A realistic appraisal. From AP, with thanks to Nicolei:
General Peter Schoomaker compared the global war on terrorism with fighting cancer. And he says the threat from Islamic militants who want to destroy the United States is "never going to go away in our lifetime."He says people eventually get cured of pneumonia. When it comes to cancer, he says the disease may go into remission -- but never really goes away.
Militant Islam is to the 21st century what Communism was to the 20th century.
This is in fact an excellent analogy.
Cancer begins when a single cell in a body decides that it is the only one that matters. Some environmental factors may cause a cancer to begin, these include exposure to UV light, oil and smoking. There follows rapid growth of the cancer. In the most aggressive cancers, these cells do not resemble the specialised and organised cells elsewhere in the body, but seem to have degenerated into more primitive cell types.
The number of cancer cells increases far faster than the healthy cells. To do this a cancer will often release chemical messengers demanding more of the bodies resources, and so, more of the bodies blood gets diverted to the tumour.
The cancer grows so rapidly however that even this is often not enough. The center of the malignancy may be short of blood and begin to rot at the core.
As well as growing, a cancerous tumour will locally invade the surrounding tissues It will also have a few cells sent off in the blood stream and where they land, they will attempt to grow into another malignant tumour.
There are only two possible outcomes.
1)The host dies.
2)The cancer is eliminated.
He's obviously right, as the Koran will always contain the declararion of war against non-Muslims. Whatever 'reforms' occur in the Islamic world, the Koran will always be there to nullify them.
President Bush is using Chemo therapy now on the bad and infected cells while unfortunatly some good cells will be damaged or killed, but the risk needs to be taken to have a chance at eradicating the cancer.
*drops the extra handle* Our friend in the UK is right, lefites will always see what they want to see- right up the moment their a$$es are on the line.
As to Chemotherapy- would that we could stick with That, and not have to apply radiation treatment.
Peter,
one addendum to your possible outcomes. While it is try that either the host dies or the cancer is eliminated, you forgot to point out the fact that since the cancer is not capable of sustaining life, even if it wins, it dies.
I've said what General Schoomaker said.
This is why the West has no choice but to call upon Islam to reform its system of beliefs and if it refuses, we must force the change.
We should not allow this kind of disease to spread.
Unfortunately, even if we do war upon this enemy, I would have to agree with the general, that it will not go away in my lifetime.
A request:
Would Mr. Spencer, Hugh F, Mentat or Bob Evans or anyone with knowledge of Mr. Milosovic's troubles please confirm or dispute my thoughts on Kosovo and the KLA.
Back when all of this was happening, Bosnia, Kosovo, the KLA...etc... my interpretation of events was that a country was under seige by terrorists, posing as liberators, with the backing of the West, for various reasons, and that S. Milosovic was set up as a genocidal monster for defending his country.
When I took the side of the Serbs, I was immediately set right by all around me, especially a 'peace nik' who worked at the U.N.in New York.
Was I right to support Milosovic and the Serbs against the 'ethnic' Albanians? Or am I way off base?
Can you tell me more about this group and what they wanted.
Thanks.
And let me make myself clear: when I say reform, I am definitely talking about changing elements of the Koran, destroying any texts that condone murder, subjugation and taxation of other cultures and religons, etc.
I'm talking about curing this cancer. Uunadulterated war upon this problem. It is the only solution that I can see -- and if that sounds like a harsh one, consider the nature of the enemy and the grimmer nature of what the future would be like if we do not take drastic measures.
Islam must confront itself or there can be no peace with the West.
Interesting analogy...
Containing cancer is the first order of business...Take drastic surgical measures to remove as much of the cancer as possible and then use chemical and/or radiological treatments to contain and possibly shrink the remaining cancerous cells.
Deport Islamists (surgical)....Secure our borders and Islamic Borders (Chemical/Radiological)...and let the cancer collapse from within it's own rotting core...
Patricia,
you were right to support the serbs. Even today the serbs are being killed on a daily basis, their antique churches are destroyed, houses burned, and hospitals vandalized. Do you realize that even today, the muslims are attacking and damaging UN forces. They want the UN out. Please do not be fooled because it is not in the mainstream news. Read the Greek, Cypriot, Balkan, Romanian news on the internet (some in english). For even more horrifying accounts, read the mulsim sites how they praise the acts of their albanian brothers (most in arabic).
Further reason why immigration of Muslims must be conducted in a responsible manner. Muslim Immigration must be seriously regulated and perhaps stopped. We may be breeding our own intifida right here in America.
Patricia,
I agree with oiko, so I will not add excess verbiage. Supporting the Serbs was correct against Bosnian Muslims.
I would like to point out, however, that I am Bob OWENS, and not a place to get a reasonably priced breakfast.
Well, unless you're REALLY cute... ;-)
Bob Owens said: ". . .since the cancer is not capable of sustaining life, even if it wins, it dies."
Bob, as a physician AND cancer patient, I fully endorse what you say. That is why ultimately, no matter what "success" Islam may achieve in the short run, it will lose in the long run. It is simply inconsistent with the demands of reality, including the reality of the nature of human beings--thinking, reasoning beings. From the tone of so many posts this morning, it's obvious that everyone at this site recognizes the means that must be used to enable the civilized peoples of the world be able to live like human beings again, because, as
Antijihad says, ". . .the Koran will always contain the declararion of war against non-Muslims. Whatever 'reforms' occur in the Islamic world, the Koran will always be there to nullify them." So, as
Foehammer remarks, ". . .when I say reform, I am definitely talking about changing elements of the Koran, destroying any texts that condone murder, subjugation and taxation of other cultures and religons, etc."
True, true, and related, people! There's one more thing we should all recognize about cancer, and why it is so hard to eliminate.
We all have heard about stem cells that are found in every organ in the body--those in bone marrow are the best known, but they exist in every tissue type.
There is mounting evidence now that cancer also has stem cells, and while chemotherapeutic agents kill actively dividing cancer cells at a high rate (they divide often), they also kill healthy cells, although at a lower rate, since healthy cells divide more slowly. Rapidly dividing cells in the gastrointestinal tract and bone marrow are killed at a higher rate, for example, than more slowly dividing skin cells. The "therapeutic ratio" is about six cancer cells killed for every healthy cell killed.
Now here's the bigger problem, and a further analogy to Islam: The cancer STEM CELLS are unaffected. Even if you kill every last active cancer cell, the stem cells remain. If they start forming cancer cells again, it will take about the same amount of time--usually about ten years--for a diagnosable tumor to reappear.
The further analogy to Islam is this: Their school children represent the "rapidly dividing cells," and the schools, be they madrassas or secular, represent the "growth factors" (all kinds of things stimulate the growth of cancer--you've probably heard about the problem with hormone replacement therapy in women, but there are many, many more). This--the schools--is what stimulates the growth of new cancer cells. So, unless the Koran, which can be compared to the "stem cells," is fundamentally changed, the cancer will remain, and we will have to deal with it again and again.
Foehammer's contention that the Koran etc. must be changed is correct; the Koran is is the "stem cell" of the Islamic cancer.
It's going to take a very long time for our people to dare to cross the "religion barrier" and do what must be done. Eventually, though, I predict that we will be living much the way Israel does today, and when that has been going on long enough, people will simply get tired of it, and not only will we begin behaving rationally to destroy our enemy, but we'll quit putting restraints on Israel.
I have a hard time when people advocate halting immigration to the United States of certain peoples. Our country was built on the work and ideas and hope of immigrants.
At various points throughout our history, people have wanted to halt various groups coming to our shores. At the time those reasons seemed sound. Looking back, that has always been a bad choice. It is with this historical detachment that I try to look at the current issue, that of Arab/Muslim immigration.
I strongly feel that our diversity is America’s strongest asset. Stifling that by halting the immigration of certain groups, even for what appears to be obvious reasons, troubles me.
If we are to consider halting immigration of one group, we must consider halting all immigration, temporary and permanent. No more Latinos. No more Europeans. The United States is closed. Come back some other day.
“But Europeans aren’t at war with us. Latinos aren’t killing us,” I can hear people argue.
Really? Richard Reed and Jose Padilla aren’t terrorists?
“But they are Muslims,” I hear people say. Yes, they are. But I didn’t exactly seem them wearing “Have you hugged your suicide bomber today?” tee shirts.
Did you?
Think carefully folks. The immigration issue isn’t as cut and dried as you think.
Mr. Owens,
You sight one example and name 2 people. Yes there are CONVERTS, but these same converts could be called Owens, or Susan. If 95% of a group is intent on destroying you, the best way to arrest this, is by not permitting them access to you. Latinos, Chinese, Caribbean’s, Koreans, Africans (non muslim), have all acclimated, have become a integral part of European and North American society. The muslims as a whole have not, and they refuse to acclimate. Yes I am for the immigration ban on all muslims, be it Europe or North America, or even South America (growing problem).
Mr Owens, sirs,
Barely, my proposition is banning the entrance (or imprisoning, or whatever the national security requires) to all that provedly advocate for Shari'a law.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe argues that free trade and restricted immigration are totally in agreement with the principles of Liberty (BTW, I think this article is a must read):
"The Case For Free Trade And Restricted Immigration",
http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/13_2/13_2_8.pdf
Patricia, He is an interesting link to one site I found googling. It alleges to reveal some hidden truths about the conflict. I think the UN was tricked and manipulated. Crimes were perpetrated on both sides. The mass exterminations the BBC was reporting centrainly didn't happen. I read during the conflict that an estimated 200,000 had been exterminated. In reality a few hundred in local attacks.
http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/index.html
Bob Owens:
While Reed and Padilla are both terrorists, neither of them came to the US as immigrants, as far as I know.
Padilla is a US-born citizen (although he may be from Puerto Rico, I can't recall off the top of my head), and Reed made use of the loophole that exempts citizens of many countries from needing visas to visit the US. He just hopped on a plane.
I see no reason why we can't restrict (or end) the flow of Muslim immigrants, at least those planning to stay here permanently. We're supposed to be conducting interviews and background checks on them anyway. Surely we could determine what their religious affiliation is during that process.
If it takes longer to get a visa as a result, who cares? If they don't like it, they can go somewhere else.
As for comparisons to past calls to stop the immigration of people from other groups, there's one major difference: As far as I know, none of those other people were coming here with the intention of destroying us from within.
There's a world of difference between keeping people out because they pose a real danger and keeping them out because of simple prejudice.
I'm not offering solutions folks. Just point ou the complexities of the issues.
By the way, we certainly CAN refuse to admit people to the US as residents based on where they're from, because we already do so.
We've used a quota system for issuing resident visas since the late '60s.
All we have to do is change the quota for Muslim countries to "0."
Obviously, that won't keep ALL Muslims out, but it's a start.
Mr Owens,
Don't put prejudice as complexity: immigration control (*control*, not total ban) is NOT an anti-freedom policy. In fact, it is a pro-freedom policy (see the case of Switzerland, as Mr Hans-Hermann Hoppe points out in his paper "The Case For Free Trade
And Restricted Immigration", http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/13_2/13_2_8.pdf.)
Related to the "internal" Shari'a law activists, I say: prison as the mildest penalty.
The Western civilization love of freedom and free speech is being exploited by Muslims (sorry, there is no such a thing as moderate islam, it is all right there in the quran). When is the West going to wakeup and realize the grave dangers posed by islam and muslims? We should make no mistake here, the teachings of islam condone and encourage lying for the benefit of the religion. All the talk about islam being a peaceful religion is nothing but lies. In fact, the word "love" is not even mentioned at all in the quran.
The cancer analogy is bang on target. If the west (particularly europe) needs immigrants to compensate for its declining birthrate, I would strongly suggest diversifying its immigrant base - look particularly towards Indians and Chinese - honest, law abiding, willing-to-integrate, education-valuing people who've seen Islamic invasion attempts in their histories and know what is at stake. Best of all, they contributre positively to society, don't come seeking asylum and don't live on welfare.
The UNHCR released the figures for countries hosting refugees. US is 5th. Note: Most refugees are from muslim countries.
TOP HOST COUNTRIES
Pakistan 1.1m people
Iran: 985,000
Germany: 960,000
Tanzania: 650,000
US: 452,500
UNHCR figures for 2003
Some changes should be made, stop immigration and refugee status.
I really dont see how muslims are not intergrating with society? I went to school with alot of muslims and they where just like every other student. there familys all worked and alot of them owned there own business's (you know the american dream....)
joseph,
you new they were muslims though. Did you know who was Greek orthodox, russian orthodox, luthern, presb., buddist, hindu or other, i do believe the answer is no. But you knew who were muslims.
I will let you figure it out.
Joseph, please leave Barbieland once in a while and do see the realities of the world.
US immigration should be made to understand that Islam is not just a religion that should be given the due process of political correctness and treatment as the other religions. Islam has always taught that Islam is a total of life with specific instructions on which hand to use to wash your genitals to how you should stand and bow and kneel when praying. Of particular importance and yet sadly ignored to US peril is that Islam teaches that it cannot be separated from politics which makes Islam a political ideology.
If Islam is recognized also for its political ideology like communism or Nazism, then the measures needed to be taken to combat this ideology become clear.
1. Just as we didn’t speak on behalf of Nazis that they are not racist even though Hitler preached and practiced his master (Aryan) race theories, we can stop saying on Muslims’ behalf that Islam is peaceful.
2. Islam should be registered in US as a political party and their mosques recognized as political centers since in reality Islam refused to separate state from religion. Political correctness simply refuses to acknowledge the fact that Friday sermons can be and have been political in nature.
3. As part of Islam tenets that Islam cannot be separated from the state, Islam teaches that Muslims’ sole allegiance is to be given to Allah and his (Sharia) laws alone and not to man made laws. Therefore any Muslims immigrants who wish to take up US citizenship should be made also to renounce this Islamic teaching; otherwise they will be lying when they swear their allegiance to the US flag and man made Constitution.
4. Any calls for the lesser jihad (violent) made in the mosques should be treated as such – using the mosques as a recruitment center for a foreign military.
5. Islamic dresses such as their robes or hijab, should be recognized as not only a religious symbol, but also as a political symbol. If the Ku Klax Klan hood and Nazi swastika armband are banned from schools, and since Islam do not separate itself from the state, then Islam dress code should be treated as such – a political symbol that must be banned from schools.
Any talk of reforming Islam is meaningless if Islam is not made to separate Islam from the state. Why do you think they wish to be ruled under sharia laws even they are residing in a non-Muslim country? Muslims must be forced to face the consequences of their refusal to separate state from religion. Despite the fact that every Muslim terrorists are inspired by Islam and continues to be inspired by Islam even though others may claim that they are misguided, the west still refuse to see Islam as an insidious political ideology and more.
Cancer can be caused by free radicals. Think of Muslims in US as being free and potential radicals.
Was I right to support Milosovic and the Serbs against the 'ethnic' Albanians? Or am I way off base?
Can you tell me more about this group and what they wanted.
Thanks.
Posted by patricia at June 17, 2004 11:07 AM
Same thing is happening to the Jews in Israel the Arabs have more money to spred their lies!!!
I watched a cnn clip that was sent to the USA and a woman claimed to have been raped and all her jewels stolden But then on Itailian news same woman and she had all her gold on and was saying how wonderful the camp was and she was able to make it out with a lot of her savings??
The Itialians were agains to war because they saw what it was about and when 30,000 arabs mulsums meet in Roma Life changed the Itailains could not understand how America could be so wrong!!! They stuck with the USA in part because they knew we would wake up and see the light. The Italians changed their President to help stop the Mulsums from coming there and staying there! Italy also made a new law that says you can shot some one in your house that is robing you because these monsters were killing people!! They learn about the 1600s in their Schools and knew what was comming down the ROAD!! and they did not like cliton they read the cox report and wanted him in JAIL!! Do not believe all the Press!
Wednesday, June 16, 2004 1:13 p.m. EDT
Media Mislead on 9/11 Commission Finding on Iraq-al Qaida Link
Reports Wednesday morning that the 9/11 Commission has determined there was no cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida are completely false - and are undoubtedly driven by the media's determination to contradict the Bush administration's claims that such a link exists.
"9/11 Panel Says Iraq Rebuffed Bin Laden" reads the headline on the Associated Press report on today's Commission staff statement.
But that's not what the Commission staff report actually said.
The below passage, for instance, does more to confirm the Bush administration's claims of an Iraq-al Qaida link than it does to contradict them.
"The Sudanese, to protect their own ties with Iraq, reportedly persuaded Bin Ladin* to cease [support for anti-Saddam Islamists in Northern Iraq] and arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda*.
"A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting Bin Ladin in 1994. Bin Ladin is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded." [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 5]
Apparently never responded? How, pray tell, does the AP derive from those words the conclusive claim that Iraq "rebuffed" bin Laden?
The Commission statement continues:
"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after Bin Ladin had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship."
What's the evidence for this less-than-conclusive surmise?
"Two senior Bin Ladin associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq," says the Commission.
Such a statement begs the question: Why does the Commission, let alone the press, take the word of two senior bin Laden associates over, say, Iraq's new prime minister, Iyad Allawi.
Last December he told the London Telegraph, "We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda."
Reacting to the discovery of an Iraqi intelligence document placing 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta in Baghdad two months before the attacks, he continued:
"This is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with al-Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks."
In fact, nowhere does the Commission make the claim that Iraq and al-Qaida never cooperated. What it does say is "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." [NewsMax italics]
Apparently Dr. Allawi's asssement counts for nothing.
Even so, it's worth noting that elsewhere in today's staff statement, the 9/11 Commission asserts:
"With al Qaeda at its foundation, Bin Ladin sought to build a broader Islamic Army that included terrorist groups from Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Oman, Tunisia, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Somalia, and Eritrea. Not all [terrorist] groups from these states agreed to join, but at least one from each did." [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 3]
In other words, at least one terror group from Iraq did form an alliance with bin Laden.
Another problem: If the press is going to take today's staff statement as gospel, certain long-held media assumptions will need to be drastically revised, such as the widely accepted notion that al-Qaida was involved in the first World Trade Center bombing.
Not true, says the Commission.
"Whether Bin Ladin and his organization had roles in the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center ... remains a matter of substantial uncertainty," the staff statement says, before insisting, "We have no conclusive evidence" of a bin Laden link. [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 6]
The same goes for "Operation Bojinka," the 1995 plot to hijack 12 airliners hatched by Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that experts say was the blueprint for the 9/11 attacks.
"[Mohammed] was not, however, an al Qaeda member at the time of the Manilla [Bojinka] plot," Commission staffers say, even though they acknowledge that he went on to mastermind the 9/11 attacks.
The press is furiously spinning the 9/11 Commission staff statement in a bid to discredit the Bush administration. Americans should go to the Sept. 11 Commission Web site and read the conclusions for themselves: http://www.9-11commission.gov/ Commission spellings
Wednesday, June 16, 2004 1:13 p.m. EDT
Media Mislead on 9/11 Commission Finding on Iraq-al Qaida Link News Max.com
So don't wait till the fire is burning before you buy a hose?
Part of the American Tribe
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the Course to Victory Amen
PS Mentat ME TOO!
joey
are you that fat guy what his name ishib i see on Tv once in a while
If you are boy you cahnge your tune with Joe the other night What getting worried sence the Muslums say we cant be there that we in the USA will declare this counrty a Muslum Free Zone and you will have to go live in a Muslum country????
Part of the American Tribe
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the course to Victory Amen
Posted by joseph at June 17, 2004 02:13 PM
I really dont see how muslims are not intergrating with society? I went to school with alot of muslims and they where just like every other student. there familys all worked and alot of them owned there own business's (you know the american dream....)
-------------------------------------------------
Well mate I don't live in your country I live in mine and I tell you for a fact that they don't integrate into British society. If you like I will go a take a drive tomorrow and take some photos. Entire main streets where there are nothing but Muslims. Call it integration when they try to change our laws to fit theirs? change the way our schools are run and force a change on school uniforms? Force a change on animal rights so they can kill animals in a inhumane way? Force posters advertising underwear to be removed because they are too close to a mosque? I have a 'live and let live' attitude towards most ethnic minorities in this country but these guys are trouble.
cube
You are almost right but you have to talk to cancer surviers!
The true cure is TRUE FREEDOM this is freedom if you want to leave this faith you don't get you head cut off??
It is proven the True Freedom has changed many!
Freedom does not mean without laws. You can not yell fire in a crowed theater if there is no FIRE!!!
Part of the American Tribe
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the course to Victory Amen
Catherine, I'm sure you bring up excellent points.
Would you please translate them into a modern form of English so that the rest of us can understand them?
I admire your fire and your enthusiasm, but most of the time, it might as well be in Urdu.
Islam is merely a political statement. Historically, it is a plagiarized, militant,
elitist, and racist form of Judaism, which had existed for thousands of years before this clown Muhammed. Muhammed was a political unifier, not a prophet. Anyone can recopy biblical verses and say God gave it. Islam is repressive, backward, and the scourge of the modern world. It promotes totalitarianism, ignorance, and prejudice. It is also very good at getting people to perpetually support lost causes. It has created an environment of envy that motivates the "enlightened" to do nothing but destroy rather than pull themselves out of the social, economic, and intellectual hole they are in.
Islam is intolerant and promotes blame for its own inadequacies. Its hard to imagine any success to be obtained by blowing yourself up and killing people. Give it up. Even September 11, as terrible as it was, was a mosquito bite to the free people of the world. This jihad against the west thing is accomplishing what? A lot of dead Muslims I would say. Everytime a Muslim shouts God is great and chops off an American head, 10 of his illustrious companions get killed. For a people who invented the number system, they sure are bad at math. I don't think they even know what they are fighting for. Its just some weird, frenzied, crazy religious fervor for nothing more than some lunatic nationalistic or racial pride. And pride for what? What in the middle east is there to be proud of? Nothing. I would encourage Muslims to leave that bs behind and take your rightful place with the rest of the people in the civilized world. There is no place for that horrid religion among the free world, unless you enjoy groveling on the ground three times a day to the East. God, whatever you conceive him to be, is best worshipped in the quiet confines of your heart, not with coercive institutions hell bent on worldwide domination whose modus operandi is guns, bombs, intellectual pigeonholing, and repression of new ideas.
I understand the "my way or the highway" culture of Islam. That is why if you're a Muslim reading this, you probably want to find out where I live so you can shoot me, blow up my family, stab me, or videotape yourself skinning me alive as some kind of sicko medieval offering for Allah." Yeah, that would make everything right, wouldn't it? Thats the true Muslim way to solve problems.
Kill everyone who doesn't agree with you. That philosophy of Islam is the main reason that the Islamic nations of the world are festering rat holes while the rest of us are enjoying unprecedented prosperity. Pull your heads out of the sand. It isn't out fault you're still 1000 years behind. It's your fault. And its because you took so readily to the abomination that is Islam.
Kent you posted in part:
"Everytime a Muslim shouts God is great and chops off an American head, 10 of his illustrious companions get killed. For a people who invented the number system, they sure are bad at math"
The actual kill is estimated to be closer to 152-1 in Iraq over our last two incursions.
Muslims make excellent lemmings.
The entire Bosnian-Serb issue is an unfortunate enigma to me. I would very much like to have an open discussion with some Serbs if I ever get the chance, in hopes that I may better understand the history of that region and the truths or falsehoods that have been perpetuated by world media.
I do know this much: if I was told my grandmothers had been raped and murdered by a specific group of people, I'd be pretty set on revenge.
The cancer metaphor fits: with horrendous ramifications, true enormities.
El-Qaeda and Islamo-fascist terror in general are structured on a rhyzomic basis (akin to potatos or ginger), an organic mass of both directly and indirectly interlinked cells - except Islamo-fascism’s PREDATORY. Further, parasitically, it employs that other intricate, rhyzomic complex, the internet, as its “Virtual Afghanistan” nowadays, having lost the physical terrain of that country to use as its base, training-camp, supply-point, communications hub and general playground.
Well prior to Ayatollah Khomeini’s “Islamic Revolution” in Iran in 1979, the initial “infection” in the contemporary period was the arrival on the scene of the Wahabi Ikhwan (the “Brethren”), gathering for decades in the Arabian Peninsula from early in the 20th Century; their zeal for Jihad had to be harshly suppressed (and co-opted) by a desperate House of Saud in 1929-30.
With the terrorist Moslem Brotherhood founded in Egypt in 1927, the toxin turned up again, in a cosmetically different guise, in the late ‘30s. It soon manifested during WWII in a PRO-NAZI coup d’état in Iraq, a second, third and fourth seriously shaping in Iran, Afghanistan and Egypt and large-scale, open, routine collaboration of Arabs with the Afrika Korps in Occupied North Africa and with the Luftwaffe in Vichy French Syria and Lebanon.
The “Palestinians”’ Grand Mufti of Jerusalem spent some of his days back then fronting an SS-auxiliary Moslem Legion, comprised predominantly - but not exclusively - of Bosnians, assigned to genocidal operations in Yugoslavia against the Red Partisans (Titoists - embattled Britain’s sole ally in continental Europe, in the bleak winter of 1941), Jews, Serbs, Gypsies, anyone they didn’t like. Officered by Germans, co-operation in the Legion’s gruesome, ethnic-cleansing sweeps was frequently lent by the Croatian Ustashi, often with Fascist Italian co-ordination, as well as with "Greater Albanian" (Moslem) gangs in Kosovo and Macedonia. The bulk of his hours, however, the Mufti passed in the company of Himmler and his coterie of maniacal murderers.
Saudi Arabia remained neutral until the week before WWII in Europe ended, then joined the Allies. Meanwhile, it’d shipped untold barrels of oil to the Third Reich for years, via Fascist Spain, through France, paid for in Switzerland, for as long as the route was available, till mid-1944.
Despite the capture of Berlin in 1945, in 1947 and 1948, Arab veterans of the Mufti’s Moslem Legion and parallel SS units reassembled and rearmed - in the old, cruel spirit - to foment and participate in anti-Zionist violence, to abort the establishment of the State of Israel and kill the Jews. In 1948 they fought beside the five Arab armies (of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Transjordan) which invaded the nascent Israel and, thankfully, were repulsed.
Dismayed, the Islamic “Revolutionaries” then turned - with supreme reluctance, RETAINING as much as possible of it - from the Nazi matrix to that of the next totalitarian model around, Soviet Communism, spawning the poison of their new, post-war style, titled “Arab Socialism”, whose brutal implementation commenced by the late ‘50s in Nasser’s Egypt, the mid ‘60s in Algeria and South Yemen and by the ‘70s in Libya, Sudan and in Baathist Syria and Iraq….
Nicolei
Nicely said
Speaking of cancers...
My local bird cage liner ran with a full page headline "No Link: 9/11 Report Contradicts White House Claims."
I called them (1-800-295-2181 and ask for news, if anyone enjoys piling on) and asked if in light of the fact that they were lying, if they planned on running a retraction tomorrow.
They weren't. How suprising...
As it has been noted before, Islam is not the only cancer we are fighting...
Muslims are always talking about their rights, but what about the rights of child abuse victims? Doesn't anybody think that victims of child sexual abuse would find a religion like Islam offensive because he married a 6 year old girl and had sex with her when she was 9? What about THEIR rights?
Their is a really good book called The penalties for apostacy in Islam.
One can become an apostate for opening the Koran with dirty hands, throwing the Koran down on the floor, putting the Koran down in a dirty place. The penalty for apostacy IS DEATH!
HG
Are the socialist marxist roots of the Baathists ,the muslim brotherhood ,et al, part of the reason of the crazed support of the left wing western press?
Like the unbelievable support for POL POT.
As a student when i questioned it and was told i must show solidarity to one of our "brothers".
That was when i started waking up !
Davo:
No, neither the Moslem Brotherhood nor the Baath are Marxist, though the latter's "Socialist" in the identical way that the Nazis were the "German National SOCIALIST Workers Party".
The Baath was kicked off by two bourgeois Syrians, one Christian, one Moslem, upon returning home from the 1936 Berlin Olympics - powerfully impressed by what they'd seen in the Third Reich and keen to use it as a model.
The Baath's Nazi-style Fascism was replaced by "Socialistic" (kleptocratic) Fascism when the Nazis were through and when the USSR stepped in to be their new prototype and benefactor in the 1950s.
I guess the Left supports Islamo-fascism partly out of nostalgia, but more because they have so much in common nowadays, specially with the Left having scrapped the anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-genocide, etc, which once distinguished its philosophies and gone "Post-modern".
Davo:
The Moslem Brotherhood couldn't be Marxist, since that’s ATHEISM. It does, however, style itself as “Modernist”, inasmuch as it seeks “not to modernize Islam, but to Islamize modernity”.
While the Brotherhood’s pan-Islamic, the Baath (Syrian and Iraqi wings) were set up to be “secularist”, pan-Arab Parties, accommodating (loyal) Arab Christians in their Fascist structure. Its vision of Arab Nationalism is predicated upon ARAB supremacy, not that of Religion alone.
The shift of the Baath and the other “Arab Nationalists” and “Arab Socialists” from the Nazis to the Communists was more rank opportunism - with the Third Reich smashed - than any true ideological shift, in the Cold War era. Likewise, their transit from the Soviets into the camp of the Jihad is self-serving, now that the USSR’s crumbled. - Alternately, the Islamists, pleased to accept the “secularists”’ inputs, won’t tolerate ATHEISTS in their midst longer than necessary.
But finally such niceties are immaterial: the theme here is the Arabs’ constant predilection to turn to various forms of TOTALITARIANISM, whether Islamist or Communist or Nazi, instead of towards freedom. Accordingly, they’re strongly anti-American, antisemitic and, generally, anti-Western in orientation - this is where the Western Left and its running-dogs come in.
These baffled groups, having lost their “Revolution” at the end of the 20th Century, REFUSE to open their eyes and are attracted to the Islamo-fascists because they hold enemies in common with it, plus, like them, a proclivity for preordained, utopian systems of totalitarian bent (as well as scant use for facts, logic or law). Tragically shallow, on top, many Leftists romanticize Arabs and Moslems as exciting - “exotic”, erotic, socially and politically shocking, etc - as “COOL”.
Identifying themselves as the “vanguard” of progressive directions, the Leftists view themselves as having evolved “beyond Nationalism”, but they warmly support Arab Nationalism (specially “Palestinian Nationalism”) while stridently castigating Israeli, American or Australian nationalism.
These “Internationalists” oppose globalization, a planetary civilization; as the “Liberators of gender”, in the name of the “expression of cultural authenticity”, they smugly condone the collapsing of walls on homosexuals, to kill them. No problems for them in the status of women in the contemporary dar el-Islam, or the illiteracy there, or the superstition. They’re EMPTY.