Arab Columnists: Terrorists are Motivated by Cultural and Religious Factors, Not Poverty

THANK YOU, MR. SPENCER FOR THIS INFORMATION.

I DID READ THE WHOLE THING AND IMMEDIATELY SENT THE LINK TO MY WHOLE MAILING LIST. IF THEY DON'T TRUST AMERICANS TO TELL THE TRUTH, PERHAPS THEY WILL TRUST ARABS WHO CARE ABOUT THE CORRUPTION OF THEIR YOUTH AND THE WAY THEY ARE MANIPULATED BY THE SHIEKS AND IMAMS.

THE IMPORTANT POINT IS, OF COURSE, WHY THE OLD PEOPLE PASS UP THIS EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY TO GET POINTS TO GO TO PARADISE AT THE END OF THEIR LIVES AND INSTEAD, LET THE YOUNG GO AND GET ALL THE GLORY FROM ALLAH!

The statement: "old men propose war and young men die" has been paraphrased so often it may be impossible to pinpoint the original attribution. However it is true that the vitality and idealism of youth are exploited and squandered on the altar of war or to mollify someone's anger or bolster another's ego.

This time, jihad is to mollify Allah, and to assuage the anger and resentment of disdainful Muslims that care little how many young Muslim lives they squander or how many non-Muslim lives they annihilate in persuit of their goals

http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/1/25/191508.shtml
War Is Hell; Losing Is Worse
Phil Brennan
Wednesday, Jan. 26, 2005
If you are looking for a word to describe the President's inaugural address, try "grandiose," because that is what it was. Elegantly lyrical, it could have been accompanied by the "Ode to Joy" movement in Beethoven's majestic Ninth Symphony – soaring rhetoric dreamily envisioning a democratic world at peace.

I take no exception to his vision, but as uplifting it was, it dealt with the hoped-for final ending to our present trials and tribulations rather than a recognition of the state of the present conflict we mistakenly call the war on terrorism. No matter how one views this war, it is global in nature, and, being global, it includes much of the Middle East, and that includes Iraq. Like it or no, Iraq is part of the war, and what happens there will have a huge impact on its ultimate outcome.
We are beginning to experience the first stirrings of Kriegschmerz – war weariness – the malady that helped defeat Germany in World War I. It saps the will of a nation to persevere in a lengthy struggle, and its ultimate effect is to provoke a strategy of cut and run.
The first line of that siren song we are hearing now includes the seductive words "exit strategy." This is another way of saying a planned cut-and-run strategy. I saw a cartoon the other day that well described this strategy: "Do one brave thing today and then run like hell."
Well, we did a brave thing in going into Iraq, driving out a brutal dictator, arranging to turn the nation over to the Iraqi people and establishing a beachhead on the main battlefield of the war on Islamic jihad. Now there are those who want us to run like hell before the job is done. That is their exit strategy.
It is time we took a step back and considered just what this war is all about. First of all, it is not a war against terrorism – that's a weapon, not a foe. It is a war against Islamic fundamentalism and the nations waging it against us, overtly and covertly.
We didn't start this war, which has its roots in the seventh and eighth centuries. As Thomas Madden points out in his new book, "A Concise History of the Crusades," Islam was born in war and grew the same way.
"From the time of Mohammed," he wrote "the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt – once the most heavily Christian areas in the world – quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. Under Suleiman the Magnificent the Turks came within a hair's breadth of capturing Vienna, which would have left all of Germany at their mercy."
Islam has never abandoned its goal of world conquest. As Jed Babbin wrote in the current American Spectator, "under the jihadist's reading of the Koran, only those who are true believers are entitled to life, and they must subjugate themselves to the dogma of jihad."
He goes on to explain that "jihadist ideology promises to restore the idealized Islamic past of a Muslim caliphate, ruling the civilized world."
That war continues today. Its first shot against the United States and the West was fired at the World Trade Center during the don't-rock-the-boat Clinton administration, which reacted by hoping the whole thing would go away and leave us alone to enjoy the benefits of the technology and stock market bubbles before they burst, hopefully in the next administration, under another president.
Another shot was the bombing of the USS Cole, also ignored by the Clinton administration. And then came 9/11, which was not ignored by the Bush administration, which understood that we were at war and took the required actions.
Afghanistan and Iraq are our footholds in the midst of a Middle East dominated by Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria – the nation-states wedded to the jihad. The existence of a democratic Iraq is simply intolerable to these bellicose Islamic nations. Were we to abandon our foothold in Iraq, it would be quickly destabilized and absorbed by one of its neighbors and Iraq's condition would be far worse than it was before we invaded the country.
Cutting and running from the Middle East would bring the war to our homeland. Left to develop its nuclear capabilities, Iran could be expected to share them with its al-Qaida allies and we would be facing a serious nuclear threat here at home. Fighting the war here at home would entail the creation of a police state mechanism where all America would look like Washington, D.C., during the Inauguration – an armed camp devoid of most civil liberties. And there would be no exit strategy, nowhere to cut and run.
This war is going to last a long time, far beyond my lifetime and those of most Americans. We have no option but to persevere. War is hell. Losing is worse.
Faugh 'a Ballagh

SOME ONE FORGOT TO TELL THE WINNEYS IN THIS COUNTRY THESE COLORS DON'T RUN!!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage to stay the course to Victory [FREEDOM] to Destroy ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Evil give them Courage to Fight against this Evil Amen

Listen up, Dhimmi Left:

"This [means] that financial and economic factors can not be associated with this group. Therefore, it is a cultural and religious factor that motivated them [to kill] innocent people and destroy the country's infrastructure."

This is welcome, but of course it is welcome only as it shows the odd Arab commentator who is hinting at something like the truth. But no one should be satisfied with the idea that it is alla about Islam itself. It is not.

What the Saudi authorities dislike, and what they will permit limited commentary on, is the "misunderstood" application of Islam, used to justify attacks on the Al-Saud family themselves as they continue to pocket much of the country's unearned oil wealth.

It would, of course, be impossible for this commentator, or any other Muslim commentator, to come close to suggesting that the problem is not that of those who "misunderstand" the religion -- and thereby treating the Saudi rulers as "infidels" -- but those who understand the religion perfectly, and are willing to wage war as Muhammad would have understood it, and so would not only Ibn Taymiyya, but also those whom one is led to believe were milder sorts -- Ibn Khaldun, say, or Al-Ghazzali, both of whom wrote of the obligation of Jihad. And they did not mean "struggling with one's conscience."

US TELL THE TRUTH? HA! HA! HA! My European ancestors massacred the native Americans. The current US was built on the sweat of slaves.

Anyway, here's some info.

There is ... a large body of evidence that U.S. training and aid programs directly and indirectly encouraged and promoted death squads and torture. First, there is the stress on the great desirability of foreign investment, and therefore of a favorable investment climate for economic growth. Second, there is the focus on subversion, counterinsurgency, and a holy war against an insidious Communist enemy who comes in many guises, and who actually hates our beloved protector, the Godfather! This provided the spiritual backup to torture. Third, there is a great deal of evidence of U. S. provision of torture technology and training, which have been diffused among a great variety of client states. Electronic methods of torture, used extensively in the field and in the Provincial Interrogation Centers in South Vietnam, have spread throughout the system of U.S. clients. A.J. Langguth claims that the CIA advised Brazilian torturers using field telephones as to the permissible limits that would avoid premature death. Klare and Arnson show that U.S. firms and agencies are providing CN and CS gas grenades, anti-riot gear, fingerprint computers, thumbscrews, leg-irons and electronic "Shok-Batons" among a huge flow of "equipment, training, and technical support to the police and paramilitary forces most directly involved in the torture, assassination, and abuse of civilian dissidents." Langguth also notes that one of the pioneer death squads in Brazil, Operacao Bandierantes (OBAN) was financed through the auspices of a local business man widely thought to be a CIA agent, with encouragement given to U. S. local corporate funding by the U.S. consulate. And one of the most notorious Brazilian torturers and death squad organizers, Sergio Fleury, was introduced to the Uruguayan police through CIA contacts.
As the United States has supported torture directly via training programs and the implements of torture, and indirectly by means of its sponsorship of the NSS, it is natural that it also protects the torturers by apologetics and silence. This being official U.S. policy, the mass media have done the same. In Paraguay, for example, Al points out that although "Stroessner has said that he considers the American Ambassador to be an ex officio member of his Cabinet, the U.S. has never officially acknowledged or taken steps to prevent the use of torture by a government which appears to be very much within its sphere of influence". In Greece, to take another interesting case, torture on an administrative basis was introduced in 1967 with the takeover by the U.S.-trained, supplied and supported colonels. Al noted in its 1974 Report on Torture that "In terms of power and influence the U.S. government plays the predominant role in Greece." Al also points out, however, that U.S. criteria of acceptability and serviceability seem to be confined to strategic interests and a "congenial environment of political stability." Since the Greek torture regime met these criteria, other matters were of little account, and U.S. policy on Greek torture "as expressed in official statements and of official testimony has been to deny it where possible and minimize it, where denial was not possible. This policy flowed naturally from general support for the military regime.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Herman%20/USSponsorsNSS_Herman.html

ENJOY!

The Devil in the Details: The CIA and Saddam Hussein
The coup that brought the Ba'ath Party to power in 1963 was celebrated by the United States.

The CIA had a hand in it. They had funded the Ba'ath Party - of which Saddam Hussein was a young member - when it was in opposition.

US diplomat James Akins served in the Baghdad Embassy at the time. Mr. Akins said, "I knew all the Ba'ath Party leaders and I liked them".
"The CIA were definitely involved in that coup. We saw the rise of the Ba'athists as a way of replacing a pro-Soviet government with a pro-American one and you don't get that chance very often.

"Sure, some people were rounded up and shot but these were mostly communists so that didn't bother us".

This happy co-existence lasted right through the 1980s.
One thing is for sure, the US will find it much harder to remove the Ba'ath Party from power in Iraq than they did putting them in power back in 1963. If more people knew about this diabolical history, they just might not be so inclined to trust the US in its current efforts to execute "regime change" in Iraq.

Here then are some quotations that I've gathered on this fascinating early history of CIA involvement in the vicious history of "regime change" in Iraq:In early 1963, Saddam had more important things to worry about than his
outstanding bill at the Andiana Cafe. On February 8, a military coup in Baghdad, in which the Baath Party played a leading role, overthrew Qassim. Support for the conspirators was limited. In the first hours of fighting, they had only nine tanks under their control. The Baath Party had just 850 active members. But Qassim ignored warnings about the impending coup. What tipped the balance against him was the involvement of the United States. He had taken Iraq out of the anti-Soviet Baghdad Pact. In 1961, he threatened to occupy Kuwait and nationalized part of the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC),
the foreign oil consortium that exploited Iraq's oil. In retrospect, it was the ClAs favorite coup. "We really had the ts crossed on what was happening," James Critchfield, then head of the CIA in the Middle East, told us. "We regarded it as a great victory." Iraqi participants later confirmed American involvement. "We came to power on a CIA train," admitted Ali Saleh Sa'adi, the Baath Party secretary general who was about to institute an unprecedented reign of terror. CIA assistance reportedly
included coordination of the coup plotters from the agency's station inside the U.S. embassy in Baghdad as well as a clandestine radio station in Kuwait and solicitation of advice from around the Middle East on who on the left should be eliminated once the coup was successful. To the end, Qassim retained his popularity in the streets of Baghdad. After his execution, his
sup- porters refused to believe he was dead until the coup leaders showed pictures of his bullet-riddled body on TV and in the newspapers.

Source: Andrew and Patrick Cockburn, excerpt from Out of the Ashes, The
Resurrection of Saddam Hussein, 2000. Cited by Tim Buckley

The CIA has been organizing "regime change" for 50 years. They have removed many governments that are unfriendly to US corporate interests and replaced them with regimes that are more likely to work closely and slavishly to carry out the economic and geopolitical desires of the US corporate elite.

But the CIA's crimes don't end when a right-wing coup has succeeded. The CIA then has to keep its repressive despots in power in order to ensure that they can put into place and then maintain a variety of unjust economic systems and structures. This is done with arms sales (and outright gifts of "surplus" weapons), glowing diplomatic support, "intelligence support" (sic) and massive economic investment (i.e., pillaging as much profit as possible by exploiting the natural resources that drew them in there in the first place, and handing out some of the spoils to a loyal local elite).
http://www.representativepress.org/CIASaddam.html

Hugh
I think they are pulling some wool??

They know we are strong in our will and will not back down they run for cover to hide in wait??

Can not trust??

Looks good but remember all those quran make peace when you are stronger break peace??

Remember Chamberlin??

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage to stay the course to Victory[FREEDOM] to Destrory ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Amen