About Me

Name: Cary Wesberry
Email: carywesberry@sbcglobal.net Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Cheney: "America's Commitment to Israel's Security is Enduring and Unshakable"

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Saturday, March 22, 2008 4:45:48 PM
The United States backed Israel's right to defend itself against rockets from Hamas-ruled Gaza and will not pressure the Jewish state to take steps that threaten its security, US Vice President Dick Cheney told a joint news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Jerusalem Saturday evening.
 
"America's commitment to Israel's security is enduring and unshakable, as is Israel's right to protect itself always against terrorism, rocket attacks and other attacks from forces dedicated to Israel's destruction," Cheney said, adding that "the United States will never pressure Israel to take steps that threaten its security."

The vice president reaffirmed Washington's commitment to the establishment of a Palestinian state, and assured Palestinian leaders that "they, too, can be certain of America's goodwill" as it tries to help Israel and the Palestinians reach an accord.

"We want to see a resolution to the conflict, an end to the terrorism that has caused so much grief to Israelis, and a new beginning for the Palestinian people," he said, adding that "we must not and will not ignore darkening shadows of the situation in Gaza, in Lebanon, in Syria and Iran," and the threats these areas pose to Israel.
 
 
 
Cheney definitely deals with the ongoing war in Israel with a lot more loyalty than Condi Rice.  Maybe he could take over representation of the United States in this matter.  Cheney will be focusing on the threat of the nuclear armament of Iran while meeting with other Israeli leaders including Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More Suicide Policy, Israel Approves Russia to Deliver 25 Armored Vehicles to Palestinians

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Saturday, March 22, 2008 4:39:06 PM
Israel has approved Russia's plan to deliver 25 armored vehicles to Palestinian security forces in the West Bank, Israeli Defense Ministry spokesman Ronen Moshe said Friday. 

Israel was initially opposed to Russia's proposal two years ago to deliver the vehicles to Palestinian security forces out of concern that the weapons might find their way into the hands of the Hamas movement.

The Jewish state later thwarted the deal after learning that the Palestinians wanted to equip the vehicles with guns.

During Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's visit to Jerusalem this week, Israel consented to the delivery of unarmed vehicles, and will approve the shipment of 25 armored vehicles once forces of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas gain wider control in the West Bank, the defense ministry said.

The Hamas movement seized control of the Gaza Strip in mid-June last year and forced Abbas' security forces out of the enclave.
 
 
 
 
The Palestinians are going to mount weapons on those vehicles and proceed to use them to murder Jews.  It's what they do, it's what they've always done.  Any other consideration is fantasy.  The Palestinians have proven themselves uncivilized and untrustworthy again and again.  To give them more weapons and/or the means to use them is suicide policy on the part of Israel.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Palestinians Accuse Jews of Burning Arab Children Alive

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Saturday, March 22, 2008 4:33:41 PM
(IsraelNN.com) Palestinian Authority children in Gaza are being raised to believe the ancient Eastern European blood libel myth about Jews, with a twist: in this version, the Jews don't make matzah from children's blood; they burn them alive...

According to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), Gaza children were recently taken to an exhibit depicting Israel burning children in a crematorium. The exhibit was created by a body named “The National Committee for the Defense of Children from the Holocaust.”
The exhibit also featured a black platform with the words, “Stop the Israel’s Holocaust” [sic]. Both are used to reinforce programs on PA TV (the television station controlled by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah terror group) that brainwash Arab children to believe that Israel burned children during the Holocaust.

About 1.5 million Jewish children were murdered during the Holocaust which accompanied World War 2. They were shot, gassed, tortured, worked, starved, frozen, neglected to death – and on some occasions, burned alive.
 
 
 
Those whacky Palestinians are at it again.  The irony is beyond reason, then again everything the Palestinians say and do is beyond reason.  1.5 million Jewish children murdered, in fact by the same methods the Palestinians accuse the Jews of doing to their children.  All the Jews have ever tried to do is help the Palestinians, primarily based on allow their children to flourish in peace.  This article shows just how sick and twisted the Palestinian mentality is.  The Palestinians as a people are truly unforgiveable.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Communist China Does What it Does Best

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 9:22:43 PM
ZHONGDIAN, China (AP) — China blanketed restive Tibetan areas Thursday with a huge buildup of troops, turning small towns across a wide swath of western China into armed encampments.

Beijing acknowledged that last week's anti-government protests had spread far beyond Tibet's borders and that police opened fire on protesters. It warned foreign tourists and journalists to stay away from a huge expanse of territory across four provinces.

In an overture of peace, the Dalai Lama offered to meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao and other leaders, reiterating that he was not asking for Tibetan independence.

China has repeatedly ignored calls for dialogue, accusing the exiled Tibetan leader and his supporters of organizing violence in hopes of sabotaging the upcoming Beijing Olympics and promoting Tibetan independence.

Hundreds of paramilitary troops aboard at least 80 trucks were seen traveling along the main road winding through the mountains into southeastern Tibet. Others set up camp and patrolled streets in riot gear, helmets and rifles in the town of Tiger Leaping Gorge, a tourist attraction in Yunnan province bordering Tibet.

Farther north, the largely Tibetan town of Zhongdian, renamed Shangri-la a decade ago, was swarmed by 400 armed police. Many carried rifles and what appeared to be tear gas launchers. Residents walked freely among the military, and there was no sign of a daytime curfew.

The troop mobilization was helping authorities reassert control after the broadest, most sustained protests by Tibetans against Chinese rule in decades. Demonstrations had flared across Tibetan areas of Sichuan, Gansu and Qinghai provinces in support of protests that started in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa.
 
 
 
That's right, Communist China does what it does best; oppress the population as only true Communists can.  If you love liberal-Commies then you'll be mightily impressed with the Chinese government.  Over recent days they've shown us all what socialism can do when carried through to its natural and logical conclusion.  Most people in the world live in China, and most people in the world are horribly oppressed by the atheistic socialist Communists of the same country.  So the next time some fool asks you why you aren't a liberal, tell them it's because you don't like killing people.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hillary Clinton, Co-President for Eight Years

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 9:14:17 PM
The thousands of pages of Hillary Clinton's documents generated while the New York senator was first lady during husband Bill Clinton's presidency reveal a sort of "Co-President Hillary," according to the chief of Judicial Watch, the organization that filed a lawsuit to obtain their release.

About 11,000 pages of Mrs. Clinton's daily schedules were released today by the National Archives and Records Administration, and Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Fox News a quick overview revealed some interested activities.

"It looks like she was co-president, involved with Cabinet-level meetings," he told the network. "She was meeting with Cabinet-level officials on a daily basis."

He also said it appeared there was inappropriate campaign fundraising going on in the Clinton White House, based on a "short review" of those documents.

"The only reason there were no prosecutions," he said, "was the Clintons were running the Justice Department."

He also said it appeared that shortly after Clinton supporter Vincent Foster reportedly committed suicide, Mrs. Clinton had ordered her staff to clean out his office, interfering with what could have been the scene of a crime.

Nearly half – 4,800 – of the pages have parts blacked out, and archivists said that was done to protect the privacy of third parties who were mentioned in Mrs. Clinton's paperwork.

The Associated Press reported its own review of the documents showed her "tackling health care reform out of the gate, with a meeting three days after her husband's inauguration and many more as the year went on." Her plan to create a national health care administration eventually failed.

The AP also noted Mrs. Clinton helped her husband "win congressional approval of the North American Free Trade Agreement," which she now is criticizing.

Judicial Watch has posted links to the thousands of pages on its website.

"The Clintons have slow-pedaled this process but were unsuccessful in delaying the document release any further," Fitton said earlier. "However, this does not put an end to Judicial Watch's pursuit of Hillary's White House records, including her telephone logs."
 
 
 
 
Oh my.  I knew Bill Clinton was too much of a sex-crazed hick to run the White House!  Now we have the proof thanks to Judicial Watch and WND.  Hit the link above to get the whole story and to also make your way to the thousands of pages of Clinton documents posted from the Judicial Watch website.  I'm sure you'll read them all.
 
We also find that Hillary helped win approval for NAFTA, an agreement she now criticizes; sort-of like McCain voting against the Bush Tax Cuts but now supporting them, only in reverse.  You've just gotta love, love, love our whacky politicians; always changing their minds... to help the country of course. 
 
Well, it looks like the country is going to have one of three Democrat Senators as our new President come November.  You might as well pick the boob who actually has boobs and also ran the White House for eight years.  Remember, you can pick one of the two inexperienced Senators or you can choose the one who helped get us NAFTA, aggressively pursued socailist healthcare, and covered-up illegal campaign donations.  I think we have a winner!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Church Re-Printed and Supports Hamas Terror Manifesto!

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 8:55:57 PM
JERUSALEM – Sen. Barack Obama's Chicago church reprinted a manifesto by Hamas that defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist and compared the terror group's official charter – which calls for the murder of Jews – to America's Declaration of Independence.

The Hamas piece was published on the "Pastor's Page" of the Trinity United Church of Christ newsletter reserved for Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., whose anti-American, anti-Israel remarks landed Obama in hot water, prompting the presidential candidate to deliver a major race speech earlier this week.

Hamas, responsible for scores of shootings, suicide bombings and rocket launchings against civilian population centers, is listed as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

The revelation follows a recent WND article quoting Israeli security officials who expressed "concern" about Robert Malley, an adviser to Obama who has advocated negotiations with Hamas and providing international assistance to the terrorist group.

In his July 22, 2007, church bulletin, Wright reprinted an article by Mousa Abu Marzook, identified in the newsletter as a "deputy of the political bureau of Hamas." A photo image of the newsletter was captured and posted today by the business blog BizzyBlog. The Hamas piece was first published by the Los Angeles Times, garnering the newspaper much criticism.

According to senior Israeli security officials, Marzook, who resides in Syria alongside Hamas chieftain Khaled Meshaal, is considered the "brains" behind Hamas, designing much of the terror group's policies and ideology. Israel possesses what it says is a large volume of specific evidence that Marzook has been directly involved in calling for or planning scores of Hamas terrorist offensives, including deadly suicide bombings. He was also accused of attempting to set up a Hamas network in the U.S.

Marzook's original piece was titled, "Hamas' stand" but was re-titled "A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle" by Obama's church newsletter. The newsletter also referred to Hamas as the "Islamic Resistance Movement," and added in its introduction that Marzook was addressing Hamas' goals for "all of Palestine."

In the manifesto, Marzook refers to Hamas' "resistance" – the group's perpetuation of anti-Israel terrorism targeting civilians – as "legal resistance," which, he argues, is "explicitly supported by the Fourth Geneva Convention."

The Convention, which refers to the rights of people living under occupation, does not support suicide bombings or rocket attacks against civilian population centers, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America noted.

Marzook refers to Hamas' official charter as "an essentially revolutionary document" and compares the violent creed to the Declaration of Independence, which, Marzook states, "simply did not countenance any such status for the 700,000 African slaves at that time."

Hamas' charter calls for the murder of Jews. Among its platforms is a statement that the "[resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the rock and the tree will say: 'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him!'"

In his piece, Marzook says Hamas only targets Israel and denies that Hamas' war is meant to be waged against the U.S., even though Hamas officials have threatened America, and Hamas' charter calls for Muslims to "pursue the cause of the Movement (Hamas), all over the globe."

Trinity Church did not respond to a phone message requesting comment.

Obama's campaign also did not reply to phone and e-mail requests today for comment.

Obama aide wants talks with terrorists
 
 
 
Yes, you read correctly.  B. Hussein Obama's Trinity Church in Chicago, the one he and his family have attended for twenty years, the one that's lead by America-hating racist Jeremiah Wright, also re-published as part of Church materials a Hamas terror "manifesto" which claims terror as a legitimate practice, refuses to recognize Israel, calls for the murder of Jews, and compares itself to our Declaration of Independence.  The beliefs held by Hamas were proudly heralded by B. Hussein Obama's church and his lunatic pastor.  Follow the link above to read the whole thing.
 
For twenty years Obama has been soaked in a hateful terrorist view of our country that supports a group of Jihadist whose evil is second to none in all the world.  Al-Qaeda themselves have not managed to commit the regular abominations and atrocities carried-out by Hamas, and Obama's chruch of two decades revels in their ideology calling for the murdering of Jews and the destruction of Israel.
 
Democrat voters need to think long and hard before their primary.  Is this the man you really want to represent you in the race for the White House?  Is terror and hatred the banner in which you wish to be represented to the world?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Knowing Obama - Just Come Clean Barack

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 8:16:46 PM
Obama condemns Wright’s “incendiary rhetoric,” but says he can’t “disown” the man. What is it about this Democratic presidential candidate that attracts the likes of Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and The New Black Panther Party?

Former Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards once famously quipped, “The only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy.”

After being caught in bed with a live racist-/America-hater, Senator Barack Obama did rhetorical hand-stands to explain away the liaison.

Obama delivered his 5,000-word rationalization (“A More Perfect Union”) in Philadelphia on Tuesday. The New York Times was positively orgasmic, headlining its editorial hosanna “Mr. Obama’s Profile in Courage.”

The senator finally confronted his Wright problem out of necessity, not courage. His campaign threatened to sink under the weight of the minister’s nutty rhetoric. (Mean conservative talk-shows kept playing cuts from recordings of Wright’s sermons.)

You have to admire the way Obama nimbly pirouetted around Wright’s hysterical anti-Americanism.

Describing Wright’s statements as “incendiary language to express views that have the potential to widen the racial divide” and which “denigrate the greatness and goodness of this nation,” the candidate heroically declared that he had already “condemned” said statements “in unequivocal terms.”

Gee, maybe the New York Times is right. I guess it really takes guts for the front-runner for his party’s nomination to pronounce America “great” and “good.”

Then, the fearless candidate proceeded to forthrightly address what he knew and when he knew it – sort of.

“Did I know him (Wright) to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.” Of course, initially Obama claimed plausible deniability. (“None of these statements were ones that I had heard personally in the pews.”)

Note the following: Obama never tells us what form Wright’s occasional fierce criticism of “American domestic and foreign policy” took. He never explains in what ways the Rev’s rhetoric is considered “controversial.” Most importantly, he never discloses the form his allegedly strong disagreement took.
Did he:

1. Stand up in the middle of one of Wright’s hate-filled sermons and shout “Enough of this crap!”
2. Threaten to resign from the congregation.
3. Send a letter of protest to his pastor and spiritual mentor?
4. Express outrage to the church’s governing body?

Answer: None of the above.

For 20 years, Obama occupied a pew of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ and listened to Wright spew his poison week after week, month after month, year after year. But until the last few weeks – when his association with the rabid Rev. became an impediment to his triumphal march to the presidency -- there is no record of Obama protesting a single word of Wright’s “controversial” criticisms.

However, we do know that Wright married Obama and his wife, that he baptized both of the candidate’s children, that Obama once made a $20,000 gift to the church, that he called Wright his inspiration, and that he based his 2004 speech to the Democratic National Convention (and later the title of his best-selling book) on one of Wright’s sermons.
 
 
 
Just come clean Barack, admit that you and your lovely wife hate America and all the white people in it.  Admit that you both pray before bed that people just like me will go away and turn the whole country over to you without a fight.  Admit that white people aren't the only ones you distrust and fear; tell us about your disdain for Hispanics and Asians as well.  Admit the only white people you do like are from France and Russia.  Life's too short, even when you live to be 104, to keep all this bottled up inside. 
 
Your pastor knows better.  He opens himself up before God and everyone else to admit his hatred for America and anyone who's not considered black at least on a weekly basis.  Wait, doesn't that mean he's supposed to hate you too Barack?  How did he get past the fact your mother's white, and that you were raised by both her and your white grandmother who now has big fat tread marks on her from being thrown under the bus?  Deep down inside, when your cowering under the covers late at night in fear and hatred of whitey, do you wonder if your pastor actually hates you too for your genetic inferiority?  I'm just full of questions today Senator.  Let's see if I can come up with some more.
 
Did Jeremiah Wright sigh in relief when he married you to a black woman instead of having to realize his worst fears come to life before his very eyes?  Did he wince when he baptized your children knowing that they're one-quarter white?  Being your mentor, and having just now come to know the character of the man; surely these things have entered your mind once or twice in the past weeks.  Did you worry if you were going to get away with it?  Have you been quaking with guilt and having nightmares of "pastor" Wright condemning you at the pulpit instead of your enemies?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Yes, Iraq Had Unsettling al Qaeda Connections" by Nicholas Guariglia

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 7:44:51 PM
The proposition that Iraq, prior to our intervention, never had a connection to al Qaeda, or to any Jihadist movement in a broader sense, has prematurely congealed into conventional wisdom. Nevertheless, this exemption of the Hussein family is fallacious and untrue. It would be appropriate if we can look at the history and information we have — the known knowns, let’s say — in an empirical and apolitical manner, separating this discussion from the debate as to whether or not any of this merited war.

That is a separate opinion and another topic. With that said, until I hear a conclusive argument otherwise, I will consider the issue of Iraq’s sponsorship of terrorism a dead horse which requires continued beating.

This is the kind of stuff that is made up of scrambled captured data and thousands of pages of government documents, many of which have yet to be translated. So it may be best to keep it at the theoretical:

What do we know about collaboration?

We know that, despite continued insistence by some Czech officials, contrary evidence pretty much cements that the Atta-Prague story – where the lead 9/11 hijacker supposedly met with Iraqi intelligence agents prior to the attacks – is false. Iraq, we can positively claim, had nothing to do with the events of that day.

We know that the 9/11 Commission, which has been trumpeted as the end all-be all regarding this issue, states “to date we have seen no evidence that (earlier Iraq-al Qaeda contacts) ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship.” The findings continue, “Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.”

Let’s concede these points. Three counterpoints arise, however. Firstly, it should be noted that it was always unclear whether or not al Qaeda’s relationship with the Ba’athist government (which it distrusted immensely) had reached a collaborative level; secondly, it should be noted that al Qaeda is unique amongst the world’s terrorist networks in that it has few, if not zero, “collaborative” and “operational” relationships with other states and regimes (including their long-time patrons and ideological clones, the Islamists in Sudan and the Salafist Taliban guerrillas); and thirdly, the entire premise behind preemptive/preventative intervention is to prevent such collaboration.

Yet what does the 9/11 Commission report say about the relationship?

Some cite this testimony and are acute in washing their hands of the issue. “Iraq never attacked us, never worked with al Qaeda, end of story,” the reasoning goes. But there is more to it than meets the eye. In the same 9/11 Commission report which discounts a collaborative link, there is recognition of long-held attempts by both parties to cooperate against common opponents.

During his time in Sudan, we know that bin Laden himself “met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994… (bin Laden) is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but there is no evidence that Iraq responded to the request,” the report reads. The next few years saw “additional efforts to establish connections,” as bin Laden and Dr. Zawahiri sent out “a number of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation.”

The investigation continues, stating “Hussein’s efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis… led him to stay clear of bin Laden.” But in mid-1998, “the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative.” The report goes on, detailing how in March and July of that year al Qaeda operatives met with Iraqi intelligence agents. In 1999, during a period of “strains” with the Taliban, “Iraqi officials offered bin Laden a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Laden declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative.” Two years later, Kurdish Islamists in Iraq “with bin Laden’s help… reformed into an organization called Ansar al Islam.” Intelligence suggested at the time, and suggests today, that the “Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common Kurdish enemy,” namely, the other secular Kurdish leaders Jalal Talabani and Masoud Barzani, who were despised equally by the Islamists and the Ba’athists.

What does this all mean?

The point is not that there was any provable impending doomsday on the horizon, or that the Iraqi Ba’athists and the al Qaeda chaps were fond of each other. They were not fond of each other, and were ideologically in disagreement, inasmuch as the Ba’athists in Damascus and their Hezbollah surrogates in Beirut, or the Shi’a mullahs in Tehran and their Sunni beneficiaries in Gaza, conjure up diametrical opposition.

The point is simply that those who discount any unsettling link – or worse, and even more irresponsible, discount the possibility that the two entities might curtail their pride, hold their noses, and collude against innocents – ought to be challenged. And they ought to be challenged by sources and references they themselves cite when they assert there was no reason ever to be concerned.

So, there we have it: requests for basing privileges and offers of asylum, each of which were turned down not due to hostility but due to the unfavorable logistics of the moment. One looks at Hussein’s history of offering safe haven to the world’s most wanted men (Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, etc.), and Iraq’s preponderance to support Jihadist groups affiliated with al Qaeda as far away as Algeria (the GSPC) and the Philippines (the Abu Sayyaf Group), and it should be acknowledged that it was not entirely unreasonable for a statesman to look at Iraq and al Qaeda’s unclear relationship and say, “This is as far as it is ever going to get.”
 
 
 
Well done Nicholas Guariglia.  I too concede that it's not unreasonable for a politician to look at Iraq and al-Qaeda and conclude their relationship would go no further.  While someone could make that assumption, I certainly would not.  Given Saddam's history outlined in the article above, there's every reason to believe he would finally one day work with al-Qaeda.  We know he gave haven to Zarqawi when he fled Afghanistan after being wounded by coalition forces before we moved on Iraq. 
 
The problem with Saddam however was never really his al-Qaeda connections but the fact he used chemical and biological weapons against both his enemies and his own people.  Not to mention, which no one ever does, the 17 UN Resolutions he failed to comply with.  Which, if you remember, was what President Bush was repeating over and over again leading up to the war.  Saddam used WMDs, refused to comply with 17 consecutive UN Resolutions, and threw-out the UN inspectors as well after refusing to provide appropriate documentation and allow private interviews with his scientists.  This was reported on day and night leading up to the war in Iraq.  We were right to invade, we were right about his use of WMDs, and we were obviously right to show concern about his attempts to give haven to al-Qaeda throughout his tenure as dictator of Iraq.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Conquest Model of Islamic Terrorism" by Moorthy Muthuswamy

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 7:24:36 PM
The Western political, defense and intelligence establishments, for the most part, view Islam under the "religion model." In this model, aspirations of Muslims are seen to be no different from the ones in any other religious community. It acknowledges the violent track record of Muslims and its probable origins in Islamic scriptures, but hopes that, as is the case with other ethnic groups and nations, over the passage of time, Muslims too will eventually overcome the hurdles to become a cohesive component of the global community. This model implicitly assumes coexistence.

However, unlike any other religion, terrorism in the name of Islam, with the arrival of 9/11 attacks on America, has become a strategic threat to Western civilization. While still clinging to the religion model of Islam, the West is hoping to diffuse Islam-based terrorism through a multitude of approaches. These measures range from occupation of Muslim majority areas to crush the sources of terror, efforts to help build institutions for development and governing, use of massive amounts of aid, bring forth pressure on the financiers of terror, etc.

Smoldering Iraq, deteriorating Afghanistan, increasingly destabilized Pakistan, a virulent Iran, unabated funding for terror from Saudi Arabia and the unending supply of anti-American jihadists compel us to realize that American strategy in the global war on terror requires fresh perspectives and new approaches informed by deeper insights. Specifically, the religion model of Islamic terrorism itself requires rethinking.

Western sociologists and war strategists have mostly utilized the dynamics of Muslims vis-à-vis westerners and their ally, Israel, to influence what they see as "root causes" of terror. Prominent among these are the "grievances" Muslims feel in the hands of the West and Israel.

The most prominent grievance is Israel's continued military dominance of neighboring Middle Eastern nations and the unresolved status of predominantly Muslim Palestinians. Although one could argue that most of these grievances are self-inflicted, Muslims have managed to successfully transplant the idea that being part of the weaker civilization, they are the victims.

Wearing the mantle of a victim has its advantages, including the ability to camouflage aggression as a form of self-defense.

However, the dynamics of Muslim-non-Muslim interaction in the developing world tells an entirely different story. Far more aggressive tactics have been employed by Muslims against much weaker opponents, be it in Darfur against black Africans or against brown unbelievers in South Asia. Here too terrorism is employed, but only as part and parcel of a multi-front religious war of conquest (called jihad).

In the past sixty years, from every Muslim majority region of South Asia – without exception – be it Pakistan, Bangladesh or from India's own Kashmir valley, non-Muslims have been driven out in massive numbers to Hindu-majority India. This occurred when Muslim populations in these regions obtained political power. In 1971 about three million Hindus were slaughtered by the Pakistani army in the then East Pakistan and many more were driven to India, never to return. Surrounded by many Islamic nations, even the mostly non-Muslim India is seeing signs of an Islamic siege – the necessary instrument of an Islamic conquest.

This data bespeaks conquest in the name of Islam, using terror and more. This has no parallel with any other religion in the modern era. Most of these expulsions and genocides occurred before 1972 – well before the large-scale infusion of petrodollars and Wahhabism. This occurred despite the populations sharing ethnicity, language, culture and food habits. Also notable is that unlike the advanced, powerful and wealthy West, South Asia consists of populations that are among the most impoverished and deprived on the planet.

The geographical extent and the size of Muslim populations (about a third of the worldwide total) in South Asia make the above data an unlikely anomaly. This data is indicative of absolute violation of coexistence and hence is outside of the scope of the religion model. It compels one to scrutinize the roots of Islamic scriptures and study Islamic history of conquest.

Bill Warner has published a ground-breaking statistical analysis of the Islamic trilogy (consisting of the Koran, Hadith and Sira). His analysis emphasizes the point that that the Islamic scripture is predominantly political and that the religion itself was probably designed to extend Islam's founder Mohammed's powerbase upon an edifice of theology.

That a conquest-based ideology should use religion in its framework should be no surprise. Religion provides enduring and powerful legitimacy, inspires followers and helps impose the will of a civilization on unsuspecting alien populations.

Had western analysts been perceptive to the ongoing dynamics of the Islamic conflict in South Asia, they would have likely concluded that that the religion model of Islamic terrorism would be grossly violated by this data and that a different model is required.

Indeed, the conquest model of Islamic terrorism not only explains the data discussed concerning South Asia, the enduring Israel-Palestinian conflict too may be readily understood through this model. The revealing feature of the conquest model is the Muslim passion for conquest through jihad-building, not nation or community building. It comes as no surprise that significant aid given to the Palestinians by Europe and others have been, to the most part, wasted and the jihad directed at Israel continues.

The religion model would have the grateful Islamic world thanking America for siding with the Muslims both in Afghanistan (during the Soviet occupation) and more recently in the Balkans, both in words and in action. Instead, as part of the conquest vision, America has been relentlessly attacked by Islamists, due to its preeminence as the non-Muslim super-power.

The conquest model is a much more inclusive and nuanced one, where terror is just one of the many tools for achieving objectives. It also explains why the Muslim population in Europe is fast growing, angry and is disfranchised (through self-infliction) – to deliberately create conditions conducive to Europe's demographic conquest by the Muslims. The religion model of Islam also fails here, as it would have likely predicted that the transplanted Muslims would avail themselves of the opportunities like the Hindus in Britain and participate in its national aspirations.

Institutionalized mistreatment and repression of Muslim women has long puzzled many observers. But this is readily understood in the context of the conquest model and with the observation that Mohammed, the founder of Islam, by historical accounts, was a strong male and that his conduct was fully consonant with long established cultural precedents.

It is not the intention here to claim that the conquest model of Islamic terrorism is an all-encompassing one. Yet, this model is far more successful in explaining the dynamics of Islamic conflicts and societal outlook of Muslims – including the contemporary ones – than the religion model.

In the context of the conquest model, the Western approach to the war on terror would indeed be very different. For instance, the notion of introducing democracy in Muslim nations such as Iraq or Afghanistan without weakening Islamic ideological hold on the population will be considered flawed. Islamic religious institutions in the West will be seen as instruments of conquest of unbelievers and a repressive element in the life of Muslim citizens (these institutions are now protected under the religion model on the grounds of religious freedom). A Muslim minority’s drive to segregate themselves through special treatments will be seen as the first step toward creating their own exclusive place and eventually their own land – a form of conquest.

In the conquest model, Islam itself is seen as less a religion and more as an ideology of conquest – as an affront to liberty and wealth-creation, much like communism. From this perspective it is difficult to foresee how Islam can be reformed any more than Communism has been. This view makes it possible to wage a far more comprehensive ideological, political and military warfare against what is plausibly an ideology of conquest.
 
 
 
If the conquest model is correct in interpreting Islam, then we have indeed made some grave miscalculations in dealing with this particular ideology.  The conquest model accurately explains the history of Islam including Mohammed and the Qur'an.  Much of this has been brought to light by many brilliant writers, but I've never seen it put together to form a complete picture of what we're dealing with until now.  All the facts we know about Islam and Jihad tells us that the conquest model as an explanation of the Muslim world is true.  Everything they do as a religion, everything they pray for, is geared towards conquering the unbelievers of the world by the sword.
 
Those who don't convert, if lucky, are forced into dhimmitude- made into second and third-class citizens (slaves) with higher taxes and less wages paid than that of Muslims.  A great many of us in the West would sooner die fighting than submit to Islam, including myself and my family.  As I've shown you here on this very site, the Qur'an commands that infidels (unbelievers) are to be executed if we refuse to convert.  In most cases Islamists would rather we just be killed. 
 
We ultimately have three options when faced with the conquest model of Islam.  Submit, die, or fight.  The former is hardly an option and the latter is exactly what Islam will get if those of us who love God and freedom have anything to say about it.  Until the Western World forces a change of leadership we are on the losing side of this war.  With cowards and liars leading our armies we cannot hope to defeat the Jihadists and continue to live as free God-fearing people.  The disease that is Islam will only be cured by the righteous among us.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Shin Bet Spies on its Own People Instead of Seeking Justice

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:19:07 PM
An announcement posted and circulated in Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem in recent days warns students that a Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) agent, masquerading as a friend of one of the eight students killed by a terrorist in the school two weeks ago, has been frequenting the school grounds and trying to glean information from students, Army Radio reported Thursday.
 
"Keep your eyes open and avoid unnecessary conversations," says the announcement, which asserts that the parents of one student spoke to the suspicious-looking man and understood that he was trying to obtain information about possible revenge measures.

On Saturday, the Shin Bet said it had completed a probe into media reports of involvement of a rabbi from Mercaz Harav in plans to carry out a revenge attack and had found them baseless.

The Shin Bet statement dismissed a report that was broadcast on Channel 1 last week by diplomatic correspondent Ayala Hasson according to which a group of right-wing Jews had received permission from several rabbis to avenge the terrorist attack at the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva on March 6 in Jerusalem in which eight students were killed and nine were wounded.

Several days before, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter told National Religious Party MK Zevulun Orlev that neither the police nor the Shin Bet had information concerning such a plot. 

Security officials explained Saturday that one of the main reasons for issuing the statement was to prevent the defaming of an entire sector in society - the National-Religious camp - as well as Mercaz Harav, whose students were reported to have been involved in the alleged plot.
 
 
 
 
What's the point here exactly?  The prevention of justice?  If so, the Shin Bet is surely doing its best to make sure justice never occurs for those who murdered the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva students in cold blood.  Wouldn't it be nice if the Shin Bet were spending time and resources on arresting those who are guilty, and maybe just maybe aiding those willing to give their time to enforce justice.  The reason there's even discussion of avenging those dead students is because those considering it know their government won't do what needs to be done: a speedy apprehension, inquisition, and execution of those responsible for the Yeshiva atrocity.  Heaven forbid there be justice for Jews!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Is Anybody Listening?" by Eden Lieberman

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:06:51 PM
It’s hard for me to explain what my family has been going through. The stress, the phone calls to my father every five minutes, and the tensions that make us fight with each other.
 
Recently, four Qassam rockets landed in my kibbutz, including one in the swimming pool. The radio announced that there were no casualties, but when I walked on the path leading to the pool I did see a casualty: A bird. A dove.

A dove of all things, meant to symbolize peace and tranquility, suffered shrapnel wounds to its head. This sight caused me to feel anger and hatred, and for a moment to truly understand the reality we live in. I know that some will say it was “only a dove,” but for me the symbolism was clear. Hamas knows we exist but it does everything in its power to hurt us.

I feel a mixture of frustration and confusion, fear and weakness, pain and anger. But more than anything, I feel that nobody listens.

I go through a constant emotional storm that does not let go. I have had so much practice that I feel like an Olympic champion in running-away-from-Qassam sprints. My response to the Color Red alert is illogical. I cannot even describe it for you in words. You cannot explain this feeling to someone who has not experienced it.

For the time being, God has protected me and my family, but I don’t know for how long He would be able to safeguard us all.
 
It is important for me to take this opportunity to invite all the ministers in the Israeli government to visit and stay over at our kibbutz. For one night, I want them to feel what I feel every day, the whole day.

Yet despite all, I still haven’t lost hope – the hope that one day things will be good around here.
 
 
 
 
Eden Lieberman is a 13 year-old girl living in Kibbutz Nir-Am, Israel.  Wonderfully well-written for anyone, regardless of their age.  Needless to say I was touched by Eden's words.  If Israeli leadership had an ounce of guts instead of constant cowardice they would take Eden up on her offer.  One 13 year-old girl shows more courage than the whole of the Israeli government.  It would be shameful if politicians had any shame to feel. 
 
Eden sprints from Qassam rockets raining down from Gaza while Condi Rice jets around the Middle-East coddling terrorists, while B. Hussein Obama complains that no one feels sorry for him, while his wife hates America, while Communist sympathizers in my country and in Israel complain they don't have enough money to remain unemployed, and while her own Prime Minister Ehud Olmert retreats from evil like a craven cow.  Eden Lieberman, at 13 years-old, knows more of the reality of the world and facing evil than most everyone elected to office in the civilized world.  Our leaders have less experience than she does.  Put her in charge and you fools might actually get some results!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bin Laden: Palestine Can Only Be Re-Taken "With Fire and Iron"

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:47:53 PM
Pan-Arab Al-Jazeera TV has broadcast what it describes as a new audio tape by Osama bin Laden in which the al-Qaida leader slams Palestinian negotiations with Israel and urges holy war for the liberation of Palestine.

Bin Laden says in the recording that "Palestine cannot be retaken by negotiations and dialogue, but with fire and iron."
 
 
 
Re-taking a state which never existed.  Ludricrous.  Palestine exists today for no other reason than to kill Jews.  It's only purpose is to rain down rockets on Israel.  The Palestinians have no historical right to exist as a state, that's what Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon are for.  Muslims have every other country in the Middle-East in which to live but the only one they want is Israel, not because it belongs to them but because it's there and filled with infidels.  If Israel did not exist the Islamists would pick other non-Muslim countries and proceed to take them over.  It's not going to end until the terrorists of the Middle-East are dead.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

85% of Palestinians Support Terror Against Israel - 93% of Religious Jews Oppose Withdrawals

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:38:33 PM
(IsraelNN.com) Two recent polls find a vast majority of Arab supporting terror attacks and a growing Israeli majority opposed to further withdrawals.

A recent Palestinian Authority poll shows that 84 percent of PA Arabs approve of the massacre at Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva in Jerusalem, where eight students were gunned down and ten wounded.

The poll, carried out by Ramallah-based pollster Khalil Shikaki, interviewed 1,270 PA Arabs. 64 percent support the rocket attacks on Israeli cities and towns such as Sderot and Ashkelon launched from Hamas-controlled Gaza. Those who oppose the attacks don’t necessarily do so on moral grounds, but rather strategic considerations.

A slim majority of PA Arabs support Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas for president over Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas.

In February of last year, a Near East Consulting (NEC) poll found that 75 percent of PA Arabs do not think that Israel has a right to exist.

Referring to the most recent poll, Zionist Organization of America President Morton Klein said the results were not surprising. "This poll, unfortunately, merely confirms the results of innumerable earlier polls, showing Palestinians to approve of terrorism that targets innocent Jewish men, women and children and rejecting peace or co-existence with Israel as a Jewish state. In these circumstances, it is clear that a Palestinian state would be nothing more that the world's newest terrorist state. It would be folly for either Israel or the United States to support the establishment of a Palestinian state under such conditions and it noteworthy that the former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff, Lt.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon, former CIA director R. James Woolsey and pre-eminent Middle East historian Bernard Lewis have all come out in opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state."

Israelis Tired of Withdrawals
A poll commissioned by SOS-Israel phrased the question about future withdrawals: “In light of the results of the Disengagement plan from the Gaza Strip, are you in favor of a continued withdrawal from Judea and Samaria?"

64.9 percent answered that they oppose further withdrawals and 23.9 percent said are in favor. The others would not answer the question. Divided into religious demographics, 95 percent of Hareidi-religious opposed withdrawals, followed by 90.9 of the national religious and 57 percent of the non-observant public.
 
 
 
The Palestinians prove themselves incapable of peacefully co-existing with the Jews of Israel.  What's worse is they are proud of it!  Palestinians are a terrorist people who commit murder and torture while behaving worse than most animals on the planet.  They are monsters who have no right to live under the circumstances of their ideology.  I wholeheartedly agree with John McCain on one point; if Hamas and those like them are allowed to continue and win they will spread far outside the area.  If Hamas enjoys killing Jews then they enjoy killing Americans.  This is our war just as much as it is Israel's.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain Visits Israel

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:18:06 PM
US presidential hopeful John McCain says he understands Israel's response to rocket attacks by Palestinian militant groups. 

Mr McCain was speaking in the Israeli town of Sderot, which has often been hit by rocket fire from the Gaza Strip.

"No nation in the world can be attacked without responding," he told reporters.

Mr McCain, a Republican senator who looks set to become the party's presidential candidate this autumn, also called for progress towards peace.

The Arizona senator, who is on a fact-finding trip to the Middle East, expressed sympathy for the people of Sderot.

"The fact is I come from a border state and if people were rocketing my state, I think that the citizens from my state would advocate a very vigorous response," he said.

Israel launched a military offensive in Hamas-controlled Gaza three weeks ago in response it said to Palestinian militant attacks.

More than 120 people were killed in the violence, most of them Palestinians.

Abbas call
The security situation along the border between Gaza and Israel lent urgency to US involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, said Mr McCain.

But he said he was not sure that a peace deal could be reached this year, despite the US administration's best efforts.

Mr McCain earlier had talks with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.
After talks with Ms Livni, he reaffirmed his commitment to Israel and attacked the Islamist militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.

"If Hamas and Hezbollah succeed here, they are going to succeed everywhere," Mr McCain told reporters.

Mr McCain also spoke on the telephone with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, afterwards telling the media that Mr Abbas "wants to get this [peace] process started".

He added that Mr Abbas did "not support the kind of activity that is taking place in Gaza" - a reference to the rocket attacks on southern Israel.
 
 
 
I'm encouraged slightly by McCain's words to Israel.  However, it's important to set the record straight on one comparison he espoused.  While McCain does come from a border state, it's obvious he would so nothing whatsoever about attacks to his people from another country.  Thousands of people die every year on our border with Mexico, we just unearthed about 3,500 of them, and McCain has done nothing at all to prevent this or to fight back in any way.  In fact, McCain co-sponsored the McCain/Kennedy Anti-Security Horror giving amnesty to tens of millions of illegal aliens that include terrorists and murderers of the worst sort.  So, to tell Israel he would hear the call of his people and retaliate as well sounds just a tad hallow when the facts are presented.  On the bright side, there's no way it can be said that McCain would support Israel less than Hillary or B. Hussein Obama.  We at least have that going for us.  If he did better than Condi Rice I would be happy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Abbas' "2008 Return"

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:06:45 PM
DEBKAfile publishes here for the first time details of the Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ master plan for wrecking Israel’s 60th anniversary celebrations. The project is called the “2008 Return” 

Its highlights are disclosed here with DEBKAfile’s comments.

The Palestinian leader has circulated guidelines for three million Palestinians to leave their homes on the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon on May 14 and march on Israel’s borders, including the Green Line. The march is to take place a week after Israel’s Independence Day on May 8, 2008. If Israel obstructs their passage, they will strike camp and live in tents until Israel surrenders and lets them through.

This stunt will be accompanied by pressure from the Palestinian Authority on international organizations to force Israel to implement UN Resolution 194, passed by the General Assembly on Dec. 11, 1948.

DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources report that Abbas commissioned the “2008 Return” project from a special Fatah forum headed by Ziyad Abu Ain from Ramallah, deputy minister for Palestinian prisoners in the Salam Fayyad government and close associate of Marwan Barghouti, who is serving life for five terrorist murders.

Operation “2008 Return” is described in its introduction as a decision by the Palestinian people “to implement UN resolution (194), declare themselves holders of the UN blue banner, and return to their homeland, from which they were forcefully expelled [Jaffa, Haifa, Acre, Ramla, Lod, Ashkelon etc]… in order to live in peace and security with their Israeli neighbors.”

[DEBKAfile: This motion is dredged up from the past as though history had stopped at that point and the subsequent 60 years of Arab belligerence, endless conflict and further UN resolutions had never happened. Another part of the same resolution appointed a Conciliation Committee to establish contact with the parties and assist them reach a final settlement of outstanding questions. This part was buried under decades of Arab rejection.]

The introduction goes on to state: “Neither the Jews nor the international community can stand against the desire of the Palestinian people to exercise their right of return to their homeland and to their homes, land, holy places [Jerusalem] and heritage.”

[DEBKAfile: Mahmoud Abbas incidentally lays claim to Christian as well as Muslim holy sites – therefore also Nazareth and the Sea of Galilee sites.]

The introduction is followed by a set of instructions to Palestinian communities, of which seven are the most relevant:

1. All returnees must attach the UN resolution and refugee card on their chests.

2. All returnees must bring their tents and other goods with them. If obstructed by Israeli forces from reaching their land, they must set up their tents on the border and stay there until Israel surrenders and allows them to cross.

[The plan is to deploy hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in tent cities indefinitely on all of Israel’s borders.]

3. Jewish friends are called upon to assist in resolving the Palestinian refugee problem.

4. Arab governments and friends all over the world are called on to support the logistics of the operation.

5. Palestinian holders of foreign citizenships, especially US and European, are to charter planes for flights to Israel or neighboring countries on May 14, 2008, as well reserving passage on tens of ships to dock at Israeli ports on this date.

6. Personal invitations will be extended to all world leaders for their support.

7. Kings and leaders of Islamic countries will be invited, as well as members of the Israeli government and Knesset. Special invitations will be sent to the US president and members of the Senate.

The document ends with an appeal to the Arab nation, especially the Saudi King Abdullah, to support the operation politically, diplomatically and materially.

DEBKAfile’s Palestinian sources report that Mahmoud Abbas intends to submit his ambitious master plan to the summit of Arab rulers meeting in Damascus March 29.

There is no knowing how much support he will win from Arab governments or whether the different Palestinian communities will rise to his call. The whole plan may simply fold for lack of response – or not. Abbas’ main objectives appear to be to upstage the warlike Hamas and throw a wet blanket over Israel’s anniversary celebrations.
 

 
Mahmud Abbas' "master plan" is to stage a riot on the borders of Israel.  If the Palestinians have homes in Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon then why not simply live there?  Answer:  Living in those countries deprives them of murdering Jews with their time instead of being productive members of civilized society.  Here's a thought; instead of murdering Jews and marching on Israel, stay home and raise your families outside of violence and inhuman behavior. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12345678910…115116Next »