Archive for November, 2008

WAR WARNING- LOW! Pakistan-India

Thursday, November 27th, 2008

William R Collier Jr.
The American Freedomist
Twitter
Headline News

UPDATE-

Nov. 30 2AM

I am talking to people in Mumbai, hope to have interviews on our BTR show in coming week, and it seems there were 30 total terrorists, but only 10 are accounted for. Also, numerous locals say the terrorists had MP7′s not AK’s, which accounts for the carnage because these are more rapid fire weapons.

I am seeing a possible link, and this seems odd, with the Tamil Tigers naval wing.

I am asking people in India, across the political and religious spectrum, thanks to a new contact we just made, who they blame and what they think should happen.

Presently, it seems Pakistan is making the right noises, but the Indians will want serious actions, serious actions the present government may not be ABLE to take, which could be a real problem.

The extremists in Pakistan are risking the existence of the State, trying to foment a war with India, or, barring that, simply trying to force a showdown between the tribal areas and the Pakistani government, perhaps in the hope of fomenting an ISI run coup, which would, of course, lead to war with India.

The AFN issued a warning , low, for India and Pakistan and we were going to cancel it today, but we are going to hold off a bit longer now.

Let us hope our concerns are not going to be realized.

Bill Collier
The American Freedomist

Pakistan promises to aid India

Stating that India should not jump to conclusions Hussain Hariqqa, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US, promised Pakistan’s support in the fight against terror.

This more conciliatory tone is encouraging. If rogue elements within the ISI it is probable that the Pakistani government will take more serious measures to root them out.

Al Quedas’ gambit was to provoke Conflict ond undermine Pakistan’s stability- assuming that this was Al Queda (we are still give this s confidence level Of 4 out of 5). If this is true, the gambit is probably not over.

Assuming that the Pakistani government continues to be sympathetic the ball is in the Indian government’s court. So far, the Indian government is painting a picture of foreign involvement and could conceivably take this opportunity to settle unresolved issues with Pakistan. This seems illogical but it IS possible.

We will continue to cover this with more analysis.

MORE ENCOURAGNG NEWS- Indian Parliamentarian, Congress Spokesman Rajiv Shukla Thursday said that none of the Central and Maharashtria governments has so far said anything about the linkage of Pakistan with Mumbai terrorist attacks. In a telephonic interview with Geo News, the Indian Parliamentarian said that such impression is being created by the Indian media which should be avoided.

He said that “both India and Pakistan are victims of terrorism and instead of blaming each other they should cooperate in defeating the common enemy”.

This now laces Pakistan in a tough position, as already noted, in that they will have to face a terrorist insurgency in the Kashmir border area as well as in the tribal lands near Afghanistan.

The crisis in Mumbai is not voer yet, however, and now there is talk about the 9 hour delay before Indian forces entered the Taj hotel along with a posible link to the Tamil Tigers, in Sri Lanka, who do have a known history of mounting low grade naval operations. It is posible that LTTE, the Tamil Tigers organizations, assisted the terrorists.

What seems clear is that the terroriusts want everyone to THINK Pakistan or the ISI were involved. The Indian Prime Minister is now talking in terms of tougher anti-terrorism laws and I can see a picture where the Indians blame the Tamilis for supporting rogue elements if the Pakistanis give them cover by in some adminitting that native terrorists were involved and vowing to go after them with ful force. The Pakistanis are talking in terms of being victims themselves of the same terrorism.

We are not ready yet to cancel our war warning, but we are much more posisitve about the end results of this action. The terrorists would like to take more action, but they may not be able to.

Earlier reports of some sort of gunfire and explosions in Karachi, Pakistan could just as likely have been a government operation against possible terrorist groups and so far there is a new blackout about the incident with no more news coming from that city.

Barring unforeseen events, which we must allow for, it appears that the Indian government is keeping its cool, the Pakistani government is being more conciliatory, and the gambit may have failed in its primary aims. Its secondary aims, of causing financial disruptions to India may meet with limited success but so farAsian and Indian stocks have not been adversly affected, perhaps tourism in Mumbai will be affected, but that has yet to be seen.

———————

We issue a WAR WARNING for India and Pakistan with a LOW probability based on a potential visceral reaction by the Indian government, in response to popular oputrage, which may not be amendable to logic or diplomacy.

The American Freedomist will be reviewing the POTENTIAL for an armed conflict between India and Pakistan over the Mumbai (Bombay) attacks.

“They are from across the border and perhaps from Faridkot, Pakistan. They tried to pretend that they were from Hyderabad,” Major General R.K. Hooda, leading the military operation to flush out the extremists, told reporters.

I am going to be monitoring diplomatic channels and checking with military intel sources as well as new sources in the region to asses the possibility for a war between India and Pakistan.

We issue a MEDIUM War Warning as a precaution in view of the possible visceral reaction to this attack, not do to any specific intelligence on troop movements or activities. REPORT any news about this incident to bill@freedomist.com or use the comment feature.

We consider this to be a high threat to peace in the region and are looking for signs of troop movements, rhetoric from the Indian authorities, and possible rhetoric from Pakistan.

Possible de-escalating factors may include a statement of intent from Pakistan to renew efforts to combat terrorism in the troubled Kashmir area and to offer cooperation with Indian authorities, which while beneficial to Indian-Pakistani relations would further escalate tensions between the government and the population of Pakistan which tends to lean towards the terrorists in its sympathies overall.

This development complicates US activities in the region and places US and NATO forces in a nation that is land-locked and that is surrounded by more or less anti-US powers leaving only Pakistan as the AIR BRIDGE to Afghanistan. The purpose of the terrorists is to foment unrest in Pakistan, even at risk of war with India, and to thereby jeopardize the Air Bridge making continued deployment of US and NATO forces untenable.

This is not to say the strategy will work, but this is indeed the strategy.

We estimate, with 4 out 5 confidence, that Al Quada was behind this attack and that further attacks in the US or Indonesia are envisioned by the enemy.

The initial response to the crisis by the President Elect, who has gained the political leadership even before being sworn in, has been tepid and halting, a fact not lost on the enemy.

In a related story, warning of an Al Queda attack on New York Subways or Train stations are, in our estimation, a diversion from the real target but even with this in mind, US law enforcement and the military appear to continue to enjoy the upper hand in terms of tracking and stopping terrorist plots. Eventually, of course, this will fail and no doubt Al Quada wants to cause a failure.

An apparent COMITY of action between Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Al Queda is more likely a result of a shared belief that the new president will be uncertain in his responses and that now, during the transition, is the time to seek out ways to undermine the US.

US officials are no doubt shuttling between Islamabad and New Delhi in an effort to prevent a serious rupture between Pakistan and India, however viseral passions often trump the most logical and well intended diplomacy.

The Cross and the Crescent (II)

Thursday, November 27th, 2008

From the desk of Dr Sam C. Holliday, director of the Armiger Cromwell Center

~~-:-~~

 

 Continued from Part I

Strategy of the Third Jihad
It is a mistake to focus only on terror. The strategy of the Third Jihad is far more complex. It is to be expected that the media, politicians, and those trained for conventional War will focus on the violence of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Taliban. After all, this is why the current conflict is called a War on Terror – although terror is only a tactic.

However, the most significant threat to Western culture comes from non-violent means: infiltration into Western countries; the conversion of people to Islam; subversion of Western institutions – particularly academic; manipulation of the media; demonstrations and other forms of confrontation; penetration of Western political parties through funding; and manipulation of Western legal systems. The objective is to undermine confidence in traditional values as well as legal and political systems.

This is not to suggest that terror, and the direct action units of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Taliban, are not important tools used by the Third Jihad, but to suggest that they are not necessarily the most important. Neutralizing those using terror tactics is a necessary condition, but it is not a sufficient condition.

The Third Jihad is a continuation of a religiously inspired movement based on an ideology teaching that it is every Muslim’s duty to use any means necessary to compel everyone’s submission to “the way of the Prophet.” After Muhammad’s death, in the seventh century, the First Jihad spread under the caliphs (vice regents) west from Medina across North Africa and then into Spain, France, and Italy, and east across the Middle East deep into Southwest Asia. Then Islam consolidated its control of the lands conquered.

The First Jihad ended in 1492 when Islam was driven out of Spain. The Second Jihad started with the fall of Constantinople in 1453. The Ottoman Turks then implanted Islam in the Balkans and established hegemony over lands from North Africa to India. The Second Jihad was stopped in 1682 with an unsuccessful attempt to capture Vienna; it was held in check during the modern era (eighteenth and nineteenth centuries) by European power, and ended in 1924.

In 1979 the Third Jihad started with the Shah of Iran being overthrown by Shiite followers of Ayatollah Khomeini. It was given focus in February 1998 with a Sunni fatwa, which declared war on America and its allies. The Third Jihad is just another effort to spread Islam – and to take down the Great Satan. The goal of the Third Jihad is to replace all secular governments from Morocco to Indonesia with a single Great Caliphate that would then be able to convert the rest of the world to Islam. This is why it is an illusion to think that the threat will end just as soon as Western armed forces are withdrawn from the Middle East.

Among the tactics and techniques used by the Third Jihad are:

  • Infiltrating and taking over existing political, social, campus, and cultural organizations to realign them towards the goals of the Third Jihad;
  • Using deception to mask the intended goals;
  • Cultivating the intellectual community into “understanding Islam,” including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize positions of the Third Jihad and to chronicle the peaceful history of Islam;
  • Using destructive criticism to weaken those in authority by suggesting they are an elite mistreating the “disadvantaged” for their own personal interests;
  • Maintaining the appearance of “moderation” by avoiding public alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals;
  • Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratic institutions on all levels in Europe and America, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
  • Using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into the service of the Third Jihad;
  • Monitoring Western media in order to quickly respond to “smears against Muslims;” Forming alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that can provide aid and support to Islamic action groups;
  • Keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind;”
  • Establishing a right to Sharia law within their communities;
  • Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for all Muslims;
  • Collecting funds to indefinitely support the Third Jihad globally; and
  • Establishing financial networks to fund actions in target countries.

These tactics and techniques are used differently within each target country to weaken or overthrow those in authority. However, the Third Jihad does have a general strategy of five stages in which conflict moves from peace, through irregular warfare, to war. This is the same strategy used by insurgents for centuries. The tactics and techniques listed above are the activities by the insurgents – who can be either home grown or from other countries – during the first, second, and third stages.

Terror is not used in the first stage (Creation), and it has an insignificant role in the second stage (Organization). Terror plays an important role in the third stage (Control of the People) and is expanded in the fourth stage (Territorial Control), as the conflict becomes hybrid war. In the final stage (Overthrow) violence goes beyond terror to become conflict between the insurgents/embryonic state and the authorities of a state/failed state. In fact often the final stage can accurately be called a civil war.

- Creation
A few individuals organize clandestinely. They increase the size of the underground and attempt to cause or accentuate insecurity among the people and weaken the government’s influence.

- Organization
The leaders continue to build their organization, camouflaging it behind legitimate political, social, humanitarian, campus, religious, and labor organizations. Action to cause insecurity and dissatisfaction grows bolder with strikes, riots, selective terrorism, and intimidation. The insurgents’ aim at this stage is to cause the officials to react awkwardly and to take politically unwise steps.

- Control of the People
Direct action units are organized, but terrorism is restricted. The aim is to weaken loyalty to the government. Warfare is everywhere and nowhere. The insurgents control certain areas, which the police avoid. The goal is to transfer the loyalty of the people from the government to the insurgent organization.

- Territorial Control
The insurgents create a base of operations and establish a “liberation government” to rival the legal authorities. Direct action units start to operate from the base areas, and the use of terror increases. Psychological operations, to gain approval for the insurgents and contempt for the government, are intensified both internally and externally.

- Overthrow
Operations are conducted to cause the fall of the government and to establish the insurgents as the legal government. During this stage the conflict might remain irregular warfare or it might be transformed into civil war.

Strategy to Defeat the Third Jihad
More effective ways to neutralize the tactics, techniques and strategies of the Third Jihad must be used in the future if it is to be defeated. We must defeat, deter, or neutralize our enemy. In irregular warfare there is never the final victory of conventional war – success is defined by stability.

First, we must recognize that destroying a few leaders will not end the Third Jihad. The leaders represent an important segment of our enemy, but not its totality. Second, we do not want to make Islam or an entire culture our enemy. Third, we must recognize that the demise of Israel will not mean an end of the Third Jihad, even though Israel will always be used to rally support for the Third Jihad. Fourth, we must recognize that withdrawal from the Middle East will only embolden the evildoers (Hirabahists) and make the final clash of civilizations more likely.

The best strategy for those that want to defend Western culture would be to:

1. Assure that Iraq, and the rest of the Middle East, is stabilized and that worldwide no state is willing to support insurgents attempting to overthrow those in authority.

2. Work toward energy independence through: (a) developing alternative sources of oil so that our economy is not dependent on energy sources that our enemies can disrupt; (b) using less oil, and less energy overall, while maintaining our standard of living; (c) developing new sources of energy – primarily nuclear.

3. Adopt a policy of containment until the faults within the Third Jihad cause its ideological certitude to collapse, and pursue policies, both overt and covert, to hasten this collapse.

4. Face the fact that communication superiority is a prerequisite for success in irregular warfare, just as air superiority is a prerequisite for victory in conventional war. To date we have been ineffective in the strategic communication campaign to strengthen the will of our own people, to weaken the will of our enemies, and gain the support of people around the world. In the current battle of wills, strategic communication is the center of gravity. This conflict is not to be won through economic, diplomatic, and military means.

5. Develop a message as effective as Muhammad’s in winning hearts and minds and a sociopolitical structure based on that message which is more powerful than that of the global revivalist movement known as the Third Jihad. Recognize that the true believers of the Third Jihad are willing to suffer, sacrifice, deceive, kill, conquer, and die for their cause. Recognize that we need true believers in our cause.

6. Encourage the respected leaders and scholars of the Islamic world to condemn those using violence in the name of Islam in religious terms, rather than in Western secular terms, and condemn those in the West who give aid, comfort, and support to the evildoers (Hirabahists).

7. Make a distinction between war, irregular warfare, and peace and develop stability forces, distinctive from war fighting forces, specifically for operations in irregular warfare. Integrate members of all government agencies (specifically Defense, State, CIA, USIA, USAID, and Commerce) into the stability forces. Deploy war fighting forces as a deterrent in peace and irregular warfare but only engage them in combat for extended periods of time with a declaration of war by Congress. Use stability forces in overt and covert operations during peace and irregular warfare. Revise the JCS Unified Command Plan into a National Security Operations Plan so that the stability forces have adequate supervision and support during peace and irregular warfare.

8. Take actions to counter the effects of postmodern thought on Western culture. The weakening of the will in Europe and America, and ability to protect Western culture as it developed in the modern era (until the 1960s), has many causes. Partly it is the result of actions by those disillusioned by World War I and World War II, and partly it is the result of the cycle of rise and fall common to all groups. The ability to counter the Third Jihad depends on strengthening the will of all of those who value Western culture.

Nation-building
We need to become more skillful in getting others to build their own nations at little or no cost to us. Those identifying with the nation being built must accomplish nation-building. Others can assist, but the leadership, dedication, vision, and energy must come from within – from those who are part of the nation being built. At the heart of nation-building is the creation and maintenance of a common sense of identity from which behavior is self regulated without coercion. Neocolonialists (those of the Wilsonian School) often assumed that the United States can build nations – this is foolhardy.

- Caption: Afghan heroin, police woman Malalai Kakar -

Nation-building requires continual attention to four interrelated tasks:

1. Achieve stability within a specific territory.
2. Provide effective local authority.
3. Organize and motivate the people.
4. Satisfy aspirations of the people.

Achieving stability is a prerequisite for the other three tasks. However, stability cannot be seen as an end in itself. It is merely a means to the end of nation-building. However, when the focus is on the creation of a state, actions to control the territory of that state can be carried to the extreme – such actions actually hinder nation-building since they do not produce a self-regulating equilibrium. This has been a major reason the neo-colonialists have failed to achieve long-term benefits.

Stability is achieved when the government of a state has a monopoly on force within the territory of that state, and no other group within that territory is willing, or thinks it is able, to use force to achieve political ends. Police forces of the provinces must be integrated into an alliance coordinated by the central government. In addition the central government would have armed forces stronger than any of the provinces. Any group committed to the use of force to weaken or overthrow the established government, i.e. insurgents, must be neutralized. It makes no difference where the insurgents come from.

  • First of all, this requires an effective intelligence system that will allow rapid response to any attempt at intimidation by the insurgent group, or payment to it.
  • When terrorism becomes a tool, policing appropriate for ordinary crime must be supplemented with counterinsurgency units, tactics and techniques. This will usually require some temporary limitations on civil rights and the legal system. This will require agreement on a social contract, which establishes limits on police activity, and the appropriate checks and balances. Finally, if the insurgent group gains control of any territory, control must be regained, with armed force if necessary, and the leaders must be neutralized.

A second task of nation-building is to provide effective local authority. Each individual lives in a concrete, human, face-to-face world of clear and specific events and situations. Aspirations and an unseen environment may shape his spiritual and material life, but he knows through what he sees, hears, smells, and feels.

This nation-building task provides local leadership – leadership which is: alert for signs of problems, inequalities, and injustices; able to use initiative and flexibility to win loyalty and produce results; capable of countering acts of intimidation, violence, and destruction; able to see that everyone can earn a decent living; loyal to the established institutions; creates a climate to encourage civilian investment; and is capable of educating each individual with values that blend freedom, ambition, duty, and responsibility in accordance with the customs and traditions of his nation. These judgments must be as seen through the eyes of the people and culture involved; they should not be as perceived through postmodern views in a wealthy, western, secular state.

The third nation-building task is to organize and motivate the people. A nation is no more than people welded together by a common destiny, which binds together tomorrow, today, and yesterday into an active whole. This nation-building task creates and maintains shared values, attitudes, habits, and goals which shape the institutions through which a nation lives and grows: the patterns of cooperation and conflict; the fabric of sanctioned relationships; the unseen lines of magnetic strength which link, join, and confine; the elusive cultural environment. This task creates kinship.

The fourth nation-building task is to satisfy aspirations of the people. The fuel of progress is the never-ending attempt to satisfy aspirations. Aspirations can unite people in a common effort; yet, aspirations can set one against another, preventing progress. Satisfying aspirations is an elusive, two-faced task of nation-building. Sole concern with satisfying aspirations can only result in turmoil, frustration, and bitterness; as past aspirations are approached new and more demanding ones are invented. This task means that each nation has its own, unique, ideology.

For all Arab-Muslim countries this means a replacement of the pseudo-religious radicalism taught in the mosques with the progressive, compassionate teaching of Islam. This task, just like achieving stability, will actually hinder nation-building when it is carried to an extreme. If this conceptual framework is to be useful, actions to accomplish these four tasks must be interrelated, and the building and maintenance of a nation must be seen as a never-ending process.

Conclusions
Muslim extremists (Hirabahists) are indeed a serious threat to modern Western culture, but so is postmodernism. We should attempt to weaken the evildoers (Hirabahists) through separating them from those Muslims who accept pluralism, and through encouraging secular Muslim states to neutralize them. While our strategy must attempt to eliminate the evildoers (Hirabahists), it must also seek alliance with those Muslims who want spiritual purity in the eyes of Allah together with better lives – freedom, equality, self-determination, representative government, and the pursuit of happiness.

Western culture must be freed from the decline and decay caused by postmodern thought. The balance between secular authority (the control of behavior through the rule of law) and sacred authority (the control of behavior through shared moral, ethical, and religious convictions that provide an inner compass for individuals) must be reestablished [ed. see "Secular and Sacred Authority: why we need it!"].

Traditional patriotism needs to be respected, and national identity must be valued more than multiculturalism and diversity. The U.S. government needs to reorganize so as to reflect the reality of irregular warfare, rather than the War and Peace dichotomy of the past 300 years.

Copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center, 3750 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 374, Atlanta, GA 30319-1322. 404-201-7374. Permission is granted to forward this article by e-mail to friends or colleagues on a fair use basis. For reprint permission, contact Armiger Cromwell Center at armigercc@comcast.net

 

More by Dr Sam Holliday filed in “The Armiger Cromwell Center”

Related:

- “Reforming Islam: Beware of the Fifth Column”
- “Effectively Communicating Jihad: a spade is a spade”

- Filed on Articles in “The Unholy Alliance” -

 

The Cross and the Crescent (I)

Thursday, November 27th, 2008

From the desk of Dr Sam C. Holliday, director of the Armiger Cromwell Center
~~-:-~~

In his 1996 book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Samuel Huntington predicts a clash between the West and the Islamic world as some Muslims continue their attempt to establish the Great Caliphate – in which everyone is governed by “the ways of the Prophet.” In 1921 Hendrick Van Loon, in The Story of Mankind, described the struggle between the cross and the crescent. He explains how peaceful Arab shepherds listened to Muhammad, mounted their horses, drew their swords, and in less than a century pushed to the heart of Europe and proclaimed the glories of Allah, “the only God,” and Muhammad, “the prophet of the only God.”

Today we face the third episode in the Great Jihad (Holy War). The current so-called War on Terror could be a precursor for a final Clash of Civilizations, or it might be only a skirmish, which if handled correctly can prevent death and destruction of a magnitude the world has never seen. This essay is an attempt to determine the nature of the current threat to Western culture and to suggest what should be done.

Possible Outcomes
If ever there is conflict to the point that either Western culture or Islamic culture is utterly vanquished the world will be fundamentally altered. There will be more death and destruction than in World War I, II, and the Cold War combined. Terror will be an everyday occurrence, and weapons of mass destruction will kill millions.

Our challenge is not to accept the inevitability of this final Clash of Civilizations, but to do whatever is possible to prevent it. True excellence is not killing all of your enemies, but defeating your enemies without killing. Reasonable people must have the conviction, knowledge, and courage to challenge the extremists on both sides – evildoers (Hirabahists) and postmodernists.

However, from what we see on TV reasonable people might be in short supply. Reasonable Muslims around the world need to step forward and challenge those advocating the Third Jihad, for they are subverting Islam to advance their own agenda. The extremists call themselves jihadists (holy warriors), but they are hateful unholy warriors (Hirabahists) defaming the Prophet Muhammad.

Reasonable Westerners, and their allies around the world, need to prevent postmodern thinking from weakening Western culture to the point it is unwilling to defend itself and becomes an easy target for conquest by the Third Jihad. Postmodern thought attempts to eliminate or modify many of the roles, rules, standards, and character that were accepted as proper, good, and right in Western culture prior to the 1960s. Postmodernism visualizes “progress” toward an ideal “Postmodern Culture” that is nonjudgmental and nondiscriminatory, in which disagreements are resolved by universal law, debate, and compromise – but never by the use of force.

The Role of Islam
It is true that there are many violent apostates (Hirabahists) in mainstream Shi’a and Sunni Islam who claim they are faithful to the teachings of Muhammad. They often claim that the only basis in the Qur’an for Muslims to address non-Muslims is to struggle until the non-believers are converted, expelled, or destroyed. If most Muslims accept this view, the final Clash of Civilizations is inevitable.

But the teachings of Muhammad are not so simple – they combine opposites: struggle and tolerance. They present several kinds of jihad. It all depends on what Muslims are led to read into Muhammad’s words and actions. Hopefully there are Muslims who want to avoid the death and destruction of the final Clash of Civilizations. If so, they must find ways to be faithful to the Prophet Muhammad and the Qur’an while they stress inner jihad for themselves and practice compassion, mercy, and tolerance toward non-Muslims. However, this is certainly a long shot. Yet we must convince any such Muslims that they are our allies – that all Muslims are not our enemies.

Initially Muhammad spoke to the pagans who worshiped the meteorite now enclosed by the Kaba at Mecca. Islam was then expanded into a reform movement – in part to replace Judaism and Christianity that had, according to the Prophet Muhammad, gone astray and were no longer the proper legacy of Abraham, Moses, David, and Solomon. The Qur’an clearly states that the Bible is false, and rejects Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God.

Islam from the very start was a religion of struggle, both inner and against non-believers. It sought to eliminate temptations that the devil might use to erode commitment to Allah. It sought to get all people to submit to Allah. Islam does not give a high priority to economic wealth, prosperity, freedom, self worth, or comfort. Islam seeks purity. Thus in many ways Muslim true believers are less concerned about non-Islamic religions or Western armed forces being in their lands than they are about non-Islamic ways, i.e. movies, pop culture, dress and behavior. The challenge we all face is to show that Islamic purity is compatible with Western Culture—a very difficult challenge.

Obstacles
Islam is hostile to pluralistic, representative, secular government, since true believers consider Qur’an law and its sharia derivatives the only basis for governance. It is true that Christianity, Shinto, and other religions also do not have stellar records in this regard. However, dhimmi status (subordinate, disfranchised residents subject to discriminatory taxation and limits on freedom) is unique to Islam. Only when Islam controls a country and all non-Muslims have accepted dhimmi status can evildoers (Hirabahists) accept diversity.

Neither Islamic fundamentalism nor Western postmodernism can tolerate the coexistence of religion and reason. Neither will accept the suggestions in the lecture of Pope Benedict XVI at Regensburg on 12 September 2006. The Pope called for the rejection of dogmatic faith, cultural relativism, and forced conversion. But these seeds of hope fell on the unwelcoming ground of Islamic fundamentalism and Western postmodernism. Even some fundamentalist Christians did not welcome the Pope’s comments.

Islamic extremists see nonbelievers as too weak, too easily tempted, too confused to govern themselves; therefore, they must be shown the way, and protected, by scholar-jurists that know the way of Allah. With the same reasoning, postmodernists think people must be shown the way, and protected, by secular authority.

The evildoers (Hirabahists) see the Third Jihad as a way to seek their Utopian vision of restoring Islamic rule to all lands ever ruled by Muslims but now governed by Christians, Jews, and apostate Muslims. The secular transnational postmodernists of the West are equality rigid in their convictions as they seek their Utopian vision of a worldwide postmodern culture that is nonjudgmental, nondiscriminatory, and in which disagreements are resolved by law, debate and compromise – but never by the use of force.

It is true that Islamic extremists want to expel Western influences from all territory formerly under Muslim control. They want their politico-economic and philosophical views to be dominant. While most insurgents in the past were motivated by a Utopian view of a better world with economic equality and social fraternity, Islamic extremists seek spiritual purity in the eyes of Allah. They seek to protect people from worldly temptations; therefore they attempt to remove anything that will prevent people from submitting to Allah. Postmodernists solve the same problem by giving in to all temptations, thereby making the very idea of “temptations” moot.

Continued in Part II, “Strategy of the Third Jihad” … “It is a mistake to focus only on terror. The strategy of the Third Jihad is far more complex. It is to be expected that the media, politicians, and those trained for conventional War will focus on the violence of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Taliban …”

Copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center, 3750 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 374, Atlanta, GA 30319-1322. 404-201-7374. Permission is granted to forward this article by e-mail to friends or colleagues on a fair use basis. For reprint permission, contact Armiger Cromwell Center at armigercc@comcast.net

 

More by Dr Sam Holliday filed in “The Armiger Cromwell Center”

Related:

- “Reforming Islam: Beware of the Fifth Column”
- “Effectively Communicating Jihad: a spade is a spade”

- Filed on Articles in “The Unholy Alliance” -

Revising “the Logic of Hegemony”

Sunday, November 23rd, 2008

John Rosenthal has got a worthy piece of prose up on Pajamas Media that makes the skin crawl. “German Publishing’s Man in the White House” tells of Obama’s ties to Germany’s Bertelsmann Publishing and a massive conflict of interest yet to be fully disclosed.

There’s the fact that the emporium happens to be the President Elect’s principal source of income, but even worse, perhaps hard to imagine in this day and age – or sadly, not any more – the Bertelsmann conglomerate does not belong to the vein of Teutons, who in a less politically correct time, were referred to as ‘good Germans’.

Consider: the Bertelsmann Foundation and Corporation are two perfectly intertwined entities, both in effect, emanations of the Mohn family. Rosenthal:

“It might be considered irrelevant today that Bertelsmann massively collaborated with the Nazi regime during World War II. (For more on this, see “Bill Clinton’s German Paymasters.”) But it is surely not irrelevant that when German researcher Hersch Fischler first brought this fact to light, the family proposed to have the matter further investigated by one Dirk Bavendamm. Bavendamm is the family’s “in-house” historian, having written no fewer than three commissioned histories of the Mohn family and the Bertelsmann Corporation.

As so happens, he is also an open revisionist, who calls World War II “Roosevelt’s War” and suggests — à la contemporary 9/11 conspiracy theorists writing on George W. Bush — that Franklin Delano Roosevelt intentionally permitted the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to occur. Bavendamm has even written a book on the subject with the curious title Roosevelt’s War 1937-45 and the Puzzle of Pearl Harbor [Roosevelts Krieg 1937-45 und das Rätsel von Pearl Harbor].

“With the events of December 7-8, 1941 [i.e., the attack on Pearl Harbor], Roosevelt … had achieved his most important aims,” Bavendamm has written in an essay on the subject [German link], “America’s entry into the War occurred with the enthusiastic consent of the overwhelming majority of the American people — … Roosevelt had finally convinced them that it was their sacred duty, guns in hand to defend freedom, democracy, and prosperity around the world.” (For more on Bavendamm, see Hersch Fischler and John Friedman’s “Bertelsmann’s Revisionist” here.)

The theory that the Pearl Harbor attack was a set-up is, incidentally, standard neo-Nazi fare. Interestingly enough, in his infamous “God Damn America!” sermon, Obama’s longtime pastor Jeremiah Wright invokes precisely this theory as apparently well-established fact: “The government lied about Pearl Harbor too,” he says. “They knew the Japanese were going to attack. Governments lie.”

The Obama team and the Mohns would undoubtedly say that it is scandalous to suggest that the Mohns were using their millions to influence the American presidency or that Obama could possibly be corrupted. (…) >>>

Be that is may, the Ayn Rand/Stephen Hicks school of philosophy never misses target. Mutual attraction apart, follow the irrationals, follow the collectivists, follow America hatred, and sooner or later one ends up in places where bodies have been piling up, eventual good intentions notwithstanding.

- Filed on Articles in “Revisionism” -

Family Ties: the Stone-Age Roots of the Nuclear Family

Friday, November 21st, 2008

A recurring theme are the so-called dialectics. Read all about it in the dossier – an explanatory introduction is at the bottom.

What we mean, are the Hegelian dialectic, which grew out of the Kantian dialectic, which led to the Marxist dialectic, and now morphed into the Postmodern dialectic.

Don’t be fooled by nonsense about women’s lib, gay rights and same sex marriage: these are all ruses to take out one of the main pillars of ‘the power structure’, romantic love and marriage.

Remember that upsurge in Swedish films and books around the sixties, portraying marriage and family life as sheer and sure hell …? That was no coincidence! (Here’s a Dutch book of some notoriety, but every Western country probably has its own version. Sartre’s existentialism did away with all human company in general: “hell, are the others.”)

Romantic love – according to Ayn Rand – is a bourgeois, selfish, social construct that becomes fashionable in societies with a strong middle class. That being the case, all the more reason to shatter that important pillar.

Among the nobility and the peasantry marriage has always been an institution for the formalization of family ties and the regulation of inheritances. It was of course sanctioned by a church ceremony, preferably held before the bride’s bun was showing – just for good measure so as to ensure the groom’s party wouldn’t be left holding a barren bag… eh, hag.

But here’s news: A Stone Age burial in central Germany has yielded the earliest evidence of people living together as a family within a tribal social structure …

MSNBC: “The Flintsteins? Germans find Stone Age family – 4,600-year-old grave yields genetic evidence of family life (and death)” (includes video material)

(…) The 4,600-year-old grave contained the remains of a man, woman and two youngsters, and DNA analysis shows they were a mother, father and their children. (…)

“By establishing the genetic links between the two adults and two children buried together in one grave, we have established the presence of the classic nuclear family in a prehistoric context in Central Europe — to our knowledge the oldest authentic molecular genetic evidence so far,” lead author Wolfgang Haak of the University of Adelaide, Australia, said in a statement.

The researchers studied four multiple burials at Eulau, Saxony-Anhalt, all dated to the same time and containing adults and children carefully buried facing each other. (…) >>>

Perhaps tribal people 4,600 years ago, knew what we have been taught to forget for political reasons: that single mum families are the surest road to poverty and dependence – dependence on the state, all for our own good, of course. No wonder it was sold in Europe, first as morally acceptable, then as a value and even a right.

- Filed on Articles in “The Dialectics” -