Afghanistan Strategy?

I am more than likely not too popular with Leftists and centrists: I firmly believe there is only one way to win the theatre of war in Afghanistan. America needs a WWII mentality to do whatever it takes to win a war even if civilians (who more than likely support their leaders) are harmed in collateral damage. Now it is obvious that eight years of war fighting non-national entities that are transnational terrorists is a bit too long to go without a decisive crippling of the enemy.

Carpet bombing of training camps and terrorist managed opium fields used to generate narco-bucks needs to take place. Then one may ask: “What about the Tora Bora cave system that is used as an effective terrorist hideout for the Taliban and al Qaeda?” It is time to use surgical nuclear strikes equal to a little lesser than the Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That’s correct. I said the politically incorrect of nukes. Also I am not just speaking of the mountains of Afghanistan but also the mountains and training camps of Pakistan.

Will Pakistan protest? More than likely that would be the case. Will Pakistan use its nuke arsenal in retaliation against American in Afghanistan or Iraq? A Pakistani nuke reprisal would be a foolish strategy since America is capable of blowing our erstwhile ally off the map. The old Cold War Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is something the Pakistan military would comprehend (unlike the Mullah-Messianic dictatorship of Iran).

Anyway, here are some previous posts I have utilized concerning an Afghan strategy:

· “Comment: Can We Win in Afghanistan,” by Gary H. Johnson, Jr.

· “Resolve 9/11,” by John R. Houk

· “Is This Obama’s War?” by JudgeBob.

Now Ben of Ben’s Blog has a radical view on Afghanistan. Ben’s post is really a critique of a Col. Tom Snodgrass post at American Thinker. Ben has some agreement and disagreement which I feel is worth the read.

JRH 9/17/09

Comment on Mainlining Bill Roggio

In war civilian casualties should be expected when the civilians willingly support the combatants or the combatants hide among unwilling civilian human shields. An example of the flawed strategy to place civilian comfort above winning wars is the case when a group of Marines failed to receive air support for fear of hurting civilians. That became a disaster for the Marines.

Read this and more at The AfPak Reader.

JRH 9/13/09

Israel, Hezbollah and Iran Nukes

An assassin Islamic terrorist with ties to Hezbollah was assassinated in Damascus, Syria on February 2008. That person was Imad Mugniyah. Mugniyah was no doubt the darling of the Muslim Middle East. He had no trouble associating with Shi’ites and Sunnis alike. Mugniyah was a Commander within Hezbollah which is Shi’ite and Iranian influenced. He also had close associations with Usama bin Laden. He was quite the indiscriminant homicidal killer of Westerners, Jews and even Muslims.

Mugniyah even founded his own offshoot terrorist organization with the appellation of Islamic Jihad. He notoriously murdered hundreds of U.S. Marines in Lebanon. Bombed and killed Jews at Israeli foreign embassies. He is noted for bombing the Khobar Towers in the heartland of Dar al-Islam; i.e. Saudi Arabia.

Although Israel has not officially claimed the glory for assassinating Mugniyah in Damascus, it is widely agreed by Western and Islamic international political watchers that Israel is the culprit hero.

So here is the thing. The Middle East and particular medieval minded Muslims living there are really into the vengeance blood libel thing. Since Israel is the perceived hero that terminated the Islamic lunatic murderer, it is widely expected the Islamic group – Hezbollah – who Mugniyah was associated with will seek payment for the blood libel.

Hence a war of words has been exchanged between Israel and Hezbollah. Lee Smith writing for Hudson Institute speculates that the war of words may elevate into an actual war (again) between Israel and Hezbollah.

Of course the geopolitics involved in another war against Hezbollah in Lebanon is that Hezbollah is a client terrorist organization of Twelver-Shi’ite psycho Iran. Currently Iran is on a path to build a nuclear arsenal and has not been shy about publicly saying that Israel needs to be wiped off the map.

Israel in its turn has not been shy about saying the existence of a nuclear Iran is unacceptable.

So people may be wondering, “What would Iran do in another armed conflict between Israel and Hezbollah?”

I think that is the incorrect question.

The question should be as Israel finds an excuse to invade Lebanon because Hezbollah acts of vengeance in Israel or toward Israelis in foreign lands: Will Israel use an invasion of Lebanon to make a stealth attack on Iranian nuke locations?

After all it assumed that Iran would unleash Hezbollah on Israel anyway if an attack on Iranian nuke facilities occurred. Why not engage Hezbollah preemptively as a distraction then artfully attack Iranian nuke sites?

Sure Israel will be castigated by the Western Left and maybe some token vitriol by surrounding Sunni Muslim nations; nonetheless if Hezbollah gives Israel a good chance to invade Lebanon to punish a transnational terrorist organization that is utilizing a near puppet Lebanese government as a base, Israel should preemptively invade Lebanon then strike Iran nuke sites.

I believe the Sunni Arab nations will secretly be happy that Israel made an effort to set the Iranian nuke program behind if not lucky enough to obliterate it completely.

Syria would be the only wild card in this scenario. Syria has some kind of aggression pact with Iran and is the Iranian conduit to supply Hezbollah militarily (and probably the Sunni Hamas movement as well). Syria has a history of gutlessness when the possibility that war may mean a regime change of the Assad family from power. On the other hand Assad’s Syria may use this as an excuse in trying to retake the Golan Heights lost to Israel in 1967 after Syria (one of a few Arab nations) invaded the Land of Israel.

GO ISRAEL!

JRH 8/20/09

JIHAD COULD SPREAD IN U.S. PRISON SYSTEM!

Move America Forward (MAF) is one of the premier pro-troop organizations in America. MAF is rightfully investing their efforts in preventing the closure of Gitmo. The obvious reason is the inmates of Gitmo are mostly transnational terrorists captured by American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Left has whined that the continued imprisonment of Gitmo detainee terrorists is becoming a violation of human rights, due process and a violation of the Geneva Accords as relating to Prisoners of War.

MAF and most sane Americans understand that Islamic terrorists are at war with America even if President Barack Hussein Obama and his Leftist cadres deny that war. Indeed many released Gitmo Islamic terrorist detainees have returned to their ways of killing American troops.

Here is a message from MAF presenting their case to Americans for funds to continue the educational fight against the Obama Administration and the Left.

JRH 8/1/09

Gingrich: Pelosi Step Down as Speaker

Well I can see the reason that Newt Gingrich is a politician. His recent e-newsletter castigates Speaker Pelosi without actually calling her a liar. I was not so capable of being so diplomatic.

Speaker Pelosi is the classic example of the hypocrisy of the now devotedly Leftist Democratic Party. The Democrats went on a rampage of vilifying President Bush’s policies of keeping America safe even to the point of calling for a criminal investigation of the Bush Administration and those that acted patriotically to protect American citizens from the reoccurrence of another 9/11.

With the aid of the Mainstream Media, the Democrats unleashed some political venom of propaganda upon American voters to influence votes that placed the Democrats back in the driver’s seat in 2006. Then the voters received another chunk full of propaganda that elected a deceptive Leftist President whose primary goal is to transform America away from her roots of Christianity toward the diversity concept of Secular Humanism and the redistribution of wealth. The term “redistribution of wealth” is MSM code talk for Socialism at best and Communism at worst.

One can see Communism at its worst through the eyes of Comrade Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong.

The social transformation led by President Barack Hussein Obama and the elite cadres of the Democratic Party is subtly validating some of the worst elements of the morally depraved in America. The transformation excuse: The morally deprave are people on par with a race or religion; to discriminate against the morally depraved is thus racism and a denial of civil rights that all the diverse Americans should enjoy.

Okay, I know I digressed on Speaker Pelosi.

Newt neatly rails on Pelosi by putting her political agenda of persecuting the Bush Administration for the Democrats call torture. Is it not ironic the Obama Administration has gone to great lengths not to insult Mohammedans by eliminating such terms as the Global War on Terror (GWOT) or Islamic terrorism to find neutral words? Yet the Obama/Pelosi Democrats have no trouble using the word “torture” rather than Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT) against Americans that have devoted themselves to keep other Americans safe. Does anyone see the lunacy on this political vendetta to prevent Conservatives of the Republican Party from ever gaining control of Congress and the White House?

But check it out: Since Speaker Pelosi as the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence committee never protested EIT; does not that make Pelosi an adherent to the practice of protecting Americans?

So you see how Speaker Pelosi has dug a hole for herself by attempting to use plausible deniability to make it look like she was never on board with EIT.

Newt is correct that Pelosi should be removed not because of her political agenda, but because her political agenda has placed America and Americans at risk by diluting National Security.

JRH 5/20/09

Pelosi: Liar, Stupid or Both

There is ONE WORD for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi – LIAR.

Contrary to a whole host of contradicting reports that Pelosi was indeed privy to “waterboarding” as enhanced interrogation techniques – EIT - (Most Republicans). Now that the Obama Administration and most Leftist Democrats have labeled waterboarding as torture, there has been a huge Leftist push to investigate the Bush Administration and the Intelligence Community concerning EIT.

I am willing to bet this Leftist push to fry the Bush Administration for keeping America safe will suddenly cool off. Why? The reason is an actual investigation will prove that Pelosi is a liar. That would mean one of the most powerful persons in America could be subject to a scandal that would do huge damage to the Democratic Party as the so-called Party of change.

As long as Pelosi is adamant that she was too stupid to understand what the of EIT is, I am fairly certain there will be no push from the House leadership in some kind of tawdry investigation of the Bush Administration keeping America safe.

Read the AP article that comes across as sympathetic toward liar – I mean Speaker - Pelosi.

This has all the appearance that Speaker Pelosi is going to take on the CIA. So somebody is lying – either the CIA or Pelosi. Since I never trust a Democrat, I suspect Pelosi is lying. If Pelosi is lying she can say publicly “I want those documents made public” and hope the CIA will not release classified data to protect their position.

If the CIA is lying (which I doubt in this case), then the CIA or Pelosi. Since I never trust a Democrat, I suspect Pelosi is lying. If Pelosi is lying she can say publicly “I want those documents made public” and hope the CIA will not release classified data to protect their position.

If the CIA is lying (which I doubt in this case), then the release of classified document would show Pelosi is not as stupid as she appears.

I am guessing the CIA is doing some research and may pick & choose documents that make the CIA look good and infer that Pelosi is incompetent (or we could say a stupid liar).

She chastised reporters for falling for the Republicans’ political machinations and deflecting attention from their misdeeds. To clear the air, Pelosi said, “I’d be very happy if they released the briefings.”

And that is the only way this matter can be cleared up. A lot of documents should be declassified, including the briefing Pelosi cites. Either the CIA withheld information from Pelosi et al., or Pelosi is now lying. Either way, the briefing should be released.

While they are at it, all of the memos that deal with this topic should be released. Let’s see the intelligence on what al Qaeda was up to and what intelligence, precisely, came out of the interrogations of senior al Qaeda terrorists.

Something tells me that we will hear a response from the CIA shortly. (John McCormick)

Yeah baby, it is doubtful America’s chief spooks is going to allow Pelosi to malign them since there is an appearance the CIA tried to malign President Bush’s effort to invade Iraq.

Keep in mind that if Pelosi is leaning toward stupid rather than liar (I believe she is both), you have to know as Speaker of the House Pelosi is third in line if something horrible happens to the President and Vice President. This makes Pelosi one of the power elite in America. Does America want a stupid and/or liar to have such power?

JRH 5/14/09

Words Matter in the War on Terror

By now you have to be aware that the Obama Administration is trying to wish away the Global War on Terror by simply obfuscating the meaning of words.

Raymond Ibrahim has written an essay that words matter to America’s enemies and to Americans for that matter. Islamic terrorists are extremely motivated by the meaning of words in their Theo-political agenda to establish an international caliphate to make planet earth totally Mohammedan by hook or by crook. If hook and crook does not work then death is the last option. You could call it the Islamic Final Solution for the kafir nation.

The Obama Administration’s change of the Islamic terrorist lexicon cheats Americans of knowing what America’s enemy has in mind for them.

JRH 5/8/09
************************************
Words Matter in the War on Terror

By Raymond Ibrahim
Middle East Forum
Orig. Pajamas Media
May 4, 2009

Knowledge is inextricably linked to language. The less accurate words are, the less accurate the knowledge they impart; conversely, the more precise the language, the more precise the knowledge. In the war on terror, to acquire accurate knowledge — which is pivotal to victory — we need to begin with accurate language.

Would the free world have understood the Nazi threat if, instead of calling them what they called themselves, "Nazis," it had opted to simply call them "extremists" — a word wholly overlooking the racist, expansionary, and supremacist elements that are part and parcel of the word "Nazi"?

Unfortunately, the U.S. government, apparently oblivious to this interconnection between language and knowledge, appears to be doing just that. Even President Obama alluded to this soon after taking office when he said, "Words matter in this situation because one of the ways we're going to win this struggle [war on terror] is through the battle of [Muslims'] hearts and minds."

According to an official memo, when talking about Islamists and their goals, analysts are to refrain from using Arabic words of Islamic significance ("mujahidin," "salafi," "ummah"); nor should they employ helpful English or anglicized words ("jihadi," "Islamo-fascism," "caliphate"). Instead, vague generics ("terrorists," "extremists," "totalitarians") should suffice.

A renewed defense of this disturbing trend was recently published by one Colonel Jeffrey Vordermark and deserves examination. After suggesting that Americans "love to throw around foreign words," Vordermark writes:

We have fallen into the "jihad" trap. The term is used in casual banter yet most remain clueless regarding its origin or meanings. We think, therefore we know. Pundits, academics, and laymen profess to know its meaning, and the term is daily news in the mouths of reporters and in the banners of headlines. Unfortunately, its very use assumes that Islam is simple and monolithic. … As a nation and society, we could not be more incorrect.

While lofty sounding, this view is riddled with problems. First, by seeking to excise the word "jihad" from public discourse, due to the erroneous notion that that term is apparently unknowable, this position is self-defeatist.

"Jihad" has a very precise, juristic definition; more to the point, Sunni Islam — which accounts for nearly 90% of the Islamic world — is, in fact, "simple and monolithic," thanks to the totalitarian nature of Islamic law (Sharia), which categorizes all possible human actions as being either forbidden, discouraged, legitimate, recommended, or obligatory. Indeed, of the major religions of the world, none is perhaps so black and white, so clear cut as Islam, which meticulously delineates to Muslims the correct "way" of living ("way," incidentally, being the literal definition of the word "Sharia").

Thus to try to portray Islam and its institutions as somehow "otherworldly" and unfathomable — so let's just not bother trying to understand in the first place — is not only folly, but precisely what the Islamists themselves most desire: to guard Islam's more troubling doctrines, such as jihad, from infidel scrutiny.

Vordermark continues:

Historically the term [jihad] applied to the concept of either a "greater jihad," or a "lesser jihad." The former denoting the daily struggle of the believer to overcome "self" in the pursuit of Allah's will, and the latter traditionally meaning defense of religion, family, or homeland [emphasis added].

Let's for the time being overlook the hackneyed stress on the so-called greater-lesser jihad dichotomy — which, semantics and sophistry aside, does not invalidate the lesser jihad (i.e., armed warfare). The real problem here is that Vordermark's assertion that the military "jihad" has been "traditionally" limited to "defensive warfare" is totally false.

Even so, Vordermark is to be excused; he warns us about accepting definitions of "jihad" from "pundits, academics, and laymen," and surely his falls into this category. Thus let us dispense once and for all with infidel-based definitions — including my own — and see what Islam's own most revered authorities have to say about what "jihad" really means:

First, it needs to be borne in mind that Sunni Islam is wholly dependent on the various rulings (ahkam) of the so-called four schools of jurisprudence (al-madhahib al-arba'). I am currently reading an Arabic manual called Al-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa al-Sunna ("The Jihadi Upbringing in Light of the Koran and Sunna"), written by one Sheikh Abd al-Aziz bin Nasir al-Jalil. After closely examining the word "jihad," he concludes that "jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and then they refuse."

The book also contains terse summaries of the word "jihad" from each of the four schools of jurisprudence, which have the final say as to how Islam — or in this case, jihad — is articulated: According to the Hanafis, jihad is "extreme and strenuous warfare in the path of Allah, with one's life, wealth, and tongue — a call to the true religion [Islam] and war to whoever refuses to accept it"; according to the Malikis, jihad is "when a Muslim fights an infidel in order that Allah's word [Sharia] reigns supreme"; according to the Shafi'is, jihad is "fiercely fighting infidels"; and, according to the austere Hanbalis, it is "fighting infidels." (Note: "infidels," or kuffar, simply means non-Muslims.)

In short, the "traditional" meaning of jihad is offensive warfare to spread Islamic hegemony — period. This is doctrinally, textually, historically, and consensually demonstrable. At any rate, who probably better understands what jihad means, the non-Muslim Jeffrey Vordermark or the Muslim Abd al-Aziz bin Nasir al-Jalil? More to the point, whose definition will Muslims actually take seriously?

While the U.S. government is busy censoring itself, only the above "legal" definition of jihad provided in al-Jalil's book carries any weight with Muslims — "radical-moderate" dichotomies not withstanding. And since that is the case, so too should it be the only definition that non-Muslims rely on in their formal analyses — that is, if they are ever permitted to incorporate words like "jihad" again.

But what is the point of all this equivocation? The government memo explains:

Never use the terms "jihadist" or "mujahideen" in conversation to describe the terrorists. A mujahed, a holy warrior, is a positive characterization in the context of a just war. In Arabic, jihad means "striving in the path of God" and is used in many contexts beyond warfare. Calling our enemies jihadis and their movement a global jihad unintentionally legitimizes their actions [emphasis added].

Aside from the fact that, once again, we are offered a false definition of jihad — the equivalent of the Christian notion of "just war," which it is not — the apparently widespread assumption that the words we use can ever have an impact on what is and isn't legitimate for Muslims and within an Islamic context is beyond ludicrous.

Muslims are not waiting around for Americans or their government — that is, the misguided, the deluded, in a word, the infidel — to define Islam for them; much less will subtle word games and euphemisms emanating from the West manage to confer or take away Islamic legitimacy on the Islamists of the world. For Muslims, only Islamic law, the antithesis of international law, decides what is or is not legitimate, or in legal terminology, what is mubah or mahrum.

Furthermore, the U.S. government would do well to worry less about which words appease Muslims — the memo also warns against "offending," "insulting," or being "confrontational" to Muslims — and worry more about providing its own citizenry with accurate and meaningful terminology.

Words matter. Whom those words are directed at matters even more. The world's Muslims aren't holding their breath to hear what sort of Islamic legitimacy the U.S. government is about to confer on any given Islamist group, since it is not for non-Muslims — the despised infidels — to decide what is and is not Islamic in the first place. Americans, on the other hand, who still wonder "why they hate us," are in desperate need of understanding. Using accurate terminology is the first step.

Finally, as this article is dedicated to "words," know that there is a reason that the words "knowledge" and "acknowledge" are etymologically related: without doing the latter — in this case, without acknowledging the true nature of the Islamist enemy and his goals — one can never possess the former: requisite knowledge for victory.
__________________________

Raymond Ibrahim is the associate director of the Middle East Forum and the author of The Al Qaeda Reader, translations of religious texts and propaganda.

This text may be reposted so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

©1994-2009 The Middle East Forum

Pelosi Did Not Disapprove of Torture

An oft reported theme I have put forth is that Democrats lie. There was a time when only the obvious Left wing of the Democrat Party would indulge in political slight of hand and tell a lie for political gain in the hope the Center to Right would acquire a bad public image. The Democrat fringe was in the mold of Senator McGovern. The McGovernite Dems were an electoral laughing stock. That is because the Democrat Party used to be dominated by Center-Right Statesmen in the mold of Senator Scoop Jackson of Washington State. Those Democrats are long gone.

Now that the fringe Left has utterly taken over the Democrat Party America can expect lies for political public enhancement will be the norm rather the exception.

The Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in her minority leadership role was involved in about thirty meetings along with other Republican and Democrat leadership circa 2002. Those meetings explicitly detailed the enhanced interrogation techniques to be used on Islamic terrorists captured shortly after the invasion of Afghanistan.

Nancy Pelosi is the ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives and third in line for the Presidency if a cataclysmic catastrophe occurs to the President and Vice President. This woman of High Government Office has down right lied claiming there was NO detail given in those meetings explaining the nature of enhanced interrogation techniques.

Here is a side thought: Is it not interesting the Obama Administration is bent on calling Islamic terrorists and the Global War on Terror by long drawn out names obfuscating the reality of America’s enemy? Yet the successful methods to extract information from those Islamic terrorists to keep America safe are “torture.” Can you say political agenda?

Pelosi is being busted in public in the deceitful hypocritical lie to protect her Leftist back-side.

Porter J. Goss a former CIA Director is part of an increasing line of individuals calling Pelosi out on her lies.

Many Joe Americans may ask, “What’s the big deal? Politicians lie for gain all the time. What makes Speaker Pelosi’s lie any different?”

The big deal is part of the Democrat Party road to power was decrying the lack of civil rights for non-State terrorist POWs who utilized heinous brutal torture that cost lives prior to their capture. Using the weariness of the Global War on Terror by the American public, the accusation of torture as an American war crime was used to paint a picture of evil of Republicans who believed in winning rather than losing.

Pelosi is in a position of choosing to lie about any knowledge of what enhanced interrogation techniques entailed OR owning up to the truth proving the Democrats lied there way to the American voters’ hearts.

JRH 4/26/09

The American Way and Political Islam are NOT Compatible

As a Christian Right kind of guy I view Islam/Mohammedanism as the greatest threat to American Liberty and freedom of thought or conscience since Soviet Communism was extremely active in infiltrating American social settings as well as infiltrating the government.

I have been on the fence between grouping Islam with radical Islam and trying to see a separation between the two.

As an American and a huge supporter of Freedom of Religion (although not to the extent Leftists shut down Christianity on related taxpayer connected community or national apparatuses) I struggle with the concept of Islam being a religion that can practice in America. There is absolutely no tolerance within Islam for other faiths or lack of faith for that matter.

In Mohammedan dominated nations being a non-Muslim makes you a second class citizen and susceptible to retribution for practicing another faith (or lack thereof) openly, especially if the other faith promulgates its tenets as better to Islam or is critical of Islam. Retribution could be as horrible as death and destruction.

According to Islamic sacred writings there is no separating the acts of worship from the acts of politics. Thus the American and/or Westerner needs to comprehend the concept of Political Islam. Part of honoring the Mohammedan Allah and its Prophet is wreaking havoc on non-believing Muslims (kafir) until there is a humiliating submission (the second class citizen) or conversion or death. This Political Islam concept is hugely prevalent among Mohammedan dominated nations.

In the West it is obviously not quite so virulent; however there is evidence that the back to the basics ideology of radical Islam is making an inroad into America and the West. Honor Killings is something the Western Public is beginning to slowly understand is part of the strict Islamic paradigm even though the politically correct Mainstream Media (MSM) has gone to great lengths to obfuscate the murder of a Muslim (usually woman, daughter or sister) to any connection to Mohammedan practices. I have even read the denunciation of Honor Killing from Muslim-American groups as being un-Islamic and more a cultural phenomena from foreign nations. Hello, the foreign nations alluded to are Mohammedan dominated.

Just as I am about to join groups and people that are on the “Ban Islam” bus I across such websites similar to Muslims Against Sharia or committed Muslims who denounce the Political Islam of Mohammedan retro-revivalists. One such person is M. Zuhdi Jasser who condemns Political Islam because he wants his Islamic family to be partakers of the American dream of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness while freely practicing his faith.

Now that is the real American Way: individual autonomy merged with an American consciousness or assimilation while honoring the roots of your heritage. This kind of assimilation has occurred with countless immigrants to America in the past yet this is the kind of assimilation that retro-Islamists abhor as insulting to their Prophet Mohammed and his god known as Allah.

Jasser has an essay entitled, “Obama Administration Stacking the Deck with Islamists”. It is an awesome essay which points to the Obama Administration having connection with Islamists in America and abroad who are definitely anti-American and live for the premise that America will slowly be infused with a enough Muslim converts to take over the political process thereby ending the American paradigm of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. READ IT!

JRH 4/17/09 (Hat Tip: ACT! For America)

Gitmo and Wishing Islamic Terrorists Away

I support organizations that are anti-jihadi and pro-security in order for American Liberty to be freely practiced. One of many of those organizations is Move America Forward. Many of these anti-Jihadi organizations operate on a grass roots supply budget as opposed to wealthy Leftists as George Soros or Saudi money funneling to anti-American causes.

MAF (as well this blogger) strongly support keeping Gitmo open. Leftist critics look at Gitmo as a civil rights violation of individuals accused of civilian crimes. Of course this is ludicrous for the thugs in Gitmo are transnational terrorists or possessors of information about transnational terrorism in a war that cannot be defined or measured by the Geneva Conventions.

I mention the Geneva Conventions because the signatories of the rules of war as applied to POW’s are in a war with Stateless transnational terrorists who have NOT signed the Conventions nor have any intention of doing so.

In essence transnational terrorists are war criminals which no State can be held accountable because of plausible deniability.

These war criminals are conducting a war which Leftists wish to view as civilian crimes accountable to courts which have different rules of law ranging from Western civil rights to totalitarian dictatorships with the lame United Nations as an arbiter of International Law.

Regardless how the Left tries to alter the state of war radical Islam is waging on the West overtly or clandestinely by utilizing different words to wish the war away, transnational radical Islamic terrorists will be dangerous to Western citizens and the Jews of Israel.

President Barack Hussein Obama has signed the order to close Gitmo. Now the Obama Administration is admitting that some of those Islamic thugs that deserve no American civil rights afforded to accused common criminals will be released on American soil.

Here is the MAF email with the usual request for grass roots donations.

JRH 3/24/09

Shoher Tactics for Islamic Terrorism

Here is an interesting theory on executing a war on terrorism when there is so much public support for the terrorists a “Collective Liability” should apply to civilian supporters of terrorism. It is a portion of a chapter from a book entitled “Samson Blinded: a Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict” by Obadiah Shoher.

Evidently Shoher is a pseudonym. Shoher writes in the hyper-militant Jewish style of Rabbi Meir Kahane. Kahane was considered a racist Jew by moderate and Leftists of both Israel and America. The racism stems from Kahane’s writings that definitively proposes a plan to give incentives for Arabs that call themselves Palestinians to vacate the West Bank. Further Kahane’s writings promoted a policy of forcibly expelling West Bank Arabs if they did not leave willing. And even further Kahane promoted transforming Israel (or at least a portion of Israel) from a secular State to a Jewish theocratic State.

Needless to say Kahane was not endeared by Israeli Leftists or politically correct Israeli moderates. Kahane was jailed for his writing and the organizations it formed around Kahane’s extreme thoughts. Kahane even won a seat in Israel’s Knesset; however he was booted out for his views.

Rabbi Meir Kahane became a martyr to his followers when a Muslim terrorist assassinated him (the guy nabbed was acquitted). (Kahane info is thanks to Answers.com)

Since Obadiah Shoher writes in the spirit of Rabbi Kahane, he has chosen anonymity so that lunatic Muslims cannot assassinate him like Kahane.

Shoher’s writing are extreme as the portion entitled “Collective Liability for Anti-Israel Terrorism”. I know Shoher’s thoughts on rules of engagement with Muslim terrorists and the Muslim population that supports them are definitely not politically correct. I also know if the West (inclusively Israel) cannot wrap their minds around the fact that Muslim terrorists could care less about Western protocols that have led to such war rules as the Geneva Conventions.

Since the Geneva Conventions are not even close to concepts taught by the Quran and Mohammed, Muslim terrorists laugh at any obligation of Western war rules of engagement.

As far as Muslim terrorists are concerned Western concepts of Justice and Civil Liberty are a weakness to be exploited. Hence Muslim terrorists have no qualms of integrating supportive civilian Muslims in their agenda. In essence Muslim civilian support for terrorists by extension makes the civilian a terrorist. If the civilian does not wish the consequences of a terrorist, then the Muslim civilian should renounce Islamic terrorism and aid in eradicating terrorism.

It sounds rough nonetheless battling Muslim extremism in the same way as we do today (particularly with appeasement tactics) will eventually erode Western and American culture into non-existence.

JRH 3/16/09

Khan the Nuke Proliferator Released by Pakistan

Is Pakistan sending a message to the West or possibly America in particular? The reason I ask this is a Pakistani Judge released Abdul Qadeer Khan from house arrest (I cannot believe he was not in a dark prison for treason).

Who is Khan you may ask?

Abdul Qadeer Khan is the father of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Understandably he is considered a hero among Muslim Pakistanis; however Khan is somewhat the father of Iran and North Koreas nuclear ambitions. Khan sent the nuclear data he developed to those two nations and several other rogue nations.

This seems that would move Khan from Pakistani national hero to the Pakistani version of Benedict Arnold – traitor. Near neighbor Shi’ite Iran is not exactly the best buddy of the Sunni Mohammedans of Pakistan.

Here is the incredulous pronouncement from the Pakistan Supreme Court on Khan:

"The court has said as he was not involved in nuclear proliferation or criminal activity, there is no case against him, therefore he is a free citizen," said Ali Zafar, Khan's attorney.

What? Selling Pakistan State secrets to rogue nations and probably Islamic terrorists is not nuclear proliferation and not criminal activity?

This tells me Pakistan’s so-called alliance to battle al-Qaeda and the Taliban was a deceptive ruse to receive military aid from America while simultaneously favoring Islamic terrorists hiding in their nation.

Adding to my suspicions is the Pakistan governments complaining of American troops and military drones crossing the Afghan/Pakistan border to take out al-Qaeda and Taliban Islamic terrorists. If Pakistan is a true ally with the USA on the Global War on Terror (now declared over by President Obama), the Pakistan government would not only be supportive but also cooperative.

JRH 2/8/09 (Hat Tip: Israpundit)

The War with Militant Islam is on:

The War with Militant Islam is on:
The West does not Know the War is on!

John R. Houk
© February 3, 2009

I think Ben Shapiro just became one of my favorite anti-jihad polemicists.

I just read a Shapiro essay entitled, “ENOUGH OF RADICAL ISLAM.” He calls for the end of the mindset of the Global War on Terrorism, which frankly has been my mindset since September 11, 2001.

Shapiro has been good enough to give a better defined phrase for the conflict with America, American Ideals and Western Culture. That name is “militant Islam.”

It is the very defining phrase the West has been terrified to use for it is definitely NOT Politically Correct. The concept of the West at war with militant Islam rubs against the grain of the civil right of Freedom of Religion. Western Constitutional development is all about individuals able to practice their conscience whether it is secular or theological, whether it is theological or atheistic or simply no defined ideology other than Liberty.

To say the West is at war with Militant Islam is reminiscent of the West’s internecine religious wars over Christian theological viewpoints. To the Middle Eastern Mohammedans war against Militant Islam will be reminiscent of a Roman Catholic dominated Europe inspiring the Crusades. Today’s Islamic propaganda paints a picture of Christian Europe exacting blood lust on victimized Muslims. The medieval Catholic view for the Crusades was to ostensibly allow pilgrims to safely travel to the Holy Land yet more probably due to years and years of attacks by Mohammedans against Christian lands.

The Western mindset has been brainwashed to accept the Crusades as a blood thirsty period in Christian history with the victims being Mohammedans. Of course that is a pure propaganda spin by self-loathing Western Leftists. Muslim Supremacists who cannot even conceive that Theo-political Islam is a perpetrator of propagation by the sword, the execution of blood thirst that makes the Crusaders look like novices in violence, the total denigration of non-Muslim kafir to subhuman treatment evoking humiliation and other heinous discomfiting acts of brutality.

When Western Culture surpassed Islamic culture in technology and Civil Rights, Islamic Culture became an isolated culture stuck in medieval past. The last bastion of Islamic supremacy was terminated at the end of WWI when superior Western technological weaponry and tactics virtually terminated the Turkish Ottoman Empire shrinking that nation’s imperialistic holding to a more defined Turkish land mass.

Unfortunately the secular minded Ataturk wished to emphasize Turkishness so much that the old Islamic methods of brutality was used to secure what is today modern Turkey. The Greek population that was quite significant in Western Turkey was brutally forced out to the liberated Greece (formally under Islamic Ottoman brutality). Then there was the genocide of Armenians who were force marched to the east of Turkey. The Greeks and Armenians were Christians; however the was another group of people deemed not Turkish enough even though they were Muslims. That group is the Kurds who faced persecution from Ataturk’s Turkey and racist hate from Muslim Arabs and Muslim Iranians.

It is time to retire the Global War on Terror mindset and call this war for what it really is – this war is against Militant Islam. Militant Islam is merely following and acting out the writings in their holy books and the recorded examples of their Prophet Mohammed.

I for one do not wish to lose this war and centuries of Western Culture wiped away as the Muslims did to Christian Culture in the Middle East, Northern Africa, today’s Turkey and a significant portion of Eastern Europe.

And I am just writing about the war the West has with Militant Islam. Militant Islam has wiped away Buddhism from Afghanistan and slaughtered Hindi peoples in India.

Give up on what is Politically Correct and focus on the reality. As long as Middle Eastern Muslims have economic power they will acquire military power. Iran is currently deceiving the gullible that a nuclearization program is for peaceful purposes. HELLO! In what or if anything has the Mullocracy of Iran demonstrated peaceful inclinations. Nuclear weaponry is the end-game of an Iranian nuclear program.

Pakistan already has nuclear weapons. Thus far a rational Pakistan military has controlled the nuke arsenal; however Pakistan and its populace is becoming more and more radicalized into Militant Islam. There are elements within the Pakistan government (particularly its spy services – ISI) here are sympathetic and cooperative with Militant Islamic terrorist transnational groups residing in Pakistan. The meaning of this is that a Sunni version of a Shi’ite Iranian revolution could possibly take over Pakistan.

The West must acknowledge what Militant Islamists already know – the clash of civilizations is on. That Militant Islamic knowledge combined with Western Political Correctness denial gives Militant Islam the upper hand.

JRH 1/3/09 (Hat Tip: Ben’s Blog)

BHO Surrender will Lead to Islamic Attack in America

President Barack Hussein Obama – in effect – has surrendered to Islamic terrorists by declaring an end to the Global War on Terror (GWOT).

As this news spreads to transnational Islamic terrorists I expect swooning intoxication of blood lust for the kafir for these Islamic nut jobs will view President Obama’s surrender as a Jihad victory.

The Leftist reviled former President Bush protected an attack on American soil since the cowardly al-Qaeda sneak attack of September 11, 2001.

There is evidence that transnational Islamic terrorists have not given up on the idea of attacking the American Homeland, they have merely been thwarted.

After the Obama surrender, expect an attack sooner than later.

A ‘dirty bomb’ is a possibility however a bio weapon is probably easier and my guess is to potentially take out more Americans than 9/11.

Last year, Dr. Jeffrey Runge, chief medical officer at the US Department of Homeland Security, told Congress that the risk of a large-scale biological attack on the nation is significant and the US knows its terrorist enemies have sought biological weapons. Runge said al-Qaeda is the most significant threat.

Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has long shown an active interest in biological weapons. In the late 1990s, bin Laden set-up 19 chemical and biological weapons laboratories in Afghanistan stocking them with deadly pathogens: anthrax, plague, and botulinum toxins. He hired Ukrainian and Russian experts to train his people and, according to then-CIA director George Tenet, bin Laden trained his operatives “…to conduct attacks with toxic chemicals or biological toxins.”The group’s biological weapons expert, Midhat Mursi al-Sayid Umar, who was reportedly killed by a US missile in 2008, published a 5,000-page encyclopedia of jihad devoted to chemical biological warfare (CBW). Al-Sayid’s manual, which is available in print and on the Internet, provides instructions on how to manufacture rudimentary biological weapons.The availability of al-Sayid’s CBW cookbook makes it possible for independent jihadist cells like the AQIM to attempt to manufacture rudimentary biological weapons. That’s why it shouldn’t be a surprise when there are attempts to manufacture agents by franchise groups such as the 2003 incident in London where six Algerians were charged with plotting to produce the poison ricin and the 2005 French government claim that al-Qaeda cells in the Pankisi Gorge region of Georgia are producing anthrax bacteria, ricin, and botulinum toxin. (Robert Maginnis – HumanEvents.com)

Does this sound like the end to the Global War on Terror? It is a Leftist delusion that a stroke of a pen will end GWOT. BHO’s surrender is merely adding fuel to the fire of future attacks on American soil.

JRH 1/24/09

The Fight to Keep Jihadists Locked Up Begins Today

Below is a Move America Forward appeal for funds to lobby against the closing of Gitmo. Personally I sense there are too many Leftists in power to prevent Gitmo’s closing; however I laud Move America Forward for telling why the war criminal prison at Guantanamo Bay should be remain open.

That reason being that valuable intelligence information has been extracted that has aided in keeping American soil free from major Islamic terrorist attacks and intelligence about Islamic terrorist operations in foreign nations like Iraq and Afghanistan.

The thing the Left oriented Mainstream Media fails to inform Americans about is that many have been released from Gitmo and indeed returned to their Islamic enemy combatant ways in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Gitmo should be kept open until Islamic terrorism is resolved in a victory. If that means a life sentence for Gitmo inmates then so be it.

JRH 1/22/09

Does a Northern Front Appear Immanent for Israel?

The Jamestown Foundation – Global Terrorism Analysis division – believes there is a potential for escalated warfare in Israel’s future. These thoughts are directly related to sporadic yet continuing missile launches into Israel from Southern Lebanon.

The Jamestown Foundation explores all the angles that might result in Israel beginning a second front against Islamic terrorists bent on destroying Israel. That exploration makes their essay a good read.

Just as a teaser: the logical missile launching Islamic culprits would seem to fall on Shi’ite Hezbollah; however Hezbollah has not accepted the credit and Lebanonese government officials also say it is not Hezbollah. The working theory implied is that Sunni Islamic murderers representing Arabs calling themselves Palestinians may be stirring Israel up to confront Shi’ite Hezbollah. Apparently the radical Sunni Islamic terrorists of Southern Lebanon despise the bigger and stronger Shi’ite Hezbollah as Islamic heretics.

Coupling the Sunni/Shia animosity is that the transnational terrorist organization al-Qaeda has called on Islam (i.e. Sunni) to rise up against Israel. This rising up includes criticism for Egypt and Jordan for not invading Israel; ergo the Sunni citizens of those dis-respective nations should rise up against their governments for being in collusion with Israel and the USA.

Although the Jamestown Foundation has a banner declaring itself a neutral source of information and analysis, I detected a hint of a pro-Palestinian victimization while there seemed to be a de-emphasis of Israeli Victimology.

Still the analysis is very compelling and a good read.

JRH 1/15/09

Obama to Close Gitmo

I firmly believe closing Gitmo and releasing terrorists back to their homelands to rejoin their cadre of Islamic murderers is a huge mistake.

Even the terrorists that are taken through civilian justice rather than military or a special tribunal is flawed thinking.

These terrorists are in essence war criminals and should be tried as such.

And said trials should take place after someone has the cajones to end the Global War on Terror with the goal of all wars – VICTORY.

Melanie Morgan has sent out an email to seek donations against the Leftist agenda of closing Gitmo as well as utilizing an online petition to deliver to the current President-Elect-Barack Hussein Obama.

It is worth posting:

JRH 1/13/09
********************************



OBAMA PLANNING TO SHUT DOWN GITMO FIRST WEEK IN OFFICE
AP REPORTING 2 CLOSE TO OBAMA SAY ORDER MAY COME IN FIRST WEEK OF PRESIDENCY. WE CANNOT ALLOW OBAMA SHUT DOWN GITMO!

Melanie Morgan
Move America Forward
Sent: January 13, 2009

President-elect Barack Obama is likely planning to order the closing of the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay on the same day he is sworn into office, Jan. 20 according to an AP story out today. Some of the estimated 250 terrorists, al-Qaida and Taliban suspects could then end up in America, despite outcry from local residents.

This radical plan is naïve, dangerous to Americans, counter-productive for national security, and insulting to our troops at Gitmo who exhibit perfect professionalism. We won’t take it lying down.

GITMO PETITION

MOVE AMERICA FORWARD CONTRIBUTION

Obama should not even consider closing down the prison until he personally visits and meets the brave men and women who work there. They serve with honor and dedication, despite what the mainstream media have said about them. Obama hasn’t even taken the time to send an aide or staffer to see the facilities firsthand.

The only reason for closing Gitmo is to make leftists and some European countries feel better. They have fallen for the tripe that liberals and their cohorts in the media have spread about our troops and the facility. That and they may just truly hate America.

Well I have seen firsthand the conditions in which these dangerous men live. They live in a climate-controlled, state-of-the-art prison with floors clean enough to eat off of. They watch movies while relaxing on an overstuffed sofa; they have six meal plans from which to choose what they eat; they are called to prayer five times a day as proscribed in their Muslim faith; they have three medical personnel for EACH terrorist.

And let’s not forget: Not one American has been charged with a crime for the handling of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. There’s nothing to suggest that anything approaching a crime has taken place there. We know that our military brings to justice those who break the law within their ranks. So, if something happened that was so bad in Gitmo, why hasn’t anybody been charged? Because NO LAWS WERE BROKEN!

I am outraged at the lies that have been spread about Gitmo and the work of our troops. If Obama foolishly chooses to close Gitmo and ship radical jihadists to America, he is saying that our troops haven’t done their jobs, or worse, that they’ve committed atrocities. That’s outrageous, but it seems that to him the feelings of left-wingers mean more than America’s safety or the honor of our military.

The radicals are already pushing Obama to free an alleged terrorist who killed an American soldier and engaged in other terrorist acts.

Groups on Monday sent a letter to Obama asking him to drop charges against Omar Khadr, who allegedly killed a soldier and committed material support for terrorism and espionage. If Obama won’t suspend the military commissions and drop the charges, these groups want him to send Khadr to Canada for rehabilitation. How do you intend to rehab an alleged terrorist who killed an American soldier?

We must stop this nonsense and send a clear message to Obama: Keep Americans safe from terrorists by holding them at Gitmo. Move America Forward is leading the charge against the radicals’ agenda to bring terrorists to America and near our homes.

All presidents during war time have held enemy combatants in prisons and camps until the war ended. President Abraham Lincoln held as many as 18,000 suspected Confederate sympathizers and tried enemy combatants throughout the Civil War.

Obama must not be allowed to play along with the slanders against our troops. We Americans must stand up now and tell him to cut the nuttiness before it’s too late.

Sacks: The Exquisite Irrelevance of Proportionality

Leftists, European Governments, Middle Eastern Governments and so-called Palestinian-Arabs have been whining about a disproportionate use of force by the Israeli Defense Forces to the civilian targeted missile attacks by Hamas.

This is a load of propaganda dung aimed at the West to pressure Israel to stop the war and continue to allow Hamas to shoot missiles into Israel.

What is happening between Hamas (Gaza-Gazastan-Hamastan) and Israel is an ongoing war with Israel in which Hamas’ end goal is Israel’s destruction.

Add to this that missiles came out of South Lebanon (the haven of Iran supported Shi’ite Hezbollah) and struck an Israeli nursing home. The miracle: no human injuries occurred. The tragedy: a building that is a residence for the elderly and recuperating individuals has a bunch of holes in it.

Should not Israel be held to the same proportionate response in protecting its citizens as any other nation would in fact respond in an attack?

Leslie J. Sacks examines the hypocrisy of the double standards that other nations do the same themselves while expecting Israel to execute a lesser proportionality.

Read the Sacks essay.

JRH 1/8/09

Sacks: Gilad Shalit: 900 Days in a Gaza Prison

I usually post guest posts on SlantRight.com; however due to a security program my own website has detected something that is an illegal word or link according to its program. My web master son is looking into the situation between work, college and family. So below is the post I attempted at SlantRight.com.

Leslie J. Sacks writes about Gilad Shalit. He is an Israeli soldier kidnapped by Islamists and held captive in Gaza/Hamastan by Hamas for about 900 days.

At this point I would see it as a miracle from God if Shalit is still alive since Hamas decided to up the ante of their hate toward Israel.

JRH 1/1/09
***********************************
Gilad Shalit: 900 Days in a Gaza Prison

By Leslie J. Sacks

Post Sent: Tue 12/30/2008 6:56 PM

A series of boats, stocked with reporters and (on second thought) presumed medical and food supplies have plied the waters of the Gaza coast, hoping to provoke a strong Israeli reaction. The ongoing blockade by Israel's small but efficient navy prevents shipments of TNT, rockets, bombs, guns, ammunition and assorted other war/terrorism materials from reaching Hamas and their full time Jihadists. Israel's detractors call Gaza a "jail" in turn.

Whether these boats are stopped or allowed through, their wake of publicity churns through the world's media at such a rate that coverage of the ongoing tragedies in Congo and Darfur, among others, appear as mere oversights, as footnotes to the real story: namely, the Palestinian victims of Israel's brutish hand.

Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was kidnapped on June 25, 2006 by Hamas gunmen inside Israel. He has been a pawn ever since: Hamas demands the release of over 1,400 murderers, terrorists and the like for Shalit's return, a price that is clearly too dear for (even) Israel to pragmatically consider.

Shalit's family should take a page from Hamas' propaganda machine, which - along with those of Hezbollah and the PLO under the deceased Yasir Arafat - have been the world's most effective propaganda worldwide since the end of the KGB (indeed, the KGB taught Arafat his most effective propaganda tools). The Shalits should charter a boat and sail into Gaza, with a similar horde of journalists and videographers, to demand the release of Gilad. They should call loudly to meet with Hamas, with the UN representatives in Gaza, as well as with all the various Gaza clan leaders. Whether ignored or imprisoned, they would inspire the world's sympathy - no jail could long hold the pleading parents of young Gilad Shalit. Either way, a propaganda coup.

Well worthy of consideration, no?

Hamas parades mock Gilad Shalit before crowd of thousands in Gaza:

'Gaza-bound Iranian ship has hidden agenda' (Jerusalem Post)
_________________________

Mr. Leslie J. Sacks
11640 San Vicente Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90049
Tel: 310.820.9448 Fax: 310.207.1757
Leslie@LeslieSacks.com

LEAVE COMMENTS on LESLIE'S BLOG: http://LeslieSacks.Blogspot.com/

Israel Defends itself – The Anti-Semitic World Disdains Isrel Self-Defense

After years of not responding to missile attacks from Hamastan (Gaza) Israel has finally embarked on what any other nation would do – DEFEND ITSELF.

I heard a great analogy by Benjamin Netanyahu on Fox News this morning. I’m afraid the best I can do is paraphrase the analogy from memory so if you heard the same thing rest assured my interpretation of Netanyahu’s analogy is at least close to the original.

First of all let me say this. Netanyahu was incredibly placed in a position in which he had to defend the Israeli attacks on Muslim Arabs that have the sole desire only to destroy the Land of Israel.

Eventually Netanyahu gave this analogy to the Fox News interviewer concerning Israel’s increasingly upgrade of the intensity of self-defense.

Netanyahu eventually added something like this:

Having Hamas directly south of Israel shooting missiles at Israeli civilian is like America tolerating a hostile al-Qaeda camp just outside of New York City.

America would Ruby Ridge that al-Qaeda camp if it existed outside of New York City. Although I suspect survivalists would join whatever American authority in blasting radical Muslims off of American soil.

I came across a post from Publius’ Forum that shares my shared mystification that the Times Online is more concerned about Obama’s Foreign Policy goals affected by Israel protecting itself from the murdering Muslim Hamastanis.

The Times should be reporting that even as Israel is coming down harshly for Hamas missiles being launched on the Land, Hamas is continuing to launch missile at population centers and NOT Israeli military targets.

JRH 12/30/08