claiming to be the new Caliph. The last Cé³rdoban Caliph was Hisham III (1027—1031). With different factions competing, the Caliphate finally crumbled in 1031 into independent taifa kingdoms.
and as always…communal leadership by amoral leaders results in collapse…
note that there is ANOTHER FAction of islam i did not bring up… where one faction used the Berbers… the one prior was FAtima…
(this is where you get that wacky cultural mash up of Illuminati myths, masons, progressives, Fatima against the catholic church, and lots of odd things that don’t go together without ignorance as paste. lets just stick with the easy facts!)
now remember, the leaders of all this exist in an almost unbroken history… like the ownership of the notre dam cathedral… unbroken since when?
well, the fall of Cordoba is also because the Berber invasion mentioned above, kicked off the first crusade…
even the slicing of heads has a deeper meaning!!!!!!!!!!!!
[it did also for the celts, picts, and even the aztecs and other tribes of south america]
and so through out the 8th century and this period the christian kingdoms had begun reconquista, and the birth of the term “renagade” as well.
In 1095, Pope Urban II, inspired by the conquests in Spain by Christian forces and implored by the eastern Roman emperor to help defend Christianity in the East, called for the First Crusade from Western Europe which captured Edessa, Antioch, Tripoli and Jerusalem.
and thus the first crusade…
the western society viewed by progressives as the key to world peace and has to be exterminated and eradicated, to them, oppressed islam.
ie. the oppressors have only ONE right, to lie down and die… and so, any self defense is the defense of their oppression… got it? (its inane but it does allow for the conclusions they want and the hate they need)
it was from this that Lavant was born!!! (and i will bet almost no one you talk to on either side would know what that was!)
but lavant is the territory today of Israel, syria, lebanon, jordan, etc..
and so, ALL this is is the continuation of the struggle from the first caliphate to the losses to the christian kingdoms when they responded to attempts to take them over, by taking over the aggressors.
as with holocaust replacing certain terms… doing so disconnects the modern events with the long and troubled history, that would reveal that the lineage of the same players are STILL playing!!!
the lavant is almost all now back in the CONTROL of the new caliphate…
C. Snouck Hurgronje – 1916
[its is common in this history that the WOMEN of the losers marry with the winners. ie, mix races… while the men die out to destroy the society!!! study history… so the idea of white men not being marriageable, and the negation of the women that would be their mates, is the same thing. ie, the defeated die out as their women no longer marry them and marry up… into the new caste… all one has to do is read history beyond Zinn]
University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org interview survey of 4384 Muslims conducted between December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007-1000 Moroccans, 1000 Egyptians, 1243 Pakistanis, and 1141 Indonesians-reveal that 65.2% of those interviewed-almost 2/3, hardly a “fringe minority”-desired this outcome (i.e., “To unify all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state or Caliphate”), including 49% of “moderate” Indonesian Muslims.
and REGARDLESS of what spravka they give YOU… the people in those countries that see advances, and gifts, and wins… they see it differently…
ie… its like the radio man telling you that the yankees have to win, as the advances of the other team mean nothing. well, the other teams followers do not see their advances as futile, and if they win, who was the deluded?
thats our position now… the announcers from before the protests, have been telling us that cordoba mosque doesnt matter, the fall of X is democratic, not islamic… and so on..
the Yankees have to win..
but in truth, each point is a nail in the coffin in the game.. if you dont belive it, watch what happens when it goes to far and people say, hey! can we have our temple on the mount back?
the lavant pretty much only requires the fall of one more state, eh?
It increasingly looks like that the only choice for Arab and Muslim-majority nations is between despotism and anarchy. Both will be bloody and instable, ready to burst with violence and aggression.
Sergey…
When median IQs norm to 80 ish…
Despotism is the only form of rule that has historically worked.
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft2.htm
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft.htm
Read the second before the first.
La Griffe du Lion spells out mathematically why the world is what it is — economically and, indirectly, politically.
The best way to reduce poverty in the Ummah is far them to have fewer babies.
Nobody knows what happens next. We’ve never f’ed up this badly.
The best way to reduce poverty in the Ummah is far them to have fewer babies.
great… Feminism is already on the job!
Neo, you mentioned Iraq, I’m afraid as Mr. Frank noted above, thanks to the smartest man ever to occupy the White House, Iraq is about to end badly. I’m sure many of us here predicted in 2008 that Obama would try to lose Iraq for whatever psychological payoff he gets from boasting of being smarter than GWB. He is somewhat transparent in that respect.
Now I get to use a Churchill quote about a certain General, he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Here’s another deep thought on my part, a second Obama term would be better than the first because there are no more countries left to lose to the islamo- fascists and the economy is already at rock bottom. Since things could not get worse we should have no fear of Obama making them worse. I can see the Democrats referencing that as a campaign slogan, incompetence you can rely on.
Things can get a lot worse if 0 is in for another four…
I think that most people are missing the big picture here.
What is happening in Libya is not an isolated situation, nor is “the Arab Spring,” or developments in Iraq, or Iran, in Lebanon, Gaza, or India, in Malaysia, in Europe–soon to be Eurabia–or here in the United States, although our glorious Administration and State Department are treating them as such.
Pull back and put things in historical perspective.
Starting in the 7th century A.D. Allah, the Qur’an, and Muhammad commanded all Muslims to fight an eternal war or “Jihad” against all unbelievers until the Muslims conquered the world and all its peoples, and the Muslim’s House of Islam conquered and devoured our unbeliever’s House of War; and when the dust settled, Islam will have become the only religion, and all unbelievers will either have been converted to Islam, will have been made slaves, some conquered unbelievers will have been forced to become “dhimmis,” second class citizens under Muslim rule, and the most recalcitrant unbelievers will have been killed, at which point, ultimate victory will be achieved, and “all will be for Allah.”
Within a hundred years of Muhammad’s death in 632 A.D. what had been the Christian Middle East had been conquered and occupied (and still is today), and in the centuries following a large portion of the known world was overrun by Muslim armies; a Muslim army made Islam’s first large scale attempt to conquer continental Europe at Tours outside Paris in 732 A. D., and such large scale attempts were made by other Muslim armies/armadas on three separate occasions in the 16th and 17th centuries–at the Siege of Vienna, at the Sea Battle of Lepanto off the coast of Greece, and again at the Gates of Vienna.
Eventually the loot, slaves (estimated at something like 17,000,000 slaves sold in the world-spanning, 1,400 year-old Muslim slave trade), and intellectual capital from the various conquests that had propped up the various extractive Muslim empires dwindled, Muslim’s power waned, and the last Muslim Empire, the Turk’s Ottoman Empire, and with it the last Caliph, vanished in the 1920’s.
But, beginning in the 1930s, a religious revival started in the Muslim world, led by the Muslim Brotherhood, which saw Muslim’s backwardness and lack of power as the result of Muslims falling away from Islam, of adopting Western ways, and the Brotherhood urged a return to the strict, orthodox ways of 7th century Islam. When the Saudis and other Muslim leaders in the Muslim world (the Umma) discovered–starting in the 1930s and 40s–that they sat on immense wealth in oil, untold billions of dollars began to be devoted to funding Jihad and to the realization of the Brotherhood’s proposed Reformation, and the Jihad and the goal of “all being for Allah” were rejuvenated.
Muhammad famously said that [The essence of ] “war is deceit,” and while–as we have seen–Muslims will “waylay “ and “ambush” us, and use “every [violent] artifice of war” against us unbelievers as the Qur’an’s Sura 9, the “Verse of the Sword,” commands them to do, they will also use “disinformation” and the “Holy Deceptions” of Takiyya (lying) and Kitman (withholding critical parts of the truth) in their efforts to deceive us, to further our doubt and confusion.
Thus, despite its record–ancient and modern–of conquest, slavery, pillage, rape, and slaughter–Islam is touted as “the Religion of Peace.” Quranic verses are cherry picked, taken out of context, truncated, misquoted, and turned on their head to prove that “Islam forbids the killing of innocent civilians” (the Muslims doing the quoting never informing us evidently fearful, uninformed, and gullible “unbelievers” that Muslim ideologues say unbelievers are all “guilty” of denying Allah, the Qur’an, and Muhammad and that, therefore, no unbeliever can ever be “innocent,” and neither are there really any “civilians”–unconnected to and not contributing to its war potential–in a modern state).
Yes, there are some differences and local, internal developments in each country of the Umma, but there is also an overarching, fundamental agreement in Islam and within the Umma on the primacy of the sacred Jihad against all us accursed unbelievers, and on the ultimate goal of Islam of conquering and ruling all the world.
There is likely no central “Islamic command bunker,” nor need there be, for anyone who reads the Qur’an, the Hadiths, and the Sira, and who knows the history of Muhammad and of Islam has read Islam’s field manuals on subversion and war, is a potential “self-starter,” and knows what to do.
It is in the interest of Islam and of Muslims intent on/supporting Jihad for us to see somewhat more benign and less alarming, unconnected situations and “isolated incidents” here and there around the world, rather than for us unbelievers to put things together, to “connect the dots,” and to realize that we are under world-wide attack just as much as we were in WWII, and that what we are really seeing are the various manifestations of a systematic, deliberate, world-wide Jihad (as Norman Podhoretz has christened it, WWIV) that is being waged against all us unbelievers by the forces of Islam and by Muslims in each country of the world and on a myriad of fronts and battlefields; sometimes overt, sometimes stealthy and covert, sometimes using violent methods, sometimes using more apparently innocent, democratic, and “peaceful” ones, sometimes using these methods and modes sequentially and/or simultaneously, but all Islam and Muslim’s violence, terrorism, strategies, subversion, intimidation ,and deceptions aimed at the goal of hastening and bringing about the day when “all will be for Allah.”
To hew more to the central question, if there is this Muslim WWIV against all unbelievers going on the Podhoretz says there is, have the changes brought about by the “Arab Spring” advanced the cause of this Jihad or hurt them, put us unbelievers in a better position or worse?
Well, I think anyone looking at the two Muslim “tyrants’ toppled so far–neither one of them a strict adherent of Islam–would have to say that the toppling of these particular “tyrants,” that we formerly either supported in the case of Egypt, or tolerated in the case of Libya–our old, traditional policy being “better the devil you know than the devil you don’t”–has advantaged the Jihad, by putting people in power in Egypt who are more fundamentalist adherents of Islam, and perhaps, de facto, putting the Brotherhood itself in charge there, and early indications are, putting another fundamentalist, Shari’a obeying leader in charge in Libya.
Now, the next question becomes, why did Barack Hussein Obama–the son, step-son, and grandson of Muslims, wh9o was living as and educated as a Muslim for several years during his childhood in Indonesia, and who sat for 20 years in the pews of the pro-Palestinian, anti-White, anti-Israel and anti-American Rev. Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright– disturb what had been a relatively successful policy from the standpoint of us unbelievers and our interests (not to have Islamic states become more militant, and to lessen the chances of us being attacked by one of them), and order the changes in U.S. policy that ultimately led to these results?
“I think that most people are missing the big picture here.
Not at all W.D., but pleased to read your beautifully succinct and well written compilation of the high points of background history which are critical in understanding what is driving today’s events.
“Now, the next question becomes, why did Barack Hussein Obama…?”
Sultan Knish’s article perhaps sheds some light on that (?):
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2011/10/lefts-worst-crime-in-middle-east.html
The major problem is that cults, especially the radical left and islamic cultural type (because they are so pervasive), reflect an intrinsically shallow perspective in viewing the possible solutions for social problems, and as being exclusively in the collectivist and top-down authoritarian domain, as well as being justified by an insistance on their dogmatic religious or political brand of choice, ie. socialism and islam. These are intellectually shallow people, with an insidious dose of megalomania thrown in, unable to see “the big picture” as you say, and that there are solutions to everyday problems which can be found outside of their established dogma and assumptions.
Removing choices, one after another, instituting nanny state regulations which curtail individual judgement and responsiibilty, after a while you have the totalitarian police state. There are so many other choices, but these shallow people can’t see them; one reason that democracy is hollow outside of the integrity of a well conceived republic which we are in the process of losing ours.
I understand the phenomena of megalomania in leadership, as well as the ignorant and intellectually lazy lemming masses who acquiece in the direction. What I don’t understand is what drives our MSM’s complicity in the erosion of intellectual honesty and rational judgement. These are people who should know better.
One additional aside (besides noting that I didn’t adequately proof read several sentences in my above comments, though the intent is, in any case, clear), is that one of the important common characteristics of confiscatory government bureaucrats and left-wing politicians generally is their lack respect for real money, a lack of significant personal investment in what it takes to make real money, and the consequences of losing it. It’s a glaring example of their shallow nature, and why our system is so out of control, with spending having evolved through several decades from “millions”, to “billions”, and now “trillions”. It is simply not real to these people. The inflation in the next several decades will be, especially for the poor.
I’ll grant the huge cost in “treasure”, but “blood”?
It says something when you realize that Bush met with the families of ONE IN TEN of the soldiers who gave their lives in Iraq. The entire WAR cost more lives than a number of single battles in US history.
I do agree with Bupkis–because–hard as it is on their loved ones and communities–in comparison with past wars, we have lost a relatively small number of soldiers killed and wounded in all of our recent battles/wars since WWII and Vietnam.
In fact, I would argue that, it has not only been our totally misdirected foreign and military policies but, in particular, it has been our increasingly “risk-averse” society, most especially including our military and policy making class, that has doomed many of our military actions to failure.
I don’t think the military class is risk averse as much as politically aware. It’s been made clear to them that the public takes loss of American life poorly, even ALL loss of life, to a large extent. It actually places a rather perverse pressure on the soldier. Not only does s/he not want to risk their own asses, but their officers don’t want them to, either, even as they don’t dare shoot a civilian despite the deliberate confusion and intermingling of the bastards with them. This means they have to be both a lot more careful with themselves and VERY careful about civilians, but they also have to be aggressive enough to go after the sonsabitches.
BTW, in no sense do I mean to denigrate the loss of a single soldier. Any loss is a tragedy, I’m just saying from a historical standpoint the kind of losses we suffered in Iraq are pitifully low in terms of what we accomplished. It is a great loss to the soldier and his family but it’s one that literally millions of Americans have made in other times and places.
That we have “Allies” in the Muslim world is a fiction, for what we have, in reality, are Muslim states and leaders who are merely at different stages of their “long con,” i.e. Muhammad’s “deception,” their Takiyya and Kitman against us unbelievers; the pretense of their being our “allies” that they purvey (in return for monetary aid and support, and the absence of bombs raining down upon them) to us only too willing to be fooled, us frightened, willfully ignorant, and gullible “unbelievers.”
We unbelievers are sleep walking to our extinction, cooperating in our own demise because we refuse to face Reality–things like the apparently deep Saudi involvement in 9/11–see, for instance, the story just now surfacing about the wealthy Saudi Family in Sarasota, Florida who hosted Muhammad Atta and eleven of the 9/11 hijackers in the months before 9/11, and who then vanished back to Saudi Arabia a few days before the attack–leaving so hurriedly that they abandoned their houses, clothes, and all their possessions, abandoned their expensive cars in their driveways, food in the fridge and fresh fruit on the table (http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/09/22/saudi-royal-ties-to-911-hijackers-via-florida-saudi-family-0/), or the obvious implications of the fact that for five or more years Bin Laden lived in a conspicuous, fortified house in a tightly controlled Pakistani military zone, full of a who’s who of high level Pakistani military retirees, across the street from the town’s police station, around the corner from their West Point, and only a few dozen miles from the Pakistani capitol (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8488236/WikiLeaks-Osama-bin-Laden-protected-by-Pakistani-security.html), or the rising number of terrorist attacks or attempted attacks by Muslims around the world and, in particular, here in the United States (see http://thereligionofpeace.com/ ). For we desperately want to deny that Islam and Muslims have been and are today prosecuting a global war of extermination against us, and that–like it or not, want it or not–we are already neck deep in WWIV.
We will grasp at any straw, ignore any and all evidence, refuse to draw the obvious conclusions, and twist and distort every aspect of reality if we have to, if only it will allow is to suppress the actual “reality on the ground,” and to keep the denial going. For we are terrified of facing the likely extremely violent, arduous, bloody, probably generations-long war were are now an involuntary participant in.
So, its “Lets Pretend” time.
Thus, our clueless/subverted Leftist MSM and our State Department–mostly run, unfortunately, by a bunch of people sympathetic to Muslims and the Arabs and hostile to Jews and Israel–often talks about our “Ally” Pakistan and they also talk about our “Ally” Saudi Arabia, but still, here and there, one hears speculation that the Saudi rulers might also be a target of the “Arab Spring.” If, as I wrote above, the Saudis have been one of the chief bankrollers, if not the chief bankrollers and supporters of the fundamentalist Wahabi’s call for a return to strict 7th century Islam, why would they be a target?
Well, as I understand it, the Saudi ruling family are “riding the Tiger,” they have made a deal with the devil; for decades they have supported Islam, the Jihad, and the fundamentalist Wahabi sect by focusing Wahabi efforts outward, by overtly doing things like paying to establish the large majority of the (fundamentalist) mosques throughout the world (and here in the U.S.) and then paying too, for their operating expenses, by paying to publish and distribute free to these mosques Qur’ans and “teaching literature” that pushes the Wahabi line, and by doing things like pursuing a gigantic “influence operation,” by spending additional hundreds of millions of dollars here in the U.S. to establish Middle Eastern study centers, endow chairs of Middle Eastern Studies, to support individual scholars and existing departments, and to establish scholarships for Middle Eastern studies at dozens of our most influential U.S. universities–all to increase their influence over the Academy here in the U.S., to push the Wahabi view of things, and to gain influence over/control of the “narrative” and, thus, over our perceptions and understanding of the Middle East, Jihad, Islam, Muhammad, the Palestinians, and Israel; and these are just those of their activities that we are aware of because they have been mentioned in the MSM. Occasionally, though, the mask slips, someone doesn’t follow the “narrative,” and we also see the rare reports about the Saudi involvement in 9/11, or about how members of the royal family and prominent Saudis are also covertly pouring money and support into the cause of Jihad.
And all of these Saudi efforts are premised on the Wahabis directing their attentions outward against the rest of the world, and not inward against the Saudi dynasty.
Instead of playing “Lets Pretend,” I believe that we stand a much greater–in fact, the only chance of surviving and winning WWIV–if we cut the crap, get off the stupefying drug of denial and, instead, play “Lets Face Reality,” and act on that actual Reality on the ground, and in our best “unbeliever” interests, no matter what bad feelings, turmoil, inconvenience, hard work, courage, vigilance, persistence, fortitude, or violence might be required to insure our survival.
Exactly W.D., and the cherry on the top, what part of this picture don’t people have the common sense to get? Hillary Clinton’s long-time and closest personal aide (privy to the America’s most sensitive intelligence, etc.) is a Saudi whose parents are high profile academics in the “kingdom”.
Pingback:lift chairs for the elderly