The Pakistani jihad heats up. "At least 5 killed in Pakistan blast," by Peter Lloyd for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (thanks to JE):
Rescue workers douse burning vehicles after a series of blasts in Lahore. It is the fourth terrorist attack in the past five days in Pakistan.There has been another suicide attack in Pakistan, targeting a prestigious naval college in the eastern city of Lahore, where at least five people have been killed.
It is the fourth terrorist attack in the past five days in Pakistan.
At least three successive explosions rocked the naval college in the centre of Lahore, causing a fire and widespread panic.
On Sunday, a teenage bomber blew himself up at a meeting of tribal elders discussing how to tackle Al Qaeda and the Taliban, killing 43 people.
A suicide attack on the funeral of a policeman last Friday killed 44 people.
Bush's allies in "war-on-terror", from the "Religion-of-Peace". Go Figure!
President Bush knows nothing about Islam.
I suspect his deal with appeasing them has to do with Pak has a nuclear weapon.
Speaking of "Pak," "Naseem" seems to have disappeared since *he* was outed a week ago!
A must-read from "Sons of Apes and Pigs" today - Western Backlash! Read what German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schauble has to say!
http://www.sonsofapesandpigs.org/2008/03/the-western-baclash-we-predict.html
Darcy says:
President Bush knows nothing about Islam.
Too right. Bush knows absolutely nothing about Islam. Worse still, he doesn't seem to know anything about anything, has run out of ideas, and never bothered to learn anything about Islam - and seven years after 911, that is utterly unforgiveable. For years, I cut him some slack, but not anymore. He really is the dumbest and least knowledgeable of the 43 US Presidents - and that is saying something, given the fact that Carter is a former President. And even Carter himself didn't do as much to aid and abet the Jihad against Israel and the West as Bush has during his Presidency. There were no billions for the Palestinian terrorists during Carter's day. The less said about Bush's second term, the better. What a monumental waste of almost four years. Seven years after 911, the victims of that atrocity must be rolling at high speed in their graves, at the knowledge that the murderous Jihadists have got closer than ever to defeating us - something that ought to be unthinkable given our supposed military and economic might, and never would have happened if only Bush had possessed the knowledge, the clarity of words and expression, the courage, vision and wisdom of a Winston Churchill or a John Quincy Adams, but, sadly, he is the exact opposite of what these towering figures were. Their strengths are, unfortunately, Bush's biggest failures. The appalling consequences of Bush's failure, or inability through lack of knowledge, to call out Islam for what it is, immediately in the aftermath of 911 will live with us for generations.
The Islamists in Pakistan are flexing their muscle. They know that "regime change" is coming and are preparing to gain control. The Islamists want nukes.
A must-read from "Sons of Apes and Pigs" today - Western Backlash! Read what German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schauble has to say!
darcy,
Great article! I just wish the American media would follow the German and Danish lead and print the cartoons also.
It would be interesting to know what our Presidential candidates would say if asked if they support the German and Danish initiative.
I think I'll E-mail Glen Beck and O'Reilly and ask them to put the question to the candidates.
The appalling consequences of Bush's failure, or inability through lack of knowledge, to call out Islam for what it is, immediately in the aftermath of 911 will live with us for generations.
Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at March 4, 2008 8:12 AM
So right, Spirit of 1683.
We should have retaliated immediately. Instead, we get a Yale graduate calling Islam "the religion of peace."
Spirit Of 1683,
You're being way too generous toward Carter. In his day there was no Democratic caucus calling for the creation of a Palestinian state. We were still fighting the Cold War.
Maybe he didn't give the money to the Palestinians but he enabled the Islamic takeover of Iran, now the primary state sponsor of terrorism.
The only reason he didn't aid the Palestinians was because he never got the chance. We had the good sense to give him the boot after his first term. Since then, he has joined the Palestinian cause with gusto.
Peace, not apartheid. That is Jimmy Carter.
The scary part is Bush knowledge of Islam degraded over his term. He seemed to understand it more in 2001 than 2008.
As for Pakistan, the chickens have come home to roost.
Tribal elders being killed by terrorists? That's rich. How many of these same elders supported Osama and the Taliban and cheered the 9/11 attacks? The monster they themselves created is now devouring them. Tough luck!
Fourth mass murder in Pakistan in five days kills five at Lahore naval college...
PMK
Carter was booted out back in 1980 whilst the latest jihad was still in its infancy. He was a complete and utter failure, but the biggest failures as regards handling the Jihad have come in the post-Carter era. Why wasn't Hizbollah destroyed and the Iranian regime taken down in 1983 after the murder of 241 US marines in Beirut - under Reagan's watch? This would have nipped so much trouble in the bud and was an ideal time to perhaps change the course of history. What do you suppose would have happened if those Marines murdered in Beirut had all come from the old Soviet Union instead? The Islamic genie was long out of the bottle by the time of the 911 atrocity, and since then, it has become much harder for us to push it back in and put in the stopper, thanks to the poisonous activities of the so-called human rights activists, all manner of liberals, the PC brigade, the press and the MSM, not to mention our self-loathing and fear of calling the enemy. Everything that has happened during and since the end of the Carter era has convinced the Jihadis of our weakness.
When jihad come to town, the morgues start to fill up. Just how many muslim "brothers and sisters" have to died to fill the needs of the radical, jihadist, Islamist, not-very-nice terrorists?
We should have retaliated immediately. Instead, we get a Yale graduate calling Islam "the religion of peace."
Posted by: darcy at March 4, 2008 8:41 AM
After a meeting with Samil-Bin-Laden and Bush Sr., on 9/10, with Bandar-Bin-Sultan, conveniently adopted as "Bandar Bush" and wahhabbi funded Arbusto, what did Americans expect from Bush, but:
- Bin-Laden family excorted to safety.
- Blaken pages from 9/11 interim commission report.
- This: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
That Bush and Bandar smoked cigars while twin-towers were smouldering, just proves Bush was an Islamist supporter even before he got "elected", thanks to his brother's state. 9/11 was just another opportunity to suport his wahhabbi financers from Riyadh thru a phoney and self-defeating "war-on-terror" costing American lives and tax-dollars. And why shouldn't he? Americans had made this AWOL, spoilt, brat the president/commander-in-chief/leader-of-free-world, Twice!
Spirit,
No argument about Lebanon. Of course Hezbollah wouldn't have existed were it not for Carter. That regime should have been taken down in 1980 after they declared war on the US by invading our embassy and seizing diplomats. By 1983 it was too late. It was fully entrenched. Only the Iranian people could take it down. That remains the case today.
What if those soldiers had been Soviet?
You reminded me of the hostages that were taken one by one in Beirut. Most had lived in Lebanon over a decade. They were held captive for years. The one Soviet hostage that was taken was quickly released, with no quid pro quo.
Well, there they go again, killing each other off.
if they keep that up, Islam will become the fastest shrinking religion in the world.
Maybe Obama can speed things up by bombing or invading.
Naseem's gone, been banished to the outer darkness from whence she came. What She/he/them were good for, was a periodic report of local happenings in Lahore.
Unless that whole part was made up. The one thing I did learn from her/him/them, is what the word 'lund'
means. I'm thinking about writing a book about it, or maybe a short article, or maybe I should just leave that to the experts...
It's not much. Given that Joseph Stiglitz is now calling the Iraq fiasco -- there's still time to justify part of the investment, to weaken the Camp of Islam, to extract a victory of it, if only we get out -- the "three-trilliion-dollar war," the $30 billion that has been given (or partly by being a debt forgiven) to Pakistan, since 2001, hardly amounts to a hill of beans, in free-spending, heedless, semi-demented Washington, where the tens of billions are thrown around like confetti, now to this malevolent group or country, and now to that.
Still, it is $30 billion down the Pakistani drain. Why any more? Why not take the measure of Muslims, why not try, for god's sake just try, to sit still for a few months and begin to make sense of this ideology that is so very different, in what it contains, and its effect on the minds of the vast masses of Believers, from any other faith? It is not only a religion. It is a politics. It is a way of life. Study that politics, study that way of life. Begin to understand how deeply it effects its adherents, and how so many of them have become so adept -- apparently, for some of find what they do transparent -- at preventing Infidels from finding out too much about their faith, and continuing instead to be satisfied with interfaith-healing pieties that any defector from Islam, or any non-Muslim who has grown up in a society where Muslims rule, can only regard with amazement, disbelief, and horror.
darcy - what happened to Naseem? outed?
duh-swami - banished?
Darn, I missed it.
Great !
another example of religious solidarity from the best of all peoples
I hope they keep it up.
darcy - what happened to Naseem? outed?
duh-swami - banished?
Darn, I missed it.
Posted by: Borg
Yep, I thinks so, several days ago Robert, Hugh and comp got tired of her/his/their BS and eliminated her participation. She/he/they, whined a little about it, but it is now bye-bye. If anything changed I don't know about it...
OT-
Now they are bombing tanning salons.
http://www.cphpost.dk/get/105934.html
PMK says:
By 1983 it was too late. It was fully entrenched. Only the Iranian people could take it down. That remains the case today.
In 1983 the Iranians were halfway through an eight-year-long war with Iraq. That was a golden opportunity to bring down the mullahs which was passed up by Reagan.
Hugh,
"Still, it is $30 billion down the Pakistani drain. Why any more? Why not take the measure of Muslims, why not try, for god's sake just try, to sit still for a few months and begin to make sense of this ideology that is so very different, in what it contains, and its effect on the minds of the vast masses of Believers, from any other faith?"
I'm very much in favor of the government making sense of the ideology -- rehiring Coughlin would be a start -- but even with that, why would such an understanding make a difference in evaluating whether or not to remain involved in Pakistan? (As opposed to understanding of how to be involved, which it certainly would change.)
Pakistan has nuclear weapons. What that means, to me, in light of what I know of Islam (which is that Islamists with nuclear weapons have an ideological incentive to attack others, especially Israel to start), is that we should back whatever strongman is willing to most genuinely work with us, and forget this elections-for-Islamist-dictatorships idiocy.
Yes there's the major catch that whatever strongman is willing to work with us is likely to be two-faced and not really working with us, on account of Islam. But, when (1) nuclear weapons are involved, and (2) we aren't pushing for "Islamic Democracy" (an oxymoron if ever there was one), then (1) the incentives are high enough for us that it seems to be worth it, and (2) the incentives for the strongman to work with us become high enough that he might be relatively reliably cooperative.
I'm open to having my mind changed by good argument, but this is how I currently see things.
OT- The appalling state of maternity care in NHS hospitals. What does this have to do with jihadwatch. The somali man who took his wife home for a natural childbirth when she needed a cesarian. Did she die? No follow-up.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/womenfamily.html?in_article_id=525270&in_page_id=1797&in_page_id=1797&expand=true#StartComments
Saudi claims he was "very drunk" when he attempted to rape a 12 year old boy.
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008/03/04/46467.html
Horrible. Do they have souls?
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008/03/03/46430.html
That Bush and Bandar smoked cigars while twin-towers were smouldering, just proves Bush was an Islamist supporter even before he got "elected", thanks to his brother's state. 9/11 was just another opportunity to suport his wahhabbi financers from Riyadh thru a phoney and self-defeating "war-on-terror" costing American lives and tax-dollars. And why shouldn't he? Americans had made this AWOL, spoilt, brat the president/commander-in-chief/leader-of-free-world, Twice!
Posted by: Aler
Hey Alert, you really should stop drinkin that kool-aid man. The all wise libs have done everything in their power to help the Jihadists and subvert our efforts. The latest being the traiterous Pelosi refusing to even give the FISA bill a vote. They were to busy trying to destroy the REAL threat to life as we know it, Roger Clemens. GIVE ME A BREAK!
Another OT
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL0257077720080302
We either force our will on them or they on us. Unlike the 1500's there is no longer a way around them. keeping the various groups/Clans/Tribes splintered. Be they Nation States or groups within. The worst of them are trying their damnedest to unite Islam.
To George Bushes credit, he has certainly exposed any number of fissions within Islam as well as with the Infidel. Right down to Kosovo. At least now it is clearly Identified as Muslim. So when things start to happen, everyone will understand why. Now is the time to declare mission accomplished there and get out while the getting is good. No need to keep that door to a conflict of interest open any longer.
Historically, Islams spread has only been blunted by their defeat on the field of battle. Armies have always suffered their most catastrophic casualties when running away.
I figure if we do run, it will be on one side of Gibraltar or the other side of Indonesia.
What to do while there is the real issue and unconditional aid from the west is not the answer.
In 1983 the Iranians were halfway through an eight-year-long war with Iraq. That was a golden opportunity to bring down the mullahs which was passed up by Reagan.
Spirit,
How? By dropping leaflets? By bombing them ourselves? That would have accomplished a whole lot - prove (in their eyes) the "great satan" is out to destroy Islam.
That war started while our diplomats were still being held hostage. The Iranian people were gung ho. As it is they still blame us for 1953. So here we would have been, thirty years later, bringing down another "popular" Iranian leader.
The Iranian people welcomed Khomeini with open arms. They got what they asked for. The revolution may have been more than they bargained for but it was what they wanted. Now let them live with it or change it. It's not our job and it never was, even in 1983.
PMK
It seems as if it is you who isn't living in the real world. You will discover that I was talking about bringing down the mullahs in the afternmath of the murder of 241 peacekeeping US Marines in Beirut in 1983, had you bothered to read carefully. By then, the US Embassy hostages were already back in the US. That slaughter of Marines was an act of war carried out against the US by Iran through its Hizbollah proxies. The Iranian regime should have been made to pay the biggest price imaginable for that atrocity, and showing that the US meant serious business 25 years ago might well have strangled the latest anti-Western Jihad at birth and saved so much trouble later on.
Spirit,
It's just not clear how you think it could have been done. We were still fighting the Cold War. The Soviets were nearby. I understood exactly what you said about the Marine attacks. It's a huge country. There wasn't an obvious response. It's easier said than done.
It was four years after the revolution, meaning the government was less vulnerable than it would have been in 1980. We had no soldiers anywhere in the Middle East. We could have closed the Straits of Hormuz or bombed from the air but would that have been enough to get rid of the mullahs? I don't see how. The Iranian people weren't being held prisoner and they weren't struggling to free themselves from a dictatorship.
Iran was almost taken over by Communists in 1953. Mossadegh's government was being taken over by Communist forces, which led to the US-backed coup against his government. The coup that brought in the Shah was, ironically, backed by clerics. Today it is pointed to as proof of American imperialism in Iran. Thirty years later you have a "popular" revolution and the US gets rid of the mullahs? Either we declare war on Iran or we don't. It's not a place for surgical strikes.
Hey Alert, you really should stop drinkin that kool-aid man. The all wise libs have done everything in their power to help the Jihadists and subvert our efforts. The latest being the traiterous Pelosi refusing to even give the FISA bill a vote. They were to busy trying to destroy the REAL threat to life as we know it, Roger Clemens. GIVE ME A BREAK!
Posted by: TEXROCK at March 4, 2008 12:00 PM
"The all wise libs" have nothing to do with the "war-on-terror" or Bush's allies Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, which is the topic of the thread. You, however, do explain why Bush got elected twice and is still not impeached for pro-wahhabbi and anti-US position.
Finally, am not a commie or a democrat. Also, please think patriotism, not politics, if you see the difference.