An empire cannot rule by force alone. A handful of Englishmen could not have ruled India by force. Today, Americans cannot rule over more than a billion Muslims with force alone. They need - and have - collaborators.
Most Muslims are collaborators. That is why the so-called 'terrorists' - in fact, jihadis - are such fresh - and refreshing - newcomers. They are the ones against whom America - and its allies in Europe, Canada and Australia - must use force, with the active connivance of the collaborators.
Naturally, the jihadis then turn against the collaborators, as in the recent shooting episode in Pakistan. War within the umma is to be deplored, but collaborators should be taken out wherever possible.
This raises a difficult question. According to al-Ghazali, a Muslim ruler, so long as he allows prayers and the sharia, must be obeyed no matter what else. That leaves the democracies - since these fall outside the purview of Muslim political philosophy, the jihadis can do their worst in these polities.
But, it would seem, not in an autocracy.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Daphne Du Maurier on the Palestinians and Israel
In her short story, The Way of the Cross, Daphne Du Maurier reveals quite a bit about the plight of the Palestinians and the sheer wickedness which had brought forth Israel.
"His wife had countered the business chat by holding forth about the distress and starvation amongst Arab refugees, which, she insisted, was the responsibility of the whole world. She might have contributed towards this, thought Babcock, by wearing a less expensive fur coat, and giving the money saved to the refugees."
"No one will ever settle down in this part of the world, and they'll still be fighting over Jerusalem when you and I have been in our graves for years."
The Colonel vividly recalls Jewish terrorism:
"We only acted under instructions, the Colonel told himself. They came direct from High Command. Terrorism was rife at the time, the Palestine Police Force couldn't deal with it, we had to take control. The Jews were laying mines at street corners, the situation was deteriorating daily. They had blown up the King David Hotel in July. We had to arm the troops, and protect them and the civilian population against terrorist attack. The trouble was, there was no political policy back at home, with a Labour government in power. They told us to go soft, but how can you go soft when people on the spot are being killed? The Jewish Agency insisted that they were against terrorism, but it was all talk and no action. Well, then we picked up this Jewish boy and flogged him. He was a terrorist, right enough. Caught him in the act. Nobody likes inflicting pain ... There were reprisals afterwards, of course. One of our officers and three N.C.O.'s kidnapped and flogged. Hell of a row about it at home."
Then there's the observation on illegal settlements:
"Kate Foster, having inspected the Al Aqsa Mosque, had resolutely turned her back on the entrance to the Wailing Wall--too many Orthodox Jews pressing forward over the enormous space where their government had had the ruthless audacity to bulldoze Jordanian dwellings and condemn more Jordanians to desert tents--and returned towards the Dome of the Rock."
Reading the story, you are convinced that terrorism pays - it has created the 'modern' state of Israel. Al-Qaeda's strategy, then, is a very sound one.
It'll probably work.
"His wife had countered the business chat by holding forth about the distress and starvation amongst Arab refugees, which, she insisted, was the responsibility of the whole world. She might have contributed towards this, thought Babcock, by wearing a less expensive fur coat, and giving the money saved to the refugees."
"No one will ever settle down in this part of the world, and they'll still be fighting over Jerusalem when you and I have been in our graves for years."
The Colonel vividly recalls Jewish terrorism:
"We only acted under instructions, the Colonel told himself. They came direct from High Command. Terrorism was rife at the time, the Palestine Police Force couldn't deal with it, we had to take control. The Jews were laying mines at street corners, the situation was deteriorating daily. They had blown up the King David Hotel in July. We had to arm the troops, and protect them and the civilian population against terrorist attack. The trouble was, there was no political policy back at home, with a Labour government in power. They told us to go soft, but how can you go soft when people on the spot are being killed? The Jewish Agency insisted that they were against terrorism, but it was all talk and no action. Well, then we picked up this Jewish boy and flogged him. He was a terrorist, right enough. Caught him in the act. Nobody likes inflicting pain ... There were reprisals afterwards, of course. One of our officers and three N.C.O.'s kidnapped and flogged. Hell of a row about it at home."
Then there's the observation on illegal settlements:
"Kate Foster, having inspected the Al Aqsa Mosque, had resolutely turned her back on the entrance to the Wailing Wall--too many Orthodox Jews pressing forward over the enormous space where their government had had the ruthless audacity to bulldoze Jordanian dwellings and condemn more Jordanians to desert tents--and returned towards the Dome of the Rock."
Reading the story, you are convinced that terrorism pays - it has created the 'modern' state of Israel. Al-Qaeda's strategy, then, is a very sound one.
It'll probably work.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Pearl Harbour: what did Roosevelt know?
On December 1, six days before Pearl Harbour, Roosevelt had given the British ambassador a clear commitment of support in the event of war. Why did he do so?
After Admiral Nagumo's force set sail for Pearl Harbour on November 26, the American government seemed - or appeared to seem - totally unaware of the movement of ships. They knew that Japanese forces were heading from Indo-China towards Malaya and Thailand: then why were they oblivious to this movement? After all, America had been doing its best to crush the life out of the Japanese economy with sanctions.
Churchill knew about Nagumo's fleet, and must surely have passed on the message to Roosevelt. What did he hope to gain by deceiving the Americans? The destruction of the American Pacific fleet could hardly have helped Britain.
Therefore, either Churchill or Roosevelt was withholding information - the former from the Americans, the latter from the American people. Since the first hypothesis must be ruled out, the second must be retained.
Roosevelt deliberately allowed around 3,000 Americans to be murdered so he could take America into the war.
Sound familiar?
After Admiral Nagumo's force set sail for Pearl Harbour on November 26, the American government seemed - or appeared to seem - totally unaware of the movement of ships. They knew that Japanese forces were heading from Indo-China towards Malaya and Thailand: then why were they oblivious to this movement? After all, America had been doing its best to crush the life out of the Japanese economy with sanctions.
Churchill knew about Nagumo's fleet, and must surely have passed on the message to Roosevelt. What did he hope to gain by deceiving the Americans? The destruction of the American Pacific fleet could hardly have helped Britain.
Therefore, either Churchill or Roosevelt was withholding information - the former from the Americans, the latter from the American people. Since the first hypothesis must be ruled out, the second must be retained.
Roosevelt deliberately allowed around 3,000 Americans to be murdered so he could take America into the war.
Sound familiar?
Friday, May 13, 2011
Antares
It's been years since I've seen Antares. In Dhaka, living in a concrete box called an apartment, one can't even see the blue of the sky!
So I hope to venture out where there's no light or noise or dust pollution and watch Antares rise.
It is scheduled to rise at 7:11 pm, exactly when the sun is scheduled to sink. That means that Antares will be well-nigh invisible then - especially as Antares threatens to rise exactly in the south-east, almost opposite the sun in the north-west (azimuth 110 SE).
I love the name Antares! It is the opposite of Mars (Ares), the god of war, and war is abhorrent. So I love Antares, red and glowering from the night sky when the moon is absent. And I feel secure that it is not Mars.
How I love Antares! Pray that the clouds will not obstruct the view of Antares.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
the casus belli
What's the casus belli?
1.7 million children murdered through sanctions (with Madeleine Albright gloating on prime time).
Another 1 million murdered after the second Iraq War.
God knows how many murdered in the Af-Pak wars!
Whether Bin Laden is alive or dead is immaterial: will the jihad go on? Will the westerners keep paying with their blood and lives? Let us pray and hope. This is jihad.
Jihad is a Muslim's duty: we may not all be able to pursue jihad, but we must - must - encourage those who can. How?
If we give money to jihadis, they will arrest us. Fine. Some people will risk arrest.
But we can also pray for them: no government can arrest us for that!
We can slaughter a cow or a goat for them.
We can ask mawlanas to say a prayer for them: it costs very little, and is perfectly legitimate. No state can arrest us for that.
Somehow or other, we must encourage the jihadis: if they killed 3 million in Iraq, then the loss of 3,000 American lives is nothing. It is a pathetic exchange.
Jihad is a duty: if we cannot perform it, we must encourage it.
Muslims of course are scumbags: so long as they are comfortable, they will not fight jihad. This must change. JIHAD!
Include a prayer in one of the five for the jihadis! Or is that too much to ask? Are yo so so in love with life and America that you can't offer up one prayer for your jihadi brother? Shame!
You have relatives in America? Then warn them to leave. If they don't, so much the worse for them. He who lives with ebles must suffer the fate of ebles.
The Great Satan is western civilisation: wish him luck who embarks on its destruction. Then pray.
1.7 million children murdered through sanctions (with Madeleine Albright gloating on prime time).
Another 1 million murdered after the second Iraq War.
God knows how many murdered in the Af-Pak wars!
Whether Bin Laden is alive or dead is immaterial: will the jihad go on? Will the westerners keep paying with their blood and lives? Let us pray and hope. This is jihad.
Jihad is a Muslim's duty: we may not all be able to pursue jihad, but we must - must - encourage those who can. How?
If we give money to jihadis, they will arrest us. Fine. Some people will risk arrest.
But we can also pray for them: no government can arrest us for that!
We can slaughter a cow or a goat for them.
We can ask mawlanas to say a prayer for them: it costs very little, and is perfectly legitimate. No state can arrest us for that.
Somehow or other, we must encourage the jihadis: if they killed 3 million in Iraq, then the loss of 3,000 American lives is nothing. It is a pathetic exchange.
Jihad is a duty: if we cannot perform it, we must encourage it.
Muslims of course are scumbags: so long as they are comfortable, they will not fight jihad. This must change. JIHAD!
Include a prayer in one of the five for the jihadis! Or is that too much to ask? Are yo so so in love with life and America that you can't offer up one prayer for your jihadi brother? Shame!
You have relatives in America? Then warn them to leave. If they don't, so much the worse for them. He who lives with ebles must suffer the fate of ebles.
The Great Satan is western civilisation: wish him luck who embarks on its destruction. Then pray.
World Trade Centre
My friend, who is a civil engineer, had these further comments to make about the WTC:
"Prolonged heating can get steel to its melting point.
"Prolonged heating can get steel to its melting point.
But what's important is the mode of failure of a particular structure.
The towers in question had an inner concrete core which carried the bulk of the vertical loads, and an outer steel frame which are good for resisting lateral loads - like wind or earthquake.
When the plane struck the building, one side of the outer steel frame of 3 or 4 stories was knocked out.
No problem, the building 'stood', as expected.
It is possible for the concrete core to lose strength with prolonged heat at the affected levels.
But it is highly unlikely for the whole core to crumble vertically straight downwards, as had happened over there.
The upper part of the structure should have 'tumbled over' laterally, with the lower part remaining relatively unscathed."
Monday, May 9, 2011
The Facts Behind 9/11
I got this e-mail from my friend who is a civil engineer:
"the melting point of mild steel is approx 1300 degree Celsius (2400 F).
"the melting point of mild steel is approx 1300 degree Celsius (2400 F).
It boils at 3000 C (5400 F).
Jet fuel has ignition point of 200 deg C (400 F).
Thermite is a reaction by which the steel itself is used as a fuel and its melting point is lowered.
This reaction has explosive effects.
Jet fuel does not induce thermite reactions."
Yet architects and engineers have found evidence of thermite reaction in ground zero (see ae911truth.org).
Yet architects and engineers have found evidence of thermite reaction in ground zero (see ae911truth.org).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
