| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Some might argue that situations like this demonstrate why coalition troops need to stay in Iraq, in order to attempt to prevent Iraqi society's slide into sectarian violence and Sharia law. But how long? More than four years was not enough, and the speed of Basra's degeneration into the situation described in this article following the departure of the British only underscores how terribly Western governments miscalculated their plans in assuming "we all want the same thing": Civil liberties? Equal rights? Separation of religion and state? Underlying that error, of course, is the politically correct dogma that Islam is inherently egalitarian and peaceful.
" 'Shiite Taliban' rises as British depart Basra," by Sam Dagher for the Christian Science Monitor:
Basra, Iraq - The billboard in Umm al-Broom Square was meant to advertise a cellphone service. Instead, it has become a message to those who dare to resist the rising tide of fundamentalist Islam in Iraq's second largest city.
The female model's face is now covered with black paint. Graffiti scrawled below reads, "No! No to unveiled women."
That message joins the chorus of ultraconservative voices and radical militias that are transforming this once liberal port city that boasted some of Iraq's most lively nightclubs into a bastion for hard-line Shiite Islamists since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
Now, as the British prepare to exit Basra Province altogether after pulling out from this provincial capital last week, they leave behind what has been described by many here as an emerging "Shiite Taliban state," a reference to Sunni extremists in Afghanistan.
And with the British gone, many say, they leave open the possibility that Iran could extend its influence within the mosques, religious schools, and militant party headquarters. Over the past four years, Basra has undergone its own Islamic revolution of sorts.
Posters of the leader of Iran's 1979 social and religious revolt, Ayatollah Khomeini, who at the time imposed similar limits on his society, are plastered everywhere in Basra.
"There is pressure from parties backed by Iran to sideline liberal, secular, and leftist forces," says a labor union leader and a former communist, who, like most people interviewed for this story, did not want to be named for fear of retaliation. "Personal freedoms are being squashed … the fabric of Iraqi society has been ruined."
Public parties are banned. Selling musical CDs is forbidden in shops. Those who sell or consume alcohol face recrimination, even death. Artists and performers are severely restricted and even labeled as heretics. A famous city landmark, a replica of the Lion of Babylon statue that stood here for decades was blown up by militants in July. It was considered idolatrous, according to the strict interpretation of Islam.
Signs ordering women to cover up appear throughout the city. One woman, an Iraqi female activist from Basra, says the notices even threaten death. One banner, she says, said unveiled women could be murdered and no one could remove their bodies from the street.Read it all.
Posted by Marisol at September 18, 2007 8:55 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Damned if we stay, damned if we leave.
Posted by: Elric66![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 18, 2007 9:17 AM
....be forewarned....you do not want Islam in your neighborhood....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at September 18, 2007 9:21 AM
Islam, the religion of the devil.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at September 18, 2007 9:31 AM
"Selling musical CDs is forbidden in shops."
-- from the article above, describing what happens when the True Islam, unmediated by softening custom and human desire, takes over, whether as here in Basra, or anywhere else
Islam and Music: something for counter-Da'wa specialists -- are there any as yet? -- to be sure to remind those captive audiences in prisons, the ones most subject to the inveiglements of tireless Muslim missionaries.
at September 18, 2007 9:32 AM
IMHO, the failure in Basra is a British failure, not an American one. From what I have read (admittedly, I am not very well informed) the Brits took a very low-key approach, shunning to go in and root out the bad guys, and mocking the American "cowboys" who did. They failed miserably in their PC police action.
That said, I agree that the inital strategy for revamping Iraq into some sort of Middle Eastern Canada (which country, by the way, does not work that well either) has proven to be a failure. I still have hope that something more or less democratic (probably based on tribal loyalties), confederal and benign will emerge.
Posted by: Minority of One at September 18, 2007 9:39 AM
Back in 2003 when I backed the invasion of Iraq I didn't understand the basic realities of Islam. I know better now. As long as Islam remains, the problems remain. Now that I'm no longer ignorant about Islam, I realize what a mistake it was.
exsgtbrown is absolutely correct, you do not want Islam in your neighborhood. Prevention is the only sane option.
By the way, I highly recommend visiting the website ummah.com. You don't have to register, just lurk and read, you'll get a good feel as to why allowing Muslims to settle in the West is such a bad idea.
Posted by: Proud Infidel at September 18, 2007 9:43 AM
I have to believe that the majority of the people in Basra want to live without music, with women covered in black, etc. If they wanted more out of life, they could and would fight back and expel the Taliban fanatics. The Muslims want to live that way, without joy and beauty. I agree with the poster who said that 'you do not want Islam in your neighborhood.'
Posted by: maryrose at September 18, 2007 10:13 AM
Realize the enemy. The truth will always outlast any p.c. rhetoric.
Posted by: americanmadestrat at September 18, 2007 10:27 AM
Talk about a major disconnect between these Muslims in Basra and the ones attending Bush's Iftar dinner. Muslims have learned well that when dealing with the West: appear sophisticated and engaging and apparently Western on the outside, but once back on their native turf, it's black chadors, no sophistication, just the same old ideological Islam.
Are our leaders so blind and gullible? (rhetorical question)
Posted by: HOV Dummy at September 18, 2007 10:29 AM
I hope they get more of it, fundamentalism is good. I hope the zealots pour it on; then, maybe the peaceful, westernized Muslims will take it upon themselves to act. I'm tired of seeing our treasure and young men doing it for them.
Famous Lie:
"We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10,000 miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves."
Posted by: Pelayo at September 18, 2007 10:46 AM
I commented on this yesterday in another post.
How can we expect to change ideology, dogma and tradition based on twelve hundred years of existence in four short years?
Someone didn't take or pay attention to that World Civilization survey course at Yale, Harvard or Georgetown. Islam is diametrically counter to democratic principles as defined by Western Civilization broadly and American Democracy specifically. It will take much more than billions of dollars and the high capitalistic ideals of the current administration to get al ummah to change.
Islam in its current state is a cult of personality worshipping Mohammed. Al ummah rejects everything we believe. Leave them to destroy one another, buy their oil as fast as we can. Hopefully they will run out soon. When they do, they will retreat back into the desert where they came from. They will no longer pose a threat to us if we accept them for what they are and concentrate on cleaning our houses of their poisonous, capricious and viral cult.
Posted by: detocquevilledisciple at September 18, 2007 11:01 AM
i wonder if Cat St- err... Yousef has any concerts planned here in the near future? Or has he gotten the memo about music and Islam yet? Islam->suffocation->death
Posted by: is_LAME at September 18, 2007 11:03 AM
Proud Infidel, we have all learned a lot since 2001 and a lot more since 2003. It appears that the denizins of Capitol Hill have learned nothing.
Posted by: Pelayo at September 18, 2007 11:04 AM
..."It appears that the denizins of Capitol Hill have learned nothing.
Posted by: Pelayo "
....except the secret bathroom stall handshake and the secret dhimmicrat stash the cash in the freezer plan.....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at September 18, 2007 11:25 AM
Since the Shia have gone from “good guys” to “bad guys” to “good guys” and now apparently back to “bad guys”.
And the Sunni have gone from “bad guys” to “good guys” and have now morphed into a combination of “bad guys” and “good guys”.
It is time for a new acronym. Roll out the new bad guys, they are the AIFs.
Al Qaeda are still the worst guys, but the AIFs are catching up. AIF stand for “Anti-Iraqi Forces”. It is really a very robust term when you think about it.
In other news from the Republic of Oceania, the British withdrawal exposes the supply lines into Central Iraq, which could pose a serious problem in the real world.
Posted by: pez at September 18, 2007 11:51 AM
Some might argue that situations like this demonstrate why coalition troops need to stay in Iraq, in order to attempt to prevent Iraqi society's slide into sectarian violence and Sharia law. But how long?
I'd estimate about 100 yrs. Longer if the necessary post-Kemalist eradicate-Islam program fails. If that happens, then 1,000 yrs minimum.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at September 18, 2007 11:55 AM
Minority of One:
I cannot agree with your conclusions. While the approach implemented in Basra appears not to have taken, in the sense that a pluralistic society akin to a Western democracy has not arisen, there is certainly enough blame to share in Iraq, both in this instance and as a whole. The failure in Iraq is a Western one, based upon the failure of Western leaders, particularly four or five individuals in Washington D.C., to understand the principles of pluralistic democracy in the first place and then to understand just how stony the field of Moslem culture is to the transplanting of this concept in the second place. One wonders not so much that the concept was rejected by the Iraqis but rather that ignorance in the West is so profound that we delusionally believed this to be possible at all.
So where are we.? PC nice-nice doesn't work. But brute-force-and-ignorance doesn't work all that well either. Although the enemy is easier to manage when they're dead, the cost-per-dead-jihadi is still too high with the present approach. In my opinion, the Israelis have got it right, or at least those Israeli actions recently on display in Syria. Western forces must remain on station in the Middle East, but not the cumbersome approach adopted up to this point. It's sending an elephant to fight a wasp nest --apparently a GOP elephant with a whole pile of overweight industrialist Sahibs in the howdah.
A permanent ground presence in the Middle East should be considered only where the hosts are decidedly pro-Western, if such places can be found. Perhaps Christian areas in Iraq and Lebanon. But so far as the rest is concerned, it would seem that Special Forces operations are the only way of economically identifying enemy assets and putting them out of action. Let the enemy watch THEIR back for a change. And before any sort of conventional presence is considered ever again, let a real demand for democracy arise from Moslem countries first, demonstrated by observable actions there, by the people living there, not by some wannabe nabob living in comfort in the West.
Posted by: Chatillon at September 18, 2007 12:17 PM
Islam is like syphillis. The hideous sores may have disappeared for a long time but a billion people are now in the final stages of a disease called Islam. Blindness, insanity, softening of the brain, and crippling inertia.
A nuclear Iran on the shia side with an apocalyptic agenda. On the sunni side, Osama bin Laden, the most revered and beloved figure in the Islamic world who has called for the death of two million American children as 'delightful to Allah' - the God of Syphillis.
ISOLATE THE ISLAMIC WORLD FROM US.
Posted by: poetcomic1
at September 18, 2007 12:19 PM
"I'd estimate about 100 yrs. Longer if the necessary post-Kemalist eradicate-Islam program fails. If that happens, then 1,000 yrs minimum.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer"
....it is sad someone has to babysit a bunch of malcontents who will never behave...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at September 18, 2007 12:21 PM
"Islam is like syphillis. The hideous sores may have disappeared for a long time but a billion people are now in the final stages of a disease called Islam. Blindness, insanity, softening of the brain, and crippling inertia."
Excellent analogy poetcomic1.
Maybe if things get really bad in Basra, the Brits can send in one of their crack elite Royal Navy/Royal Marine boarding parties to restore order. Er...wait, that probably wouldn't work either.
Posted by: High_Peak at September 18, 2007 12:33 PM
Another shining example that supports Hugh's position of the "war" in Iraq, like the re-emergence of the Taleban in Afghanistan once the majority of the focus of the coalition forces was drawn elsewhere was.
This will continue on it's present course, ad infinitum, and there is nothing the US can do to prevent it. The ranks of the Islamists are easily replenished and apparently, their pool of resources runs quite deep.
Posted by: awake at September 18, 2007 12:36 PM
"Mission Acomplished!"
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at September 18, 2007 1:11 PM
Don't know what all the complaining's about. The situation in Iraq is unfolding exactly as bush predicted: the Iraqis are standing up as coalition forces stand down.
What's that, you say? It's not democratic Iraqis who are standing up, but iraqi shi'ite militias? Really? Well, I don't see what difference that makes. They're iraqis, after all, and that's what really counts.
Posted by: sheik yer booty at September 18, 2007 1:24 PM
"No! No to unveiled women"....from headline.
What -- do Muslim men 'lose control' when they see a woman's face? Are they that undisciplined with their sexual thought life? This policy would probably change if Muslim men were required to cover up their faces with a suffocating veil.
Posted by: champ at September 18, 2007 1:35 PM
Chatillon,
I am not sure which part of my post you were disagreeing with. I maintained that the failure in Basra was a British one, and you seem to have agreed.
I certainly did not say, nor did I wish to imply, that democracy building in Iraq has been a success, in fact I think I said the opposite. Nor did I say, or wish to imply, that US forces should keep a large footprint (or any footprint) in Iraq in the long term. But, given where we are at this moment, it is simply not possible to get out quickly. Even if some would find the resulting chaos to be a good thing in realpolitik terms, it would have huge and unpredictable political repercussions in the West. So, for another year or so, American forces will need to keep whacking the jihadis hard, killing the largest number possible. That is what the "allies" in the region (temporary and unreliable as they are) respect, i.e. the strong horse.
I suggest that, in a year or so, some sort of stable, or metastable, more or less benign political structure might emerge in Iraq, providing the cover for us to get out and to establish whatever bases etc we need in the ME (if any were, in fact, needed). Which is what should have happened immediately after toppling Saddam, but it didn't and we must now live with it. Then, if the shia and sunni start whacking each other in a couple of years, well, not our problem.
In the end, maybe the failed Iraqi democracy project will be a blessing. If nothing else, it has shown that, beyond any doubt, offering democracy to arab muslims in the ME is a complete waste of resources. In the future, if a dictator needs to be toppled, hopefully, it will be a quick strike and we will immediately get out once the job is done.
I fully agree with you that using rapid strike forces (air, special forces) to defuse problems as they arise would be preferable to having 100K pairs of boots on the ground.
IMHO, the only real long term solution for our present ME problems will be to stop relying on their oil to fuel our economies. They could still sell their oil to others, and make plenty of cash, but they could not use it as a cudgel against us. It could happen fairly quickly, I think, if we started using clean coal technology and exploiting tar sands and oil shales. The price of oil would go up, but it would be worth it.
Posted by: Minority of One at September 18, 2007 1:40 PM
Proud Infidel wrote:
"Back in 2003 when I backed the invasion of Iraq I didn't understand the basic realities of Islam. I know better now. As long as Islam remains, the problems remain. Now that I'm no longer ignorant about Islam, I realize what a mistake it was."
I too made this mistake. Going after WMD to me was the point. Saddam could no longer be trusted with them. I'm still not convinced that his weapons were not scurried away to Syria. But making a democracy of Iraq? Utterly impossible, given the depth of Islamicism inherent to the culture. In a power vacuum it is always the brutal thugs who move in--thus Saddam, or now likely some Iranian-style Mullah.
Posted by: JohnAdams at September 18, 2007 1:47 PM
Minority of One wrote:
"I suggest that, in a year or so, some sort of stable, or metastable, more or less benign political structure might emerge in Iraq,"
To me, that sounds exactly like the prediction for iraq in the near future from the current administration.
A year or so?
stable or metastable?
More or less benign?
Might emerge?
I am surprised you went out on a limb there like that.
Posted by: awake at September 18, 2007 2:26 PM
awake,
Yes, my description does resemble the current admin's predictions. That is because I think that is the best solution available, at present. Not that I agree with the tactics being used, in so far as I can tell what they are (e.g. I would be for air strikes against jihadi training camps inside iran), but the strategy of leaving behind something at least metastable (like virtually every govt in the ME and much of South Asia is metastable, see Pakistan) is the only viable one.
Cutting out quickly would have unpredictable repercussions, in US politics, and probably around the world. It would make things worse, not better.
As if it needed saying, the ME is a messy place. And as long as we need the oil from there, we will continue to get involved in messy situations. Even then, as long as the West, or, at least, the US, continues to believe that Isreal has a right to exist (as do I), there will be messy situations to deal with.
Sharing the planet with islam isn't easy.
Posted by: Minority of One at September 18, 2007 2:52 PM
Awake,
Hey how are you? Eagle banned me finally. LOL
Posted by: Elric66 at September 18, 2007 3:12 PM
I'm OK. I swore never to post there again. I have been posting on salahudin's site, at least for the moment.
We shall see how long that lasts as well. :)
Posted by: awake at September 18, 2007 3:15 PM
he is just as bad. They both outright lie what you say. Ask Sal why he compares Bush to OBL.
Posted by: Elric66 at September 18, 2007 3:16 PM
JohnAdams,
I'm convinced Saddam had the weapons but managed to hide them in Syria with the help of Russia. But I also foolishly believed that the Iraquis would accept real democracy, a result of my lack of knowledge about Islam. Wherever Islam dominates, the rule of reason is DOA.
Not the conclusion I wanted to reach. I wanted to believe that whole "Religion Of Peace" claptrap. But then, reality just doesn't care what we want, does it?
Posted by: Proud Infidel at September 18, 2007 4:04 PM
but...but...but...the "enlightened ones" said things would be better if they left.
Hmmm...gee, what an revelation.
(/sarc)
at September 18, 2007 6:17 PM
Has anybody told Bush & Company that the "surge is working" only where our troops are patrolling in force, with guns at the ready? That the "insurgents" drift away from where our soldiers maintain a fighting presence, and drift back again when we declare the area "stabilized" and move on to the next hotbed of insurgency?
Much has been made of the areas where the local Sunni chieftains are resisting (Sunni) al-Quaeda; but what will happen when the Shiite militias threaten those villages? At a guess, the Sunni locals will accept the protection of al-Quaeda rather than being overrun and murdered by Shiites. (And, presumably, the al-Quaeda guys will make an example of those chieftains who dared to resist them... Too bad, it would have been nice to have a possibility of a "middle path".)
Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at September 18, 2007 7:45 PM
Kind of a steep price to pay for a few Sailors.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at September 18, 2007 9:03 PM
According to one account, Shi'ite militia trucks were pulling up to Basra police stations and commandeering all weaponry literally as soon as retreating British convoys moved out of sight.
This indicates that local Iraqi police are either sympathetic to Shi'ite militia, or are too weak or disorganized to resist them.
I suspect it is a combination of the two.
This is so ludicrous--remember, just recently, the Brits were twitting the US over how much better things were going in Basra than in US patrolled parts of Iraq.
Sadly, they didn't seem to have any better understanding of the Jihad-ideology than do Bush and company.
Even worse, many of Bush's political opponents have *even less* understanding of the situation, believing all the problems have been caused by the actions of the West, or even that there are no real threats at all--just stuff trumped up for political gain.
Posted by: gravenimage at September 18, 2007 11:01 PM
From Jcom"but...but...but...the "enlightened ones" said things would be better if they left.Hmmm...gee, what an revelation."
Yes, let's keep pouring men and money so that Iraq can bask the light of a Koran based constitution.
You do spot the tiny flaw in Operation "Iraqi Freedom" don't you?
Namely, that US soldiers are giving their lives so that Iraq has a Koran based constitution.
And you're happy with that?
That's why Infidel soldiers signed up?
Not to defend their country, oh no, we can't have any of that old style "dying, defending one's country" nonsense.
Now it's become "dying so that Iraqis can vote in an election and live under islamic law"
Granted, it's just a tiny problem with "Iraqi Freedom"
at September 19, 2007 12:19 AM
Some might argue that situations like this demonstrate why coalition troops need to stay in Iraq, in order to attempt to prevent Iraqi society's slide into sectarian violence and Sharia law. But how long?More than four years was not enough, and the speed of Basra's degeneration into the situation described in this article following the departure of the British only underscores how terribly Western governments miscalculated their plans in assuming "we all want the same thing": Civil liberties? Equal rights? Separation of religion and state? Underlying that error, of course, is the politically correct dogma that Islam is inherently egalitarian and peaceful.
As long as you have globalists like "Hannity," "Rush," and their ilk convincing people that their views of remaining in the quagmire is the only position that "support the troops," and that "cut-and-run" means surrender; then you are stuck forever.
We sure won't win, because we have no definition of "victory" other than it means that "the situation on the ground is improving."
We sure won't lose, because we'll continue to throw bodies into the fray.
The globalist paradigm is ultimately a losing proposition for the U.S. because all globalists believe that the resources in the US-- including human resources -- exist merely for their utilitarian gain; they care not for long term benefits of the nation.
We need to strategically withdraw from iraq; let it go to hell; regroup, rebuild our resources, and prepare to destroy completely the enemy which will come back in either case.
Finally, we need to dump the globalists be they bitch hillary, bufoon bush, clown kerry and all the rest of these miserable excuses for potential presidents -- along with all the murdering islamic vermin bent on killing every living thing sooner or later who fund these aformentioned leeches!
Posted by: witness at September 19, 2007 2:02 AM
Hmmm...heard this stuff before...wonder where?
Oh yeah...picturing the same mentality if it were 65 years ago...
http://www.tothepointnews.com/images/stories/liespower.jpg
...wow, little people change, and history really does repeat itself.
Fascinating
Posted by: jcom972 at September 19, 2007 3:49 AM
" do Muslim men 'lose control' when they see a woman's face? "
....they lose control when they wake up.....
at September 19, 2007 5:53 AM
...especially when she responds to him:
"BAH HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!"
at September 19, 2007 6:01 AM
From jcom"Hmmm...heard this stuff before...wonder where?
Oh yeah...picturing the same mentality if it were 65 years ago...
http://www.tothepointnews.com/images/stories/liespower.jpg.......wow, little people change, and history really does repeat itself....Fascinating"
You do see the difference between "Operation Iraqi Freedom" and WW2 don't you?
Here's a hint. The US soldiers didn't die defending a NAZI based constitution in Berlin.
Penny dropped?
at September 19, 2007 7:10 AM
From the article:"Signs ordering women to cover up appear throughout the city. One woman, an Iraqi female activist from Basra, says the notices even threaten death. One banner, she says, said unveiled women could be murdered and no one could remove their bodies from the street."
That's been going on now in Basra for quite some while.
Ever since Saddam got kicked out in fact.
The crazies in Basra are so....erm....crazy they've even drawn the wrath of Tehran.
Which speaks volumes.
Yep. A trillion buckeroos, thousands of body bags and in a couple of years it'll all be Irans.
The Marx Brothers had more competence.
Posted by: ewha1 at September 19, 2007 7:26 AM
great photo, jcom. The dreaded Soros pulling the strings.
Good article on the Iraq debacle from the ever readable Trifkovic. Wonderful comments too from the dying out breed of PaleoCons. Going the way of the dinosaur I'm very much afraid.
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=332#more-332
Posted by: ewha1 at September 20, 2007 3:38 AM
Oh Soros. What a sorry fool. The only bigger fool has to be lieberman. THE idiot who famously eulogised the Al Qaeda linked KLA and cheered on when they slaughtered Infidels in Kosovo.
He pronounced "The] United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same human values and principles ... Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values"
A prize lemon to be sure.
Posted by: ewha1 at September 20, 2007 6:07 AM
And who famously said that leaving Iraq would be a "victory for al-Qaida and a victory for Iran"
Which is a mite strange, coming from one of the biggest proponents of "Iraqi Freedom", which has........cough....... given........cough........Al Qaeda and Iran one of their........cough.....biggest successes.
LOL as some posters say.
Posted by: ewha1 at September 20, 2007 6:14 AM
...sounds eerily familiar...as if such wisdom comes from someone familiar...
like "Apis" Dragutin Dimitrijević
The Black Hand Црна рука / Crna Ruka
Mentalities that were solely responsible for starting the greatest conflagration in European history, starting with WWI, a 20 yr ceasefire, and then WWII, thus THE greatest conflagration in human history...nah, such wisdom from well-demonstrated self-agendas of their own are of no help at all, and have no room to talk...and this continuous schizobabble from one who has less than zero experience in the matter becomes laughable.
Like I said, and say again...
L...O...L
Posted by: jcom972 at September 21, 2007 6:20 PM
From Jcom"The Black Hand Црна рука / Crna Ruka....Mentalities that were solely responsible for starting the greatest conflagration in European history, starting with WWI"
Oh dear, your grasp of 20th Century history is a tad lacking.
Simplistic and erroneaous would be some of the kinder comments.
You showed your.....cough....less than brilliant knowledge on the Balkans in an earlier thread - you'd talked of the Yugoslav Army fighting a dirty war in Kosovo but when I asked you for evidence to support your theorem you slunked off in a sulk -so the fact that your hero is Lieberman - a guy who equates the Al Qaeda linked KLA with the Founding Fathers - doesn't really come as much of a surprise.
"schizobabble"? Judging by the bizarre nature of some of your indecipherable postings and making grand statements without a scrap of evidence, I'd suggest you were projecting a tad.
"schizobabble"? That's a word you got from Dr Phil isn't it. Now now, Jcom, less daytime TV and more reading 20th Century history.
LOL as some would say.
at September 21, 2007 9:53 PM
I don't watch TV...and I coined that term myself, (not sorry) to burst anyones ego bubble.
My 20th century history is just fine...I taught it at Naval Academy Post-Grad School...and I'm also well-versed on wannabes who try to conceal their own lack of "wisdom" but fail when their lexicon common to those I use perjoratives on come out every single time as predictable as the sun rising in the east.
I don't project anything...I call a spade a spade, have done it well and effectively for decades now, and the feigned acts of being reserved are too little and too late considering past exchanges from such elements whose behavior is more appropriate from a soccer team firm.
I stand by my comments, as I have infinitely more experience in the matter...how things are with that other side over there, I'm afraid, is less easy to say, since the only thing close to substantives come out to no more than pissing, moaning, bitching and complaining...which solves nothing, and reflects the lack of alternatives on the part of said pot calling the kettle black.
More substance and less soap opera drama (as well as acting like a troll) makes all the difference in the world.
;-)
Posted by: jcom972 at September 22, 2007 12:27 AM
By the way...next time someone wants to put words in my mouth I didn't say...provide the link.
As for yugolav army I said they weren't exactly saints (and I'm right for saying that-THAT is what one calls "kinder comments", VERY kind)...and unless one's been under a rock for 15 years, the evidence is worldwide in the news, starting with Ratko Mladic (who considers Dimitryevic` HIS hero, hence, BLACK HAND, by his own admission), among others, and among other regions with which kosovo was only one area of interest...again, putting words in my mouth I didn't say, or twisting them is unwise, and only serves to make the accuser look like the self-interest agenda ridden he is by drawing erroneous conclusions made via their own predisposed hatred that has consumed them.
Ya see, killing the enemy with a gun in their hands is one thing...
I can even see doing it the way the Bulgarians did quite some years ago (giving them a choice...GTF out, or die-which they always choose to leave as they did, and job's done for ones homeland)...
to round them up out of bed at 4am to copycat hitler, the same guy so claimed to be hated, is pretty sad, and hypocritical...it gives nobody on that end any room to talk, and no amount of deflective counter-accusations will change that fact.
I retired from the military because it was the last straw for me, this leftwing lunatic, or her husband, bombimg serbia,
not because I sided with the serbs, as I said, because they were not saints (especially based on their history of their own agendas in mind) but because I knew protecting islamists was insane. It was about a much larger front in mind...not descendants, or their sympathizers, of the black hand, which most were, even today.
I even despise Wesley Clark's BS when he was in the balkans, nearly starting WWII by ordering our forces to fire on Russians at the airstrip, which was downright moronic.
Big difference.
I also didn't say Lieberman was a hero, though I did say he was a good man...and still is. I don't agree with his take on KLA & our Founding Fathers, but he also doesn't influence policy either...we kept him in power because the radical moron.org lackeys were far worse as kook-fringe left-wingers.
Ya see...all cats may eat meat,
and all dogs may eat meat,
but to accuse all dogs of being cats (which is essentially the same mental format that this acusation of me turned out to be the equivalent of) is downright hilarious, apart from being downright stupid.
It will help to first shelf the predisposed hatred before attempting to critique my take...to do otherwise only let's the agenda come out and doesn't contribute to the discussion at all in any constructive way. Educated folks know better than that kind of thing...try requesting an expansion on comments-it works a lot better than trolling, and saves a lot more bandwidth for real substance than having to fire back at my detractors` predisposed absurdities based on predisposed hatred (another "kinder comment" than deserved after some of that gutter language used early on some time back, thus not warranting a response by me).
There are far more effective ways of approaching it, but smarter people would've picked up on that long ago. Tragic...
...but I don't lose sleep over it.
I used to be disgusted by it...but now I'm just amused...hence, my well-founded LOL
There's a big difference between me and my detractors...
It is my beliefs that influence my politics
It is their politics that influences their beliefs...because politics IS their beliefs-aka, their religion, thus no chance of reasoning with them.
With that, though I do feel sorry for them, all there's left is to laugh...
LOL
at September 22, 2007 1:29 AM
oh dear, Jcom. You blew it. Really you did.
I could go through, verse by verse, all the nonsense you wrote: the historical nonsense, the Balkans nonsense, the causes of WW1 nonsense, the Black Hand nonsense, the schizobabble nonsense, the LOL nonsense, the nonsense nonsense, etc.
But I don' really have to do I. This simple sentence sums you up.
From Jcom"to round them up out of bed at 4am to copycat hitler"
It's the moral equivalence's wettest of wet dreams. Namely, the "you ________ ( fill in blank ) are the same as Hitler"
Yes. Getting people out of bed is comparable with Hitler. Really, that's all that Hitler did that got him a bad name. He's no different from anyone else really. Just a geezer who got people out of bed when they wanted a lie in.
This is ploy that's used by Neo Nazis time and time again. And for good reason. It works.
Neo Nazis note a civil war - or whatever -and make a comparison between one of the warring parties with Hitler.
It's effective. In fact it's so effective it's accepted by less than incisive people, Jcom for instance, who think it's a really good debating point.
Really they do. Note that Jcom has absolutely no evidence to support his Serbophobia. None. Deep down he knows it too. So, instead of doing a some reading - takes too long old boy - or simply keeping Mum, he chucks in the most dim witted of comparisons.
Note that the moment people realise they don't have a clue about something, they'll chuck it in. Eagle, a poster - on a different website - made that comparison with people on JW - as with JCOM he's no Neo Nazi: he's just friggin' pig ignorant and lazy. So instead of doing seom research, reading, etc, he just chucks it in to his argument and thinks he's doing everyone a favour. You'll find that Mr Spencer is accused of this time and time again. And you'll also note it's from people who couldn't make an argument to save their lives - out of indolence or lack of mental ability I know not.
They're in over their depth so they do huge harm by belittling the crimes of the Nazis.
It helps whitewash the crimes of the Nazis but to Jcom and all the rest of the "You're no different from Hitler crowd ya boo sucks" it's a game winner:
To realise the crass stupidity of this comparison, just see what else it's implying.
The are countless examples: Israel basically
kept the VRS - Bosnian Serb Army - going, along with Ukraine and Greece. So, if the Bosnian Serbs are no different from Hitler, that means that Israel is no different from some guy who sold the SS some nooses for their executions.
Look behind every "you people are no different from Nazis" argument and you'll find a hidden agenda. The agenda usually being either willful ignorance or some NeoNazi ideology.
You were better when you just posted incomprehensible drivel, Jcom. At least then you didn't make light of Hitler's crimes.
But to you, this rewriting of WW2 is "LOL" territory.
As I said, you blew it.
Posted by: ewha1 at September 23, 2007 12:15 AM
If that's the presumption...have at it.
The predisposition was obvious long ago, and calling it nonsense is itself, nonsense.
I prefer documented proof over ones words...and putting words in my mouth as was demonstrated from the beginning long before this thread only makes ones words even less effective...especially the erroneous lexicons used that aren't even close...
and the narcissistic projection makes any detraction of my take even more pathetic trolldom, and I've no more time for such absurdities by someone who been -there-&-done-that as I have.
Armchair quarterbacks are no substitute for the real world.
Enjoy the kool-aid from the people's temple-it seems to be the beverage of choice of my detractors.
;-)
Posted by: jcom972 at September 23, 2007 1:28 AM
;-)
Posted by: ewha1 at September 23, 2007 2:29 AM
Ah, Jcom! You've moved away from the moral equivalence world of "you're a Nazi boo hoo" arguments which is good to see and you're back into the Alice in Wonderland world of simply choosing words at random and inserting them into sentences. At least it's not offensive, which is, let's be optimistic and upbeat here, good news.
Well done.
Try not to shout "NAZI NAZI" at the top of your voice the next time you lose an argument. It doesn't help your cause and makes you look, well, rather silly.
To say the least.
Belittling the crimes of Hitler isn't a good defence. Really it isn't.
Posted by: ewha1 at September 23, 2007 3:28 AM
Someone needs to lay off a liquor, since belittling hitler's crimes was never done by me...only a detractors ASSumption...and assumptions are the mother of all F**Kups.
It is left to the pathetic accuser to furnish proof of any belittlement of hitler's crimes by my hand at ones own convenience...but since there is NONE to be furnished, as the bogus accusation is based on that assumption, influenced by anothers own predisposition as I have stated long ago, no sense in me holding mu breath on that one.
I laugh at the lying liar desperately trying to cover his own assumptive F**kup.
As I said, putting words in my mouth is very unwise, and this perpetuated obsession with me long after this thread's been taken down off the front board has become amusing.
I saw this troll coming a mile away...dealt with them for decades, and the best I swatted 10 years ago. Someone over there needs to feed their ego apparently, lest this conversation not even be necessary to bother with.
I'm still waiting for said proof, even here at 1:24am local time. I'll be back to check on what empty proof will be amusingly thrown this way tomorrow. In the mean time...
L...O...L (especially at the pathetically lame accusation leveled at me)
;-)
at September 23, 2007 4:26 AM
From Jcom"to round them up out of bed at 4am to copycat hitler, the same guy so claimed to be hated, is pretty sad, and hypocritical"
So Jcom was comparing the Serbs with Hitler. In fact the Serbs were "coycating" Hitler, no less.
Now, if that's not
a) moral equivalence run riot then what is
and
b) not belittling the crimes of Hitler then what is.
And to add a large touch of the bizarre, the crime was getting people up at 4am!!!!!!!!!
Go figure.
I'm rather amused why you think that waking people up at the crack of dawn is worthy of a comparison with Hitler. Any chance at an explanation?
And also, the significance of four o'clock? Any chance of an explanation?
From JCOM" Someone needs to lay off a liquor"
Naughty naughty JCom. Being self referential I see.
BTW I love your analysis of the causes of WW1.
Wonderful stuff.
A tad simplistic and error strewn mind, but hey, you really tried hard.
So points for effort.
Keep up the good work, Jcom, and try not to compare people you disagree with, to Hitler.
It makes you look rather silly.
To say the least.
at September 24, 2007 1:12 AM
Ah, just as expected...no proof whatsoever of ones own accusation of me...just more drivel, and same old diversion & evasion, not answering my calling their bluff & lying accusation...proves my point hands down...thought so...
...but then again, I already knew that. *yawn*
I rest my case...
L...O...L
Posted by: jcom972 at September 24, 2007 1:42 AM
I suppose now may be a bad time to say as I laugh at such predisposed militancy:
"...like shooting fish in a barrel...lol"
Only difference, at least fish aren't militantly predisposed...they're just...fish.
Dimitryevic` fans & their hypocrisy...just keep getting more and more amusing.
L...O...L
NEXT???!!!
*yawn*
at September 24, 2007 1:47 AM
Jcom"to round them up out of bed at 4am to copycat hitler"
My! Even Holocuast revisionists accept that many 1,000's died in Hitler's camps. You go even further than that and think his actions are similar to "Wakey wakey time"
Perhaps some reading on such subjects as the Holocaust will help you learn the difference between "waking people up" and "Hitler's crimes"
Posted by: ewha1 at September 24, 2007 1:56 AM
Accuracy is not an accusation of fraud.
Documented evidence is overwhelming...ones inability to take it in proper context (as the point I made of it, and was taken out of context by the very same accuser who can't furnish REAL proof I lied) is not my problem...but theirs.
Obviously militantly predisposed don't bother to actually READ my comments since they're...well, predisposed...and hypersensitive to any and all criticism, no matter how secondary it was to the main theme to begin with...I expected this from turks, not non-muslims, save that of the radical left.
Since I taught the subject, and the detractor has NOT, nor obviously learned about both subjects thoroughly, reading history isn't need on my end...but theirs.
How sad, someone with such a bug up their ass could get so livid making something of what I say out to be way off in left field (pun) instead of in proper context...
ah, the very flower of militancy. I see it hasn't changed in decades...except to get worse, and even more off-base. *yawn*
L...O...L
at September 24, 2007 2:26 AM
Now...back to topic, no thanks to my greatest fan applicant (sorry the peanut gallery is full, take a ticket, take a seat)...
We said if they left, the militants would take over the vacuum resulting in chaos.
So the troops left...result: chaos, as stated.
The left? well, they're still obsessing over their take that's now been proven wrong...but facts never got in their way either! *yawn*
But events elsewhere in the mideasy are now even tearing that lie of the militant leftists apart as we speak...leaving the rest of us rational folks who can see reality for what it is see the miliant 5th columnists of the unholy alliance as the rats on a sinking ship that they are.
History does repeat itself...
sad, too...
L...O...L
Posted by: jcom972 at September 24, 2007 3:19 AM
From Jcom"to round them up out of bed at 4am to copycat hitler, the same guy so claimed to be hated, is pretty sad, and hypocritical"
Q.E.D.
at September 24, 2007 3:31 AM
Again, accuracy of facts as I stated about others' actions proves nothing but the fact I said it...it was no lie, it was based on accurate reports of actions at the time...
Hitler was awful to many there, it was horrid, yet they pulled exactly the same thing they themselves hated hitler over...that's indisputable anywhere in the world, save that of maybe the black hand(jobs) in belgrade who get hyper over anything remotely derogatory spoken of them, no matter how accurate it is, like mine is...
...so it's pretty bewildering how such comment warrants being accused of a lie, outragous things I never did or said, blowing my facts completely out of proportion and contect for their own self-gratifying militant agenda, fraud or anything else for that matter...save that of my comment on the hypocrisy of groups in question, which is indisputable.
They did exactly the same thing hitler did, and they know it...numbers are not as relevant to the act as has been run into the ground by my greatest fan, both were horrid, neither acts are deniable, and that's that...it's about their hypocrisy I stressed, and it's beyond debate.
Man...all this over a secondary comment, and I wasnt even criticizing the serbs at the time ("the serbs weren't exactly saints" was VERY generous and lenient, made MONTHS ago, but got this trolls panties in such an uberbunch, & he's been obsessing over it ever since, lol), but criticizing the islamists...but that tends to happen with hyperpartisans of hypersensitivity who think they're clean and pure as the wind-driven snow & everyone else is not.
Been there, done that, bought the tshirt 10 times over...
...but reality never stopped dimitriyevic` fans before, so I don't expect it to stop them now.
*yawn*
Amusing...so amusing.
But...as I said...sometimes ya just gotta laugh.
L...O...L
at September 24, 2007 4:05 AM
...and speaking of REAL "denial":
from tvdog
"Moslems, who obviously did exist, were being kept in concentration camps"
CONCENTRATION camps? CONCENTRATION camps?
Oh , for fucks sake.
Posted by: ewha1 [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 7, 2006 5:09 AM
Video footage was seen worldwide, except perhaps in serbia...but the rest of the world did see it.
(forget the fact I was referring to the ones who were outright shot to death, buried alive, burned to death alive, etc without even given a choice to leave the country first...which is also documented)
Interesting...most interesting.
at September 24, 2007 4:22 AM
Oh yeah...feel free to stick THAT in the ol' Q.E.D. pipe and smoke it...
hyperpartisan hypocrites like this give honest and forthcoming Serbs (especially those who suffered equal horrors from mOslems in the balkans, and those by hitler, as well as those who are NOT hyperpartisan as hell like this one is) a bad name...
"Q.E.D.":
par·ti·san1 (pär'tĭ-zən) pronunciation
n.
1. A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.
2. A member of an organized body of fighters who attack or harass an enemy, especially within occupied territory; a guerrilla.
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a partisan or partisans.
2. Devoted to or biased in support of a party, group, or cause: partisan politics.
hyper–
pref.
1. Over; above; beyond: hypercharge.
2. Excessive; excessively: hypercritical.
3. Existing in more than three dimensions: hyperspace.
4. Linked or arranged nonsequentially: hypertext.
[Greek huper-, from huper, over, beyond.]
Hyperpartisan- above and beyond rational, especially when pertaining to a subject or belief, such as politics.
Real Serbs don't go around freakin' out nitpicking every little thing others say, put words in their mouths, jump to erroneous conclusions, fly off the handle over trivialities, nor do they obsess over irrefutables they can only fire back with false accusations toward those they can't handle, especially when it's the truth...
The ones I know laugh at this absurdity, and for obviously good reason, as those I have stated.
Unfortunate, but it is what it is...and doesn't help anything but fan flames for a truculent troll in search of an ego.
L...O...L
Posted by: jcom972 at September 24, 2007 5:41 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)