I have been in Iraq for over 22 months now. I have been working with the Iraqi police and have seen the results of the radicalization of Islam on a daily basis.
Mohammad planted the seeds of this 1500 years ago and this is only the latest crop of a long history of murder, genocide and destruction done in the name of Allah and the Prophet.
The vast majority of Muslims indeed want nothing more than to live in peace, raise their families and worship Allah. But they also contributed to this problem by refusing to take responsibility for their own nutcases. They have protected them, hidden them and excused them. They refuse to recognize that this is not a war against Islam, it is a war against those who kill.
Until all Islam recognizes this and joins in the war against them they can never have any expectation of respect or sympathy. They are protecting the enemy and therefore are enemies also.
I respectfully disagree with part of your thesis, where you suggest that this is a war against some Muslims but not all.
One might similarly say that the Battle of Hastings was not against all Saxons or all Normans. One might even say that most wars up to and including those of the 19th century were not against "all" of both sides, as they were largely confined to the battlefield and did not substantively affect civil society.
But it becomes harder in the age of total war to make this claim. WW I and WW II were without doubt toital war, whereby attacks on civilian value targets were limited only by technological capability.
We have in this case attacks that are cheered either overtly or covertly by large sections of the global population of Muslims. The survival of Western civilization depends upon us recognizing the enemy and further, recognizing the totality of the enemy. The Allies would not have won WW II if they had confined their attacks to Nazis and Japanese imperialists.
As an aside, ahMADinejad has his own site at http://www.ahmadinejad.ir/.
In the interests of free speech and openness, George and Co. are able to leave comments - though I wonder for how long if abused?
In his opening letter, ahMADinejad points out his rise from humble origins in the vein of Stalin and Pol Pot to rise from poverty to executioner to make good.
(Ed. make good? Shirley shum mishtake?)
Funny that.
Don't go to the achmadinejad blog. I hear it will do evil things to your computer. Stay away.
Jauhara, its time Achmadinejad began to worry about the west instead of the west worrying about Achmadinejad. The free ride is coming to an end and Achmadinejad and the rest of Islam will not be happy with what they have begun.
Its been a game till now, for Islam, for half a century. Islam has been allowed with a wink and a nod to tweak the tail of the tiger over and over again, restrained only by the stasis of the cold war. But the tiger was restrained too by the same thing. Now Islam has no restraints and it has become more than annoying, and it is about to find out that the tiger has lost its restraints too.
The West just hasn't quite arrived at the almost self-evident conclusion that it is more profitable to swat a gnat than to negotiate with it.
Excellent war slogan, and a terrific presentation. Your photos are powerful. If I were a Muslim, I would be a bit afraid that my taqqiyah isn't working too well anymore.
The sooner your "ground zero" becomes a real ground zero, the better.
...So, "1984" (wherein false, manufactured enemies are actively used in order to justify Government taking away our civil rights) is now a reality...
What's your point?
___________________
And to the fool proclaiming that "taqiyyah" can no longer be used by "muslims" anymore...
"Taqiyyah" is a Shia concept... it has nothing to do with Sunni Doctrine. Ask your average Sunni Muslim to explain what it means... they will NOT be able to tell you.
Now listen up, kiddies:
The religion of the Shia was started by an "apostate" Jew: Abdullah bin Saba'... It was this Yemeni Jew who taught the Jewish concept now labled as "Taqiyyah", or "deception" to his new followers amongst the Shia. Jews developed this mode of operation (i'e' "Taqiyyah") to protect themselves against the bigotry, hatred & persecution which they regularly faced at the hands of the Christians.
It was important for Jews to hide their Jewish identity, because often - if they did not - they would be openly spat on, sworn at, and otherwise brutalised by a violently anti-semetic, propagandized christian population.
Now, there's your lesson in history (See?! You CAN learn something interesting from this bigoted Blog, afterall!)
Lol thanks Mark. Excellent job of googling. See? These kinds of sites do help after all; they spur types like you to go out and learn things.
Anyway, consider the thesis under discussion at Craig's blog: a total denial of the existence of a plot in England; and compare it to the thesis under discussion here: that Muslims are behind this and other plots. Given the numerous unfoiled plots already having taken place in the world today, all coincidentally by Muslims, which seems more likely to your obviously strained brain?
A question rather than a comment: What would the reaction be to destruction of Mecca, the Kaaba (?Kabaa), Medina, Qum, etc. - Muslim holy sites? Would it diminish the authority of Mohammed? Would it take the truth out of the Koran? Would it deflate the pretensions of the terrorist class? Would the motivation for jihad be deflated?
Or would the rage intensify to the point of Armageddon?
Edwin, it might. And they would lose.
Medina next. Qom after that. And if they don't get the point, Riyadh - the main source of funds for Wahabist insanity. Possibly Tehran next. And there would not be a damned thing they could do about it. Except grow up.
bfd2bc d070e836f3
Commenting by HaloScan
