More Details on the Georgia-Hosted Jihadi Conference Emerge
by Julia Gorin
An analysis published Monday by Defense & Foreign Affairs offers some corroboration for the Georgia-hosted, U.S.-approved jihadi confab in December, the mention of which seemed to upset some readers.
Here are the relevant excerpts from the 16-page analysis, which is subscription-only and therefore not linkable:
Meanwhile, Georgia is actively seeking to exploit the spread of jamaats [jihadist mini-societies] in the North Caucasus in order to go after the Russian pipelines in hope of ensnaring the US into actively supporting a new confrontation with Russia. In early December 2009, Tbilisi organized a high-level meeting of jihadists groups from the Middle East and Western Europe in order "to coordinate activities on Russia's southern flank." The Georgian Embassy in Kuwait, for example, arranged for travel documents for jihadists from Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. (There is a large and very active Chechen/Circassian community in Jordan since the 19th Century that is heavily represented in the intelligence services and the military.) In Tbilisi, Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Lordkipanadze was the host and coordinator. The meeting was attended by several Georgian senior officials who stressed that Saakashvili himself knew and approved of the undertaking. The meeting addressed the launch of both "military operations" in southern Russia and ideological warfare. One of the first results of the meeting was the launch, soon afterwards of the Russian-language TV station First Caucasian.The jihadists of the North Caucasus -- including the Arab commanders in their midst -- came out of the early December 2009 meeting convinced that Tbilisi is most interested in the spread of terrorism. The meeting was attended by, among others, Mohmad Muhammad Shabaan, an Egyptian senior commander who is also known as Seif al-Islam and who has been involved in Caucasus affairs since 1992. He took copious notes. According to Shabaan's notes, the Georgian government wants the jihadists to conduct "acts of sabotage to blow up railway tracks, electricity lines and energy pipelines" in southern Russia in order to divert construction back to Georgian territory.
Georgian intelligence promised to facilitate the arrival in the Caucasus of numerous senior jihadists by providing Georgian passports, and to provide logistical support including the reopening of bases in northern Georgia. Russian intelligence was not oblivious of the meeting. Seif al-Islam and two senior aides were assassinated on February 4, 2010. The Russians retrieved a lot of documents in the process. Moscow signaled its displeasure shortly afterwards when the presidents of Russia and Abkhazia signed a 50-year agreement on a Russian military base in order to "protect Abkhazia's sovereignty and security, including against international terrorist groups".
A major issue still to be resolved is the extent of the US culpability.
The same analysis recalls when this misguided approach was used in the Balkans, and outlines how, in order to not alienate Muslims while we tried to contain terror from the Middle East, we fortified terror in the Balkans and jump-started the global jihad:
Initially, the US-led Western intervention in the former Yugoslavia was aimed first and foremost to salvage NATO (and with it US dominance over post-Cold War Western Europe) from irrelevance and collapse. As well, the support for the Muslims of Bosnia became the counter-balance of the US confrontation with jihadism in the Middle East. Anthony Lake, US President Bill Clinton's National Security Adviser, formulated the logic for the US-led intervention on behalf of the Muslims. The US national interest "requires our working to contain Muslim extremism, and we have to find a way of being firm in our opposition to Muslim extremism while making it clear we're not opposed to Islam. If we are seen as anti-Muslim, it's harder for us to contain Muslim extremism. And if we stand by while Muslims are killed and raped in Bosnia, it makes it harder to continue our policy," Lake argued. That in the process the US would end up partnering with, supporting and arming, the very same jihadist forces Clinton was seeking to contain meant nothing to Washington. The only thing Washington cared about was the image of a US rallying to the rescue of a Muslim cause.
Note that in the 90s the U.S., like Britain, permitted and facilitated terrorist networks to operate in Bosnia and Kosovo for the purpose of Serb-killing, and along with Germany we trained Albanian and Middle Eastern terrorists in Albania. Sure enough, the same decade saw U.S. officials participating in a December 1999 meeting in Azerbaijan very similar to the December 2009 meeting in Tbilisi, where "programs for the training and equipping of mujahedin from the Caucasus, Central and South Asia, and the Arab world were discussed and agreed upon." The mention of this meeting comes in as the analysis gives background on how we decided to support terrorism against Russia:
By 1999, the US had given up on reconciling Azerbaijan and Armenia in order to construct pipelines to Turkey, and instead Washington started focusing on building pipelines via Georgia.For such a project to be economically viable, the Russian pipelines would have to be shut down. Hence, in early October 1999, senior officials of US oil companies and US officials offered representatives of Russian "oligarchs" in Europe huge dividends from the proposed Baku-Ceyhan pipeline if the "oligarchs" convinced Moscow to withdraw from the Caucasus, permit the establishment of an Islamic state, and close down the Baku-Novorossiysk oil pipeline. Consequently, there would be no competition to the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline. The "oligarchs" were convinced that the highest levels of the Clinton White House endorsed this initiative. The meeting failed because the Russians would hear nothing of the US proposal.
Consequently, the US determined to deprive Russia of an alternate pipeline route by supporting a spiraling violence and terrorism in Chechnya....The Clinton White House sought to actively involve the US in yet another anti-Russian jihad as if reliving the "good ol' days" of Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo, seeking to support and empower the most virulent anti-Western Islamist forces in yet another strategic region.
In mid-December 1999, US officials participated in a formal meeting in Azerbaijan in which specific programs for the training and equipping of mujahedin from the Caucasus, Central and South Asia, and the Arab world were discussed and agreed upon. This meeting led to Washington's tacit encouragement of both Muslim allies (mainly the intelligence services of Turkey, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia) and US "private security companies" (of the type that did Washington's dirty job in the Balkans while skirting and violating the international embargo the US formally supported) to assist the Chechens and their Islamist allies to surge in spring 2000. Citing security concerns vis-à-vis Armenia and Russia, Azerbaijan adamantly refused to permit training camps on its soil.
Now, just to keep our -- including my -- heads straight, let's remind ourselves that this exercise that Robert Spencer was good enough to let me engage in on these pages was not a defense of Russia; it was not meant to start an argument about how bad or how not-that-bad Russia is. The point is that foreign relations in a mad world require finding enough common ground with not-so-great states so that we can work together where we can work together. It's to minimize the messiness of things. Why, when we had Russia in its historically most maleable form, did we insist on provoking and provoking and provoking? Why did we make a bad situation like Russia worse when we had an opportunity to make it better? As with all problematic countries that we nonetheless find areas of cooperation with, we narrowed even those areas by dealing with the Russians in the bad faith that had been their trademark. Simultaneously, we moved away from picking the lesser evil in a given conflict, and started siding with the greater.
It's a surreal situation indeed when the actions of my savior country put me in the position of having to "defend" Russia, whose people my parents thank their lucky stars to not have to live among anymore. I myself am a self-proclaimed Russophobe; I just had no idea how much more pathological America's Russophobia is. So for someone who is loath to visit even Brighton Beach, I find myself in a surprising position here, pointing out where we went wrong and shoved Russia back into old behaviors.
Infuriatingly predictably, one of the comment posters suggested that the line I'm taking here is one that's paid for by Russia. The same "tip" was offered to Robert by a fellow blogger -- in that tone of providing "some friendly, professional, and cautionary advice." The likes of which I'm all too familiar with by now. (One Wall St. Journal fixture advised me, "Your views on this [the Balkans] are deeply misjudged...You're not doing your career any favors." Thanks. Good thing I don't have a career, then.) It certainly would be nice if anyone paid me for anything I do, but it wasn't to be in this lifetime.
Regardless, it shouldn't seem strange for someone to be pointing out that our foreign policy is being guided by people with a stronger anti-Russian agenda than anti-jihad agenda. And notice where this kind of thinking has gotten us. Take the past two decades of Western policy and media coverage in the Balkans, which were based on information that made its way into reporters' notebooks directly from the Ministry of Information of the Bosnian Government run by the fundamentalist Muslim wartime president Alija Izetbegovic. The template was used again when politicians, reporters, NGOs and human rights organizations dutifully repeated what was coming out of the KLA-run newspapers and other propaganda organs of the Kosovo separatists. And so in service to consistency, having gotten into this hole, we've kept digging. With our Yugoslavia intervention, as the Defense & Foreign Affairs analysis points out, we've ended up "demonizing the Serbs and the world of Eastern Christianity as a whole." Such that we've arrived at a place where the word "Byzantine" is now used to mean primitive or uncivilized. While the Muslim world and Islamic heritage represent the height of culture, tradition, heritage and civilization.
One interesting thing about the reactions to calling the U.S. on its aggressive alienation of Russia via, for example, the use of jihadists is the sense of outrage and shock at the suggestion that America would support these violent groups, followed immediately by a defense or justification of such tactics (e.g. "we *should* help the Chechens against the Russians"). Meanwhile, these oh-so-incendiary allegations happen to coincide with overtly stated intentions and policies. (See the late Senator Tom Lantos and his ilk applauding the creation of a U.S.-made Muslim state in Europe, which the jihadists should "take note of," Lantos hoped.)
This is simply unbelievable. How the Hell was all this allowed to happen ?!
I suppose we come across some people far worse than Muslims themselves. It's people amnongst ourselves that brought the Muslims up and go on encouraging them. Who are these crazy people amongst us and what the Hell do they want ? What is in their minds ?? What kind of idiotic traitors are they ?
Folks, I'd imbue this story with a healthy bit of skepticism.
Let's remember that the Troofer's absurd rational for 9-11 being an inside job was ALSO the US quest for a pipeline carrying Caspian Sea oil (which was to be built through Afghanistan at some undetermined date in the future after that country had been pacified). This article mirrors such tripe.
Where is the documentation confirming this supposed "mid-December 1999 meeting"? The absence of specificity regarding the date should only magnify our skepticism.
The US did in fact side with jihadists in the Balkans, we backed a former Nazi Islamofascist in Izetbegovic, empowered Nasir Oric by giving him a safe haven from which he carried out jihad operations. We backed the Taliban in Afghanistan against the Russians. The simple point is that we should not be backing folks that do not share our core values, and Islamic jihadists do not believe in the sort of world we would create. This is creating the sort of world we would not want our children to have to live in, because it also empowers like minded Muslims in our countries. The whole mess is a terrible tragedy. I doubt we can undo the damage we have done.
There is only one explanation for backing jihadists, and that is avarice. We (NATO)can no longer be seen as fair players in dealing with the Russian Federation, because of what Clinton, and other did in the Balkans, until we come clean 100% anything we do in the region will be spoiled on the mere suspicion of supporting jihadists. We have to come clean somehow, at the highest levels of our government. I believe this story 100%, it is in line with other known facts of the region, there isn't any reason whatsoever not to believe it. In my heart I wish I didn't believe it, but as a rational person ... it just makes too much sense in light of what I already know.
I was one of the commenters who voiced skepticism in re original article, and there's really nothing to add, except for to reiterate that "we ain't got a dog in the fight between Russians and North Caucasus". Or at least we shouldn't. But the source of my skepticism was the rather ham-fisted disinformation campaign of the FSB to implicate Georgia in all this.
Judging by Ms. Gorin's response with her new enhanced version of events, another Russian campaign against Georgia is on its way, and they are desperately looking for pretexts.
Remember this item when an FSB spokesperson flashes for the cameras a body of a mojahed with "evidence" he was infiltrated from Georgia and equipped on the US nickel. You read it here first.
Cornelius, we have a pattern emerging of the USA supporting all jihad against Russia and it’s interests. We have done everything against the interests of Russia and then we cry that Russians are not our best friends. It’s understandable when we death with the Soviet Union by supporting Muslim nations and jihad its. That was the cold war and everything was fair in love and war. But there should be no excuse for a continuation of this stupid policy.
Unfortunately for us this policy is strengthening the jihad against us. Nobody except Islam wins when jihadists are supported. The USA should have learned a lesson from 9/11 about supporting jihad. We as Indians know all about the support the USA is giving the terrorist regime of Pakistan. Ever since Nixon gave full support to the Pakistan government for suppressing Bangladesh independence. For his ignoring the massacres of Hindu Bengalis by the Pakistan army.
No Cornelius, This summit of terrorist looks very plausable considering our track record.
I don't know how much of Ms. Gorin's assertions are true. But I would ask those commenters who are so indignantly expressing their scepticism the following. How do you conceivably justify the US getting involved in a struggle with no relevance to our national security and bombing the Serbs, a people who in the past have been our friends and allies, in order to expand Muslim controlled territory in Europe? Come on, big guys, explain that if you can.
read carefully. The skepticism has nothing to do with the idiocies of US policy in the Balkans or elsewhere. The skepticism concerns RUssian policy vis-a-vis Georgia - because this is what this "information" is all about.
Ugh. I have generally defended democratically-leaning Georgia against Russian depredations, but I am not going to stick my head in the sand. These are troubling allegations, and there seems more evidence to back them up.
If Georgia *is* starting to consider Jihadists potential allies on the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" model, they are shortsighted and dangerously foolish.
Muslims are almost 10% of the Georgian population, and so are likely poised to become "restive". They also border increasingly Islamic Turkey. If Georgia has encouraged Jihad activity—for any reason—they may well find themselves on the receiving end of Jihad terror, with only themselves to blame for having further enabled it.
[sorry, accidentally posted as a "comment" under earlier article] . . .
Being completely MIA from JihadWatch.org for the past several weeks, I come late to this ongoing discussion . . . and Julia is 100% dead-on. As with a "few" other responders, it continually breaks my heart that so many American's have been completely "duped" by mainstream media propaganda as to what "truly" took place in the Balkans.
For the oh-so-kind, fellow blogger offering Robert some "professional and cautionary advice" (So PC . . . I want to vomit): Maybe you should actually "read-up" on the DATA available! I suggest you visit your local library and check out history books on the Balkans or the Roman, Persian, and Byzantine Empires before offering Robert a "tip." Surely, Robert is very familiar with truth-seekers being "thrown under the bus." [no worries there Ms. Gorin].
People cannot begin to understand terrorism *until* they read about Balkan History and see that it has been the epicenter of past, present, and future terrorism stemming from a clash ideology and culture (and beyond). The Serbs have been crucified for centuries and literally used and abused by one empire after another! Whenever I see a media report about the *poor, defenseless Muslims,* I want to vomit.[save the biased accusations . . . I'm an American gal, not Serb).
Are we American's supposed to remain apprehensive of Russia? Of course. However, we have been in the cold-war mindset for a very long time, and yes, it is very hard to shake (I've had my moments). However, we have a common enemy that is more powerful, patient, and strategic than anything we can even imagine. Don't you think it's about time we start thinking strategically and offensively instead of just defensively? Remember, "It is good to strike the serpent's head with your enemy's hand."
=============
***Julia Gorin wrote: "Good thing I don't have a career, then.) It certainly would be nice if anyone paid me for anything I do, but it wasn't to be in this lifetime."***
You're right Julia. You (and many others that have written HONESTLY on the Balkans, Russia, etc.) will never be paid monetarily; However, if there truly is a "Judgment Day," then you will be able to rest assured that you left this world with your soul and integrity in tact.
Graven,
Most of Georgia's Muslim population lives in the Russian-backed break-away region of Abkazia. Keep this in mind as you formulate your opinion over events in the Caucasus.
Desidude,
The fact that you are Indian gives you every justification for being suspicious of American motives, considering our long-standing alliance with Pakistan. Nonetheless, the supposed meeting in Georgia did not necessarily take place just because you, Julia Gorin, or anybody else thinks so.
I'm not saying it DIDN'T happen; I'm saying that I'm skeptical. I would include that the meeting allegedly took place BEFORE 9-11, which would make it more plausible than after. But the part of the story that ISN'T plausible is the supposed US attempt to buy off the Russians into terminating their use of an existing pipeline.
Of course the Pakistanis Murdered 3 million in E Pakistan (Bangladesh)everyone knows this. At the time is was seen as ok to break up India, because India was neutrally aligned in the cold war, like ........ Yugoslavia. The U.S. was supplying weapons to Pakistan even after the genocide in Bangladesh, the weapon shipments did however stop for a short time after Ted Kennedy put a halt to them.
Unfortunately it is beginning to appear that everything our nation stands for in regards to freedom, everything our founding fathers fought so hard to create will boil down to Islamization, because we can't on one had use Jihasdists as tools, and on the other hand with any kind of authority disavow what they stand for. We have wrapped NATO expansion, and the breakup of nations in the guise of political freedom for Muslims with OUR Constitution as collateral so many times that we in fact now are next in line, and it will be very, very difficult for us to prevent our nice little tool from being used on us next. At this point it is virtually impossible to attach this cognitive dissonant connection with reality when we are building Islamic States in Afghanistan, and Iraq. How is it possible to undo this when we have leveraged who we are so many times, and currently have so much blood and treasure invested? I'm afraid we are sewing our own demise, and have been doing so for at least 40 years, avarice destroyed America, this is how it will read in the history books.
I don't know why any informed person would be surprised by this. The American government (along with the British government) has a rather sad history of supporting jihadists against its enemy of the year. It back the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviet Union, the Bosnian mujahideen against the Bosnian Serbs and the Albanians against the Serbs, not to mention the support that was given to recruit jihad fighters from around the Arab world to fight in these assorted conflicts. In Iraq the US supported Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias to fight the Ba'athists, while in Iran the CIA is alleged to have backed the Sunni jihadists group Jundollah. In Syria the US has reached out to the Muslim Brotherhood to undermine the secular Ba'ath regime of Bashar al-Assad and in Libya the British supported the anti-Khaddafi jihadists. So the fact that Georgia is backing Chechen jihadists with American encouragement, or at least indifference, should come as no surprise. There is a very tangled web of interaction between Western intelligence agencies and the assorted jihadist groups.
It is likely that if the US had not gone out of its way to humiliate Russia back in the 90s by warring on their long time ally Serbia, Russia now might be a little more cooperative regarding the Islamic menace. That is the root of Russian resentment and helps to shape their policies with respect to the Caucasus and Iran. So we have the US, Russia, and if Ms. Gorin is right, Georgia all acting like modern day incarnations of the Byzantine aristocrat Cantacuzene who thought he could use, and control, Muslims in his wars against his rivals.
Looks like the Russian apologists are out in force today.
May I remind everyone of the long history of Soviet support for Muslim terrorists, of Russian political and technical support to Iran in that country's pursuit of nuclear weapons, of Russia's sale of billions in arms to Venezuala's Chavez, who in turn is busy subverting neighboring Colombia, America's best friend in all of Latin America.
The idea that the fault for the decline in US-Russian relations is EXCLUSIVELY American is not only patently false, it fits the typical narrative of the anti-American Left, who blame all the world's ills on the USA.
Cornelius, now how would you like it IF one of us who distrust the American support: political, financial and military, of jihadists in Bosnia, Macedonia, Kosovo and Georgia to called you a 'JIHADIST APOLOGIST'???
Name calling is such a weak thing to do. WHY DID YOU DO THAT??
SHAME on you.
I'm NOT an apologist for US support of Muslim interests in the Balkans. Whatever my initial inclinations at the time, I now freely acknowledge it was a myopic policy.
Meanwhile, you and your friends lay the responsibility for the sorry state of US-Russian relations EXCLUSIVELY on US policy decisions. You display no acknowledgment of the very harmful Russian/Soviet policy initiatives I cited above. In my mind, that makes you an apologist for the Russians. Sad position to be in, particularly at a time when the Russians are enabling Iranian nuclear ambitions.
Cornelius, I am not an apologist for anyone. Certainly not the Soviet Union. For the longest time I was an anti communist before I became an anti islamist. I know the communist system has kept many of the countries backwards and kept the people enslaved. But communism was never a religion, it was a political system that just didn't provide what it promised. It had to crash and it did. A revised version of this system rules China and N. Korea is a communist authoritarian dictatorship. Note that china has been the recipient of a vast transfer of technology and manufacturing know-how, thanks to our greedy capitalists and crooked politicians, i.e. Bill Clinton.
What is lacking is commononality of interests. We support commies, Islamic dictatorships and jihadists because it's in our interests, well so does the Euro union, as does Russia and china and all other nations. We can argue for years about this nation or pipelines or oil fields, but it won't solve the problem. What we need is to have a common enemy and that is none other than the threat of Islam and islamist. We have to convince the world through education and sites like this, that there are new neo nazis who want to take over the world and they are the Muslims or islamonazisim. We need to act in a unified manner against Islam. If we can accomplish that than our work is done.
I appreciate your position, and I concur with your assessment that we need a united front to defeat Islam (though I disagree with your premise that "communism wasn't a religion"...it certainly was for those who believed in it, who fought for it, who died for it, and particularly for those who committed mass murder for it).
Also, while Islam is certainly our FIRST priority, I think it would be folly for us to see the world through an exclusively 'Islamic threat' paradigm. America's relationships with Russia, China and Mexico are potentially just as consequential as our struggle with Islam (Western Europe and India are together in an entirely different position by virtue of geography and demography; all other threats pale compared to Islam).
China as an entity is far more powerful than the entire Muslim world combined...and a major Sino-US conflict is possible if the two powers mismanage China's gradual supplanting of the USA as the world's #1 super-power. Meanwhile, Mexico harbors irredentist impulses on the American Southwest, and is quietly laying claim to vast segments of the USA via mass migration.
The world is a complicated place. Like you, I despise Islam, but it ain't the only game in town. We overlooked Islam while fighting the Cold War; I don't want us to make the same mistake overlooking another looming threat matrix as we battle Islam.
You are a rude, RUDE person.
How dare YOU accuse ANY person of being an apologist for Russia because they feel that the USA is going after the WRONG country, RUSSIA!! The USA needs help in war on terror and playing the terrorists off against the Russians in RUSSIA is not a good idea.
You sound like a Brzeninski when it come to Russia.
The USA should be going after the SAUDIS and the people they pay to follow their brand of RADICAL islam. And that creep zero-bama needs to stop bowing to SAUDIS/ISLAMICS!
As to Iran, who knows EXACTLY what the Russians are up to on Iran. Maybe they are the only people who get the real info about what the fool leader of Iran is up to. You do NOT know for sure and neither do I. So, there!
Obama is NOT doing anything but MAKE NOISE! yadda yadda...
You put too much faith in the big zero as IF he will really do anything to harm his fellow moslems in Iran.
The big zero is too busy trying to push Israel around.
Israel should declare Jerusalem its capital and the world can just take a hike!
Oh please how many kids did you or do you have fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan?? I got TWO! Hardly little commies here!
"As to Iran, who knows EXACTLY what the Russians are up to on Iran. Maybe they are the only people who get the real info about what the fool leader of Iran is up to."
RESPONSE: Russia's policies towards Iran have been clear for all willing to see; the sale of a nuclear research reactor, the sale of advanced weapons systems, and worst of all, the repeated attempt to prevent or water-down economic sanctions against Iran. Russia has single-handedly prevented an effective international response to Iran's nuclear gambit.
None of this seems to matter to you. What more proof does one need to ascertain your proclivities as an apologist for Moscow?
"You are a rude, RUDE person."
RESPONSE: Because I expressed my opinion? Your reaction borders on the hysterical. Your excitability and misplaced anger is such that any further attempt at dialogue would be useless.
Have a nice day.
"Meanwhile, Mexico harbors irredentist impulses on the American Southwest, and is quietly laying claim to vast segments of the USA via mass migration."
In fact, as a long time activist in the immigration restrictionist movement I agree with you. For any JWers who harbor sentimental fantasies regarding mass third world immigration I point out that without such over the last 35 years Obama could never have been elected president. That is proof enough that such thoughtless immigration policies must weaken the US; and what weakens the US is not good for the ongoing struggle with resurgent Islam. I also agree with you that there is plenty of blame to share between the US and Russia, and other powers as well; they are all engaged in the downward spiral of "Cantacuzening" each other. But I must point out that the opportunity to develop a better relationship with Russia was blown in the 1990s by the US. However it was blown by what was, up to now, the most leftist administration in US history; one consisting of a bunch of unrepetant 60s retreads.
BTW I don't share the view that you are rude; we can engage in a reasoned debate without descending into the level of name calling.
Interesting comments, rbla.
Certainly, recent immigration has had a profound impact on US society (even more so for Europe, considering the religious/cultural identity of THEIR immigrants). But I must say, immigration has been vital in the socio-economic development of America...as much as ever since the sexual revolution in the 60s and the subsequent dramatic fall in our birth rate.
My opposition is not to immigration, per se, but to ILLEGAL immigration, and to the preponderance of Mexican nationals who comprise the vast majority of immigrants. Mexico and the US share a unique history, our southern neighbor feels (perhaps rightly) that it's been the victim of an historic injustice...and it is a tragedy of social psychology that most Americans innately assume borders are somehow forever unalterable. Right or wrong, I love my country, and I'd hate to see it fragment.
You come across as an enlightened soul. We've got our work cut out for us, don't we?
Eisemhower evil has just exploded right back into the US's face in Kyrgyzstan. The gentle Kyrgyz people who used to be so friendly to the Americans, now want them out and away. They hate our country for forcing a death squad on them 5 years ago through the "color revolution", as Eisenhower did on Guatemala through a CIA coup on the request of the United Fruit Company. But this is 2010, not 1954. This is Central Asia, not Central America. The Kyrgyz people overthrew the American death squad. The strategic US Air Base in Manas crucial for the support of the US troops in Afghanistan is all but certain to follow. Yet another friendly country turned into an enemy by the Big Criminal Imbecile that is our US government. Earlier, the formerly friendly Uzbekistan kicked out the US base in Karshi-Khanabad ("K-2") for even worse US perfidity.
Wait till Russia & China get annoyed enough to support jihad against us.
By antagonizing the formerly friendly Kyrgyz people through Eisenhower deatch squad atrocities, just as it ealier antagonized formerly friendly Uzbekistan through aiding jihad against it, the US has painted itself into a corner in Afghanistan.
Now, ironically, it totally depends on Russia and China to supply our US troops in Afghanistan through their land routes and air space.
But it will take only so much American whorring with anti-Russian and anti-Chinese jihadists to annoy both Russia and China enough to deny us the use of their land and air space, and to begin all-our backing of the Taliban and al-Qaida against us instead.
Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.
Something that needs to be pointed out.
One of *the* most effective jihad tactics (it is used by all warmakers, but I think Islam has possibly engaged in it more than others, throughout history) is 'split the camp'.
Hugh, very sensibly, has pointed out to us many times the fractures in the Ummah, and the ways in which these might be left to weaken it.
But we non-Muslims must remember that the Ummah looks at *us*, probing constantly for weaknesses. The last thing the jihadis want is for the children of Eastern and Western Christendom to act together as one to defend themselves and each other. The jihadis' and their enablers' worst nightmare would be the Russian Federation and the USA simultaneously stepping free of their respective dead-end entanglements with Muslim entities, and allying themselves openly and unequivocally against jihad everywhere it is being waged.
Nor do the jihadis want the 'Western' targets of Jihad (Europe, America, Australia, etc), or for that matter, the Russian Federation, to side with Israel, or with India and other south-east-Asian targets of jihad, or with the African countries currently assailed. The antisemitism that has poisoned the soul of Russia for centuries is probably a factor in Russia's monstrous - and I call it monstrous, and stupid - insistence on running interference for, and actively assisting, Iran's nuke project. (A similar latent antisemitism is probably also at least a factor in the European foot-dragging over Iran).
We must reflect upon the existing fault-lines - which are major vulnerabilities - in our own ranks. There is no way that the jihadis will not be hard at work attempting to make those divisions worse; or trying to create new ones; and playing off (consciously or, I think, at times, unconsciously, almost instinctively - division and deception and manipulation of all kinds are second nature in the Ummah) one Infidel party against another, either directly or indirectly. Personally, I as a Christian also think, quite seriously, that there are evil spiritual forces involved as well as plenty of this-worldly political and diplomatic skullduggery. The Division and Confusion that we see blocking the ability to cooperate against Jihad, in the case of, say, Russia and the West, are - I think - coming at least in part from a spiritual realm, invoked by the continual cursing the Muslims engage in.
So let us be on our guard. It would be wise for both Russians and Westerners to remember St James's advice: "let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath". And when attempting to apportion blame, especially in connection with the egregious follies that all of us have committed in past centuries, as regards Muslim entities (all the way back to the blunders committed during the Crusades), it would be a good idea to bear in mind Our Lord's advice about sawdust and logs. As others have said, there is plenty of blame to go around.
There is not, I think, need for either Russians or Americans to become paranoid, each insisting on the perfect moral probity of their own side and the dastardly plots of the other. Because such paranoia plays right into the hands of the jihad plotters.
Rather, let Russians reflect that the Arabists among the British and Europeans and Americans have been around for a long time, and that a good few western administrations have been royally suckered by Muslims[ and let Russians not be too over-confident about their own ability to avoid being thus suckered, when they themselves have dealings with Muslims such as those in Persia.
And let the practising Christians on both sides pray that the spirit of truth will deliver us from the curse of Division and Confusion, and from Strong Delusion. And pray for their societies to be freed from antisemitism - from the native European and Russian versions thereof, as well as from the Islamic variety.
I appreciate the comments, Dumbledores. I would only caution that we not blind ourselves to certain realities...such as, that being non-Muslim automatically makes a person or nation "good", with interests that cannot possibly be inimical to our own. The truth is very different.
I'm all for working with Russia against the Jihad. I just wish there was greater reciprocity coming from them. Their Iranian policy clearly elucidates that they seem to want their cake and eat it too.
"We've got our work cut out for us, don't we?"
Yes we do. I would conclude by asking you to keep an open mind as to the damage to our culture and social cohesion that has been done through excessive (note I say excessive) immigration. If we returned to the moderate inflow that existed before 1965 we would be much better off. And this is particularly true in times when the unemployment rate is 10%, actually more if you look at it objectively. Furthermore, I think we can agree that Muslim immigration should be stopped cold. I contend that, politically speaking, it is not feasible to target only the immigration of Muslims in the absence of a general immigration reduction policy.
I found Dumbledoresarmy's comments to be quite pertinent. If you study the history of Islamic expansion you will find it replete with episodes of "treason" among the "infidels". Again and again you see disgruntled or ambitious aristocrats and politicians cooperating with Muslim invaders. It happened in Byzantium, Spain, Italy and even France. You find bishops opening the gates of their cities to Muslim armies and cooperating with their new masters. The same thing occuured in India where Hindu and Buddhist pacifists collaborated with Muslim invaders. Of course, these never ended well. Today we see the same pattern repeated with governments in America, Europe, Russia, India and China. He who does not learn from history is condemned to repeat it.
RBLA: "I contend that, politically speaking, it is not feasible to target only the immigration of Muslims in the absence of a general immigration reduction policy."
RESPONSE: Can't argue with you there. Your qualifier - "politically speaking" - is apt, and if gutting all immigration is the necessary precondition for stopping Muslim immigration, then so be it.
The last thing the jihadis want is for the children of Eastern and Western Christendom to act together as one to defend themselves and each other.
Before they can act together against Islam, the majority of Christians (Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox) have to let the scales of PC MC fall from their eyes.
These articles are are a must read for jihadwatchers.
http://www.oilprice.com/article-europes-latest-tinder-box-and-global-mega-trends-the-eus-failure-part-1-264.html
http://www.oilprice.com/article-europes-latest-tinder-box-and-global-mega-trends-the-us-support-for-violence-in-chechenya-part-2-265.html
http://www.oilprice.com/article-europes-latest-tinder-box-and-global-mega-trends-russias-preeminence-in-the-eu-energy-market-part-3-266.html
I think Russia has been preparing themselves for war as fast as they could have since 1999 . Ever since the NATO or Nazi attacks on Yugoslavia . The Russians saw how NATO developed Yugoslavia , and believed they were going to be helped in the same exsact way . The heavy continues bombing of Serbia could just as well been falling on Moscow . becuase it had the same affect . Yelsin's new liberal democracy was removed from power and even considered a stupid quisling leader . The Orthadox Russian church became very excited and Alexsander Solhenitzyn The writter that spent yrs in prison that kreuchev finaly banned from Russia had returned . Solhenitzyn selected Putin a good no nonsense leader to headup the United party of Russia . Russia was afraid and Russia was United . Like evrey country preparing for all out war Putin took Russia's new liberal freedoms a lot more totalarian . Putin strengthend Russia by arament manufacturing and arament sales . check out Russia's weapon sales the last few yrs . What could possibley be better for a bankrupt country fearing being forced to go to war or be dismembered by NATO forces . I believe Putin strengthed Russia faster than Hitler did Germany in the 30s . NATO had a chance to find out in 2008 if they wanted to punish Russia for stopping Georgia's little war plans .
Dmitry Medevedev was Russia's new president and he got a little nervious when He dicovered a bunch of NATO warships were storming towards Georgia in the Black sea . So he telephoned his commander and asked now what shall we do ? The commanders answer was if those ships cuase trouble here ? I can make them all dissapear in a few minutes . Russians maybe a little backwards on some things but weapons manufacturing is not one of those things remember the Russian tank , the AK47 , or even the Mig . A Russian fighter plane flew circles around all planes in the sky in Banglore India at the international air show a few yrs ago . This is what Clinton's war in the Balkans started for Russia and us. And they say the bear growled at Bush . And NATO did not choose to wrestle the bear they had cornered , thank goodness .