legitimate loan companies for bad credit
ZION'S TRUMPET
1Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand; Joel 2:1
Show MenuHide Menu

Category Archives: Terrorism

allah of the Raging Furnace

September 18, 2014

Foreign Policy and Roosting Chickens

By Glenn Fairman
Are  we fated, as drowsy creatures who delight in drink and lovemaking, to awaken  only after the house is ablaze? After all, who appointed us judge, jury and  executioner? Is it inevitable that the strong do what they can, while the weak  suffer what they must? Are we tone deaf to the violence of the earth until it  reaches our front gate? Have we learned nothing about the nature of absolute  evil and the supreme confidence it displays — like the vain strutting of a  shrill and capricious god?

It  is this same quality of god — this batlike deity projected against the backdrop  of Heaven that moves termite-souled men to diabolic deeds more suited to Hell’s  asylum. Having meditated deliciously upon the worm of loathing — having  consumed that toxic diet of terminal civilizations whose crimes extend past the  portals of distant memory has allowed Islam to consecrate vengeance, overweening  pride, fratricidal ecstasy, and metallic cruelty into the congealed form of a  savior who will raise it to the stars and exact every last drop of suffering  from its enemies. In swearing to the annihilation or absorption of the infidel  billions, their Allah of the Raging Furnace sanctions a litany of acts no casual  lunatic would entertain:

The  crucifixion of unbelievers, the auctioning off of captive women, brothels  containing Christian girls for serial ravishing, the rounding up and dispatching   of little boys with 9 grams behind the ear, the raping of virgin girls  before murder to deny them paradise, the beheading of non-combatants, the  summary execution of surrendered forces.

All  of these acts, and others bearing the fingerprints of demoniac imaginations, are  what comes when men sanctify that hideous presumption festering within and  sculpt that viciousness into the alabaster mantle of a distant and terrible  god.

The  fecal soul that mutates to embrace the cause of ISIS is of the very same  pedigree that commandeered American jets and introduced the manifold works of  Islam to a nation of Sleepwalkers a scant 13 years ago. Indeed, Mohammad Atta  and Co. were only the advance scouts — the furtive ambassadors throwing down  Islam’s gauntlet before their disappearing act in a deluge of smoke and ashes.  It is not mere saber-rattling rhetoric when they affirm loving death more than  life: it is their sine qua non. What we deem incomprehensible about  9/11, they hold as holy. There is no middle ground that Islam will accede to  unless we put a gun to our heads and pull the trigger  ourselves.

In case you weren’t paying  attention: this is war. And the sooner we realize that these zombies mean what  they say, will not be mollified with saccharine overtures, and will keep coming  at us until they are put down en masse, the sooner we can steel  ourselves to the necessary resolve for the monumental task at hand. Our  Constitution is not a mutual suicide pact. Curbs on immigration and maybe even  the expulsion of 5th-column elements who mean us evil should be on the table and  strongly considered. The shape-shifting mask of Islam, given the grim reality of  its relentless demographics, should not be allowed a foothold here to secure a  dagger into our backs at a time of its own choosing.

Despite  what we are told by our compliant media organs, America and the entire world are  not bogged down in some insipid struggle with an abstraction of terror, we are  locked in a civilizational battle with the unadulterated visage of Islam  Ascending — a war that assumed focus when hijacked airliners fell from the  skies. 9/11 was an unmistakable declaration of a combatant ideology’s bellicose  intentions. Years later, a great swath of America has psychologically withdrawn  from the struggle, but that has not averted Islam’s exacting eye from our tender  throats. As the once august European powers slide even more deeply into the  Anti-American and Anti-Semitic orbits of Islamicists, America and Israel will  become increasingly isolated and the temptation to choose the paths of least  resistance will lure our country to follow the Old World’s inevitable decline  into the morass of civil war or even an outright acquiescence to domestic  political coexistence with Shar’ia’s principles. If this detestable camel should  ever burrow its head under our republic’s constitutional tent, it will signal  the death knell for any hopes we have of passing on a patrimony of limited  governance, natural rights, and the liberty of free conscience to those we leave  in our wake.

If  you think that such self-delusion could never happen here, consider that   self-proclaimed God Emperor Barack Obama has now officially “jumped the shark” with his claim that ISIL, ISIS, or whatever these devils call themselves, is an  aberration of Islam’s tenets. This is a lie from the very heart of Gehenna. In  truth, Abu Bakr and the subsequent spiritual sons of Mohammad employed the exact  same strategies that ISIS now mimics as they raced across the Middle East and  into the Western world a millennia and a half past. We have only Providence to  thank that the Horde of the Crescent Star’s continued advance was arrested by  the stalwart Charles the Hammer at Tours. A great parcel of the earth did not  come under the hegemony of mass tyranny within the brief span of a century by  the humble door-to-door dissemination of Watch Tower-like leaflets. If  conquering by scimitar and submission in the name of Allah, venerating the  Koran, and the institution of a universal caliphate are not Islamic, do they  then belong to the confession of Five-Point Calvinism? Indeed, chopping heads  and taking names are the signature moves of those fanatics who are determined to  party like it’s 699.

Regrettably,  our schizophrenic Solon now finds himself in the unenviable position of having  to aerially bombard those he had promised to stand with “should the political  winds shift in an ugly direction.” Word to Obama: it doesn’t get much uglier  than this. Barry is like the reluctant father who finds himself stuck with a  litter of little curs who are short on discipline and long on enthusiasm. He’d  like to be rid of them and their shenanigans, but his furious neighbors are in  the front yard with pitchforks and torches, screaming that his brood have been  tearin’ stuff up and actin’ the fool. And so, in order to hold onto his  increasingly shaky government digs, he now has to go all Joan Crawford on the  little scamps — and his heart just ain’t in it.

Readers:   as far as ISIS is concerned, keep a sharp eye on what Obama does, and hit  the mute button when you see his stomach churning image on the tube. Better yet,  do something profitable — like addressing that stubborn ring on the family  commode.

Not  a moment too soon, Obama’s chickens have come home to roost — except that these  birds are better described as black carrion auspiciously returning to pick clean  a morbid foreign policy’s carcass. How ironic that on the 13th anniversary of  America’s 9/11, history will record that  a mediocre multiculturalist hack,  whose boilerplate rhetoric confused America’s founding with Islam’s abominable  virtues and who pressured NASA to bolster Muslim self-esteem, stood with mouth  agape as ISIS delivered that unkindest cut of all to his policy of arrogant  naiveté. Imagine George Washington promising to cast his lot with King George  shortly before Valley Forge or FDR symbolically offering the Nazis a chance to  sit in on the Manhattan Project’s briefings. Having, by virtue of his great  hubris, first stepped out on that trajectory towards folly, shall we then be  shocked that those papier-mâché Greek columns portend a Sibylline prophesy  heralding the dissolution of this “Hollow Man” who believed he could lead from  behind? If the gods first make mad those whom they would destroy, then we may be  provided a window to that prophetess’ final utterance. Let us hope that we are  not in the general vicinity when that terminal judgment alights from on  high.

From American Thinker: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/09/foreign_policy_and_roosting_chickens.html

Glenn  Fairman writes from Highland, Ca. and welcomes your correspondence at arete5000@dslextreme.com.   He can be followed at www.stubbornthings.org and on  Twitter.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/09/foreign_policy_and_roosting_chickens.html#ixzz3DfFHsnmN

Resist islam and All the Evil it Embodies.

September 17, 2014

Not

Yes. They. Are.

September 17, 2014

Real

From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

See the Difference?

September 17, 2014

From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

Stupid is as Stupid Does

September 17, 2014

Does Not

From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

It is Time. islam is The Enemy.

September 11, 2014

image001

From BNI: http://www.barenakedislam.com/

Remembering 9-11

September 11, 2014

WTC_cross-770x510

Pic found at BNI: http://www.barenakedislam.com/

Budweiser Clydesdale Tribute to 9-11

September 11, 2014

America is Too Full of Itself and Drunk on PC to Recognize our Demise

September 10, 2014

Are the Orcs Winning?

September 7th, 2014
Written by Victor Davis Hanson
(Emphasis mine – ZTW)

orcs_vdh_9-7-14-2

Fantasy versus reality.

J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings was sometimes faulted by literary critics for caricaturing the evil orcs as uniformly bad.  All of them were as unpleasant to look as they were deadly to encounter. There is not a single good orc or even a reformed orc in the trilogy. The apparent one-dimensional assumption of men, hobbits, dwarves, and elves is that the only good orc is a dead orc. So the absolutist Tolkien tried to teach us about the enduring nature of absolute good and evil. Apparently he did not think that anything from his contemporary experience might allow him to imagine reforming or rehabilitating such fictive folk.

In the 21st century we are often lectured that such simplistic, one-dimensional evil is long gone. A ubiquitous civilization has so permeated the globe that even the worst sorts must absorb some mitigating popular culture from the Internet, Twitter, and Facebook, as if the sheer speed of transmitting thoughts ensures their moral improvement.

Even where democracy is absent, the “world community” and a “global consciousness” are such that billions supposedly won’t let Attila, Tamerlane, and Genghis Khan reappear in our postmodern lives. To deal with a Major Hasan, Americans cannot cite his environment as the cause, at least not poverty, racism, religious bigotry, nativism, xenophobia, or any of the more popular –isms and-ologies in our politically correct tool box that we customarily use to excuse and contextualize evil behavior. So exasperated, we shrug and call his murdering “workplace violence” — an apparent understandable psychological condition attributable to the boredom and monotony of the bleak, postmodern office.

But then suddenly along comes the limb-lopping, child-snatching, and mutilating Nigerian-based Boko Haram. What conceivable Dark Age atrocity have they omitted? Not suicide bombing, mass murder, or random torture. They are absolutely unapologetic for their barbarity. They are ready to convert or kill preteens as their mood determines for the crime of being Christian. In response, the Nigerian government is powerless, while the United States is reduced to our first lady holding up Twitter hashtags, begging for the release of the latest batch of girls.

Is the Somalia-based Al-Shabaab worse? It likes the idea that it is premodern. In addition to the usual radical Islamic horrors of beheadings, rape, and mutilation, Al-Shabaab even kills protected elephants, perhaps thousands of them, to saw off tusks and fund their killing spree. They seem to make the medieval Taliban look tame in comparison.

Now we are glued on ISIS, the Mesopotamian killers who are beheading on video streams American journalists, as they murder, rape, and mutilate their way from Syria to central Iraq. One of the beheaders, Jihadi John, has a British accent, and seems to enjoy shocking Westerners with the fact that he is more familiarly savage than his fellow Arabic-speaking masochists. Apparently his family immigrated from the Muslim world to the affluence and freedom of the United Kingdom for a more civilized life so that their pampered son could one day leave it to seek to destroy all that had enabled him — and thereby find “meaning.”

If a British politician demanded to strip Jihadi John and those like him of their passports or an American senator demanded that we not let in any more Tsarnaev-like jihadists, the outcry would be such that the crimes of beheading and blowing up people at a marathon might pale in comparison. Cutting off somebody’s head or blowing off a leg is one thing, but casting aspersions on the Other is quite another.

All of the above might once have been lumped under al-Qaeda affiliates, but now Osama’s remnants apparently find monsters like ISIS too “brutal.” In contrast, Hamas only drives Christians out of Gaza rather than beheads them. It also executes unarmed Palestinians deemed insufficiently loyal. It maims those of rival Palestinian political groups. And it positions girls and boys as shields in places where their well-off elite commanders may well be targeted, rather than kidnap and take them out into the bush.

Although most of the savage violence that is plaguing the world today is the dividend of radical Islamists in Africa, Northern Africa, the Middle East, and, yes, Europe, state players are not immune. Bashar Assad has used the government apparatus of Syria to kill tens of thousands — some, in the manner of his old neighbor Saddam Hussein, through the agency of poison gas. He, too, is immune from an accounting — unless the even more evil ISIS catches up with him.

Europe and the United States are baffled by Vladimir Putin. He was supposed to be “reset” a long time ago. Or he should have at least reread Norman Angell’s The Great Illusion years ago, and learned that in an interconnected financial world, starting a war (like World War I) would be so suicidal a business as to prevent its occurrence. Instead, Putin is following the path of Joseph Stalin in the 1930s, gobbling up borderlands, but for the idea of the greater glory of Mother Russia rather than the Soviet commune. His modus operandi is as predictable as our Western weepy responses. He eyes some new territory. He cites long historical affinities. He points to oppressed Russian speakers. He sends in paramilitaries. And then he talks of annexing only part of some previous Russian land. Obama compares him to a cutup in the back of the classroom or dismisses his actions as macho “shtick.” Putin counters with talk about his nuclear arsenal or taking Kiev. If a journalist smarts off, Putin warns him of castration. If Putin wishes to let off a nuke, he might well do it — if only for the hell of it.

We can stop the roll call of global orcs here, with the assumption that we all know the nature of the lunatic North Korea nuclear regime, what the Iranians are planning for the children of the Holocaust, or who the sinister sort who run Pakistani military intelligence and fund terrorists in Afghanistan are. As state powers, they all have ways of incinerating tens of thousands rather than beheading hundreds.

Evil is ancient, unchanging, and with us always. The more postmodern the West becomes — affluent, leisured, nursed on moral equivalence, utopian pacifism, and multicultural relativism — the more premodern the evil among us seems to arise in nihilistic response, whether it is from the primordial Tsarnaev brothers or Jihadi John.  We have invented dozens of new ways to explain away our indifference, our enemies hundreds of new ways of reminding us of our impotence. I suppose we who enjoy the good life don’t want to lose any of it for anything — and will understandably do any amount of appeasing, explaining, and contextualizing to avoid an existential war against the beheaders and mutilators, a fact well-known to our enemies.

The Europeans are shrugging that Ukraine is lost and will soon sigh that the Baltic states are a far-off place not worth risking the coffee shops of Amsterdam to defend. Westerners lament beheadings but then privately mutter that journalists know just what they are getting into when they visit the Middle East. Murdering and abusing a U.S. ambassador on video is not such a big deal anymore and is worth only a second or so mention on Google News.

So we wait behind our suburban Maginot Lines, arguing over our quarter- and half-measure responses, refighting Iraq and Afghanistan as if they were the Somme and Verdun, assured that we can distract ourselves from the horrors abroad with psychodramas about Ferguson, the president’s golfing, his lectures on fairness, and which naked celebrity photo was hacked on the Internet.

Meanwhile the orcs are busy and growing and nearing the ramparts…

From PJMedia: http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/are-the-orcs-winning/?singlepage=true

Clueless.

August 29, 2014

Remember

From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

islam Will Only Be Destroyed by Brute Force. It Cannot be Transformed.

August 28, 2014

Islamic Terrorism and the Power of Ideas

By Yoav J. Tenembaum
In a concise and clear manner, the former United States president, George W. Bush, said on the 11th of May, 2011, that United States foreign policy should continue to promote the ideas of freedom and democracy as a way to combat global terrorism. ”The long-term solution,” Bush said, “is to promote a better ideology, which is freedom. Freedom is universal.”

In the light of the current confrontation with the Islamic State terror organization, as well as with Al Qaeda and its affiliate groups, it is pertinent to assess to what extent Bush is right.

 In order to defeat a totalitarian ideology, the United States needs to advance an alternative. It must challenge Islamism with a morally superior vision and with a pragmatically more enticing solution.

However, totalitarian ideologies have rarely been defeated solely by the peaceful counter-argument of alternative ideologies.

Napoleon’s dictatorial version of the French revolution was finally defeated at the battlefields of Waterloo, following years of warfare and destruction.

Nazism was brought to an end by the Allied armies.

The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia was defeated by fellow communists Vietnam.

Even Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union was not brought to an end just by posing an alternative ideology, but by a policy of containment, combining a military, political, and economic dimension.

Equally, Islamic terrorism won’t be defeated only by the inherently superior ideas of democracy and liberty.

Totalitarian ideologies are usually carried to success by an overwhelming sense of self-righteousness and brute force. Usually, only the counter-positing of an alternative vision and military power is able to challenge it. There can be no illusion about this. It is very difficult to defeat a totalitarian force only by resorting to the power of ideas.

To be sure, military power does not have to be deployed at each juncture in order to advance the cause of freedom and democracy. Nevertheless, it becomes much more difficult to neutralize a totalitarian force only by advancing arguments extolling freedom and democracy.

In this context one should be careful to distinguish between the use and the projection of military power.

The Soviet Union was defeated, among other things, by the projection of military power; Nazism by its actual use.

This is a point worth emphasizing.

A totalitarian force, however brutal, can be directed by rational leaders, such as the leaders of the Soviet Union or by irrational ones as Nazi Germany’s. The first are more prone to be dissuaded by the projection of power; the latter, much less so.

Islamic terrorism belongs to the latter rather than the former. Thus, the mere projection of power may not be enough to convince those who lead the Islamic State or Al Qaeda and follow its precepts to desist from carrying out terrorist attacks; it may not be sufficient either with other Islamic groups who employ violence to advance their totalitarian cause.

To be sure, Bush believes that the ideas of freedom and democracy may persuade the possible recruits of Islamic terrorist groups not to engage in suicide attacks by placing a better, more appealing alternative. Further, he contends that “It is only when you do not have hope in a society that you join a suicide bomber team.”

Unfortunately, Bush, whose instincts in this matter are right, seems to be a bit overly-optimistic.

Many individuals have joined suicide bomber teams coming from well-to-do family backgrounds and having the prospect of a hopeful future before them, including in the democratic, free world.

Fanatical ideology may not necessarily be the result of what we in the democratic world would consider as a lack of hope.

The virus of ideological fanaticism may spread quite easily among individuals who sincerely believe in its precepts. Belief, however fanatical, does not have to derive from a lack of hope.

The aim of U.S. foreign policy, then, should not be merely to place a better and more appealing alternative to those who lack hope, but rather to argue positively for a sociopolitical culture which is inherently good. Beyond that, only a combination of force, or its projection, alongside diplomatic, economic and legal means can achieve the containment and ultimate defeat of a totalitarian ideology.

It is difficult to fathom the idea that individuals may sincerely embrace a destructive ideology, one that venerates death. Unless we do, the ongoing battle against the totalitarian ideology of the Islamic State, Al Qaeda and their likes will take much longer and entail more suffering.

In a concise and clear manner, the former United States president, George W. Bush, said on the 11th of May, 2011, that United States foreign policy should continue to promote the ideas of freedom and democracy as a way to combat global terrorism.

“The long-term solution,” Bush said, “is to promote a better ideology, which is freedom. Freedom is universal.”

In the light of the current confrontation with the Islamic State terror organization, as well as with Al Qaeda and its affiliate groups, it is pertinent to assess to what extent Bush is right.

In order to defeat a totalitarian ideology, the United States needs to advance an alternative. It must challenge Islamism with a morally superior vision and with a pragmatically more enticing solution.

However, totalitarian ideologies have rarely been defeated solely by the peaceful counter-argument of alternative ideologies.

Napoleon’s dictatorial version of the French revolution was finally defeated at the battlefields of Waterloo, following years of warfare and destruction.

Nazism was brought to an end by the Allied armies.

The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia was defeated by fellow communists Vietnam.

Even Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union was not brought to an end just by posing an alternative ideology, but by a policy of containment, combining a military, political, and economic dimension.

Equally, Islamic terrorism won’t be defeated only by the inherently superior ideas of democracy and liberty.

Totalitarian ideologies are usually carried to success by an overwhelming sense of self-righteousness and brute force. Usually, only the counter-positing of an alternative vision and military power is able to challenge it. There can be no illusion about this. It is very difficult to defeat a totalitarian force only by resorting to the power of ideas.

Read it all here: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/08/islamic_terrorism_and_the_power_of_ideas_.html

The West is Committing Cultural Suicide by Allowing mooslims into Our Countries

August 28, 2014

Chaldean archbishop of Mosul warns the west about Islamic immigration

by 1389

…you will become victims of the enemy that you welcomed into your home.

Andrew Bostom has the story:

Amel Nona, the 47 year-old Chaldean archbishop of Mosul, who fled the Sunni “re-awakening,” IS-led jihad in northern Iraq, to Erbil, Kurdistan, made the following statements to Corriere Della Serra, published August 10, 2014:

“Our sufferings today are a prelude to what even European and Western Christians will incur in the near future. Your liberal and democratic principles here [in the Middle East] are not worth anything. You need to rethink our reality in the Middle East because you are receiving in your countries, an increasing number of Muslims. You too are at risk. You have to take strong and courageous decisions, at the cost of contradicting your principles. You think that men are all the same. It is not true. Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values ​​are not their values. If you do not understand in time, you will become victims of the enemy that you welcomed into your home.”

- See more at: http://1389blog.com/

mooslims are Not Like You and I. Better Learn that Fact.

August 27, 2014

Where the Black Flags Fly

Posted byDaniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog
Media conveys immediacy, but it doesn’t convey culture. Its famous flattening effect makes shoppers at a Staples in D.C. or a Whole Foods in Berkeley feel like they’re right among the toppled buildings of Aleppo or Gaza, without actually giving them any insight into the motivations of the players.
They’re watching foreign movies in a language that they don’t understand and attributing their own motivations to the main characters. They assume that the differences are incidental, but if the differences really were incidental, America would look a lot more like Iraq.
It’s been a while since Westerners lived in a society in which human life was truly worthless, in which no one trusted anyone else and it was easier to kill than not to kill.
Outside of a few urban centers in the Middle East where the elites start the revolutions that end up stringing them from the gallows, life is cheap and worthless. Men kill their wives and daughters over petty suspicions. Clans murder each other in vicious brawls. Wedding celebrations begin with firing guns into the air and end with bodies on the ground.
Everything is worth more than people. A camel has value. A pickup truck has value. A smartphone has value. All these things are hard to make.
People are easy to make.
The birth rates are high. Everywhere there are too many people. Too many sons to inherit. Too many daughters to marry off.
The UN and a whole bunch of international organizations slop in enough aid to keep hunger and disease away, but not enough to make life livable or worthwhile. The wealthy have satellite dishes on which they watch American reality shows and Turkish soaps. The poor kidnap them and hold them for ransom. It’s not just life in the Middle East. It’s the whole Third World experience.
About the only reliable source of wealth comes out of the ground and the countries that have it are usually too lazy to get it themselves. That’s what the armies of Western engineers are for. They don’t build their own skyscrapers with the oil money. That’s what the disposable Asian workers are for.
Killing is the easiest solution to most problems. Men kill over honor. Women kill themselves out of desperation. Children grow up torturing animals.
Clerics settle religious questions with murder. It’s just easier that way.
Theological debates are complicated and impossible to settle, but fly the black flags, seize a village, kill the men and force the women to convert to the true faith of the machine gun and the sword and the debate is over.
ISIS is how Islam has been settling questions of theology since the 7th century. Why stop now just because you can order takeout from your smartphone? Westerners are innately fascinated by new technology. For the Middle East, technology is a tool for settling medieval disputes. Twitter is just a way of showing off your latest crop of severed heads. The pickup truck substitutes for a camel.
Politicians settle political debates with more murders. Elections are complicated. Democracy is messy. It’s easier for a colonel to take everyone out back and shoot them. And then spend the next twenty years building palaces with his people’s wealth. And the people mostly like it that way too.
The question isn’t why should they kill, it’s why should they stop? The peace proposals never get anywhere. If you reward violence with concessions, there’s no reason for it to ever stop.  And if you don’t, what else is there to do?

When life is worthless, everyone has a gun and a grudge, it’s easier to kill than not to kill. You can see that phenomenon as readily in Chicago as in Iraq. Why not shoot the guy next door because he owes you money, because your daughter looked at him twice, because he’s on your turf or because he’s a Kurd.
Or because it’s Thursday.
Under crowded conditions, life is cheap but honor is expensive. Fights start over the pettiest things and escalate into relentless violence. You can see it in Yemen or in Ferguson. Everyone is just waiting for an excuse to be angry about something and to take it out on someone else.
The Western Urbanites who helicopter parent their 2.5 children into a Prozac prescription and lament their disposable society don’t understand what a truly disposable society looks like even though they probably live less than a mile away from one of those.
In a disposable society, people have no value. Children have no value. Human labor has no value. If you want something done, you force someone to do it. If you can’t have your own slaves, you can control an extended family. You don’t think in terms of what it costs to make something. The only cost that matters is the cost of imports. Everything else is inhumanely cheap.
Emotional reactions always trump rational ones. Everyone feels put upon and slighted from the biggest prince to the lowliest laborer. Everyone is filled with resentments that they channel through the Koran and the mad preachings of Islamic clerics promising holy wars and blaming everything on the CIA, the Freemasons and the Jews.
When it gets hot enough, the killings begin and they usually don’t stop until the weather cools down. The black flags fly. The yellow flags fly. The green flags fly. And you can either play the game or get beheaded on the evening news.
Maybe both.
There’s no morality out here. The men are careful not to look at a donkey or a woman while praying to Allah. But they have no sense of ethics. They will casually kill, steal, rape, break oaths and a commit a hundred other crimes before breakfast.
If you’re not a member of their family, you’re fair game. If you are, you had better know your place and help with the stealing, kidnapping and assorted economic empowerment projects.

Killing is easy. Self-control is hard. If there’s no accountability, no local bigshot that wants infidel tourists and their dollars and will make the killer’s family suffer, then he has no reason not to beat you, steal from you or drag you into a home in some slum somewhere and wait for the fabled wealthy infidels to pay him a king’s ransom.
If not he always cut off your head to raise the price on the next one.
His life is cheap, but yours is even cheaper. It’s best to understand that we are not dealing with a moral code that looks anything like our own. The nastier qualities of human nature, deceit, violence and greed, are practically virtues. Especially if they are directed at the right targets.

There’s a reason that Islam was born here. There’s a reason that it still thrives here largely in its unaltered form. There is no civilization where the black flags fly.

From Sultan Knish: http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2014/08/where-black-flags-fly.html

Marie Harf, the clueless State Dept. Imbecile Mouth piece, Assures Us ISIS Does Not Represent islam. WHAT? WHAT? WHAT?

August 22, 2014

Thursday at the daily briefing, State Department mouthpiece, Marie Harf, declined to acknowledge ISIS’ declaration of war on the United States of America or even  its connection with Islam.

Breitbart  When a reporter said,”The reality is ISIS has announced it’s in a war against America,” adding, “Right or wrong that is what they are saying.” Harf replied, “Well they can say whatever they like. But what I am making clear that is not what ISIS represents and they don’t represent any religion. They are at war with everyone they come in contact with.”

From BNI: http://www.barenakedislam.com/

Problem. Solution.

August 22, 2014

Cancer

Found at MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

islam. Still Crazy After All These Years.

August 21, 2014

Bracken: The Islamic Jihad Conquest Formula

Posted on August 20, 2014

iraq-isis-ap-photo

The Islamic Jihad Conquest Formula

By Matthew Bracken

August, 2014

Mohammed’s unchanging formula for conquest is time-proven; variations were also used in history by the invading Mongol hordes among others. Emissaries ride forward of their advancing armies, offering to spare the lives of the targeted population in return for their unconditional surrender and explicit submission to their new rulers. In the Islamic context this submission is exemplified by the fresh converts repeating the Shahada prayer before Muslim witnesses.

There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger.

The Shahada prayer is the first of the Five Pillars of Islam. The Shahada prayer is also what is written on the black battle flags of Islamic jihad. Along with Allahu Akbar—our God is greatest—the Shahada is the battle cry of advancing Islamic armies. In fact, the very word Islam means submission, and not peace, as it is often intentionally mistranslated by duplicitous Muslims practicing taqiya, or sanctified lying for the cause of advancing the spread of Islam.

It’s purposefully made very easy for a town or a city to submit and convert to Islam. But the entire city must surrender without posing any resistance at all. In the event of any violent or even physical resistance, a new formula applies: the Islamic jihad conquest formula. From the time of Mohammed until today—as we are seeing in the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq—the formula has not changed.

Read it all at WRSA: http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/

C’mon…I’ll be Your Huckleberry!

August 20, 2014

Say When

From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

Time to Drain The muslim Swamp

August 6, 2014

Sheep and Goats: Impure Thoughts on the Gaza War

By Glenn Fairman

Waging a war with moral trilobites is always nasty business, and no nation state knows this truth more fully than Israel in its current conflagration with Hamas. The Gaza regime is a pitiless beast whose primitive instincts compel it to commit acts that are counter to its own long-term interests. Indeed, while it is one thing to steel ones heart to the murder of a blood-sworn enemy, Hamas is bound and determined to do battle using the scarlet-stained skeletons of their own children as body armor. Tragically, it seems that every soul under the brutal tutelage of Hamas forfeits its innocence and becomes criminally culpable in earning a terrorist state’s impending judgment — to which Gaza is racing blindly to meet headlong.

It is the Palestinian’s proverbial never-ending story: Hamas instigates an asymmetrical conflict as the willing proxy of other nations: in this latest instance it is theocratic Iran. In doing so, it rekindles the Myth of Palestinian Victimhood in the theatre of the Idiot West and again refills its financial coffers from those whose ethical compass has been long shattered. In its hypocrisy, it clumsily kills its own “innocents” by launching rockets as it wails and indignantly shakes its index finger westward to an audience of friendly cameras who are as honest as Bedouin traders. Hamas has proven itself to be of pure Palestinian pedigree: incapable of honor or shame and equal to the hideous task of sacrificing the lives of hundreds of its nimble children to construct its terror tunnels or summarily executing individuals who reject the staged martyrdom that comes from standing in close proximity to a rocket launcher. No action is contemplated without the ruthless calculation of how it will play to the world’s grandstands, all while filtered through the media’s unilaterally distorted lens.

While the usual suspects of the media can be called upon to spread their legs in unquestioned obedience to Israel’s destruction, the prevailing winds have changed a bit  and the stench of sulphur rising from the rhetoric of Arab apologists has rendered the “poor- mouthing” Hamas government a figure increasingly worthy of derision. This time around, it seems as if the bloom is somewhat off the rose, since cease-fires have been routinely ignored by Hamas and the ugly truth about the origin of Gaza’s casualties is trickling out at an increased rate to help balance the regime’s well-oiled public relations machine. Other than the congenitally deranged, no one of consequence any longer doubts that U.N. schools, hospitals, and mosques are home to military HQs and munitions caches, although Hillary Clinton laughingly attributes this barbarism to the cramped conditions in Gaza. And moreover, the suffering of the Israelis in terms of their terrorized civilians and IDF casualties have been brought to light like never before to the drowsy Occidental world, thanks to alternative social media.

Nevertheless, one must awaken before perceiving the truth. Jew hating has become a revived art form in Europe and the U.S., but despite the green light of political fashion, those timid intellects that are still sensitive to the charge of anti-Semitism are quick to profess, through the aid of tortured reasoning, that although they might despise Israel, they hold no such quarrel with Jews per se. Indeed, it is through such contorted moral gyrations that the Left’s eyes glaze over so that evil is comfortably accommodated in minds that can compartmentalize conflicting claims of justice and logic.

Being a fundamentally reasonable people, Israelis have so far shown themselves unwilling to bite the bullet and conduct war in the style of their adversary, who if the tables were turned, would shed no crocodile tears in committing genocide. Although Israel could make short work of this “oozing sore” with its superior firepower by forever assuring that tunnels would not be replaced nor rockets refashioned, it has been restrained both by its own morality and by the effeminate sensibilities of naïve spectators who lack skin in the region. Thus, the IDF must resort to “roof-knocking” and airstrikes conducted with surgical precision in order to help separate the sheep from the goats — even if those adorable lambs wield AK-47’s and have been psychologically conditioned and militarily trained to snipe at advancing soldiers. In the final reckoning, death is no respecter of persons, and its claims are indifferent to whether they are administered through the hands of hardened insurgents or blushing young maidens sporting a bomb vest.

But it all comes down to this: When prosecuting war aims, the ultimate goal is to neutralize an enemy’s resources and collective will to continue fighting — not just temporarily, but permanently. It is madness to treat Hamas’ aggression as just another “mowing the lawn” exercise. Anything less is kicking the can down the road and makes a mockery of holy sacrifices and squandered treasure that have been expended in killing aggressors and shattering their swords. Without experiencing that terrible moral education of suffering that comes as retribution for fomenting wars, a people are trapped within a never-ending loop of futility: where no lessons are learned or malignant regimes replaced. With instances of national evil: where the population is complicit in electing a thoroughly wicked leadership, the people must be held accountable and made to swallow the dregs of their defeat whole. One can only imagine what might have transpired if Nazi Germany were dealt with as Hamas has been. In truth, the goals of Hitler and Hamas are identical in respect to the Jew, and the only distinction separating them is one of resources, not will. Moreover, it was thoroughly necessary to bring the stark implications of total war home to the average German: whose young boys and girls fueled the war effort, while they themselves produced the material necessities to continue German aggression. In the end, that unholy regime was destroyed and discredited in the minds of its population, and Germany was then free to rise from the ashes of its error.

Despite the current obtuseness infecting a planet that increasingly cannot divide evil from good, Israel is reaching the natural limits of its patience with Hamas. The Jewish state, having handed the Palestinians a ring of gold in good faith, has for its trouble been rewarded with missiles from a nest of adders. Incredibly, no nation on earth has been more forgiving, having been confronted and fallen upon time and again with bile and bellicosity. It is imperative to squarely face the fact that within the regimes headed by Hamas and Hizb’allah, the distinction between innocence and guilt — sheep and goats — has grown agonizingly thin. Unless a wave of introspection, delivered through the vehicle of white hot pain, is experienced and the consequences of propping up a wicked regime are internalized by the Palestinian street, many more human lives will be destroyed: either by the living death that comes from a concentrated diet of hate, or from the Israeli juggernaut who has exhausted its tolerance. Speaking to the latter, the frightening discovery of Hamas’ Rosh Hashana Tunnel Plot to massacre and kidnap Israeli civilians from towns situated adjacent to Gaza has only steeled Jewish resolve and unified her as a society, even the perpetually recalcitrant Israeli Left.

That vast system of swamps that poison the Muslim world will one day need to be sterilized and drained, and Gaza has made itself conspicuous through its reckless admixture of audacity and guile. Within any jungle where self-preservation is paramount, any distinction between sheep and goats is wasted on the lion and one baits him to his own singular peril. In that political state of nature, where the decision to either kill or be killed is the only option, do not be surprised when the craven stratagem of delivering indiscriminate death from behind a phalanx of schoolgirls raises the temperature of warfare to the melting point, and the only truly merciful response is the utter abandonment of mercy.

Glenn Farman writes from Highland, Ca.  He welcomes your correspondence at arete5000@dslextreme.com and can be followed at www.stubbornthings.org  and on T

From American Thinker: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/sheep_and_goats_impure_thoughts_on_the_gaza_war.html

Exterminated. Wiped from The Face of The Earth.

July 30, 2014

Islam is an evil political system.

There is no such thing as “islamic extremism” versus “moderate islam” any more than there was a “moderate Nazism”.

To understand this truism, one need only replace contemporary commentary or reportage on islam with the words “Nazism” and “Third Reich” to understand the abject imbecility of the entire notion of a “moderate” islam.  Nope.  The islamic political system, like Nazism, must be exterminated from the face of the earth – not merely contained, not merely subjugated.  Exterminated.

Completely Negative | Barnhardt

Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/

Shariah Law is Evil. Birthed in Hell.

July 29, 2014


From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

What Don’t You Understand? mooslims Hate Every Damn Body.

July 29, 2014

The Hatred

 

a_london_women.jpg
 

Look at them. Do these women look like they could have been in Downton Abbey?

Do they have any connection at all to England? Are their signs even in English? [No.] Make no mistake. The same hatred on display for Jews and Israel is also there for OTHER WHITES. Like the Irish. And the Italians. And the Poles. And the Germans. And the French. And the English. And the Dutch. And the Norwegians. And the Icelanders. And the Spanish. And the Hungarians. And the Greeks. And the Swedes. And the Finns. And the Russians. And Czechs. And the Swiss. No White will escape that hatred.

- -  whiskeysplace

Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/

When Fired Upon – Fire Back.

July 18, 2014

Winning the Moral High Ground is a Loser’s Game

Posted byDaniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog

 In our modern age, things no longer exist to perform their function. Washing machines aren’t designed to clean clothes, but to save water and energy. Food isn’t there to be eaten, but not eaten. And armies aren’t there to win wars, but to be moral. And the truly moral army never fights a war. When it must fight a war, then it fights it as proportionately as possible, slowing down when it’s winning so that the enemy has a chance to catch up and inflict a completely proportional number of casualties on them.

Forget charging up a hill. Armies charge up the slippery slope of the moral high ground and they don’t try to capture it from the enemy, because that would be the surest way to lose the moral high ground, instead they claim the moral high ground by refusing to try and capture it, to establish their moral claim to the moral high ground, which they can’t have because they refuse to fight for it.
Israel has been engaged in a long drawn out struggle for the moral high ground. The moral high ground is to the modern Israeli what the land of Israel was to their pioneer ancestors who drained swamps, built roads and shot bandits. Then some of the bandits were discovered to be the oppressed peoples of the region, fresh from Syria or Jordan, who then got busy retroactively protesting the settlements built on that stretch of swamp that had been set aside in their revisionist history as belonging to their great-grandparents while dangling oversized house keys to the swamp.
Sadly the only way to win the moral high ground is by losing. Just look at the massive Arab armies who repeatedly invaded Israel, did their best to overwhelm it with the best Soviet iron that the frozen factories of the Ural could turn out, and lost the bid to drive the Jews into the sea, but won the moral high ground. Then their terrorist catspaws spent decades winning the moral high ground by hijacking airplanes full of civilians, murdering Olympic athletes and pushing old men in wheelchairs from the decks of cruise ships.
All these killing sprees accomplished absolutely nothing useful, aside from the killing of Jews, which to a certain sort of mind is a useful thing in and of itself, but that failure won the terrorist catspaws the moral high ground. Their failure to win a war by hijacking buses full of women and taking the children of a school hostage conclusively established their moral superiority and nobility of spirit.
The world was deeply moved when Arafat waddled up to the UN podium, with his gun, wearing a mismatched cotton rag on his head that would decades hence become the modish apparel of every third hipster standing in line with a can of 20 dollar fair trade Lima beans at Whole Foods, because his commitment to killing people in a failed cause that even he didn’t believe in, in exchange for money from his backers in the Muslim world showed his deep commitment to the moral high ground.
In the seventies, after Israel had won a few too many wars, Henry “Woodcutter” Kissinger, suggested that it lose a war to gain the sympathy of the world. Golda wasn’t too enthusiastic about the idea, but with the old woodcutter in charge of handing out the axes, there wasn’t much choice about it. Israel came close to being destroyed in ’73, but just when it might have won the sympathy of the world, its armies of young men dashing from synagogues into overcrowded taxis to get to the front lines, turned the tide. Israel won. The woodcutter of Washington lost and Israeli scrapyards filled up with piles of Soviet steel, which was good news for the big sweaty guys who ran them, but bad news for those pining for the lofty fjords of the moral high ground.
In ’91 the Israelis went nuclear and decided to beat Arafat at his own game. Rabin and Peres talked the old terrorist out of retirement and down to Washington D.C. where they surrendered to him in an official ceremony at the Rose Garden overseen by a beaming Bill Clinton. Finally Israel had won the moral high ground. And the United States had carved off a chunk of that delicious moral high ground, even though Clinton was forced to fidget in his chair at Oslo when his Nobel Peace Prize went to the greasy terrorist, though perhaps he should have considered that defeat to be another victory of the moral high ground.

But the moral high ground proved notoriously elusive for the Jewish State. There was a brief lull when it seemed that the original sin of kicking ass had been atoned for in the Rose Garden, but then the terrorists started killing Israelis again and the Israelis insisted on fighting back. In no time at all the moral high ground was roped off with a special reserved section for terrorists and a sign reading, “No Israelis Will Be Admitted Unless They Renounce Their Government, Zionism and the Right of Self-Defense.”
Peace was the last best hope of the new Israeli Hatikvah, not to be a free people in their own land, but to be a moral people in a land that didn’t really belong to anyone in particular, but that they were optimistic everyone could live in harmony in.
But peace with terrorists meant not fighting back and there was a limit to what the 70 percent of the country that didn’t go to sleep fantasizing about peace would accept in the name of peace.
And so, terrorists killed Israelis, Israelis killed terrorists, that part of the world located in an ugly modernist building overlooking Turtle Bay, which the turtles would like to have back, condemned Israel and demanded that it resolve things peacefully by surrendering more land to the terrorists in order to build up their confidence in Israel’s commitment to a peaceful solution.
The terrorists were not expected to reciprocate and build up Israel’s confidence in their commitment to a peaceful solution because they already had the moral high ground by way of losing the last thirty engagements with the IDF, including the battle of the school they set up snipers in, the church they took over and the hospital that they used as an ammo dump.
The great quandary for Israeli leaders is how to win a war without losing the moral high ground. This is a tricky matter because it requires winning the war and winning the peace. And you can’t do both at the same time.
Israel’s solution has been to fight limited wars while remaining absolutely committed to peace. No sooner does a war begin, then it is pressed to accept a ceasefire. To show its commitment to peace, Israel is expected to accept the ceasefire. At which point Hamas will begin shooting rockets again and the whole dance will begin all over again. But Israel has trouble refusing a ceasefire because its leaders still believe that they can get at the moral high ground by showing that they are more committed to peace than the other side.
The peace is however unwinnable. It’s not even survivable in the long term. Peace either exists as a given condition or it is maintained by strong armies and ready deterrence. Peace cannot be found on the moral high ground, only the mountains of the graves of the dead.

Seeking the moral high ground is a fool’s quest. Wars cannot be fought without hurting someone and trumpeting your morality makes it all too easy for your enemies to charge you with hypocrisy. The man who spends the most time vociferously protesting that he isn’t a thief, that he has never touched a penny that belonged to anyone else and that he will swear on a floor-to-ceilling stack of bibles to that effect, looks far guiltier than the man who scowls and tells his accusers to mind their own business. The more Israel defends its own morality, the more it winds the chains of the accusers around its own neck.
Refining its warfighting with the object of fighting a truly moral war leads to refined techniques that kill terrorists but still cause some collateral damage, and to soldiers that are more afraid of shooting than of being shot at. And all this painstaking effort goes for naught since it really makes very little difference to Israel’s enemies whether they have one photo of a dead Muslim civilian to brandish or a thousand. Either one makes for the same manner of indictment. In aiming to win the peace, Israel instead, like all modern states, loses the war.
The father of an Israeli soldier told his son after he was called up for duty that he would rather visit him in prison than visit him in the cemetery. “If you are fired on, fire back.” That is good advice not just for that young man, but for his entire country, and for the civilized world. It is better to fire than be fired upon. It is better to be thought a criminal, than mourned in Holocaust museums. It is better to leave the moral high ground to those who worship the romance of endless bloodshed and defeat. It is better to lose the peace and win the war.

From SultanKnish: http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2014/07/winning-moral-high-ground-is-losers-game.html

Imagine A Religion…

July 18, 2014
Picture This

From The obduracy of the leftist project found at Barrel Strength


 

“Picture an ad showing throngs of Muslims screaming in streets, shouting anti-US or anti-Christian slogans, burning embassies, preaching hate on televisions, beheading and stoning adulterers, converts, apostates, and blocking streets in European cities with praying men, butts in the air.

“The voice-over comes on:

“Imagine there is a religion which believes it is the duty of every one of its adherents to kill, enslave and degrade anyone not belonging to it.

“Imagine there is a religion whose adherents believe in removing the clitorises of young girls to secure their sexual constancy and obedience to their husbands.

“Imagine there is a religion which takes as its divinely-ordained human model a man who married his twelve year old niece, disavowed his adopted nephew to do so, slaughtered thousands of prisoners of war, and who made his lusts the criterion and authoritative guide of all male behaviour for all time?

“Imagine a religion which says its primary texts are not just divinely inspired, but are the dictations of God to man, literally and fully authoritative, even though one fifth of it cannot be logically or grammatically deciphered, even it its original language?”

“Imagine a religion that considers all inquiry, of whatever kind, to be formally forbidden”

“Imagine a religion that believes that if God says two plus two makes five, then there is no human basis for disputing that absurdity, and that to do so would merit death?

“Imagine a religion which says that the match does not light the gasoline, but that all physical events happen directly and without intermediation or operation of physical laws, but by the will of God alone?”

“Imagine if there were  a religion which says that everything that happens in the universe: every molecule jiggling, every event that happen to a human, every bird falling from the sky, happens by the will of God alone?”

“Imagine the effects on scientific education and rational inquiry, when all possible subjects of inquiry: religious, philosophical or scientific, are forbidden.

“Would you not want to defend yourself against this religion? Would you not seek to have it disputed in public places by people in authority?

“If there were such a religion?”

I can see the hate-crime prosecutions now, but I can see the ad very clearly, and so do many of you, dear readers, without the benefit of televisions or computers. It is running every day, just the voice-over is missing. And now you have one.”

Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/

Only Death

July 8, 2014

Islam

From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

Obama Irony.

June 27, 2014

WHile

From mm: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

America Has No Will or Leadership to Win Against islamic Aggression and Terrorism

June 20, 2014
The First Terrorist War – Five Years Later Ten Eleven Years Later   — and counting

“Beyond victory in the First Terrorist War is a greater goal. What we must seek is not merely the “control” and “containment” of terror, for terror in this guise cannot be controlled or contained. We must come to the deeper understanding that only a complete victory over the global Radical Islamic forces can prevent the onset of a confrontation more terrible than the current war.” — AD, 2003

mumbaifear.jpg Mumbai

[Originally published @ American Digest in it's first year, October, 2003 ]

Sections of “The First Terrorist War”

1. Calling the War By the Right Name. 2. Not Process But Victory Restores Freedom 3. Playing for Time is Playing to Lose 4. The Goal of Radical Islam is Our Destruction 5. The War of Two Religions 6. The Unspoken Role of the Ballistic Missile Submarines 7. Avoiding the Islamic War by Winning the Terrorist War 

“[Arabs] were incorrigibly children of the idea, feckless and colour-blind, to whom body and spirit were for ever and inevitably opposed. Their mind was strange and dark, full of depressions and exaltations, lacking in rule, but with more of ardour and more fertile in belief than any other in the world. They were a people of starts, for whom the abstract was the strongest motive, the process of infinite courage and variety, and the end nothing. They were as unstable as water, and like water would perhaps finally prevail.” — T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom

1. Calling the War By the Right Name. In a war, “Know your enemy” is one of the first axioms in formulating a strategy for victory. It is an axiom the United States has ignored for over two seven years. Instead we’ve seen a host of euphemisms and slogans thrown up in the belief that, having had many decades of a life where ugly things are given pretty or neutral names, Americans can no longer “bear very much reality.” In the years between September 2001 and today, the public has had little asked of it and seen nothing happen on our soil that alarms it. All is quiet on the western front. [Update April 2013. This is no longer true.]

Foggy thinking, attractive in politics, means defeat in war. War requires “a mind of winter;” a mind that is precise, cold, and unrelenting. War requires that we call things what they are and cease to skirt issues that make us, “uncomfortable.”  Vague names create fluffy policies, hamstrung strategies, and wishful thinking. This is where we are drifting.

To say we are “involved” in a “war on terror” extends our infatuation with euphemism and obfuscation into dangerous territory.  The phrase lulls us into a state where all dangers seem unclear and distant. The “war on terror” joins an expanding list of “wars on…” such as drugs, poverty, or profuse paperwork in government. The “war on terror” implies a “process” rather than a campaign; an indeterminate series of unresolved encounters rather than decisive actions that lead to an end, to peace.

Peace is the goal of war. To accept a perpetual “war on terror” is to accept a plan for mere “management” rather than victory. The failure to  plan for victory is the construction of a plan for defeat.

To those with a clear vision of this war and a knowledge of history, it is a lie that we are “involved in a war on terror.” Our presidents, pundits and policy wonks may prefer it that way, but war is not the same as being “involved in a business slump” or “involved in a troubled relationship.”

Wishful souls in the West may see the war as a “process;” as an exercise in supply chain management. Our many millions of avowed enemies do not. Our enemies have no truck with vague thinking and phrases front-loaded with vacillation and pusillanimous wishing. Their thinking is driven by an ancient religious doctrine designed to manipulate, exploit and harness societies into servitude.

Our enemies commitment to our destruction is adamantine. It is no accident that many of their spiritual leaders speaking from the centers of their faith call for the death of the “Crusaders.” Obfuscation has no place in their plans except as if creates confusion and doubt among us. Our enemies’ goals are the same goals they have held for more than 500 years. They are the goals announced several times a week in tens of thousands of mosques throughout the world. For our enemies, the wars of the Crusades and the wars surrounding the rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire were merely prologues to this war.

One such wave (and not the least) I raised and rolled before the breath of an idea, till it reached its crest, and toppled over and fell at Damascus. The wash of that wave, thrown back by the resistance of vested things, will provide the matter of the following wave, when in fullness of time the sea shall be raised once more.”T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom

Our present reality, brought home to us in the cataclysm of September 11 (and last week in Mumbai), is that we are now fighting The First Terrorist War. We had best know it by that name. When we persist in calling it the “war on terror” our implied goal is control and containment; a “management problem”. This is a lethal illusion.

In war the only acceptable outcome is complete victory. A negotiation does not end a war – - as Oslo shows. A partition does not end a war – - as we learned in Vietnam. A cease-fire does not end a war — as we saw in the Gulf War. The Cold War taught us that a wall does not end a war. Only victory, clear and decisive, ends war and creates peace.  To date, we have failed to learn this lesson. In life, when a lesson is not learned, it is repeated.

In war, language is a strategic asset. Indeed, we see daily how language,here and abroad, is used to weaken the resolve of the United States. The central problem in calling The First Terrorist War the “war on terror’ is that the phrase soothes us into accepting less than victory; makes us accept war-without-end as a new deal; a new normality where terror is accepted as the status quo. This is the state in which Israel has existed for decades as terrorist violence becomes the scrim screen  against which that nation’s life lurches on. Although our present foreign policy may impose this on Israel, a garrison state may, over time, prove less popular here at home. We are not yet the kind of country that easily accepts “The Forever War.”

2. Not Process But Victory Restores Freedom An open-ended “war on terror,” like a ‘war on drugs” invites a continuing erosion of small liberties. As this persists, once rare infringements on liberty become the norm. If it is to be the case that the shoes of all air travelers are to be inspected from now until the last ding-dong of doom, we will all be wearing sandals on airlines for the rest of our days. In this, many are correct to be wary of the long term effects of The Patriot Act. Short of military conquest, a free society does not lose its freedom. Rather, freedom is lost through small infringements on liberty and dignity in the name of security. A perfectly safe state is a state without freedom. As our policies look to sustain rather than defeat our enemies, we are to that degree held hostage to both our policies and our enemies. When war is reduced to a process, that process becomes a self-renewing system in the same way that the “war on drugs” has become institutionalized in our lives; a normal part of the background noise that defines our days. A strategy based on “management,” on diplomacy rather than victory, leads only to the establishment of internal organizations dedicated to their own perpetuation.

During the Civil War and the World Wars of the last century certain freedoms were, at times, curtailed, infringed or suspended. Following victory in 1945 these freedoms not only returned but even greater states of equality and liberty emerged. Had the Second World War ended in a negotiated stand-off at the Rhine and Okinawa, a state of war would have continued for an unknowable time and, in such a state, a less-free United States would have been a certainty. Only the destruction of the Axis powers yielded a peace out of which freedom surged, not only in America but in the lands of her former enemies as well. Victory yields freedom in peace. An armed process yields only stasis.

3. Playing for Time is Playing to Lose Our enemies (many of whom have studied and lived or now live among us) know us better than we are prepared to know either them or ourselves. In order to reform, rearm and launch future attacks they depend upon our belief that we are effectively managing the “war on terror.” At the same time they know that, absent any large attacks, we will grow weary with small but constant losses tallied daily by our “caring and sensitive” media. They depend upon us being lulled back into the state of slumber we enjoyed on September 10th. And we grant their wishes. If they are as wise as they are ruthless, our enemies will continue with their  strategies of constant attrition and small, distant attacks. They will, for the present, avoid large shocks to the nation in hopes that the ambitions of our political factions and the intellectual lassitude of our major media will result in the defeat of the present administration in the coming elections.[Check... ] The goal of this strategy is the expectation of a more somnambulant administration less invested in war and more inclined towards the failed policies of appeasement, negotiation and payoff. [... and double check.]

When that happens our present “war on terror” will become even softer; will be said sotto voce if said at all. It will be supplanted by something resembling “a diplomatic initiative to ameliorate terrorism.” In effect we shall find ourselves, as we have so often in the past under liberal guidance, trying to buy out way out of the “war on terror.” Our error will be believing that we are dealing with reasonable extortionists rather than blood enemies. And the measure of our leaders’ cowardice will be how deeply they promote this belief and the false hope it engenders.

4. The Goal of Radical Islam is Our Destruction The consequences of a political and military stand-down would be to allow our enemies the time, basing and mobility to grow in numbers, advance in training, achieve greater tactical position within and about our borders, and acquire ever more sophisticated and powerful weapons. Once they have advanced to the next level of lethality they will strike us again with an effect on our lives, liberties, property and economy more extreme than 9/11. The goals of the Radical Islamic forces arrayed against us are the same as their factotums, the Palestinians, have for Israel. In the jihad against Israel we can see what the Islamic forces have in mind for us: the complete destruction of our systems, the occupation of our land, the  usurpation of our government, and the death or conversion of all our citizens. These are the goals of Radical Islam as understood by their fundamentalists and as tolerated by the vast majority of believers.

Much has been written about these goals. Most of our scholars conclude they are only fantasies. A nuclear weapon detonated in Seattle does not care if a fantasy set it off.

Whether the goals of Radical Islam can be achieved is a matter for history to determine. It is the belief that they can be achieved that brings the First Terrorist War upon us. To the extent that we fail to recognize the intensity and commitment of our enemies in this war; to the extent we fail to match their passion for our destruction with our passion for victory; to the extent we cast our lot with our “process” as they cast their lot with their god, we weaken our ability to decisively defeat them.

Ours is a “war on terror” while theirs is a “Jihad.” Our efforts are a process. Theirs are directed by divine mandate. Whether you are of a secular or religious persuasion, it is well to remember that if you go to war you’d best have God on your side.

It is time to put away the feeble designation of our actions as the “war on terror” for it is not “terror” that shooting wars engage. Wars engage combatants, armies, populations, institutions, nations and religions. It is unpopular, almost unsayable, to designate the First Terrorist War as a religious war, yet all serious people know that this is the case and that this, in the end, is what it shall come to.

5. The War of Two Religions Through the violent attacks of a Radical Islam, two religions have been brought into conflict. The first is that of Islam, a faith that at its core requires absolute submission from its adherents, and looks towards the subjugation of the world as its ultimate apotheosis. As the youngest of the monotheistic religions, Islam is at a point in its development that Christianity passed through centuries ago. And it is not with Christianity that Islam is currently at war. Islam is saving that for the mopping up phase of its current campaign. The religion that Islam has engaged is a much younger one, the religion of Freedom. As a religion Freedom has been gaining converts since the success of the American Revolution enabled it to go forth and be preached to the world. Freedom is easily the most popular of the new religions and historically converts nearly 100% of all populations in which it is allowed to take firm root. This is the religion which we have lately brought to Iraq.

The genius of the religion of Freedom is that it allows all other religions, from the venerable to the trivial, to exist without fear of censure or destruction. Indeed, the only thing that the religion of Freedom firmly forbids is the destruction of Freedom itself. “Thou shalt not destroy Freedom” is Freedom’s single commandment. And Freedom has been shown to resist efforts to destroy it in the most ferocious way. It’s enemies would do well to ponder the fate of previous attempts to do so.

On September 11, the agents of Radical Islam began their attempt to destroy Freedom by attacking it at its core. The reaction of Freedom to this assault has been, once you consider the destructive power of the weapons systems it possesses, measured, deliberate and cautious. This is because Freedom, although sorely wounded, does not yet feel that its very existence is threatened. A more serious attack at any time in the future will put paid to that specious notion.

Following a second attack at a level equal to or exceeding September 11, any political opposition to pursuing our enemies with all means at our disposal will be swept off the table. The First Terrorist War will begin in earnest and it will not be a series of small wars with long lead times and a careful consultation of allies. The war will become, virtually overnight, a global war of violent preemption and merciless attack towards the spiritual and geographic centers of our enemy. Arguments revolving around the true meaning of ‘imminent’ will be seen as they are — so much factional prattle. Due to the nature of the enemy, the First Terrorist War will be fought here and there and everywhere. It does not matter when or where the second serious strike on the American homeland takes place, it only matters that on the day after this country will be at war far beyond the current level of conflict.

6. The Unspoken Role of the Ballistic Missile Submarines Since 9/11 there is one element of our strategic forces that has not been discussed. Indeed, you seldom hear a question asked about its status. That element is our fleet of ballistic missile submarines. We currently possess 18 of these “ships,” but a ballistic missile submarine is known not as a ship, but as a “strategic asset.” Each submarine has 24 missile tubes. Each tube holds one missile with from 5-8 nuclear warheads. Each warhead can be targeted separately from the others. The range of these missiles is classified but is thought to be in excess of 6000 nautical miles. The total number of warheads is approximately 50% of US strategic warheads. In sum, any single one of these strategic assets can create the end of a significant portion of the world. At present roughly 40% of this fleet is deployed at unknown and unknowable locations throughout the world’s oceans.

Originally built in order to deter, these strategic assets now assume a more aggressive role in the First Terrorist War. Because of the religious nature of the war, our enemy is unlikely to be deterred by the threat of obliteration. He will view that as highly unlikely since it would, of necessity, involve us in the deaths of large number of civilians in countries known to harbor or be friendly to Islamic terrorists. He believes we would not employ these weapons. This misunderstanding of the history of Western democracies under arms and in a state of total war invites global tragedy.

Nevertheless, the character and goals of our enemy are as fixed as the words of the Koran and he is not to be dissuaded by the threat of annihilation. Only actual annihilation will, in the end, suffice and yield victory. In attempting to achieve this annihilation we can only hope that the political and military situation does not evolve to a level where the submarines would have to play a role.

7. Avoiding the Islamic War by Winning the Terrorist War Because we are large, lumbering, impatient and somnambulant our enemy depends on these factors to defeat us. He uses the opportunities of Freedom in order to make war upon it. He is able to infiltrate our society and institutions. He is able to be infinitely patient. He plans for the decades while we can barely manage to plan from one fiscal quarter to the next. This is a war that will play out over years and will not be resolved in months. In order to gain victory and defeat our enemy we must put in place policies and strategies that cannot easily be altered by reports, polls, or election cycles. In order to achieve this we must be, as we were in the Second World War, united in purpose. It is, sadly, the nature of our society today that September 11th’s unity was fleeting. To find this unity we must suffer through one more horrendous attack the nature and timing of which will not be of our choosing.

Still, as surely as the next attack will come, so will the unity that it creates in its wake and at that point the full power of Freedom’s Arsenal will at last be used to defend it. This is the social and political conundrum that confronts us in the First Terrorist War. And this is why the war must be divorced from ‘process’ and the goal of victory be cut into the stone of the American soul.

During the Second World War, our system, with few alterations, brought us through to a peace in which there were greater freedoms than before the war. Victory validated our way of life. Not only were our freedoms intact in 1945 but they were poised, with the economy, for a great expansion throughout the rest of the century and into this. If you had proposed, in the summer of 1946, that within 50 years all minorities would be fully enfranchised, that women would be fully liberated, that homosexuals would be a dominant force  with their enfranchisement only a moment away, and that an African-American could be elected President, you would have been dismissed as a socialist dreamer. And yet, here we are.

The same situation can also be envisioned as the result of our victory in the First Terrorist War at the end of a less-clear but no less threatening passage of arms. But this will only happen if we remain clear about the real nature of the First Terrorist War, and committed to unequivocal victory regardless of the costs in lives and treasure. Only by matching the determination of our enemy to destroy us will we prevail. The only thing that can defeat us are a dull reliance on management, a fascination with process rather than victory and the reluctance to believe the extent to which our enemy desires our annihilation.

Beyond victory in the First Terrorist War is a greater goal. What we must seek is not merely the “control” and “containment” of terror, for terror in this guise cannot be controlled or contained. We must come to the deeper understanding that only a complete victory over the global Radical Islamic forces can prevent the onset of a confrontation more terrible than the current war.

What we must press for in the Terrorist War is a victory so decisive that we can, in the end, avoid the larger war lurking on the not-so-distant horizon – - a true war between civilizations. That war, should it come, will not take the name of The Terrorist War, but of The Islamic War.

The Terrorist War is still a struggle that can be fought and won with conventional means. An Islamic War, should it come, would engulf the world and be anything but conventional.


“Some of the evil of my tale may have been inherent in our circumstances.”T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom

Vanderleun  from AD: http://americandigest.org/

The Problem in the Middle East? It’s full of F*#king mooslims.

June 19, 2014

“The trouble with Afghanistan is it is full Afghans. The trouble with Iraq is there are not enough Iraqis.”

Arab culture is not like Western culture so their way of making war is different from that of the West. “War without battle” is the preferred mode in the Arab world. That means insurgencies, terrorism and social disruption are where Arabs excel. This makes perfect sense for a culture where blood relations trump all else. Kin based societies are low-trust societies. It is trust and altruism that enable societies to engage in large scale projects like fielding large armies.

Arab societies are low trust societies, which is why they have never been good at the civilization stuff that requires large scale organization. If you can only truly count on blood relatives, scaling beyond 100 or so hands is nearly impossible. Even when you expand the circle of trust beyond second cousins, you limit the number of people capable of working as a unit to a few hundred.

It is why Arab countries are authoritarian. The people will never willingly go along with the leader, if he is not at least from their tribe. That means coercion is the only way to rule. You never hear Arab leaders talking about “their people” with any degree of pride, like you hear in the West. They don’t even have the concept down. Instead, “us” is almost always defined by blood.

The other interesting thing is all of this was predictable. The American military spent billions designing and training a military for Iraq along western lines. The trouble is they left an Arab culture that is still an Arab culture. Eventually you end up with the same old half-assed Arab army with a bunch of American gear they can barely operate. A guy named Norvell B. De Atkine wrote about this 15 years ago in a paper called Why Arabs Lose Wars. While he tried hard to inoculate himself, the author can’t help but notice the reason Arab countries are as we find them is they are full of Arabs. The Z Blog › Ruminations on Iraq

Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/

The Only Phobia is in islam

June 18, 2014


From 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/

England and the islamic Takeover. That is F#*ked Up.

June 11, 2014

Books advocating stoning, beating, loving death more than life found in Islamic Elementary School in the UK

Books were found at the Islamic Olive Tree Primary School in Luton, England suggesting that stoning and lashing individuals were proper punishments for misbehavior, according to government investigation.

ee7ca__75392546_olive1

Breitbart After an Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills) investigation, the inspectors found library books at the school that shared and promoted extremist Islamist views and had “no place in British society.” Ofsted declared the Olive Tree Primary School “inadequate” following the finding of the extremist texts in the elementary school library.

The inspectors found that the students’ “contact with different cultures, faiths, and traditions is too limited to promote tolerance and respect for the views, lifestyles, and customs of other people.”

Additionally, the inspectors found that, “There are too few books about the world’s major religions other than Islam.”

Somali woman stoned to death

Somali woman stoned to death

Farasat Lartif, a spokesperson for the Luton Islamic Center, responded to the allegations, “Ofsted came into the school looking for problems of extremism and intolerance and didn’t find any.” He continued, “We have a large number of books about different faiths, which inspectors failed to to notice, including The Diary of Anne Frank.” Lartif warned, “Many Muslims will feel alienated and victims of state Islamophobia.” (Oh, Boo Hoo)

Ofsted reported that books available in the library included The Ideal Muslim, which implores parents to beat their children if they do not start mandatory prayers by age 10. The books says of a woman’s role in the family, “if you knew the rights that your husbands have over you, every one of you would wipe the dust from her husband’s feet with her face.” Another book, Commanders of the Muslim Army, praised a principle seen espoused by radical jihadists that individuals should love “death more than life in their pursuit of righteous and true religion”.

The new findings came on the same day Ofsted warned in a report of the possibility of an Islamist takeover of 21 state secondary schools, which has been explained as a “Trojan Horse” takeover. The report found that many UK schools have been subject to a “culture of fear and intimidation.”

wife-beat_new2

From BNI: http://www.barenakedislam.com/

Really Joey? Climate Change? Get Back in Your Padded Cell Joey.

June 11, 2014

Biden Says Released Detainees More Focused on Climate Change Than Jihad

“Look, I know some of you are uneasy with those folks being released from captivity. But I want you to know something that’s very important. Those five guys are more concerned right now about the devastating effects of climate change than they are about killing Americans.” The DAILY RASH

Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/